[Phsstpok]

An American nuclear carrier group is several orders of magnitude more capable than the tiny ships the UK sent to the Falklands, even their carriers. For one thing they didn't have any AWACS coverage, which made it possible for the "tenacious pilots of Argentina" to get within missle range. A US carrier battle group can generally "sanitize" an area 300 miles in diameter and NOTHING will get into them under power.

I'm not worried about an exocet or even a cruise missile coming in during a combat action. They've got R2D2s (Phalanx CIWS) to deal with those vampires and they work real good.   Even a top line Russian Mig with their best pilots would have a hard time getting into engagement range.  And then there's the story about the USS Ronald Reagan having directed energy point defense.  The nickname for CVN 76 is "The Ronny Ray Gun." I got a non-denial denial on that rumor from a senior chief involved in the build out of the CIC and the RRs shake down cruise as his final assignment before retirement.

No, I'm worried about a carrier battle group steaming into the Persian Gulf during some conflict and sailing over a previously placed nuke left on the bottom by the Iranians. There's no way to defend against that.

[Alter Kaker]

For one thing they didn't have any AWACS coverage, which made it possible for the "tenacious pilots of Argentina" to get within missle range. A US carrier battle group can generally "sanitize" an area 300 miles in diameter and NOTHING will get into them under power.

AWACS isn't too effective against cruise missiles or submarines, and your antisubmarine and antimissile capabilities are not what they're cracked up to be. Asymmetrical warfare and all that.