F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
It's been done before. Remember the 1981 NATO exercise where a massive fleet traveled all the way from the U.S. to cross the GIUK gap and conducted constant flight operations coordinating 83 ships from four different nations under EMCON conditions.
1981 was 40 years ago. Why do you keep quoting the long distant past as if it is the present.
I knew you were going to ask that.

I bring up the 1981 exercise because due to it being detailed in a book about the U.S. Navy and at various other sources, I know more about the details of it than later exercises, though I do know the U.S. and allied navies did conduct similar exercises several years later (thought still in the 1980s).

The severely moribund nature of the Russian military in the 1990s made it utterly pointless to conduct such exercises.
[/QUOTE]
LOL most nonsense from 1981 is so remotely useless that is has also been declassified already. At any rate satellite and missile tech increases since then make 1981 as relevant as the stone age
 

Dayton3

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
516
Reaction score
173
Points
178
It's been done before. Remember the 1981 NATO exercise where a massive fleet traveled all the way from the U.S. to cross the GIUK gap and conducted constant flight operations coordinating 83 ships from four different nations under EMCON conditions.
1981 was 40 years ago. Why do you keep quoting the long distant past as if it is the present.
I knew you were going to ask that.

I bring up the 1981 exercise because due to it being detailed in a book about the U.S. Navy and at various other sources, I know more about the details of it than later exercises, though I do know the U.S. and allied navies did conduct similar exercises several years later (thought still in the 1980s).

The severely moribund nature of the Russian military in the 1990s made it utterly pointless to conduct such exercises.
LOL most nonsense from 1981 is so remotely useless that is has also been declassified already. At any rate satellite and missile tech increases since then make 1981 as relevant as the stone age
[/QUOTE]

Except the Russians are far, far less active in launching satellites now than the Soviets were in 1981. Numbers count.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
It's been done before. Remember the 1981 NATO exercise where a massive fleet traveled all the way from the U.S. to cross the GIUK gap and conducted constant flight operations coordinating 83 ships from four different nations under EMCON conditions.
1981 was 40 years ago. Why do you keep quoting the long distant past as if it is the present.
I knew you were going to ask that.

I bring up the 1981 exercise because due to it being detailed in a book about the U.S. Navy and at various other sources, I know more about the details of it than later exercises, though I do know the U.S. and allied navies did conduct similar exercises several years later (thought still in the 1980s).

The severely moribund nature of the Russian military in the 1990s made it utterly pointless to conduct such exercises.
LOL most nonsense from 1981 is so remotely useless that is has also been declassified already. At any rate satellite and missile tech increases since then make 1981 as relevant as the stone age
Except the Russians are far, far less active in launching satellites now than the Soviets were in 1981. Numbers count.
[/QUOTE]
Dude the current enemy is not Russia, wake up fool


1United States$19,485,394,000,000$19.485 trillion2.27%325,084,756$59,93924.08%
2China$12,237,700,479,375$12.238 trillion6.90%1,421,021,791$8,61215.12%
3Japan$4,872,415,104,315$4.872 trillion1.71%127,502,725$38,2146.02%
4Germany$3,693,204,332,230$3.693 trillion2.22%82,658,409$44,6804.56%
5India$2,650,725,335,364$2.651 trillion6.68%1,338,676,785$1,9803.28%
6United Kingdom$2,637,866,340,434$2.638 trillion1.79%66,727,461$39,5323.26%
7France$2,582,501,307,216$2.583 trillion1.82%64,842,509$39,8273.19%
8Brazil$2,053,594,877,013$2.054 trillion0.98%207,833,823$9,8812.54%
9Italy$1,943,835,376,342$1.944 trillion1.50%60,673,701$32,0382.40%
10Canada$1,647,120,175,449$1.647 trillion3.05%36,732,095$44,8412.04%
11Russia$1,578,417,211,937$1.578 trillion1.55%145,530,082$10,8461.95%
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
316
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
 

verker

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
476
Reaction score
99
Points
43
Location
Nordic
Current enemy are China and NOT Russia bid from above myself.

F-35 not personal minion.

F-18 are personal minion.

F-16 are personal minion.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
316
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
It's been done before. Remember the 1981 NATO exercise where a massive fleet traveled all the way from the U.S. to cross the GIUK gap and conducted constant flight operations coordinating 83 ships from four different nations under EMCON conditions.
1981 was 40 years ago. Why do you keep quoting the long distant past as if it is the present.
I knew you were going to ask that.

