Let's face it....the day of big war ships is gone ...

[CrusaderFrank]

Depends on the size of the inbound munition in question.

Soviet anti-carrier tactics were based on long range missiles diving in at Mach 2-3 and with 1 ton warheads.

smaller stuff would need dozens of hits to do actual damage.

smaller stuff at mach 9?

 

[martybegan]

smaller stuff at mach 9?

depends on its mass and density.

you can put a 2" hole in a carrier and it will still be a carrier.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well you might clear the fog one day.

Why did we attack Iraq after 9/11?

You are just dead set on proving yourself a dumbass, aren't you?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You are just dead set on proving yourself a dumbass, aren't you?

Tell me again what Iraq's role was in the 9/11 attack

 

[Mr Natural]

Well you might clear the fog one day.

Why did we attack Iraq after 9/11?

Because the Bushes were good buddies with the Saudis and somebody over there (other than the Saudis) needed to be attacked in response to 9/11.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Because the Bushes were good buddies with the Saudis and somebody over there (other than the Saudis) needed to be attacked in response to 9/11.

What did the Saudi government do to support Al Qaeda?

 

[AlexanderPK]

The reactors are smaller, designed to scram if in trouble, and any runaway reaction would be quenched by the seawater entering the reactor systems either before or after the meltdown.

Let them stay afloat in any case, nuclear power is a *****. What if the water won't quench it and it'll run away anyway.

 

[Invisibleflash]

The increase in speed, power and accuracy of the new generation of killer missiles pretty much eliminates threat of large sea going war ships.
Hell even smaller and faster ships are no longer safe.

Unless some comes up with a bubble field ( the power plant necessary for that would never float) .... No amount of defense can be totally effective against a multiple launch of dozens of hypersonic projectiles at the same time

Time to re-think.....
Maybe the new battleships all need to be submarines?

Jo

Depends on 2 things...

1 - Does the country being attacked have the means to destroy the ships?

2 - Even if they have the means, do they have ball size?

Russia has been attacked through our proxy for years. We confiscate their ships; Europe steals their bonds and Russia never does a thing to retaliate. I reckon Puttin has a ball problem.

China too! We have shut down their trading partners that they have invested millions, if not billions in. They suck it up... and they swallow!

I think both countries just want peace and trade with America. But once America puts you on the shit list; they won't stop until you are destroyed. There is no other choice.

 

[The Duke]

Well you might clear the fog one day.

Why did we attack Iraq after 9/11?

Distraction from the Bushes and to feed the MIC.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Let them stay afloat in any case, nuclear power is a *****. What if the water won't quench it and it'll run away anyway.

Russia has lost numerous nuclear submarines with no difficulties. We lost two. No problems.

 

[The Duke]

Russia has lost numerous nuclear submarines with no difficulties. We lost two. No problems.

We lost 2?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

We lost 2?

Thresher and Scorpion. Both in the 1960s.

 

[AlexanderPK]

Russia has lost numerous nuclear submarines with no difficulties. We lost two. No problems.

Okay then, let them sink.

Just kidding. Actually I thought we were lucky they have been able to shut those reactors down. For all of those accidents were peace time accidents and war environment might have prevented the happy in a way endings.

 

[gipper]

I doubt Israel wants this to happen, as any retaliation would be against Israel in the hopes of getting other Arab states to jump in to save them.

Same thing Saddam tried in 1991.

Except Bibi has been demanding Iran be attacked by the US for years.

Where do you get your news? You might try different sources.

 

[gipper]

…

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

It would probably be wise to invest in heavy cruisers and destroyers you'll still need a carrier to to bring your air wings to bear but yeah they're Giant bullseyes... All you need is one missile to slip through to knock it out of commission and send it back for repairs

China and Russian depending on drone swarms may not be all that forward thinking

 

[martybegan]

Let them stay afloat in any case, nuclear power is a *****. What if the water won't quench it and it'll run away anyway.

That much water would quench it, after possibly a steam explosion on the kiloton range.

 

[Oddball]

Sorry, but I don't go for the ITS TEH JOOOOOOOSSSSS logic.

It's old, tired and played out.

Straw man argument.

The Likud party isn't TEH JOOOOOOOSSSSS in totality...They're only a small subset; Israel's Bushbot warmongers.

 

[martybegan]

Straw man argument.

The Likud party isn't TEH JOOOOOOOSSSSS in totality...They're only a small subset; Israel's Bushbot warmongers.

People can hide their antisemitism all they want in rationalization, but deep down it's the driving force for 90% of what we see on this board and out in the real world.

 

[AlexanderPK]

What bothered me most was radiation poisoning. Chernobyl has been quiet for forty years yet the zone won't be suitable for life for ages or even millennia to come.