- 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 10:10 pm to tigeraddict
Posted on 3/15/25 at 10:10 pm to tigeraddict
Remember they also said after World War I that a moving battleship and firing its anti-aircraft weapons could not be hit.
Where there is a will there is a way, and technology is improving so fast it is hard to keep up.
Where there is a will there is a way, and technology is improving so fast it is hard to keep up.
0
Posted on 3/15/25 at 10:26 pm to BarberitosDawg
I just look forward to a Sub hitting the base of those fake Chinese islands, and watching them capsize. Then we can have Hank Johnson come out and be like...
Posted on 3/15/25 at 10:31 pm to Shiftyplus1
quote:
But if we get involved in a war with a nation that has the ability to launch multiple hypersonic missiles, it'll be our submarines that may decide the fight. We have 66 nuclear subs. Russia has 31, and they are trash. China has 12.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 10:59 pm to HeadCall
quote:
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.
I mean... an entire carrier group costs around 30 billion.
we spent 150 billion on housing and caring for illegal immigrants last year.
The human casualties and the damage to morale and effective readiness does make the "cost" high though, for sure.
Posted on 3/15/25 at 11:21 pm to tgerb8
The US must open up more naval base to limit one carrier to a port. One time under Obama there were 7 in one port, this cannot and should not happen.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:41 am to BarberitosDawg
Yes, it’s why they build them. Military planners are idiots, always planning to win the last war.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:48 am to Reagan80
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. i doubt this is true but you never know.This post was edited on 3/16/25 at 7:50 am
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News