I bring up the 1981 exercise because due to it being detailed in a book about the U.S. Navy and at various other sources, I know more about the details of it than later exercises, though I do know the U.S. and allied navies did conduct similar exercises several years later (thought still in the 1980s).

The severely moribund nature of the Russian military in the 1990s made it utterly pointless to conduct such exercises.
LOL most nonsense from 1981 is so remotely useless that is has also been declassified already. At any rate satellite and missile tech increases since then make 1981 as relevant as the stone age
Except the Russians are far, far less active in launching satellites now than the Soviets were in 1981. Numbers count.
Right now the Russians (to monitor carriers and other large ships) have two sattelites with passive sensors "Lotos-S", and two sattelites with active radars - "Pion-NKS" - system "Liana".
It allow them to locate the carriers every six hours.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
It's been done before. Remember the 1981 NATO exercise where a massive fleet traveled all the way from the U.S. to cross the GIUK gap and conducted constant flight operations coordinating 83 ships from four different nations under EMCON conditions.
1981 was 40 years ago. Why do you keep quoting the long distant past as if it is the present.
I knew you were going to ask that.

I bring up the 1981 exercise because due to it being detailed in a book about the U.S. Navy and at various other sources, I know more about the details of it than later exercises, though I do know the U.S. and allied navies did conduct similar exercises several years later (thought still in the 1980s).

The severely moribund nature of the Russian military in the 1990s made it utterly pointless to conduct such exercises.
LOL most nonsense from 1981 is so remotely useless that is has also been declassified already. At any rate satellite and missile tech increases since then make 1981 as relevant as the stone age
Except the Russians are far, far less active in launching satellites now than the Soviets were in 1981. Numbers count.
Right now the Russians (to monitor carriers and other large ships) have two sattelites with passive sensors "Lotos-S", and two sattelites with active radars - "Pion-NKS" - system "Liana".
It allow them to locate the carriers every six hours.
Again while you are watching Russia China will roto root your ass


Satellite quick facts
Includes launches through 7/31/2020

  • Total number of operating satellites: 2,787
    • United States: 1,425
    • Russia: 172
    • China: 382
    • Other: 808
 

Dayton3

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
516
Reaction score
173
Points
178
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
The AEGIS system using Standard SAMs have proven to be quite good at shooting down missiles.

You don't have to shoot down every missile anyway. Unless they have nuclear warheads which means an entirely different type of conflict is underway.
 

Dayton3

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
516
Reaction score
173
Points
178
Again while you are watching Russia China will roto root your ass


Satellite quick facts
Includes launches through 7/31/2020

  • Total number of operating satellites: 2,787
    • United States: 1,425
    • Russia: 172
    • China: 382
    • Other: 808
So you are admitting you were lying up thread when you claimed that Russia and China had "10,000 satellites".

Nice of you to admit you're nothing but a troll and a liar.
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
952
Reaction score
948
Points
898
Location
Arizona
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

hahahhahahahahha ''all infants''' hahahahhahah
....we were mistaken..we thought you played only Missile Command...now we know you play Star Trek
hahahahahah
you are the one playing games in your parents' basement
You are the noise


Now do you have any comments on the made in japan F-35 Lightning

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Flown by Hirohito Jr
THOUSANDS of missiles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahhahahahahahahh
Exactly China alone has thousands of missiles of various sizes, many in an attack would be dummies anyway clearing the way for the real warheads. You do understand the concept right?

No real need to even sink a carrier as just poking a hole in one will force retreat to which no other carrier would dare replace

No comment on made in Japan F35's
Actually, a 100,000 ton ship is barely going to even notice a hole poked in its hull. Much less be forced to retreat.
LOL you think that Chinese DF-21 won't make a big enough hole to sink the carrier

No chance.
LOL no chance that a 250 or 500 kt nuke warhead would poke a big enough hole to sink a carrier

OKEEDOKEE

Should we have all F35's built in Japan now?
The second China uses a nuke on a American warship, the USA launches hundreds of ICBMs carrying multiple warheads. Less than thirty minutes later China ceases to exist.
Wrong because the reason to use the anti ship missile is because the carrier attacked China. That said since the carrier is no longer a first strike weapon that can survive, it no longer has a purpose.

Unless the USA attacks camels again.

