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

To: Mariner

Two things:

1) It’s surprisingly hard to sink ships, even harder to sink aircraft carriers (because they are mostly air), and harder to sink big ships.

Despite some taking enormous damage, the US did not lose a fleet carrier in World War II after 1942.

Thus a US CVN would be INCREDIBLY hard to actually sink; would likely take either many, many large-diameter torpedo hits (such as Russian 650mm) or a fire that gets out of control. Even a fire that gets out of control would likely leave a floating, burned out hulk. And US damage control has really become a science.

Thus people need to get the “sink” idea out of their heads.

On the other hand, it’s VERY easy to put a CVN out of operation. You need a largely undamaged flight deck, a ship that’s not on fire, and enough forward speed for launches. Even single missiles, torpedoes, mines, or suicide boats are capable of doing enough damage to damage the flight deck, start a fire, or take out a propeller. A CVN that can’t conduct flight ops is a worthless piece of metal.

2) The Iranians almost certainly can’t sink a CVN, but they have hundred to thousands of weapons that could damage a CVN long enough to disrupt flight operations, IF they made it through the Strike Group defenses. Ignore the “AEGIS/CIWS ROOOLZ!” people because nobody has actually EVER launched a many-missile attack against any naval warship in combat. Predicting the outcome of things that have never happened before is perilous.


28 posted on 04/09/2012 11:50:11 AM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Strategerist

1) It’s surprisingly hard to sink ships, even harder to sink aircraft carriers (because they are mostly air), and harder to sink big ships.

But the Willie Dee tried......http://www.ussiowa.org/general/html/willie_d.htm


32 posted on 04/09/2012 12:02:47 PM PDT by csmusaret (I have kleptomania, but when it gets too bad I take something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Strategerist
"Two things:"

The price for attacking an Aircraft Carrier with national assets is far too severe for any nation to contemplate.

And when operating 300miles out, suicide to attempt.

I'm thinking many folks are not aware how dominant the USN is at sea. We are unchallenged outside the littorals. If you see a Carrier in the Gulf, you can bet we do not intend to attack. And, you can bet we have sufficient assets in the region to effect terrible retribution.

I hear things have changed, but the price of a Carrier used to be total nuclear war. You can bet it's still extreme.

44 posted on 04/09/2012 12:53:55 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Strategerist

Are you telling them how to attack us? This site is outlandish in that regard.


81 posted on 04/09/2012 9:34:36 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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