- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: USA vs China: To Sink a Carrier
Posted on 7/30/22 at 8:14 pm to LookSquirrel
Posted on 7/30/22 at 8:14 pm to LookSquirrel
quote:
I submit that, in the context of a great power war, the aircraft carrier was effectively proven obsolete in 1945.
I don't agree with that, but there IS a retired Naval captain... a career NFO at that... that argues that carries are effectively obsolete in their current form, and we should go to an all-missile and UAV force. Here's the cover of his paper:
Keep in mind that this was published by the Center for a New American Security, a left-leaning group that argues that we'd all be safer with some special forces and a few drones, and that all the rest should be shitcanned so that we can have universal healthcare and such.
Me, my take is that if you're going to put a military force in the field, then it's inherently risky, and that there's no substitute for putting a man's arse in a cockpit or bridge or tank and sending him in harm's way. Yeah, a lot of them are going to die. That's warfare. No way around it. There is no "cheaper, safer" way to go to war.
0
Posted on 7/30/22 at 8:21 pm to HeadSlash
As much as I am impressed with the phalanx (sp?), I did read during the gulf war there was a destroyer putting up flac to confuse an attacker's radar and the phalanx shot at the flac above the destroyer. With its limited time it can fire, I hope they worked out the bugs (like this).
Posted on 7/30/22 at 8:56 pm to memphisplaya
quote:People tend to forget the proximity of both South Korea and Okinawa to Taiwan. Fighters based on Okinawa would rule the skies over Taiwan.
On top of having military bases in South Korea, Japan, and if it hasn’t tipped over Guam. On top of that we have military presence in Thailand, Philippines, and Singapore.
Posted on 7/30/22 at 9:01 pm to LookSquirrel
We need to be doing everything possible to push/help Japan towards full rearmament.
Posted on 7/30/22 at 9:59 pm to klrstix
quote:
You are assuming our leadership would have the political will to make this happen...
Well they certainly aren't concerned with national security.
I firmly believe any US-involved conflict of is for personal profit of certain government entities and individuals. Likely on both sides.
This is a very convenient time to hide Joe in the basement.
This post was edited on 7/30/22 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 7/30/22 at 10:04 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
People tend to forget the proximity of both South Korea and Okinawa to Taiwan. Fighters based on Okinawa would rule the skies over Taiwan.
They're far away enough that they'd need to tap a tanker to get back to those places, and we know that in any peer fight, China would throw everything into killing our tankers and AWACS birds, then sit back and watch the F-15's fall into the drink as they run out of gas.
Going to Taiwan means going to China's backyard, where they'll have an overwhelming advantage. No way to get around that.
Posted on 7/30/22 at 10:08 pm to LookSquirrel
I feel like it’ll be one hell of a demonstration of stand-off weapons systems.
Posted on 7/30/22 at 10:11 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
Why do you think we are letting Ukraine fight our proxy war with Russia. The US is going to have to defeat these countries
We aren’t getting directly involved because we don’t want an all out war with Russia. Not right now anyway
Posted on 7/30/22 at 10:29 pm to DesScorp
quote:
oing to Taiwan means going to China's backyard,
Except they don't have a navy or air force to contend and the US could launch strategic strikes to cripple them. They have less than 2100 airplanes while the US has more than 14000. 360 of which are within an earshot of Taiwan on 4 different carriers.
Guam is also home to dozens of F-22 and stealth bomber jets. US, South Korea and Japan would stop Chinese attempts from just those bases and the surrounding escorts. Australia's proximity is also another strategic base however the main US military base is far down on the South East corner of the continent.
Posted on 7/30/22 at 10:44 pm to TigerOnTheMountain
quote:
Nothing. Strike groups are more than equipped to handle anything the Chinese realistically could throw at it.
I certainly hope you are right. I know from my history study that the U.S. Navy thought it was the most powerful and invincible Navy in the World prior to Dec. 7, 1941. That type of complacency cost us dearly at Pearl Harbor. I would not be surprised at another sneak attack somewhere by the Chinese. I hope none of this comes to pass. My granddaughter is currently deployed on a Carrier Strike Group. Yeah, I'm worried.
