Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dennisw; Skooz; zarf; hc87
A few facts just to remember:

Not a single US fleet carrier was lost in WWII due solely to enemy action. The ones we lost all required scuttling and/or an attack by our own forces to put them down.

Not a single US fleet carrier launched after 7 December 1941 was lost at all. (CV-9 Essex and subsequent)

Saratoga, essentially at ground zero for the Able/Baker nuclear weapons tests, would not have sunk with even moderate damage control. As it was, she took several hours to go down.

The Forrestal incident involved as much explosive ordnance as a dozen simultaneous cruise missile strikes, and she wasn't lost either.

The reason they put carriers in battle groups is that they are part of an integrated defense system with their own assets (CAP), Aegis cruisers/destroyers, SSNs for ASW, etc. making it far from easy to get a missile to the carrier in the first place - and it would take a lot more than one.

The USS Stark was hit with two Exocet missiles, one of which did not explode (which makes the problem worse, since that second missile's fuel fed the fire which was a bigger problem than explosive damage). She made it.

The USS Samuel F B Roberts hit a mine directly under the keel, the exact point for maximum effectiveness. She made it.

The claims that warships are 'missile magnets' (as the referenced article claims) have been around since the claim changed from 'bomb magnet' and before that whatever other weapon was on vogue. The facts say it is very, very difficult to sink a US warship, particularly an aircraft carrier. Our damage control is better than the Brits (by demonstration) and our ships are ridiculously overdesigned by commercial standards.

But they're damn good as warships.

By the way, a simple hull speed calculation on a 1000-ft hull shows that a carrier with 280,000hp can get up to 40 kts pretty easily. The actual top speed is classified, but it's a lot more than 31 kts.
87 posted on 06/19/2006 2:48:00 PM PDT by Gorjus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: Gorjus
By the way, a simple hull speed calculation on a 1000-ft hull shows that a carrier with 280,000hp can get up to 40 kts pretty easily. The actual top speed is classified, but it's a lot more than 31 kts.

Is that with, or without, jet assist? :-)


89 posted on 06/19/2006 2:54:27 PM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: Gorjus
Re: Not a single US fleet carrier was lost in WWII due solely to enemy action.

Sorry, but the USS Yorktown, CV-5, was sunk due to enemy action at the Battle of Midway. After having suffered Japanese air attacks that damaged her mightily, repair crews were trying to stem flooding when the Japanese submarine I-168 torpedoed "The Fighting Lady" while also breaking the back and sinking the Destroyer USS Hammann (DD-412) that was beside the Yorktown.

From http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/8791/cv5hist.html

The second attempt at salvage, however, would never be made. Throughout the night of the 6th and into the morning of the 7th, "The Fighting Lady" remained stubbornly afloat. By 0530 on the 7th, however, the men in the ships nearby noted that the carrier's list was rapidly increasing to port.

Realizing there was no hope to save her, all who were able, from the other ships watched. With respect, they removed their hats. Some cried. Many muttered "The old York's going down. The old York's going down". At 0701, as if tired, the valiant flattop turned over on her port side, gave a loud groan, and sank in 3,000 fathoms of water, her battle flags flying.

100 posted on 06/19/2006 3:43:39 PM PDT by Bender2 (Gad! The inmates have control... And I'm trying to quit smoking!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: namsman

Ping! Check out reply 87 and then 100, if you haven't already by the time you read this..........


103 posted on 06/19/2006 4:18:34 PM PDT by SW6906 (5 things you can't have too much of: sex, money, firewood, guns and ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: Gorjus

So you really think the Kitty Hawk, with an FFG in train, can make better than 31 knots?

What's the shaft pressure like on a Nimitz when it gets beyond 33 knots?


184 posted on 06/24/2006 10:06:56 AM PDT by hc87
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson