Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2nd Carrier Arrives Off Straits Of Hormuz

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Doom and Gloom
 


I don't think they will send a Carrier through until A destroyer or two goes through without harassment. Carriers normally stand off and strike at will so the enemy can only guess where they are.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


Tracking is different than engaging with 100% success. Sure I can see 100 deer on a field, does that mean I can use my gun to take them all out while they are charging me?


I have never seen deer do that. But, I suppose it depends on the gun.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
This is completely consistent with standard Navy policy for over a year. 75% of the time there are two CVN Carrier Strike Groups in the area. A carrier Strike Group has ABOUT (it's a fluid kind of thing) ten ships altogether, including a squadron of destroyers, a cruiser, some frigates, and a supply ship in addition to at least one attack sub. This is the George Washington Strike Group.

There is also always at least one "Amphibious Ready Group" which includes and LHD or LHA. They look like carriers, so lots of people call them that. However, they are about a third the size of a CVN (40,000 tons versus 100,000 tons displacement) This is an example. They hold helos and Harriers, primarily, though the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter, an STVOL plane, will be hosted by these ships as well. Same rule applies. Several ships compose the group. These Groups carry a bunch of Marines and a couple of tanks and are capable of mounting a very small invasion, but nothing really substantial.

We go through this every time a Strike Group shows up. This is completely normal in all respects. It does NOT show an "escalation" of tensions. It is NOT a prelude to WW III. It does NOT represent an invasion force against Iran.
edit on 1/11/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Iran have been testing there ballistic missiles for attacking ships.

They will be travelling supersonic which is very difficult to deal with.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by Doom and Gloom
 


I don't think they will send a Carrier through until A destroyer or two goes through without harassment. Carriers normally stand off and strike at will so the enemy can only guess where they are.


Carriers are sort of hard to hide, no?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
[removed quoted off-topic comment]






I am against war for profit but I love my country and her people. If they attack mainland USA I say may there God help them.



edit on 1/12/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth

Originally posted by TheMindWar
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I heard an article today by a couple of individuals who work at the pentagon who state many in the pentagon believe or "know" that Iran does have at least three nukes. I understand it may just be propaganda, but they went on to say that the problem Iran has is the delivery system. Its easy to build nukes but its difficult to place them on warheads (which they are close to achieving within 12 months). Personally I have no problem with iran having nukes, afterall Isreal has them.

As for a delivery system, iran has the capability to deliver such nukes by hand. It would not suprise me at all if the US mainland and isreal was struck if iran is attacked.









If they struck mainland USA. You would see huge contracts for getting out oil in contaminated areas. Because Iran and it's people would be glass.




This is the simple truth.


i'd imagine that once the war started iran pretty much knows that the place is going to get a trillion dollars an hour of american hardware paying it a visit and dropping so much crap that you'll be able to make a fortune as a scrap metal dealer if you have a lead lined suit for the next 1000 years



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by Doom and Gloom
 


I don't think they will send a Carrier through until A destroyer or two goes through without harassment. Carriers normally stand off and strike at will so the enemy can only guess where they are.


Carriers are sort of hard to hide, no?


They keep them up to a thousand miles away at times and the air ops constantly jam the enemies radars so no they are easily hid. Our carriers are way to deadly for Iran and they simply don't stand a chance.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxatoria
 






If there is another carrier coming that makes the magic number 3. If they have 3 in the area something is coming and coming very soon.




If Iran leaders had any sense they would come to the table as fast as possible before this reaches the point of no return.



They will lose and if they use the big one they will cease to exist as a nation. And that goes for Syria and Pakistan also we would not stop until they were all gone.
edit on 11-1-2012 by Subjective Truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by thelastlineofwhat
 


I think the SeaRAM + CIWS was specficially designed to handle the sunburn, but maybe not in a salvo attack. I could be wrong, as USA does tend to hype up systems and they fail miserably, case in point: the patriot missile defense in the Iraq war Part 1.

