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.

 

Aircraft Carriers have been obsolete for a long time

page: 11
8
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by Hopechest
Seeing a fleet of ships that size is extremely intimidating when they are parked off your coast.

It is a very effective propaganda tool because they represent the military power that the US holds over any given country.

What can do that better?


Nothing can intimidate a well prepared and equipped general. A smart general will see a big chunk of steel that he can blow up nicely with destroyers.

Keyword, destroyer. A destroyer is much more intimidating.


Except an aircraft carrier can launch aircraft before a destroyer even see's it and they can launch missiles many miles from a destroyer




posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Jepic
 




A cruise missile can engage any ground or air target. That includes armored vehicles and infantry.


please cite the cruise missile that can engage an areal target

please cite the cruise missile with loiter capability

please cite the cruise missile that can attack multiple targets and or make a second attack on the initial target

please cite the cruise missile that can deliver a variable yeild warhead [ a trike fighter carrying 16 bombs - can drop 1 ~16 on the same target - in 1~16 strikes , or attack 1~16 targets with variable numbers of bombs

the cruise missile is a one trick pony - its only advantage is that it does not put a pilot in theatre

to abort a cruise missile strike once lauched - you have to self destruct it - or assign another target - either way - its gone - manned strike aircraft can abort

FFS - this thread has now jumped the shark - you are using sci-fi films as your " evidence " ?????



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic


It's the same with the fleet. If a carrier group can have a layered defense why can't a destroyer fleet. And much more effectively at that! The amount of missiles a fleet can launch will just overwhelm the carrier group. It's impossible for a standard carrier group to intercept a massive barrage of incoming projectiles. The fleet on the other hand can intercept a massive barrage because it has enough projectiles to counter it.


lol you just explained why destroyers would fail, you have to concentrate on attacking and defending when a carrier only needs to defend, its aircraft will eat all of you away.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by MConnalley
F/A-18

" Crew: F/A-18C: 1, F/A-18D: 2 (pilot and weapons system officer)
Length: 56 ft (17.1 m)
Wingspan: 40 ft (12.3 m)
Height: 15 ft 4 in (4.7 m)
Wing area: 400 ft² (38 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 65A005 mod root, 65A003.5 mod tip
Empty weight: 23,000 lb (10,400 kg)
Loaded weight: 36,970 lb (16,770 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 51,900 lb (23,500 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × General Electric F404-GE-402 turbofans
Dry thrust: 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 17,750 lbf (79.2 kN) each

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 1.8 (1,190 mph, 1,915 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
Range: 1,089 nmi (1,250 miles, 2,000 km) with only two AIM-9s
Combat radius: 400 nmi (460 mi, 740 km) on air-air mission
Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,240 m)
Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
Wing loading: 93 lb/ft² (454 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.96

Armament

Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan nose mounted 6-barreled gatling cannon, 578 rounds
Hardpoints: 9 total: 2× wingtips missile launch rail, 4× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 13,700 lb (6,215 kg) external fuel and ordnance
Rockets:
2.75 inches (70 mm) Hydra 70 rockets
5 in (127.0 mm) Zuni rockets
Missiles:
Air-to-air missiles:
4× AIM-9 Sidewinder or 4× AIM-132 ASRAAM or 4× IRIS-T or 4× AIM-120 AMRAAM, and
2× AIM-7 Sparrow or additional 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
Air-to-surface missiles:
AGM-65 Maverick
Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)
AGM-88 HARM Anti-radiation missile (ARM)
AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
Taurus missile (Cruise missile)
Anti-ship missile:
AGM-84 Harpoon
Bombs:
JDAM precision-guided munition (PGMs)
Paveway series of laser-guided bombs
Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
CBU-87 cluster
CBU-89 gator mine
CBU-97
Mk 20 Rockeye II
B61/Mk57 nuclear bombs[102]
Others:
SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod or
AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk Targeting pods (US Navy only), to be replaced by AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR or
LITENING targeting pod (USMC, Royal Australian Air Force, Spanish Air Force, and Finnish Air Force only) or
up to 3× 330 US gallons (1,200 l; 270 imp gal) Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time.

