posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 05:04 PM
"All should remember that our existence as a nation is the result of OUR overcoming the greatest naval power the planet had ever seen... the British
read some books and educate your self for Gods sake.
"having been aboard 2 ships and shore duty in an 8.5 year stint, i would say that we do have the best ships in the world. and for the most part, the
best men and women for crew. no matter what, there will always be weaknesses."
Same kind of nonsense as; "Driven two Cadillac's and nothing else, I can say that we make the best cars in the world, made by the best men and
women."- all cause I say so.
"Ironically the tank is the best weapon for the desert. It is efficient and strong and capable of taking advantage of the terrain fully. Helicopters
have their intakes clogged and are vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire. So are aircraft.
In the first gulf war the primary destroyer of T-72s were M1A1s followed by the USAF...the USN only shot down a few enemy air craft and had only a few
So your analogy back-fires in this sense."
You're a Russian, what the hell happened to your common sense? Should I guess or leave it alone?
Sub-sonic relic such as Exocet proved to be more then capable of defeating modern ship defenses on a number of occasions, striking both English and US
navy vessels armed with Phalanx and other defenses.
Kh-41 type weapon alone is capable of neutralising ANY current vessel, not considering a myriad of new generation weapons.
New generation munitions such as air launched ram jet delivery shell housing a supersonic torpedo CLEARLY marks the END of offensive NAVY vessel OF
Modern deployment options allow for a simultaneous attack from the air and from under the water, leaving ANY surface vessels DEFENSELESS.
Intercepting a small target maneuvering at Mach 3+ is EXTREMELY problematic, and requires implementation of NAVY ABM systems which have not even been
proposed yet, while defense from a supersonic torpedo requires an intercepting supersonic torpedo, technology which US NAVY does not posses, and even
when it will, it takes only one to detonate under the hull and snap the bow by the rising gas bubble.
In any regard, attempts to adequately defend ANY Navy vessel against such weapons is futile, not only by its virtue, but by the enormous cost of
defense verses attack ratio.
While energy weapons will naturally evolve and replace kinetic defense weapons, retrofitting an attack weapon to withstand higher tolerance is MUCH
Just as with all leaps of technology in military, it always takes the "Charge of the light Brigade" to drive the point home, and unfortunately at
the enormous cost of life. Just as with musket verses knight, cavalry charges on artillery, infantry charges on machine guns, battleship verses the
carrier in WWII etc, and the same fate will fall upon the 20th century concept of Naval power projection when it encounters weapons of the 21ct