Posted on 10/25/2016 7:03:28 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
I believe into the Seventies, that the Soviets were doing underway refueling from bow to stern with the oilers.
I found that amazing.
And the flight deck missile launcher is a cool idea. But I would expect the Japanese Navy to have some sage advice about how keeping 20,000 pounds of explosives and god only knows how much rocket fuel 3 feet below a flight deck might be a bad idea.
Very solid points. I see these stories here all the time about how US Carriers are hopelessly vulnerable to the new “weapon X’.
I think in real life, attacking a US Carrier battlegroup is very dicey business. Very few are up to the task. They will get hurt very bad, and there are not good odds of success for them.
I know what what we have and I know what we can do and what we can’t. You don’t see what you can’t and its not your fault. Internet research is nice but it is only 30% accurate Wikipedia does a nice descriptive job but does have lots of inaccuracies. Actual naval combat scenarios are not developed using Wikipedia or other public sources. The Russians have also been understating and hiding its strength for awhile. It is larger than listed in the online resources and is growing as they are rapidly taking things out of the reserve fleet and restoring them to service. They are getting ready for war.
Study this battle and learn:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima
There are lots of parallels of what can happen to us today.
Thank you for the link.
I’m well acquainted with the Battle of Tsushima. I lived in Japan for several years, and has spent much of my adult life learning Naval History. I am not an expert, but can speak broadly, competently and conversationally about naval matters with someone who is.
There are a lot of parallels to nearly anything, it is one thing humans are very good at.
What I know about this isn’t solely from the Internet, it is from a life of accumulated study, of paying attention to these things long before the Internet came around, and having practical experience with a portion of it.
So sure, I don’t know about all the top-super-secret stuff the Russians are building with funds from some store of money somewhere, or rusting ships they are taking out of some god-forsaken rusting anchorage somewhere and restoring to modern capability. I also don’t know what our military has that they aren’t talking about either.
I just don’t buy it. What I do buy is a lot of people who have a hankering to see the Soviet Union rise again. They long for those “good old days” while forgetting that behind all that was the fixings of “The Gulag Archipelago”. But I do see that as a real danger.
Believe what you will. I know reality.
“I am not an expert, but can speak broadly, competently and conversationally about naval matters with someone who is.”
You sure do and military technology and history has also been my hobby too since I have been 9 years old. I have a awesome library of books on various subjects. But there is huge difference between book knowledge and reality that will change your perspective. It would shock you to find out how book knowledge only barely scratches the surface.
I suspect that getting hit with a 1,600-lb warhead at mach 2.5 (let alone a swarm of them) would sink pretty much anything, except maybe Iowa class battleships that were made to take hits from other battleships. IIRC those missiles were a major reason Reagan reactivated the old battleships.
Great article for a lay person like me. Keep posting Sukhoi-30mki.
BTTT, thanks
Russia is as likely to shoot their own Carrier as they are shoot anything else.
Just look back at the Kursk.
100% they put the WAR in warship alright, no confusing their ships wi cruise liners
It would damage but not sink a 95,000 tonne CVN.
“...And each of those guns fires more guns...”
Twice!!!! :^)
Our adversaries having been playing psyops for 40 years with imaginary killer weapon to make duped Americans thing carrier are obsolete. Our enemies drool over our naval air capabilities and know they cannot ever compete with us. They wish they had them.
Keep in mind that the author, and by extension the site War is Boring, has been implicated in pro-Russian propaganda.
Nice but even a close hit will set off those missiles in their tubes.
They are shoot and scoot and hope to live weapons.
This is an interest of mine.
Care to share the title of the book?
” Sinking it”
Carriers are WWII relicts. They would be the first to go in a nuclear exchange. ICBM/SLBM are no longer just ballistic but targetable.
Armchair admirals who know noting about naval warfare and strategy are being ridiculous that call CVN's relics and are playing into the propaganda of the rest of the hostile world which is desperately trying to develop fixed wing naval aviation capabilities.
Every weapons system in vulnerable to being destroyed that is why it is called war.
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.