Started By
Message

Finished HH:Supernova In the East 4 Carriers replaced battleships. What replaces Carriers?

Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:30 am
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124221 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:30 am
First off, if you haven’t listened to it, do so. Worth it
Supernova in the East part IV

Dan Carlin is a master storyteller and I was engaged all throughout. The shift in the hegemony of naval warfare from the Battleship to the Aircraft Carrier (and the aircraft of course) is fascinating.

Truly a largely unknown operational theater, the pacific front called for new tech and showed how the battleships were obsolete. the dreadnoughts of old that once dominated naval warfare were simply too cumbersome and vulnerable with the advent of aerial warfare.


His likening carriers to a hive of bees was particularly interesting. And of course a slew of boxing references. The recounting of the Battle of Midway was particularly interesting.
He posits that the arrival of the dive bombers (after the torpedo bombers were mostly ineffective and wiped out) at that precise moment when the Japanese carriers were resupplying was possibly the most important 15 minutes in military history.
10:20 AM, June 4, 1942
Truly a fascinating account.

But just as the battleship replaced its forebears, and was thusly replaced by the Aircraft Carrier, what will replace These massive (both in size and in cost) carriers?

Global Power projection is obviously important, but are carriers becoming increasingly uneconomical? What are the viable future alternatives

Besides this

That could be utilized in the future as these massive platforms age? At the cost of roughly 14 billion and 7 million a day to maintain, there have to be more cost effective alternatives.


Large numbers of smaller carriers?
Hypersonic land based missiles?

What evolves to replace the Supercarrier?



This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 6:37 am
Posted by soccerfüt
Location: A Series of Tubes
Member since May 2013
65688 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:33 am to
quote:


^The Arkansas Football Program pictured
Posted by eScott
Member since Oct 2008
11376 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:37 am to
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
34475 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:37 am to
quote:

What evolves to replace the Supercarrier?


Long range missiles and drones. The US could probably get by with a dozen or so strategically located based around the world.

I’ve been listening to this also. I’m glad he went way back into Japanese development as an industrial power. It’s a seldom heard story. Lots of people know about the Pacific Theater. Although Dan dives deep into a lot of the minutia, which I love.
Posted by Oilfieldbiology
Member since Nov 2016
37515 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:38 am to
quote:

Hypersonic land based missiles?


Long range missiles and drones probability. Whether the drones are AI or remotely controlled I’m not sure but unmanned, long ranged, cheaper drones and long range, hypersonic missiles may be the replacement for the tactical ability.

I do not know what will replace it as a projection of force though.
This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 7:07 am
Posted by geauxtigers87
Louisiana
Member since Mar 2011
25204 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:42 am to
I'd rather them put money into more Nuclear submarines and more smaller carriers than large carriers at this point
Posted by Loup
Ferriday
Member since Apr 2019
11310 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:43 am to
quote:

What evolves to replace the Supercarrier?


Orbital artillery.
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124221 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:48 am to
quote:

I'd rather them put money into more Nuclear submarines and more smaller carriers than large carriers at this point


It just doesn’t seem cost effective anymore.

Just as the swarm of bees (aircraft) and subs is what spelled the demise of the Battleship, it seems that a multitude of Small, cheap (Therefore expendable) and fast craft (whether based on sea or air) could overwhelm a carrier.

Not that any current navy is fielding such a force at the moment, but the podcast got me thinking about the topic.
Posted by Trump_Hands
P-Ville LA
Member since Sep 2019
229 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:51 am to
what about parts 1-3? each part stand alone ?
Posted by LSUBoo
Knoxville, TN
Member since Mar 2006
101919 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:53 am to
quote:

What evolves to replace the Supercarrier?


Space Force.



Seriously though, we can attack pretty much anywhere in the world without having to leave base.
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
34475 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:54 am to
quote:

Not that any current navy is fielding such a force at the moment,.
Which is why the carrier is so important right now. It’s basically a floating air base that can show up off your coast.

The Chinese claim to have a carrier killer missile.

I don’t mind military spending and improved weapons. I think R&D is good just because of all the new tech that comes from it. The current size of our military can be debated though.
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
34475 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:55 am to
quote:

what about parts 1-3? each part stand alone ?
Not really. I’d start with #1.

Part IV could stand alone if you’re just interested in the American parts.
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124221 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:56 am to
quote:

what about parts 1-3? each part stand alone ?


Yes and no. All are amazing (like everything Carlin has done) and create a greater tapestry to give you a full understanding of the Japanese warrior culture.

But you could listen to each separately and still come away with a much better understanding of what is discussed even if you haven’t listened to the full series.

The devil is in the details.
Posted by tide06
Member since Oct 2011
11184 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 6:58 am to
Space force will make most of the navy outside of transport and logistics obsolete eventually.

Between land based drone swarms, hypersonic missiles and other next gen threats it’s not clear that carriers will be defensible 25-50 years from now. They may not be now, we just don’t know.
This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 6:59 am
Posted by lostinbr
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Oct 2017
9359 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:06 am to
Seems like cruise missiles are taking a larger and larger role compared to “traditional” air strikes. Don’t today’s cruisers basically fill the role of battleships in the past anyway?

As missile technology continues to advance, I could envision a scenario where the Navy shifts to smaller ships with more point defense.

ETA: It might sound silly, but I can absolutely see future naval warfare being all about:
1. Getting your missile platforms in position to strike enemy targets.
2. Destroying enemy missile platforms.
3. Shooting down incoming enemy missiles.

We already have cruise missiles that can damn near reach St. Louis from the Pacific Ocean. So at that point, it makes a ton of sense to strike from submarines and small, fast ships. Air superiority still matters though - especially in support of a ground invasion - so the big question is how quickly the future Air Force can project force into a new combat theater.
This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 7:27 am
Posted by bubblehead26
Temecula
Member since Apr 2012
333 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:06 am to
Carriers are not going away for a long, long time. The MQ-25 refueling UAV and the FORD carrier make that obvious. After that, it might start being cost effective to make the flight squadrons expeditionary (land based) and submarines patrolling the waters. Everyone thinks submarines are only out there to sink other ships, but don't forget they carry tomahawks that can do serious damage. 154 to be exact.

Beyond that, land-based stealth fighters than can evade SAMs and lay carpet bombs.
Posted by Lonnie Utah
Utah!
Member since Jul 2012
23963 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:07 am to


This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 7:08 am
Posted by Strannix
District 11
Member since Dec 2012
48919 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:11 am to
Cuck history
Posted by FlyingWingnut
.
Member since Mar 2020
130 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:16 am to
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/6/21 at 4:12 pm
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124221 posts
Posted on 8/4/20 at 7:17 am to
quote:

Cuck history


Huh? His Hardcore History episodes are probably the most unbiased and accurate retellings I’ve consumed. He doesn’t ever seem to let his personal politics bleed into his HH episodes.

ETA: hell, even in his common sense episodes he seems to approach issues with an even keel and a fair outlook. He’s admitted that he’s been calling for a political firestarter for a while. He just didn’t anticipate it being Trump.
This post was edited on 8/4/20 at 7:22 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram