Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

More images/videos at link
1 posted on 12/24/2017 8:27:27 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: sukhoi-30mki

Sounds like an easy fix.


2 posted on 12/24/2017 8:30:30 AM PST by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Jeeze, they can’t even make the deck flat. Don’t tell me they are using EEOC types to build these things.


3 posted on 12/24/2017 8:35:55 AM PST by BobL (I shop at Walmart...I just don't tell anyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Modifying a ship for a function it was inadequately designed for could be colossally expensive. I think the technology is here for a couple of dedicated, AI enhanced, swarm ships that would cruise very close to the Queen Elizabeth on both sides, bow and stern. These small ships would be cheap enough to just swap out if the technology changes beyond whatever defenses they already have installed. Networked in with the entire fleet’s defenses they’d have a heads-up for attacks that might otherwise be out of their radar envelope due to their small size. The AI feature would allow them to begin firing in the right vicinity even before they could, themselves, see the incoming missile.

Bear in mind; modern missiles maneuver when they get in range of the target. Therefore whatever retrofitted system used by the QE would need to be very robust. Missiles are generally moving faster than the mechanical slew rate and projectile travel time of any weapons system.


7 posted on 12/24/2017 8:40:31 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I remember seeing photos of WWII battleships and aircraft carriers.

As the war progressed and newer ships were built and older ones refitted, they added huge numbers of anti-aircraft guns.


8 posted on 12/24/2017 8:41:43 AM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Here's the basic problem: Russia spends 5.6% of its GDP on defense, roughly $70 billion, depending on how you figure it.

The US now spends 3.3% of GDP on defense, about $600 billion, under Obama, woefully inadequate for treaty & other military commitments.
We should be at least 4% which is roughly $800 billion.

The world average defense spending is 2.2% of GDP and rising.

The Brits spend just 1.9% of their GDP on defense, circa $50 billion, a ludicrous number and if they refuse to match US spending percent, then the difference should be paid to the US treasury for the invaluable service of keeping their sorry hindquarters safe.

16 posted on 12/24/2017 9:27:46 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

That’s why they lost HMS Sheffield in ‘82...


17 posted on 12/24/2017 9:30:51 AM PST by CapandBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Well, heck, she has no aircraft, so why waste an ASM on her?


20 posted on 12/24/2017 10:20:52 AM PST by doorgunner69 (No video seems to happen a lot when they shoot somebody..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson