In contrast to the war on land, sea control is not obtained by occupying or capturing a particular ocean or sea area. Royal Australian Navy photo The purpose of the sea control Therefore, land or carrier-based aircraft play a crucial role in obtaining sea control in the littorals. Today, no part of the littoral is beyond the reach of land-based attack aircraft. Therefore, getting sea control in the littorals is highly dependent on one’s ability to obtain air superiority. The Allies, for their part, tried to obtain control of the Atlantic by using their surface escort and land-based aircraft and, later in the war, by escorting aircraft carriers.īecause of the relatively significant differences in the size of the physical environment and the proximity of the continental landmass, there is a considerable difference between obtaining sea control on the open ocean and in the littorals. In the Arctic, Germans denied Allied control with their heavy surface and the Luftwaffe based in northern Norway. In contrast, in the English Channel and the North Sea, Allied control was disputed by German’s light forces, mines the Luftwaffe. For instance, in World War II, the Germans contested Allies’ control of the northern Atlantic almost exclusively with their U-Boats. History provides many examples where one side controlled the sea area to different degrees. The degree of overall control of a given sea area depends on the degree of control of each of the three dimensions.Įxperience shows that, during the war between two strong opponents at sea, it is difficult to obtain or maintain control of all three physical media (surface, subsurface, and the air) to the same degree or extended times. After the advent of the submarine and aircraft, two other dimensions emerged: subsurface and air space. In the era of sail, command of the sea was limited to the command of the surface. Sea control can encompass control of only the surface, subsurface, airspace, or combination of these three physical mediums. However, in practical terms, the focus should be on strategic or operational sea control of disputed control, not tactical sea control. Tactical control refers to control of a maritime combat sector or zone but sometimes can encompass a maritime area of operations. Strategic sea control pertains to the maritime theatre while controlling a significant part of maritime theatre represents operational sea control.

In theory, sea control and disputed or contested sea control can be strategic, operational, and tactical in their scale.

Thus, it essentially means the ability of one’s fleet to operate with a high degree of freedom in a sea or ocean, but only for a limited time. The term more accurately conveys the reality that in a conflict between two strong opponents at sea, it is not possible, except in the most limited sense, to control the seas for one’s use entirely or to deny their use to an opponent completely. Thus, it may be defined as acquiring and securing the privilege to utilize the maritime space in the period as expected. In the modern understanding of the term, sea control is that the stronger side carries out its main operational task in terms of time and place without significant challenge from its opponent. The use of the term sea control was a result of the gradual realization that the new technological advances, specifically mines, torpedoes, cruise missiles, submarines, and aircraft, made it difficult, even for the stronger navy, to obtain full command of the sea for an extended time over a large part of the theatre. In the aftermath of World War I, sea command was gradually replaced with sea control.

Control definition