Posted on 02/13/2016 7:21:06 AM PST by C19fan
The U.S. Navy’s latest and greatest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, when completed, will join the ranks of the world’s most advanced warships ever put to sea. It will carry an air wing with firepower second to none. It will be defended by some of the most powerful naval vessels on the planet. And yet, coming in at an astounding $15 billion dollars—the most expensive naval vessel ever—its time as the symbol of U.S. power projection and military dominance may be over.
Notice I used the words may be over. The simple fact is this: no one really knows for sure, but the trends all point to dangerous times ahead. We do know one thing with certainty—the mighty aircraft carrier is under siege, and without major changes to its capabilities, investing billions of scarce defense dollars seems a disastrous idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
They said Battle ships were obsolete but they sure sent em off Beirut.
Amazing when a shell the size of a V.W. come from over the horizon and lands ON target, maybe 32 miles away.
These aircraft carriers project American power the world over and GOD help any who try to sink em.
I don’t agree on the vulnerability of carriers against real powers, not when they are employed sensibly.
Their ability to project power ashore against minor and regional powers is an obvious benefit. They provide us with a forward air force base, and no neighboring power has to take the risk of allowing us to operate from their land.
Against a major power, carriers have to stand further back, but their value is still tremendous. Either Russia or China would have to defend not only against known lines of attack from known bases but also against a carrier approaching within hundreds of miles on any open water with access to their coasts. That’s a big increase in uncertainty, and uncertainty makes war less likely. I agree that the newest carrier cost too much, but that is a result of corrupt contracting, crony capitalism, and other flaws with our government, not flaws with the carrier itself.
No doubt, probably a good bit more economical than cruise missiles.
Supersonic, nuclear tipped cavitating torpedos.
The Uinted States today in 2016 is the equivalent of Rome in either 185 AD or Rome in 310 AD! For those history buffs among us you will know the significance of those dates. For those that don’t please research it. In either case the U.S. will NOT last as long as Rome did after either of those dates. The irony is of course that whether there is a U.S. here or not....things for the average “American” really won’t change much. In fact things might actually get better....
Carriers are now within range of many anti ship missiles.
if they are to survive they need to be able to stand off much further.
that means they require higher range robotic aircraft.
What ! it can’t fly
they have to stop building them other wise they next ones will be vsn? bill clintoon and obama.
Once nukes are used, the exchange almost certainly escalates, and those in power on both sides lose (along with many millions of their people). I don’t think either China or Russia wants to go nuclear against us or against each other, and a conventional supercavitating torpedo still has to hit. That technology is not decisive in the carrier battle because you have to get within range not just to shoot but to shoot accurately, i.e., within ten miles. My money is still on the carrier battle group (including cruisers and destroyers with air defense capabilities and one or more SSN escorts).
The last ship of any design to be built is obsolete before the keel is laid. Same as any military aircraft.
This is just a fact of life. The good thing is most can be refitted to meet current needs. The damn near 70 year old BUF comes to mind.
When my father worked at Newport News Shipbuilding there were some weeks when the company received over one hundred change orders from the Navy on one contract (carrier or submarine). That’s expensive.
True but then carriers are VERY vulnerable approaching a heavily defended coastline. If things had gone a little differently for Doolitles Raid the USN would have had 1 or 2 carriers disabled far from the nearest support base. It was an audacious move that had strategic benefits all out of proportion to the size of the raid, but the risk was also huge.
Carriers are fragile. They can be put out of action (flight operations) rather easily.
The carrier needs to be far away from the target to avoid missile strikes. We should be renewing old but high performing fighter aircraft with new frames and updated engines and avionics that have range and performance and not what we are doing now...
The Navy has other things to worry about like Lactivism and Pregnancy Awareness - things that actually matter. When it comes to toys to justify its existence, it likes self-sinking surface ships and planes that don’t fly right.
The US Navy, like the rest of the US military, is on the same plan that NASA’s manned space program was put on in 1972 - the path into oblivion and obscurity.
Same could be said about bombers as they too are vulnerable to defensive weapons. The next war will be about controlling the information and communication capability of the enemy but, this is not a new thought. Destroying strategic lines of communication and transportation will defeat any battle plan.
The supercavitating torpedo is one of those weapons that will likely never live up to it’s reputation. Because the ‘torpedo’ is a literally a rocket that flies underwater inside a small ‘bubble’ of air that it self-creates there can be no sensor interface through the air/water interface. IOW’s it’s a straight-line weapon unlike, say, a MK 48 ADCAP torpedo that has terminal guidance. If the target evades, the ADCAP adapts. The supercavitating Skval can’t do that. I think the Skval is essentially an “F-U” weapon that is designed to force a break in contact so that a Typhoon can escape it’s pursuing SSN. If you hit, great. If not at least the Typhoon has a chance to do something evasive while the US/Brit SSN is busy dodging the Skval.
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this statement.
But for our inillustrious political and military leadership, led by an enemy islamist CIC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.