- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are aircraft carrier groups [ours] obsolete in the age of hypersonic missile systems?
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:33 pm to TutHillTiger
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:33 pm to TutHillTiger
We already have items to knock drones out at a long distant, about 2 miles from what I am hearing. They are not in the field yet.
This goes back to the BAR issue of World War I, do we save it for the next war or use it now with little effect.
There is also another anti drone system in the works with greater range,
This goes back to the BAR issue of World War I, do we save it for the next war or use it now with little effect.
There is also another anti drone system in the works with greater range,
This post was edited on 3/15/25 at 8:37 pm
0
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:38 pm to BarberitosDawg
quote:
Well, I’m a boomer and what was spoken is true from his point of view. It might be dated in the era of response though…
I may be wrong but I think the boomers he's referring to are submarines.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:42 pm to johnnydrama
Thanks!
I’m a dumb ground pounding Marine from 80’s service.
quote:
may be wrong but I think the boomers he's referring to are submarines
I’m a dumb ground pounding Marine from 80’s service.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:43 pm to BarberitosDawg
No. Hypersonic ballistic missiles are just that. They target a fixed point. They don’t have much maneuverability. So a carrier moving, targeted from hundreds of miles away is not a hypersonic missiles target.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:51 pm to tigeraddict
Stratification, if your a somewhat advanced enemy would assuredly allow for this upon garnishing a fixed point before go time. Our enemies are not stupid especially the C one.
Technology is changing quickly is all.
China = Bad hombres
Technology is changing quickly is all.
China = Bad hombres
Posted on 3/15/25 at 8:55 pm to BarberitosDawg
quote:
As I understand in an all out conflict our carrier groups are supposed to last 5 days on all out combat.
If China launches 350 hypersonic missiles at a group some say it won’t last five minutes. We have in excess of 5k people on a carrier now.
Thoughts, arm chair admirals?
Well for starters they'd have to know exactly where the Carrier is and where it's going to be
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:16 pm to kingbob
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:25 pm to AURulz1
wheres Darth on this?
he drove a tank and makes models
he drove a tank and makes models
This post was edited on 3/15/25 at 10:38 pm
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:28 pm to BarberitosDawg
China won’t do that unless they face existential crisis. We aren’t looking to invade their mainland. We are trying to contain them. If they sink a carrier, we have stuff from DARPA they can’t even think of that will end their government.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:32 pm to jcaz
Well these should be Taiwan of course since Xi has been talking for so long about Taiwan is Chinese
and all of China belongs to the Chinese
But the ChiComs arent the old Chaing's too many oligarchs... still the threat of invasion is a strong card if left unplayed
and all of China belongs to the Chinese
But the ChiComs arent the old Chaing's too many oligarchs... still the threat of invasion is a strong card if left unplayed
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:36 pm to OWLFAN86
China isn’t going to invade Taiwan. They don’t need to. The Chinese play the long game.
They’ll absorb Taiwan politically/domestically within 50 years.
Beijing has nothing to gain by invading Taiwan militarily. They’d have to destroy everything than makes taking Taiwan worthwhile.
They’ll absorb Taiwan politically/domestically within 50 years.
Beijing has nothing to gain by invading Taiwan militarily. They’d have to destroy everything than makes taking Taiwan worthwhile.
This post was edited on 3/15/25 at 9:37 pm
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:37 pm to OWLFAN86
I don’t think Xi has the balls to actually invade Taiwan. It would wreck China.
And for what purpose? To fulfill some pride goal going back to 1949?
And for what purpose? To fulfill some pride goal going back to 1949?
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:41 pm to jcaz
quote:
DARPA they can’t even think of that will end their government.
Maybe not end their government, but Manta says hello. That could wreck havoc on their shipping.
I think the unmanned missile ships the navy is toying with is a good stop gap for ship hulls. Getting missile tech to a mass production level is key and people are working on making great missiles, cheap, and 10x(+). quicker.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:44 pm to BarberitosDawg
I don’t think the age of aircraft carriers is over but I think we should get away from Super Carriers and go to smaller, faster and cheaper carriers who’s primary role would be anti-submarine/air to air missions.
As it stands now our super carriers are so valuable and expensive that the loss of even one is almost inconceivable. So much so that the leadership may not even risk putting them in harms way.
We have something like 11 super carriers that can carry about 70-80 aircraft. You lose one of those and there goes a huge amount of expensive jets and 5000 sailors not to mention a $7 billion dollar boat. I’d rather see 20-25 smaller escort carriers that can carry 30ish planes and cost a fraction of the price.
As it stands now our super carriers are so valuable and expensive that the loss of even one is almost inconceivable. So much so that the leadership may not even risk putting them in harms way.
We have something like 11 super carriers that can carry about 70-80 aircraft. You lose one of those and there goes a huge amount of expensive jets and 5000 sailors not to mention a $7 billion dollar boat. I’d rather see 20-25 smaller escort carriers that can carry 30ish planes and cost a fraction of the price.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:46 pm to Indefatigable
quote:that's why I say unplayed
China isn’t going to invade Taiwan. They don’t need to. The Chinese play the long game.
The biggest threat to an invasion is if Xi starts to lose power
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:54 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:
The biggest threat to an invasion is if Xi starts to lose power
Well sure. But life isn’t a Tom Clancy novel.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:55 pm to Indefatigable
WELL HE PREDEICTED 9-11
Japanesss steel
Japanesss steel
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:55 pm to jcaz
quote:
And for what purpose? To fulfill some pride goal going back to 1949?
I don’t think that China moves kinetically on Taiwan, but this isn’t the right mindset.
1949 may as well be yesterday to Beijing.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:56 pm to OWLFAN86
quote:
WELL HE PREDEICTED 9-11
Debt of Honor goes waaaaaaayyyyy beyond Al Qaeda’s wildest dreams
ETA: Clancy did in fact predict the Russian invasion of Ukraine though. Maybe Command and Control? Hard to recollect the titles.
This post was edited on 3/15/25 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 3/15/25 at 9:59 pm to Indefatigable
Tom Clancy novels are white male conservative political prediction porn
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News