I assume that you also know that China launches their nukes against America and America no longer exist as well, Then Russia takes over both

Great plan
China has a comparable handful of nukes. somewhere between 300 and 320 warheads and far fewer missiles and launchers. The USA has between 5800 and 6200 warheads and probably a hundred times as many launchers. Most of China's launch platforms can't reach the USA, all of the USA's launch
platforms can reach China. The carriers aren't needed to attack China, that's what the air-launched cruise missiles and submarine-launched cruise missiles are for. Carriers will be used against the "islands" that China created out of sandbars and to protect the SLOCs from PLAN attacks.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
The AEGIS system using Standard SAMs have proven to be quite good at shooting down missiles.

You don't have to shoot down every missile anyway. Unless they have nuclear warheads which means an entirely different type of conflict is underway.
LOL the USS Donald Cook has AEGIS right?



With no radar lock

 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
35,934
Reaction score
12,056
Points
1,560
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
where have you been? on the moon playing Missile Command!!!????
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
952
Reaction score
948
Points
898
Location
Arizona
BTW. The 5M aero ballistic missile DF-17 with DF-ZF glider was first time spotted with H-6N.
It's 5M range is near 2500 clicks, they say. Some analysts suspect that the DZ-ZF will first be used in shorter-range roles as an anti-ship missile.
View attachment 413249
You might notice that the launch platform is a copy of a Badger which has been obsolete since the eighties and China only has about 120 of them which can only carry ONE missile apiece.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

hahahhahahahahha ''all infants''' hahahahhahah
....we were mistaken..we thought you played only Missile Command...now we know you play Star Trek
hahahahahah
you are the one playing games in your parents' basement
You are the noise


Now do you have any comments on the made in japan F-35 Lightning

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Flown by Hirohito Jr
THOUSANDS of missiles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahhahahahahahahh
Exactly China alone has thousands of missiles of various sizes, many in an attack would be dummies anyway clearing the way for the real warheads. You do understand the concept right?

No real need to even sink a carrier as just poking a hole in one will force retreat to which no other carrier would dare replace

No comment on made in Japan F35's
Actually, a 100,000 ton ship is barely going to even notice a hole poked in its hull. Much less be forced to retreat.
LOL you think that Chinese DF-21 won't make a big enough hole to sink the carrier

No chance.
LOL no chance that a 250 or 500 kt nuke warhead would poke a big enough hole to sink a carrier

OKEEDOKEE

Should we have all F35's built in Japan now?
The second China uses a nuke on a American warship, the USA launches hundreds of ICBMs carrying multiple warheads. Less than thirty minutes later China ceases to exist.
Wrong because the reason to use the anti ship missile is because the carrier attacked China. That said since the carrier is no longer a first strike weapon that can survive, it no longer has a purpose.

Unless the USA attacks camels again.

I assume that you also know that China launches their nukes against America and America no longer exist as well, Then Russia takes over both

Great plan
China has a comparable handful of nukes. somewhere between 300 and 320 warheads and far fewer missiles and launchers. The USA has between 5800 and 6200 warheads and probably a hundred times as many launchers. Most of China's launch platforms can't reach the USA, all of the USA's launch
platforms can reach China. The carriers aren't needed to attack China, that's what the air-launched cruise missiles and submarine-launched cruise missiles are for. Carriers will be used against the "islands" that China created out of sandbars and to protect the SLOCs from PLAN attacks.
This discussion is about anti ship missiles and literally the poorest range missiles that China has is in range of every carrier as carriers need to get within a few hundred miles of land to give their jets time in the air over the target
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
where have you been? on the moon playing Missile Command!!!????
No I bought birdseed for my wife's wild pets
 

AZrailwhale

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
952
Reaction score
948
Points
898
Location
Arizona
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

hahahhahahahahha ''all infants''' hahahahhahah
....we were mistaken..we thought you played only Missile Command...now we know you play Star Trek
hahahahahah
you are the one playing games in your parents' basement
You are the noise


Now do you have any comments on the made in japan F-35 Lightning

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Flown by Hirohito Jr
THOUSANDS of missiles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahhahahahahahahh
Exactly China alone has thousands of missiles of various sizes, many in an attack would be dummies anyway clearing the way for the real warheads. You do understand the concept right?

