Fire fighting makes sense, but still a "navy" of nothing but tugboats is nothing to write home about.
Nope it wouldnt be, but a fleet of tugboats with watercannons that could be adapted to be used as flamethrowers is more of a "navy" than what we would see. I mean lets see the only true naval warships was two chinese subs both of which were destoryed. The only other boat I know of is a wooden paddle wheel river boat.
Well, if Enclave had a sub, it would not be Chinese. It would be American.
And the EMP is main reason why no planes taking people from east to west or vice versa. Most of that crap would not work. Even if you had a huge GI Joe base, which had a plane, protected, and you had a pilot, well that one base. A rare circumstance. But, you need a place to go, land, and you need to know it safe, otherwise no reason to do it. Why leave your base big enough to store a plane?
Hey Bob wanna risk your life, my life, and everyone elses life climbing into the plane and hope it safe and we find a safe place to land and not die? Sure Joe, sounds fun.
Will I rule it out? No, but I will say it is rare.
Well, they probably would prefer american but they could always use the chinese subs and strip them and gut them and use just the hull as a basis to build an all enclave submarine.
I disagree.
http://www.futurescience.com/emp/vehicles.html
"Any statement concerning the effect of nuclear EMP on vehicles would depend upon details such as how your vehicle is oriented (in other words, which direction it is facing) with respect to the nuclear detonation. It would also depend upon the height of the detonation, the gamma ray output of the detonation, the distance and azimuth to the detonation, and the local strength of the Earth's magnetic field between your location and the detonation point."
----
"Those vehicles were tested up to the level that some sort of upset occurred, then further testing was stopped on that vehicle. In most cases, after the initial upset occurred, the vehicle could be restarted. In most of the remaining cases where the vehicle could not be immediately restarted, a latch-up had occurred in the electronics, and the battery could be momentarily disconnected to "re-boot" the electronics, and the vehicle could then be restarted. This temporary electronic latch-up failure mode caused by EMP is something that almost never occurs in automobiles during a typical lifetime of operation."
"Only one of the vehicles tested (a pickup) could not be restarted after some minor work, and it had to be towed to the shop for repairs."
From what I gleaned from a brief reading of the article, the jury is out on how much damage EMP actually does with relation to vehicles. So its quite a stretch to say that nothing would be available or would work, especially if the government planned ahead and properly shielded the vehicles.
I would have to say EMP damage would be hard to gauge. Its possible it could wipe out systems but we have evidence that high EMP will kill a car engine by disrupting the ignition system but after the EMP is gone the vehicle would start up again like nothing happened. I think the only vehicles that would have a higher chance of not restarting would be those with micro circuits and circuit boards which are more fragile than mechanical breaker-point style systems. For 1985 - 1995 cars, if you slide across the seat and build up a static charge and touch the computer case on the car the static charge would effectively destory the computer and require it to be replaced. The 1996 - 2012 cars are a little better now but theres still the chance that static discharge can wipe those computers out as well. Its just not as common as it was with the first generation of computers. Now on breakerpoint style systems, ive actually pumped more voltage and current through them than was designed and all it did was corrode and pitt the points a little machinists sand paper (2000+ grit) knock off the corrision and the pitts and the switching system works again.