The aircraft carrier gained ascendancy over the battleship in WWII, as signalized by the attack on Pearl Harbor, now almost 70 years ago. Although it maintains an impressive aspect, just as the battleship did at that time, its vulnerability to new weapons and capabilities is obvious. One can only hope that the proof of this will not be given in some vain display of imagined invulnerability.
I have great trust in our intelligence and technology.
During Viet Nam, the Russians had, IIRC, five COMARS. They were subs that targeted carriers.
Four of them were despatched immediately, with the fifth finding it’s ultimate fate a tad later.
I believe we will be able to take care of those threats.
Posted yesterday...
Our aircraft carriers have been in the periscope sights of communist submarines since...oh, I don’t know, the early Sixties when the Soviets made a big splash about following the USS Saratoga with one of their subs for a few days.
All surface ships are vulnerable to submarines...all of them. It boils down to how much resources are being applied to protect those surface ships via ASW technology.
If anything, we are letting ASW wither, and that is the danger.
I have seen that first paragraph of the article printed over and over and over again in a multitude of different ways for the last 40 years, but surface ships still find a way to be useful.
Interesting... I could swear I saw the Washington 4 hours ago here in Japan! That must be a powerful periscope if it can see from the Atlantic all the way to the Sea of Japan where the Washington is stationed.
Message to bubbleheads: If you start an exercise in perfect position near a cvbg then yes you have a good chance. In the real world how did you "sneak" into position at a quiet 7 knots from 1000 NM away?