It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"No one has been able to land a [big] punch on an American [aircraft] carrier for over half a century," StrategyPage notes. "There is no practical knowledge about exactly how sturdy, or not, these big ships are."
...batter the America with explosives, both underwater and above the surface, watching from afar and through monitoring devices placed on the vessel.
These explosions would presumably simulate attacks by torpedoes, cruise missiles and perhaps a small boat suicide attack like the one that damaged the destroyer USS Cole in Yemen in 2000.
That, she said, will allow the Navy to "improve the survivability of future aircraft carriers."
Certain aspects of the tests are classified, and neither America's former crew nor the news media will be allowed to view them in person, Dolan said. The Navy does not want to give away too much information on how a carrier could be sunk, Pat Dolan, a spokeswoman for Naval Sea Systems Command, said.
Posted by Seekerof
IMHO, unless the SUNBURN is well placed, one SUNBURN alone will not sink a US carrier. Way to much damage control and watertight compartmentalization on a carrier for starters.
From linked article
The U.S. Navy might just have been rendered obsolete to the point where it's ships are sitting ducks in a nuclear target gallery, rather than State of the Art fighting ships capable of defeating any foe in the world. If just three of these missiles, each one with a nuclear warhead of 120,000 tons of TNT, in the air just above the fleet, and detonated them, an aircraft carrier, all of its Aegis cruisers and all support ships, would be annihilated instantaneously.
Source
Posted by BigTrain
See iof any missiles get through. From what im told, nothing gets through the phalanx, nothing.
From linked article
The Sunburn’s combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat.
Source
From linked article
US naval commanders operating in the Persian Gulf face serious challenges that are unique to the littoral, i.e., coastal, environment. A glance at a map shows why: The Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their detection problematic.
Source
Originally posted by BigTrain
It survived the blasts for 25 days!!!!!!!!
What a champion, i can only imagine how many missiles and torpedoes it took to finally go down. I wish I could see photos, but we know thats not happening.
Train