Avionics

Hughes APG-73 radar
ROVER (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) antenna for use by US Navy's F/A-18C strike fighter squadrons"

about 1000 nautical mile range and lets say half of that range would hypothetically be needed for return trip so 500 nautical miles now, carrier knows your coming because we will always know. fighters are launched, your destroyers are moving at max speed towards carrier, lets give them 40 knots for generosity. it will take your destroyer group 12 hours to get into gun or "smokescreen" range lol. it saysthe F/A 18s combat range is 400 nautical miles so that's now 10 hours. well how about the time it takes for the jets to get there? well they go at mach 1.8 top speed or 1,190 mph so jets get there in 15 to 30 minutes, thats still 9 and a half hours to contend with aircraft and support aircraft. dude no hope.


Finnaly we are talking! Okay. Continuing your scenario. 1000 nautical miles? Are you serious? Cruise missiles have a range of 1500 nautical miles. The destroyers launch cruise missiles expending 10% of their overall capability. Missiles are faster than your jets, your jets are toast. Flying ducks waiting to be shot basically.

With 90% destructive capability remaining what will the rest of your carrier group be able to do against a massive salvo incoming.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Retikx
Its not the aircraft carrier its the 25 heavily armed ships that escort it that are the real meat and potatoes, the planes are a force multiplier. Not to mention the hundreds of amphibious vehicles that an aircraft carrier can deploy as well.


First of all it's not 25 but 6 other ships of which only 2 are destroyers. Another 2 AA ships. And finally another two anti submarine frigates.

Compared that to a standard destroyer fleet and I'm dissapointed that it has gotten this far.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by Hopechest
Seeing a fleet of ships that size is extremely intimidating when they are parked off your coast.

It is a very effective propaganda tool because they represent the military power that the US holds over any given country.

What can do that better?


Nothing can intimidate a well prepared and equipped general. A smart general will see a big chunk of steel that he can blow up nicely with destroyers.

Keyword, destroyer. A destroyer is much more intimidating.


Except an aircraft carrier can launch aircraft before a destroyer even see's it and they can launch missiles many miles from a destroyer


A destroyer can launch missiles and intercept the aircraft before they are anywhere near the fleet.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by MConnalley
F/A-18

" Crew: F/A-18C: 1, F/A-18D: 2 (pilot and weapons system officer)
Length: 56 ft (17.1 m)
Wingspan: 40 ft (12.3 m)
Height: 15 ft 4 in (4.7 m)
Wing area: 400 ft² (38 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 65A005 mod root, 65A003.5 mod tip
Empty weight: 23,000 lb (10,400 kg)
Loaded weight: 36,970 lb (16,770 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 51,900 lb (23,500 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × General Electric F404-GE-402 turbofans
Dry thrust: 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 17,750 lbf (79.2 kN) each

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 1.8 (1,190 mph, 1,915 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
Range: 1,089 nmi (1,250 miles, 2,000 km) with only two AIM-9s
Combat radius: 400 nmi (460 mi, 740 km) on air-air mission
Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,240 m)
Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
Wing loading: 93 lb/ft² (454 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.96

Armament

Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan nose mounted 6-barreled gatling cannon, 578 rounds
Hardpoints: 9 total: 2× wingtips missile launch rail, 4× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 13,700 lb (6,215 kg) external fuel and ordnance
Rockets:
2.75 inches (70 mm) Hydra 70 rockets
5 in (127.0 mm) Zuni rockets
Missiles:
Air-to-air missiles:
4× AIM-9 Sidewinder or 4× AIM-132 ASRAAM or 4× IRIS-T or 4× AIM-120 AMRAAM, and
2× AIM-7 Sparrow or additional 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
Air-to-surface missiles:
AGM-65 Maverick
Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)
AGM-88 HARM Anti-radiation missile (ARM)
AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
Taurus missile (Cruise missile)
Anti-ship missile:
AGM-84 Harpoon
Bombs:
JDAM precision-guided munition (PGMs)
Paveway series of laser-guided bombs
Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
CBU-87 cluster
CBU-89 gator mine
CBU-97
Mk 20 Rockeye II
B61/Mk57 nuclear bombs[102]
Others:
SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod or
AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk Targeting pods (US Navy only), to be replaced by AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR or
LITENING targeting pod (USMC, Royal Australian Air Force, Spanish Air Force, and Finnish Air Force only) or
up to 3× 330 US gallons (1,200 l; 270 imp gal) Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time.