I am wondering if the SM-3 would be able to handle it well, once again in a salvo attack the carrier is dead no matter how good the missile is.

Lets say the combination system is 99% good (highly exaggerating), it will only take 200 missiles to get two to get through.
edit on 11-1-2012 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)


You are assuming that the sunburn missiles will get fired.
I assume that most will be destroyed in their launchers.

Surprise is an awsome weapon.

You must have considered that theoperations planners are not complete fools.The carriers will never be put in range untill the threat of the these missiles are neutralised.

I dont want war, but it is likely going to happen.Iran's military will get tufted.
I know ther will be some attacks/strikes outside Iran, but the Mullahs and their regime are as good as dead,
after the fighting starts.

edit on 11-1-2012 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


I was in the US Navy for 8 years, and actually had the pleasure of working on the CIWS and RAM weapons systems. SeaRAM was some weird mix of the CIWS mount with the RAM missile box in place of the gun.
Now is has been a few years now but I believe it was the Block 1B system ORDALT that installed the FLIR camera on the CIWS, which allowed for the FC's to sit at the console and shoot at targets in speed boats by hand.
Some people are armchair quarterbacks and tend the speak as if they actually know what they are talking about.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by Maxatoria
 

If there is another carrier coming that makes the magic number 3. If they have 3 in the area something is coming and coming very soon.


This reply seems to indicate a third is on the way.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by Doom and Gloom
 


I don't think they will send a Carrier through until A destroyer or two goes through without harassment. Carriers normally stand off and strike at will so the enemy can only guess where they are.


Carriers are sort of hard to hide, no?


They keep them up to a thousand miles away at times and the air ops constantly jam the enemies radars so no they are easily hid. Our carriers are way to deadly for Iran and they simply don't stand a chance.


The US has the best Aircraft Carriers in the world as well as some of the best aircraft to supplement it. Their alliy the UK has the best destroyer in the world which is entering the area to help cover defences. The UK also boasts the best submarines and arguably the best special forces in the SAS.SBS. The US holds some of the most modern radar jamming equipment and has lots of technology we do not know about. I am pretty sure that the Us and UK navy will be safe.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
This is completely consistent with standard Navy policy for over a year. 75% of the time there are two CVN Carrier Strike Groups in the area. A carrier Strike Group has ABOUT (it's a fluid kind of thing) ten ships altogether, including a squadron of destroyers, a cruiser, some frigates, and a supply ship in addition to at least one attack sub.

We go through this every time a Strike Group shows up. This is completely normal in all respects. It does NOT show an "escalation" of tensions. It is NOT a prelude to WW III. It does NOT represent an invasion force against Iran.



^ Yea That! I was going to respond but you beat me to it. Good job!
The third Carrier will be relieving CVN-74 which has been on-station since 10 September and is due to leave!
Sirric
edit on 11/1/12 by sirric because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
They wont last long if WW3 breaks out. Iran has home base advantage. Shooting 500 missiles at one CBG is sure to take it out. This will only happen if they do war in the strait.

USA only has the advantage if they are out in the open, then Iran has no chance.


I think it’s just a show of force from the US at this point. Besides, all this talk about Iran taking out US carriers is ridiculous. Unless their missiles can fly at 100 times the speed of sound they will be eaten up before finding a target.



The real question remains….why won’t Iran just stop their nuclear weapons program and avoid this mess?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
reply to post by Maxatoria
 

If there is another carrier coming that makes the magic number 3. If they have 3 in the area something is coming and coming very soon.


This reply seems to indicate a third is on the way.







If and that is a big IF the Lincoln is coming that would hit the magic number of 3.


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


So you want to start a nuke war just cause you lost a carrier?

Wait a minute, I thought we were telling Iran that they cant have nukes and we go and use it on them??



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


No kidding they have to see this by now. They are being put behind the 8 ball and no matter what posters on ATS think they will lose and if they use the big one they will not only lose but be erased from history.





new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join