Posted on 04/02/2017 8:16:51 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
I like it. What are we going to do if they build 24 more?
I think our own Marines could use something like that.
Here’s the Imperial March to accompany that pic => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzntZLHcYy0
Maybe the U.S. could build a carrier India would buy. Made in America! More jobs! More exports! More winning! Go Trump!
when I see these big carriers, USA based or not, I can’t help but think of the Repulse and the Prince of Wales, which were the first capital ships sunk by air attack on open seas.
the British commander apparently did not believe that modern battleships could be sunk by air attack alone.
Do carriers have a similar vulnerability to some new weapon or tactic? They represent a huge investment in a single ship. The same money could pay for many small ships.
Is there any way to decentralize the aircraft carrier function to many small ships?
I’m not a military expert, just asking the question.
When the “Varyag” was purchased from the Ukrainians I thought the Chicoms were going to make it into a hotel/casino? What happened? Rhetorical question of course.
It’s my understanding that the ships themselves are quite sinkable and are one in a group of ships who protect it, along with aircraft and other assorted weaponry.
I don’t know how they protect against torpedoes.
Carriers are sitting ducks and rather expensive ducks at that
(chuckling)
Fleet air defense is the #1 priority for the USN. That has been neglected somewhat since the retirement of the F-14A/D and the AIM-54 Phoenix Missile a few years before that. If a battle group could be build around a small flight deck (say LHA/LHD class vessel) you could conceivably use unmanned drones. But there would have to be artificial intelligence to handle the engagements. Things would happen too fast to be using a data-link.
I seem to remember a discussion centered around what makes our carriers almost invincible - the US let it be known that the sinking of a carrier will be given a nuclear response.
Paid for with the money from these stupid free trade deals, which have created Chinese tax payers to pay into their military at the expense of American tax payers who could have paid into our military. Thanks free traitors.
Yet another way that all that cheap Chinese crap sold at Walmart and other places hurts us.
Any navy with a half-decent submarine force could take out a carrier. Carriers are only really good for taking on half-arsed mickey mouse navies that don’t have proper subs and for providing air support for invasions of countries that lack a formidable land-based air force.
Wouldn’t a carrier have an attack sub in its group to detect and eliminate enemy subs? This would be in addition to the ASW capabilities of its other escorts.
There is almost no protection truth be known. Let alone a barrage of high Mach supersonic missiles.
Trump and the USN/ defense complex have real issues that 20 years of neglect have not solved.
India loses edge? Doesn’t that depend on who has the best planes and pilots? Serious question all.
“Carriers are sitting ducks and rather expensive ducks at that”
I seem to remember a discussion centered around what makes our carriers almost invincible - the US let it be known that the sinking of a carrier will be given a nuclear response....”
So they really are sitting ducks
Good to know we have, what, 22 of them?
Good Grief.
Maybe China is building them for the little countries that have an issue with their new island.
In this day and age Carriers are LSTs. Large slow targets.
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.