Avionics

Hughes APG-73 radar
ROVER (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) antenna for use by US Navy's F/A-18C strike fighter squadrons"

about 1000 nautical mile range and lets say half of that range would hypothetically be needed for return trip so 500 nautical miles now, carrier knows your coming because we will always know. fighters are launched, your destroyers are moving at max speed towards carrier, lets give them 40 knots for generosity. it will take your destroyer group 12 hours to get into gun or "smokescreen" range lol. it saysthe F/A 18s combat range is 400 nautical miles so that's now 10 hours. well how about the time it takes for the jets to get there? well they go at mach 1.8 top speed or 1,190 mph so jets get there in 15 to 30 minutes, thats still 9 and a half hours to contend with aircraft and support aircraft. dude no hope.


Finnaly we are talking! Okay. Continuing your scenario. 1000 nautical miles? Are you serious? Cruise missiles have a range of 1500 nautical miles. The destroyers launch cruise missiles expending 10% of their overall capability. Missiles are faster than your jets, your jets are toast. Flying ducks waiting to be shot basically.

With 90% destructive capability remaining what will the rest of your carrier group be able to do against a massive salvo incoming.



This imaginary Custards last salvo you keep mentioning is ridiculous, lol destroyers expending all there anti ship missiles to kill one carrier is ridiculous, to leave the vulnerable to the next carrier what don't you get about CWIS its a mother #ing Gatling gun attached to a targeting computer, it will destroy all the cruise missiles that look like they would even hit its a damn mini gun not a one shot Rail gun. it will strafe all your missiles into destruction. you will not be hitting that carrier ever there will be so much lead and anti missile missiles in the air. its doesn't matter what the range of a cruise missile is its pointless if it will not hit. Aircraft are just sitting ducks in the anti missile department, countermeasures exist. Forgive him lord for he does not know what he says.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I needed a chuckle this morning, so thanks for this thread OP


No they are not obsolete.

I expect there is a reason why our military braniacs deem a carrier battle group to be the number one option, over a fleet of destroyers.

Carriers are invaluable in any conflict, just look at HMS Hermes and Invincible during the Falklands War.


King



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:19 AM
link   
The Op is pretty set in his thinking and I don't believe anything we say will persuade his thoughts. We have given very valid points which he has refused to listen to, but he is set in his thinking.

I commend you for sticking to your guns, but this is a no win situation.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
 




A cruise missile can engage any ground or air target. That includes armored vehicles and infantry.


please cite the cruise missile that can engage an areal target

please cite the cruise missile with loiter capability

please cite the cruise missile that can attack multiple targets and or make a second attack on the initial target

please cite the cruise missile that can deliver a variable yeild warhead [ a trike fighter carrying 16 bombs - can drop 1 ~16 on the same target - in 1~16 strikes , or attack 1~16 targets with variable numbers of bombs

the cruise missile is a one trick pony - its only advantage is that it does not put a pilot in theatre

to abort a cruise missile strike once lauched - you have to self destruct it - or assign another target - either way - its gone - manned strike aircraft can abort

FFS - this thread has now jumped the shark - you are using sci-fi films as your " evidence " ?????


Any cruise missile can be modified to include air threats.
Loiter capability... That has no place in modern warfare.
A cruise missile doesn't need to make a second pass on targets. Once it explodes there is nothing left to finish off. Second passes are a necessity for aircraft. Not missiles.
You can design a tip that releases multiple warheads or in the case you don't want multiple warheads you can leave the warheads all in for a bigger bang.

What good is an aircraft but a risk that I could lose all that precious payload who didn't have to be wasted just because the plane was shot down. If I had to choose between losing a plane with an assortment of missiles vs. just one missile, I'll take the latter.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by rowdyrich
 


yeah its 4 in the morning for me now, wered the time go



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic


It's the same with the fleet. If a carrier group can have a layered defense why can't a destroyer fleet. And much more effectively at that! The amount of missiles a fleet can launch will just overwhelm the carrier group. It's impossible for a standard carrier group to intercept a massive barrage of incoming projectiles. The fleet on the other hand can intercept a massive barrage because it has enough projectiles to counter it.


lol you just explained why destroyers would fail, you have to concentrate on attacking and defending when a carrier only needs to defend, its aircraft will eat all of you away.


Not really. It's the carrier that is outgunned. Besides I don't see it in terms of attacking or defending. I just see enemies targets getting destroyed. Whether you call that attacking or defending is up to you.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by MConnalley
F/A-18

" Crew: F/A-18C: 1, F/A-18D: 2 (pilot and weapons system officer)
Length: 56 ft (17.1 m)
Wingspan: 40 ft (12.3 m)
Height: 15 ft 4 in (4.7 m)
Wing area: 400 ft² (38 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 65A005 mod root, 65A003.5 mod tip
Empty weight: 23,000 lb (10,400 kg)
Loaded weight: 36,970 lb (16,770 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 51,900 lb (23,500 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × General Electric F404-GE-402 turbofans
Dry thrust: 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 17,750 lbf (79.2 kN) each

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 1.8 (1,190 mph, 1,915 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
Range: 1,089 nmi (1,250 miles, 2,000 km) with only two AIM-9s
Combat radius: 400 nmi (460 mi, 740 km) on air-air mission
Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,240 m)
Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
Wing loading: 93 lb/ft² (454 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.96

Armament

Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan nose mounted 6-barreled gatling cannon, 578 rounds
Hardpoints: 9 total: 2× wingtips missile launch rail, 4× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 13,700 lb (6,215 kg) external fuel and ordnance
Rockets:
2.75 inches (70 mm) Hydra 70 rockets
5 in (127.0 mm) Zuni rockets
Missiles:
Air-to-air missiles:
4× AIM-9 Sidewinder or 4× AIM-132 ASRAAM or 4× IRIS-T or 4× AIM-120 AMRAAM, and
2× AIM-7 Sparrow or additional 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
Air-to-surface missiles:
AGM-65 Maverick
Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)
AGM-88 HARM Anti-radiation missile (ARM)
AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
Taurus missile (Cruise missile)
Anti-ship missile:
AGM-84 Harpoon
Bombs:
JDAM precision-guided munition (PGMs)
Paveway series of laser-guided bombs
Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
CBU-87 cluster
CBU-89 gator mine
CBU-97
Mk 20 Rockeye II
B61/Mk57 nuclear bombs[102]
Others:
SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod or
AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk Targeting pods (US Navy only), to be replaced by AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR or
LITENING targeting pod (USMC, Royal Australian Air Force, Spanish Air Force, and Finnish Air Force only) or
up to 3× 330 US gallons (1,200 l; 270 imp gal) Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time.

Avionics

Hughes APG-73 radar
ROVER (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) antenna for use by US Navy's F/A-18C strike fighter squadrons"

about 1000 nautical mile range and lets say half of that range would hypothetically be needed for return trip so 500 nautical miles now, carrier knows your coming because we will always know. fighters are launched, your destroyers are moving at max speed towards carrier, lets give them 40 knots for generosity. it will take your destroyer group 12 hours to get into gun or "smokescreen" range lol. it saysthe F/A 18s combat range is 400 nautical miles so that's now 10 hours. well how about the time it takes for the jets to get there? well they go at mach 1.8 top speed or 1,190 mph so jets get there in 15 to 30 minutes, thats still 9 and a half hours to contend with aircraft and support aircraft. dude no hope.


Finnaly we are talking! Okay. Continuing your scenario. 1000 nautical miles? Are you serious? Cruise missiles have a range of 1500 nautical miles. The destroyers launch cruise missiles expending 10% of their overall capability. Missiles are faster than your jets, your jets are toast. Flying ducks waiting to be shot basically.

With 90% destructive capability remaining what will the rest of your carrier group be able to do against a massive salvo incoming.



This imaginary Custards last salvo you keep mentioning is ridiculous, lol destroyers expending all there anti ship missiles to kill one carrier is ridiculous, to leave the vulnerable to the next carrier what don't you get about CWIS its a mother #ing Gatling gun attached to a targeting computer, it will destroy all the cruise missiles that look like they would even hit its a damn mini gun not a one shot Rail gun. it will strafe all your missiles into destruction. you will not be hitting that carrier ever there will be so much lead and anti missile missiles in the air. its doesn't matter what the range of a cruise missile is its pointless if it will not hit. Aircraft are just sitting ducks in the anti missile department, countermeasures exist. Forgive him lord for he does not know what he says.


Did you just say CIWS will take down all the missiles? CIWS is a last stand "no hope anymore" gun. It's nothing.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
 




A cruise missile can engage any ground or air target. That includes armored vehicles and infantry.


please cite the cruise missile that can engage an areal target

please cite the cruise missile with loiter capability

please cite the cruise missile that can attack multiple targets and or make a second attack on the initial target

please cite the cruise missile that can deliver a variable yeild warhead [ a trike fighter carrying 16 bombs - can drop 1 ~16 on the same target - in 1~16 strikes , or attack 1~16 targets with variable numbers of bombs

the cruise missile is a one trick pony - its only advantage is that it does not put a pilot in theatre

to abort a cruise missile strike once lauched - you have to self destruct it - or assign another target - either way - its gone - manned strike aircraft can abort

FFS - this thread has now jumped the shark - you are using sci-fi films as your " evidence " ?????


Any cruise missile can be modified to include air threats.
Loiter capability... That has no place in modern warfare.
A cruise missile doesn't need to make a second pass on targets. Once it explodes there is nothing left to finish off. Second passes are a necessity for aircraft. Not missiles.
You can design a tip that releases multiple warheads or in the case you don't want multiple warheads you can leave the warheads all in for a bigger bang.

What good is an aircraft but a risk that I could lose all that precious payload who didn't have to be wasted just because the plane was shot down. If I had to choose between losing a plane with an assortment of missiles vs. just one missile, I'll take the latter.


planes are relativity expendable. no not any cruise missile can be modified lol, they are designed for only one job ok . how about i design a missile that carries another missile so its like 2 missile woah broski! or or! how bout a missile that can target all the missiles and fire a laser at them all at once.

how bout we bring Master Chief and that one guy from battle of los angeles to hold a laser pointer at the aircraft carrier. because that's the only way your gonna have 100 percent accurate missiles.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:31 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Jepic
 


Jepic, have you forgotten that most modern aircraft carriers carry increasingly effective anti missile countermeasures? They will soon be retro fitted with high energy laser defenses as well as the standard anti missile projectiles, which are fairly effective in thier own right. Not only that, but the ability to deploy a force of men and machinery of the scale which is made possible by aircraft carrier ships, makes them invaluable. And you are forgetting that most aircraft carriers do not operate on thier own, have constant air support, support vessels... I really do not think you have thought about this extensively enough.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
 




A cruise missile can engage any ground or air target. That includes armored vehicles and infantry.


please cite the cruise missile that can engage an areal target

please cite the cruise missile with loiter capability

please cite the cruise missile that can attack multiple targets and or make a second attack on the initial target

please cite the cruise missile that can deliver a variable yeild warhead [ a trike fighter carrying 16 bombs - can drop 1 ~16 on the same target - in 1~16 strikes , or attack 1~16 targets with variable numbers of bombs

the cruise missile is a one trick pony - its only advantage is that it does not put a pilot in theatre

to abort a cruise missile strike once lauched - you have to self destruct it - or assign another target - either way - its gone - manned strike aircraft can abort

FFS - this thread has now jumped the shark - you are using sci-fi films as your " evidence " ?????


