Lessens from the history of Naval warfare

Discussion in 'Military' started by Munin, Nov 3, 2012.

  1. Munin
    Offline

    Munin VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,300
    Thanks Received:
    92
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +95
    One of the things that intrigued me to this issue is the words of mitt Romney about the US fleet not having enough ships and Obama's answer that you don't count the individual numbers but the projection of power of the whole force ("not counting bayonets and horses")

    The question is if our modern navy idea of big carriers isn't becoming obsolete?

    Considering that navies have a tendency to be very conservative, a long time all naval powers where so conservative that they kept believing battleships where the ships that win wars. The grand admiral Yamamoto (before WWII) said that a battleship in modern warfare is as usefull in modern warfare as a samurai sword, that it is considered the battleships as elaborite religious scrolls which old people hang up in their homes, they are purely a matter of fate and not reality"


    This is a very interesting documentary about the evolution of navies during wars and how battleships became obsolete. Also 1 interesting event is discussed where there was an naval armsrace between the US and Great Britain, possibly leading to a conflict between the US and GB. If Hitler wouldn't have existed, WWII might have been between different powers. (And those who say it was "just an armsrace", then consider that the cold war was also "just an armsrace")

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otvrS-AYq80]The Battleships - The Darkness Of The Future - YouTube[/ame]


    I wonder if we still make the mistake to be overconservative? Carriers have been the centerpiece of modern navies, the question is if they are still as usefull as we claim them to be or have they become our modern "battleship mistake". Since there haven't been any modern naval wars, we might not know

    The biggest similar weakeness I see of a carrier is that 1 cheap and small ship like a submarine can sink it, it makes you think when a ship only a very very small fraction of the cost and crew can sink a 6.3 billion dollar ship or doesn't it?

    So are Carriers the new Battleships and are we potentially making the same mistake again?
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  2. Munin
    Offline

    Munin VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,300
    Thanks Received:
    92
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +95
    the other interesting fact is that our greatest potential enemy happens to concentrate its efforts on the small ship that can sink a carrier

    I made a topic about this potential enemy a long time ago: http://www.usmessageboard.com/military/65406-what-is-china-up-to-2.html


    I think we might forget that the 2 most effective naval weapons of WWII were both the carrier and the submarine. The submarine brought GB to the brink of defeat: this is something we tend to forget, that it was not only the carrier that proved to be so effective

    submarines also sunk multiple carriers (both in the pacific & in the european theatre) & sunk the pride battleship of the GB fleet (which was the 2nd biggest fleet in the world at the time). It maybe not saying much if English ships or others are sunk, but then you might think again about one famous carrier that was sunk by a cheap submarine: the USS Yorktown

    this is an old article that proves my point
    The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced | Mail Online


    So are the aircraft carriers the new battleships, the ships that project power that we believe in almost religiously?
    Are they as cost efficiënt as we pretend them to be?
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  3. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,898
    Thanks Received:
    1,792
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,887
    Granny says remind `em of dat when dey's droppin' bombs on San Francisco...
    :mad:
    Analysts: China Aircraft Carrier Landing Poses No Direct Threat
    November 26, 2012 - Western analysts say China's recent landing of a Russian designed fighter jet on an aircraft carrier, though significant, poses no immediate regional or international security threats.
     
  4. Oldguy
    Offline

    Oldguy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    4,328
    Thanks Received:
    590
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +592
  5. Warrior102
    Offline

    Warrior102 Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    16,554
    Thanks Received:
    4,019
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +4,029
    No, they're not the "new battleships." Completely different mission/capabilities.

    Carriers project power over hundreds of miles. For examplpe, we sat 200 miles off the coast and bombed Libya.

    Battleships were used for shore bombardement. When I was aboard USS Iowa, the best we could get a round was 26 miles.
     
  6. Sunni Man
    Offline

    Sunni Man Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    40,001
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Patriotic American Muslim
    Ratings:
    +12,444
    The "battle carrier group" is an expensive anachronism left over from WWll

    We have more than enough land bases around the world to handle all of our fighters and bombers. :cool:
     
  7. Warrior102
    Offline

    Warrior102 Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    16,554
    Thanks Received:
    4,019
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +4,029
    Although I enjoyed my tour in Japan, there are many Japanese who are ungrateful that Americans are stationed there. They frequently protest, demand we leave, etc. Not large numbers - just the usual small group of rabble rousers. I think we should leave Japan. We should also pull the Army out of Germany as well. Think of how much that would save.
     
  8. Sunni Man
    Offline

    Sunni Man Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    40,001
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Patriotic American Muslim
    Ratings:
    +12,444
    I agree with pulling out of both Germany and Japan.

    The people there a sick of us being there and want us gone.

    But there are many other countries willing to host our bases.

    For a hefty price........... :cool:
     
  9. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    I was here before the great naval battle was won.
    You could not show your naval on TV.
    Danged conservatives.
     
  10. Sunni Man
    Offline

    Sunni Man Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    40,001
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Patriotic American Muslim
    Ratings:
    +12,444
    I assume you are referring to the "navel" :cool:
     

Share This Page