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.
Many of the publically released "simulations" are psyop bait to direct thinking in the emenies minds.
Huge holes in the simulations are left out intentionally so as to give the enemy confidence to move forward with those actions.
What I believe he was saying was that that sacrificing a destroyer would work just a well and wouldn't degrade our naval capabiliteis like the loss of an aircraft carrier would.
LOL. I think a few mrvs would totally annihilate Iran. If they destroy a CVBG then nuking them is an option imo.
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by area6
Why would the US destroy Iran if they lost the carriers fair and square? If the US loses its carriers it would be unable to destroy iran. The carrier is what is used for destroying places and once you destroy the carrier, the US would be impotent. Think about that for a second. Also I said it will destroy the US Navy in Hormuz, I did not say elsewhere.
It does equal 600,000 square miles of Iranian glass.
Do you have a war game scenario that can provide backup evidence for this statement?edit on 30-12-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)
Think it's worth it?
You think its worth it losing a carrier group for a supposed nuclear weapon that you have no proof of?edit on 30-12-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by area6
You know Iran will be destroyed if they sink a US carrier
Russia is saying dont mess with Iran, if iran gets invaded it couuld go nuclear. If the US loses a carrier, it was fair game. If the US tries to destroy irans mainland expect DC to get nuked and NYC. Do you think it is worth having NYC and DC nuked over irans supposed nuclear weapons?
Also if the US navy attacked iran, of course Iran would take them out. Do you really expect Iran to idly sit by and take a beating by the US Navy? Of course Iran would think it is worth it if the US attacks them.
Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Having done 6 deployments to the Persian Gulf, all on carriers, I can assure you that Iran's speed boats are no match for the 25 .50 cal mounts, the minimum of 4 SH-60 Seahawk Helicopters with .50 cal, GAU-17 miniguns and Hellfire missiles, the destroyers with the same weapons capability, Tomahawks, Harpoons, and torpedoes. If I had a dime for every time an Iranian speedboat made a run at my ship I would be a rich man. It is almost impossible to sink a Nimitz class carrier. Bottom line is that Iran is no match for the U.S. Navy. Oh, I almost forgot... an aircraft carrier, as a last resort, can outrun a speedboat. A Nimitz Class carrier can reach speeds in excess of 70 mph with no problem. Also, if I had a dime for every time Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz I would be very rich. This is nothing new... in fact this news story made me yawn, and so does the "analysis" provided in the OP.
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Fitch303
LMAO, two are in dry dock under going refuling and many others supporting other missions. The US Navy in the strait would undergo heavy losses. I am talking about the one in the strait, not worldwide dude. Do you have evidence to counter my claim other than "uh no it wont"
Originally posted by bigyin
Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Having done 6 deployments to the Persian Gulf, all on carriers, I can assure you that Iran's speed boats are no match for the 25 .50 cal mounts, the minimum of 4 SH-60 Seahawk Helicopters with .50 cal, GAU-17 miniguns and Hellfire missiles, the destroyers with the same weapons capability, Tomahawks, Harpoons, and torpedoes. If I had a dime for every time an Iranian speedboat made a run at my ship I would be a rich man. It is almost impossible to sink a Nimitz class carrier. Bottom line is that Iran is no match for the U.S. Navy. Oh, I almost forgot... an aircraft carrier, as a last resort, can outrun a speedboat. A Nimitz Class carrier can reach speeds in excess of 70 mph with no problem. Also, if I had a dime for every time Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz I would be very rich. This is nothing new... in fact this news story made me yawn, and so does the "analysis" provided in the OP.
Please don't be ridiculous ... a carrier doing 70 mph
Top speed of a Nimitz Class is 30 knots or 34 mph
source
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Eurisko2012
Let me refer you to this gem of a thread regarding stealth aircraft:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Also the predator drones would not be a match for any modern air defense network; now understand that the Predator drone is also less stealthy and advanced than te RQ-170 that Iran just brought down.
Originally posted by Vitchilo
Nope. China would probably invade Iran first if Iran blocks the strait.
You know it's entirely possible
Originally posted by bigyin
Please don't be ridiculous ... a carrier doing 70 mph
Top speed of a Nimitz Class is 30 knots or 34 mph
The practical speed limit in knots for a displacement-type hull is approximately equal to the square-root of the hull length at the waterline (LWL) times 1.34
The Enterprise is the longest warship ever built. You'll find some variation among different sources, but most of them list her length overall (LOA) as 1,123 feet, whereas ALL of the Nimitz class are usually listed as 1,092 feet. The Enterprise and the Nimitz class have the same length at the waterline (LWL), 1,040 feet.
If the hulls may be considered displacement hulls, this puts the limit of both the Enterprise and Nimitz class warships at the square root of 1,040 (32.249) times 1.34= 43.2 knots.
The "threshold speed" is generally considered to occur at a speed of about 1.2 times the square root of the ship's LWL, which would mean that the Enterprise and Nimitz class ships are not likely to exceed a speed of 38.7 knots.
Naval architects have long considered the problem of achieving significantly higher ship speeds, without increasing length or decreasing beam, as the equivalent of "breaking the sound barrier" in aeronautical technology.
In the nineteenth century, Froude first accurately measured and defined the phenomenon by which increased length is required for higher ship speeds because of the prohibitive drag rise which occurs at a threshold speed corresponding to a length Froude Number of 0.3. The length Froude Number is defined by the relationship 0.298 times the speed length ratio .sqroot..sub.L.sup.V, where V is the speed of the ship in knots and L is the waterline length of the ship in feet. Thus a Froude number of 0.298 equates to a speed length ratio of 1.0.
Today, the maximum practical speed of displacement ships is about 32 to 35 knots. This can be achieved in a relatively small ship by making it long, narrow and light but also costly. To some extent it has been possible to avoid increased length above Froude numbers of 0.4, but this has been achieved in small craft design using semi-planing hulls for ships up to 120 feet long and 200 tons and improved propulsion units. In a larger ship, such as a fast ocean liner, the greater length allows a greater size and volume to be carried at the same speed which is, however, lower relative to its Froude number (i.e., 38 knots for an aircraft carrier of 1,000+ feet waterline length is only a Froude number of 0.34). On the negative side, the larger size of these ships requires significantly larger quantities of propulsion power. There are major problems in delivering this power efficiently through conventional propellers due to cavitation problems. source
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Eurisko2012
You know it's entirely possible
Anything is possible on both sides, like how Iran downed the US drone which is more advanced than the Predator. I bet the Iranians have a few surprises up their sleeves as well.
I don't think that drone was very advanced.
The Iranians probably just set up some GPS jammers
The drone lost the signal and then just circled until it ran out of gas.
The drone has a jet engine. So what? Landing gear? Satellite com gear and a cool gyro camera on the nose. It's a toy.