No real need to even sink a carrier as just poking a hole in one will force retreat to which no other carrier would dare replace

No comment on made in Japan F35's
Actually, a 100,000 ton ship is barely going to even notice a hole poked in its hull. Much less be forced to retreat.
LOL you think that Chinese DF-21 won't make a big enough hole to sink the carrier

No chance.
LOL no chance that a 250 or 500 kt nuke warhead would poke a big enough hole to sink a carrier

OKEEDOKEE

Should we have all F35's built in Japan now?
The second China uses a nuke on a American warship, the USA launches hundreds of ICBMs carrying multiple warheads. Less than thirty minutes later China ceases to exist.
Wrong because the reason to use the anti ship missile is because the carrier attacked China. That said since the carrier is no longer a first strike weapon that can survive, it no longer has a purpose.

Unless the USA attacks camels again.

I assume that you also know that China launches their nukes against America and America no longer exist as well, Then Russia takes over both

Great plan
China has a comparable handful of nukes. somewhere between 300 and 320 warheads and far fewer missiles and launchers. The USA has between 5800 and 6200 warheads and probably a hundred times as many launchers. Most of China's launch platforms can't reach the USA, all of the USA's launch
platforms can reach China. The carriers aren't needed to attack China, that's what the air-launched cruise missiles and submarine-launched cruise missiles are for. Carriers will be used against the "islands" that China created out of sandbars and to protect the SLOCs from PLAN attacks.
This discussion is about anti ship missiles and literally the poorest range missiles that China has is in range of every carrier as carriers need to get within a few hundred miles of land to give their jets time in the air over the target
Except the carriers never need to come into range of land-based missiles until the air and submarine launched missiles have killed off most of the launchers. Even then it wouldn't be ONE carrier; it would be a task force of three or four with heavy escorts plus not only Hawkeyes, but Sentinels flying in advance of the carriers augmenting the satellite observation. The Chinese missiles would never go feet dry before being destroyed. China doesn't have a thousand mobile launchers, it probably has less than a hundred, Your wave of a thousand missiles is a figment of your imagination.
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
4,233
Points
908
Location
Cryogenic capsule under area 51, I am not dead
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

hahahhahahahahha ''all infants''' hahahahhahah
....we were mistaken..we thought you played only Missile Command...now we know you play Star Trek
hahahahahah
you are the one playing games in your parents' basement
You are the noise


Now do you have any comments on the made in japan F-35 Lightning

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Flown by Hirohito Jr
THOUSANDS of missiles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahhahahahahahahh
Exactly China alone has thousands of missiles of various sizes, many in an attack would be dummies anyway clearing the way for the real warheads. You do understand the concept right?

No real need to even sink a carrier as just poking a hole in one will force retreat to which no other carrier would dare replace

No comment on made in Japan F35's
Actually, a 100,000 ton ship is barely going to even notice a hole poked in its hull. Much less be forced to retreat.
LOL you think that Chinese DF-21 won't make a big enough hole to sink the carrier

No chance.
LOL no chance that a 250 or 500 kt nuke warhead would poke a big enough hole to sink a carrier

OKEEDOKEE

Should we have all F35's built in Japan now?
The second China uses a nuke on a American warship, the USA launches hundreds of ICBMs carrying multiple warheads. Less than thirty minutes later China ceases to exist.
Wrong because the reason to use the anti ship missile is because the carrier attacked China. That said since the carrier is no longer a first strike weapon that can survive, it no longer has a purpose.

Unless the USA attacks camels again.

I assume that you also know that China launches their nukes against America and America no longer exist as well, Then Russia takes over both

Great plan
China has a comparable handful of nukes. somewhere between 300 and 320 warheads and far fewer missiles and launchers. The USA has between 5800 and 6200 warheads and probably a hundred times as many launchers. Most of China's launch platforms can't reach the USA, all of the USA's launch
platforms can reach China. The carriers aren't needed to attack China, that's what the air-launched cruise missiles and submarine-launched cruise missiles are for. Carriers will be used against the "islands" that China created out of sandbars and to protect the SLOCs from PLAN attacks.
This discussion is about anti ship missiles and literally the poorest range missiles that China has is in range of every carrier as carriers need to get within a few hundred miles of land to give their jets time in the air over the target
Except the carriers never need to come into range of land-based missiles until the air and submarine launched missiles have killed off most of the launchers. Even then it wouldn't be ONE carrier; it would be a task force of three or four with heavy escorts plus not only Hawkeyes, but Sentinels flying in advance of the carriers augmenting the satellite observation. The Chinese missiles would never go feet dry before being destroyed. China doesn't have a thousand mobile launchers, it probably has less than a hundred, Your wave of a thousand missiles is a figment of your imagination.
But in that scenario the carrier is not a first strike weapon. Also as I posted many if not most land based missiles are mobile and could be anywhere so they can not just be offed. And just 1 DF-21 is all it takes. Not sure if subs ever do anything anyway as they just wait for round 2 or 3 which has never come.
 

