Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Two: It is up to you to prove your position and arguement, not me! You google them and source them.

Actually it is up to you to prove me wrong, whihc you have not even attempted to. Of course you can't sispute my information otherwise you nwould have.

Three: My 'point of view' as you call it, is common knowledge for anyone who has the slightest inkling about US naval procedures and practices, which apparently you do not!

Of course you do ? Excedpt you have shown absolutely no evidence you do except the sad expression " Us Navy is the best, they have thought of everything", whihc obvioulsy they haven't

I would not say you have your head buried in the sand, as it is blaringly apparent that you suffer from cranial rectalitis! And you're right, this isn't a debate it's us talking to a brick wall!

Balah, you have proven nothing to contradcit me, in fact you have argued nothing at all.

I stooped to your level as it seems that is the only thing you understand. Of course, anyone checking your profile or just looking at your current point total can tell that you think you are above the rules and have probably had more posts banned than not here.

Of course that is all suppostion and in fact I have no post bans. But of course you want o make yourself seem more intelligent. Good for you - now can you nactually argue your point or just post personal attacks. You have presented NOTHING whatsover to contradicat the OP and make yourself seem irrelevent to this thread

My apologies to the mods for going off here, but sometimes you just gotta put a know-it-all punk in his place.

don't apologise for self berration although it is kind of strange. Where do you live? In the USA ? I so you can probably find a good shrink, who will sort out all your inferiority problems At leat in your bubble.

Well during the Clinton administration lots of high tech data was stolen or given to the Chinese. How many people die if a carrier gets taken out? Do you think the Chinese wouldn't work hard on a way to both destroy a huge military asset and demoralize the enemy? Underestimating China will be our biggest mistake.

There may or may not be a credible threat. The truth is we will never know until it is used and I doubt that will happen. Even if there is the carrier is the only way tp project airpower into many operational theaters so I doubt the navy will give them up.

Ok this is from a friend of mine who served aboard on of the US's Nimitz Class carriers.

"There are anywhere from 14-18 Ships in a CVBG(Carrier Battle Group) at any given time. the ships break down as such, Carrier (at the center of the group), 3 Frigates (on patrol around the carrier about 10-12 miles from carrier), 4 Supply ships, 3 Destroyers (also on patrol 8-10 miles form the carrier), 2 SSN's (on patrol about 12 miles from carrier), then you also have at least 2 Anti sub planes on patrol at all times and a Flight of Fighter planes on patrol at all times. An AWACS at 35000-45000Ft at all times. Not to mention the carrier has at least
2-3 Flight groups On call if they need to be scrambled at any given time. the Carrier along with the frigates, destroyers and subs and aircraft CIC and CIWS (Combat Information Center and Combat Information Warfare System) give a combined coverage area 50- 60 miles from the center of the Battle Group in the air and 20-35 miles at sea level. The carrier, Frigates and Destroyers also carry and utilize the Phalanx Missile interceptor system. this system is utilized to knock down incoming missile and aircraft threats.

Insofar as a missile with an emp warhead goes. If it was not knocked down by the Phalanx and it detonated all electronics aboard our modern Naval ships are hardened against all such types of attacks.

dont forget phalanx wont help vs mach 3 anti shipping missiles, or a submarine turning up in the middle of the battle group.

Phalinx is being removed from alot of ships...carriers in particular. On carriers it is called CIWS

Thanks,
Orangetom

Most surface vessels rely on two weapon systems. The Phalanx CIWS and the RIM-116 RAM Launcher. However, the RAM launcher has a range of almost 6 miles while the CIWS only has a range of 2 miles.

Additionally, the CIWS has been proven to be less than effective against fast moving targets. I remember back in 2004 we used the CIWS against a Tomahawk target drone that was less than a mile out. It took about half an hour to finally shoot it down. And that was after slowing down the drone and popping a smoke trail for visual identification.

Now an Aircraft Carrier is a large target. And an incoming attack needs to be repelled as quickly as possible. This is why a gun-based defense system like the CIWS is being replaced with longer range weapon systems like the RIM-116 (6 mile range) and the Evolved Sea Sparrow (10 mile range).