Any cruise missile can be modified to include air threats.
Loiter capability... That has no place in modern warfare.
A cruise missile doesn't need to make a second pass on targets. Once it explodes there is nothing left to finish off. Second passes are a necessity for aircraft. Not missiles.
You can design a tip that releases multiple warheads or in the case you don't want multiple warheads you can leave the warheads all in for a bigger bang.

What good is an aircraft but a risk that I could lose all that precious payload who didn't have to be wasted just because the plane was shot down. If I had to choose between losing a plane with an assortment of missiles vs. just one missile, I'll take the latter.


planes are relativity expendable. no not any cruise missile can be modified lol, they are designed for only one job ok . how about i design a missile that carries another missile so its like 2 missile woah broski! or or! how bout a missile that can target all the missiles and fire a laser at them all at once.

how bout we bring Master Chief and that one guy from battle of los angeles to hold a laser pointer at the aircraft carrier. because that's the only way your gonna have 100 percent accurate missiles.


Uhm, it's already been done. It's called an ICBM. A missile within a missile. It just proves that a navy that invests in missile technology will win against a navy that invests in aircraft technology.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic


It's the same with the fleet. If a carrier group can have a layered defense why can't a destroyer fleet. And much more effectively at that! The amount of missiles a fleet can launch will just overwhelm the carrier group. It's impossible for a standard carrier group to intercept a massive barrage of incoming projectiles. The fleet on the other hand can intercept a massive barrage because it has enough projectiles to counter it.


lol you just explained why destroyers would fail, you have to concentrate on attacking and defending when a carrier only needs to defend, its aircraft will eat all of you away.


Not really. It's the carrier that is outgunned. Besides I don't see it in terms of attacking or defending. I just see enemies targets getting destroyed. Whether you call that attacking or defending is up to you.


You precious, precious human, chaff flares and electronic jamming added on top of point to point missile defenses makes you a psychotic fool!



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by MConnalley

Originally posted by Jepic


It's the same with the fleet. If a carrier group can have a layered defense why can't a destroyer fleet. And much more effectively at that! The amount of missiles a fleet can launch will just overwhelm the carrier group. It's impossible for a standard carrier group to intercept a massive barrage of incoming projectiles. The fleet on the other hand can intercept a massive barrage because it has enough projectiles to counter it.


lol you just explained why destroyers would fail, you have to concentrate on attacking and defending when a carrier only needs to defend, its aircraft will eat all of you away.


Not really. It's the carrier that is outgunned. Besides I don't see it in terms of attacking or defending. I just see enemies targets getting destroyed. Whether you call that attacking or defending is up to you.



exactly you psychotic fool! you only see it as targets and destruction, you don't see chaff being deployed or flares or electronic jamming, or any #ing thing else i have said because you are one hard headed dumb mother#er!


Ultimately it's about destroying targets. Satellite guided munitions along with anti-jamming can circumvent all those measures. Not to say that the fleet would also have those capabilites.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by Jepic
 


Jepic, have you forgotten that most modern aircraft carriers carry increasingly effective anti missile countermeasures? They will soon be retro fitted with high energy laser defenses as well as the standard anti missile projectiles, which are fairly effective in thier own right. Not only that, but the ability to deploy a force of men and machinery of the scale which is made possible by aircraft carrier ships, makes them invaluable. And you are forgetting that most aircraft carriers do not operate on thier own, have constant air support, support vessels... I really do not think you have thought about this extensively enough.


Any capabilites that a carrier group might have, a destroyer fleet can too.




top topics



 
8
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join