Dayton3

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
516
Reaction score
173
Points
178
the carrier is a fucking bullseye visible from space 24 hours a day.

Oh sure. from those 10,000 Chinese and Russian satellites you claim are orbiting the Earth.

Sure.
It's a FUGE ocean out there.
esalla makes what I've heard called "the Star Trek mistake". esalla thinks that something like a satellite orbiting the Earth can simply be told to "scan for aircraft carriers" or something to that effect and almost instantly be able to detect any reasonably sized object on the Earth's surface.

In reality, while a satellite technically "can" detect almost any object on the surface of the Earth....it has to no where to look first. No satellite or combination of satellites ever built can sweep hundreds of thousands of square miles nearly instantly and get results. Looking for an object on the surface of the Earth is difficult enough when it is in a fixed location. It gets even more difficult when the object is moving. And a carrier will typically move at least in a 600 mile radius every day.
good analogy ..on Star Trek, they could find specific humans
Even then, it took the Enterprise hours and days to scan the entire planet with their sooper dooper scanners. Trying to find a Carrier in the middle of the Pacific is difficult enough if you know where it was but to find it when it puts on the power at 35kts or more and doesn't go in a straight line is almost impossible. It's a really, really big ocean.
They never actually have to look for the carrier now because it is always visible from the moment it leaves the base and before.

Why are you clowns babbling about Star Trek

Jesus you are all infants

And you're an URDHA.

Want a non Star Trek reference that you might can understand? No problem.

Detecting something like a carrier from satellites is like if you are in the press box at an NFL game with 80,000 fans. You are handed a state of the art pair of binoculars and a good picture of a man nearly seven feet tall, roughly 300 lbs., and wearing a bright orange coat. It short he is distinctive and obvious as hell.

You are given the section, row number, and seat number where he is sitting and told to find him. Could you find him? Sure, probably in a few seconds.

But, real life satellite surveillance is NOT like that. Instead you're given only the section number where the man is. A section has around 10,000 people total. And the man you're trying to find also knows you are trying to find him and he is free to move as necessary to evade detection within that section (area of the ocean). Plus the man you're trying to find knows the general pattern of how you'll be searching for him (because satellite paths are predictable). Finally the man in question has control over more than two dozen other people in that section whom he can move at will to help him avoid detection (the other ships in a carrier battle group along with nearby merchant shipping).

How quickly do you think you'll find the man in that section then? Sure, you might get lucky and find him quickly. More than likely you won't find him at all. Even if there are a bunch of you with binoculars.
Let me guess! You never served in the military and are talking out of your ass? The stuff you are posting about satellites finding a carrier in the ocean would have been true in the 60s and 70s, but no longer. Infrared cameras, electronic surveillance, and other capabilities you cannot even fathom make it very easy to locate any ship on the surface.
You can't use electronic surveillance if there is nothing to surveil. I assume you've heard of "emissions control".
Dude they can scan an entire ocean every day more than once, and the satellites are not tracking emissions.

Are you from Earth?
The main problem with satellites is that the most of them are not going to survive first day of the war.
What I am saying is that a carrier is useless as a first strike weapon because if it starts the war and attacks a modern enemy not using camels, such as China there will be no ship to land back on which makes the carrier useless as a first strike weapon, so why have them? Not all attacks will end in war, but any attack on China or Russia with a carrier will cause the loss of that carrier. So why have them, or are we going to take the fucking Sahara again bothering the locust eaters
But they can be useful in the second and further strikes, and, what is even more important - they are important in the protection of our ocean trade routes (for example with Australia) from attacks of Russian and Chinese cruisers and submarines.
In a war there is just no way to defend the ship from missile attack. We demonstrate that our weapons can shoot down a missile that they know is coming. Have they ever shot down a Pearl Harbor level attack where every zero was a missile?

Nope and they never will
The AEGIS system using Standard SAMs have proven to be quite good at shooting down missiles.

You don't have to shoot down every missile anyway. Unless they have nuclear warheads which means an entirely different type of conflict is underway.
LOL the USS Donald Cook has AEGIS right?



With no radar lock

overflying a U.S. ship in peacetime is no indicator whatsoever of combat performance in war time.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top