“You definitely not thinking on what I said. Just follow the thought. Any aircraft needs to come back home so it simply can NOT carry same amount of fuel as AS missile which flies only one way.”
And you claim you are smarter than Westerners, and can do calculus in your head without any effort? You’re a fraud, Ivan. You said ANY aircraft can NOT carry the same amount of fuel as an AS missile. For one thing, fuel itself is not the issue; it is fuel CONSUMPTION that matters. Do you have any idea how stupid your remark is? Hell, just US fighters alone blow your argument out of the water: F-35...1,350 miles; F-22...1,864 miles; FA-18...2,069 miles; F-15...2,300 miles; F-16...2,622 miles. Fully armed the distances would be shorter, obviously. But these numbers are the ranges without refueling; and, of course, they can be refueled in flight.
The AS missile has a range of, at most, 500 miles, and that is without the sensors needed for an accurate strike. Do the math, idiot: Even the shortest range aircraft, the F-35, has more than enough to hit a target 500 miles away and return without having to refuel. Your one-way AS missile will drop into the sea after, at most, 500 miles. Even the F-35 ONE WAY has more range than your AS missile.
“It is just physics.”
You know nothing about physics. No wonder you guys can’t design and build a competent aircraft carrier.
“So it means that carrier always will get under fire of ASes long BEFORE its aircraft may reach AS battery.”
My God, but you are dense. If the AS missile has a maximum range of 500 miles, and the carrier is 600 miles away, that AS missile will fall into the sea 100 miles short of its target. But the aircraft that took off from that carrier, even fully loaded, could hit the AS battery and return with gas to spare.
“And BTW most common Russian AS Kalibr which can be installed even on a small cutter or submarine has a range 1,600 miles but FA-18 just 600(you said). So you see a math?”
Yeah; but you don’t.
For your reading pleasure, Ivan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalibr_(missile_family)
Not a ONE of the Kalibr missiles in service has a range of 1600 miles. Longer range missiles are in development, but that does not mean they have been developed or perfected. Your carrier the Admiral Kutzsenov was under development at one time, too: How did that work out, Ivan?
You said ANY aircraft can NOT carry the same amount of fuel as an AS missile. For one thing, fuel itself is not the issue; it is fuel CONSUMPTION that matters. ==
You again didn’t understand or just distort what I said. I said if any other conditions are SAME. It means if also fuel consumption is same. With these conditions obviously any AS missile has twice bigger range because it is not need to return home.
And you claim you are smarter than Westerners, and can do calculus in your head without any effort? ==
I said the math task which westerners give their students much easier then Russian students solve. And I did NOT say I’m smarter - it is just YOUR conclusion and your words not mine))). Funny that you came to such conclusion.
Not a ONE of the Kalibr missiles in service has a range of 1600 miles.==
You so pompous and overlooking. But I said AS(antiship!) Kaliber have 1,600 miles range.
“...3M14K (SS-N-30A) An inertial guidance land attack variant deployed by the Russian Navy. The submarine-launched weapon has a basic length of 6.2 m (20 ft), with a 450 kg (990 lb) warhead. Its range is 2,500 km (1,600 mi), allowing the Russian Navy to strike targets throughout Central/Western Europe from beyond the GIUK gap. Its subsonic terminal speed is Mach 0.8....” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalibr_(missile_family)