Posted on 7/31/22 at 11:29 am to BFIV
quote:
certainly hope you are right. I know from my history study that the U.S. Navy thought it was the most powerful and invincible Navy in the World prior to Dec. 7, 1941. That type of complacency cost us dearly at Pearl Harbor. I would not be surprised at another sneak attack somewhere by the Chinese. I hope none of this comes to pass. My granddaughter is currently deployed on a Carrier Strike Group. Yeah, I'm worried.
That’s simply not true about our navy pre-1941. But don’t worry, it actually is like 12x or more powerful than the next best navy.
Posted on 7/31/22 at 11:47 am to LookSquirrel
These guys recreated a similar thing Digital Combat Simulator that was prettt good and kind of funny
[link(https://youtu.be/gCPmRnUZb3I)]YouTube [/link]
[link(https://youtu.be/gCPmRnUZb3I)]YouTube [/link]
Posted on 7/31/22 at 11:47 am to BFIV
quote:No, it did not. The British Royal Navy was far more powerful at that point.
the U.S. Navy thought it was the most powerful and invincible Navy in the World prior to Dec. 7, 1941
Of course, we far surpassed the Brits within a few years.
Posted on 7/31/22 at 12:34 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
argue that aircraft carriers are obsolete. They're not by any stretch of the imagination
As I understand it, they stand second only to the big red button in some bunker somewhere labelled "Destroy the World"
Posted on 7/31/22 at 12:49 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
As I understand it
They are the world’s greatest conventional asset and we have the most by a LOT.
Posted on 7/31/22 at 2:59 pm to beachdude
quote:
We have the capacity to incinerate China and make the ashes dance.
Capacity without leadership is useless
Posted on 7/31/22 at 3:52 pm to ChineseBandit58
"IF" they were able to sink one of our carriers, it would be.., BAD!
Hypersonis missles?
China launches DF-17 hypersonic missile off Taiwan Strait
LINK
Hypersonis missles?
quote:
"There is no defense against hypersonic,” Milley said. “You're not going to defend against it. Those things are going so fast you're not going to get it.”
China launches DF-17 hypersonic missile off Taiwan Strait
quote:
China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) conducted a live-fire exercise near Pingtan Island, about 120 kilometers from the Taiwanese coast.
The exercise included the launch of a DF-17 hypersonic system from a land-based platform, as seen in a promotional video released ahead of the 95th anniversary of the founding of the PLA, on August 1, 2022.
LINK
Posted on 7/31/22 at 5:26 pm to LookSquirrel
Posted on 7/31/22 at 11:54 pm to The Levee
USN has 13 active carriers in service now
Posted on 8/1/22 at 12:51 am to supatigah
I’d feel a lot better about our chances against China if our military leadership hadn’t gone “woke”.Forum I was reading a recently retired chief petty officer was pretty dis heartened the way the Navy was going.He said his last couple years they spent more time on diversity training and other such bs than they did training for war.
Col.David Hackworth said years ago there were no more warrior generals,they were all political animals that earned their stars by kissing arse.I’m sure same holds true for Navy admirals.
I got an inkling of this when I was in the Navy in the early 70’s.I was on Shore Patrol in Rota Spain.4-5 nights a week someone got sent to pick up our boss (Security Officer-a Commander,O-5).from an officer party and bring him home.Sometimes it was at the O Club,sometimes from an officer house.
One night I asked him if he didn’t get tired of going to parties 4-5 nights a week.He replied “ yes,I do but that’s how you get ahead in this man’s Navy.”
I didn’t say it but I thought what about merit,job performance.His reply made an impression on me ( not a good one).
My point is we have all these “gee whiz “ weapons but do we have the military leadership to fight effectively in event of a war,they might just all panic and piss their pants.
Col.David Hackworth said years ago there were no more warrior generals,they were all political animals that earned their stars by kissing arse.I’m sure same holds true for Navy admirals.
I got an inkling of this when I was in the Navy in the early 70’s.I was on Shore Patrol in Rota Spain.4-5 nights a week someone got sent to pick up our boss (Security Officer-a Commander,O-5).from an officer party and bring him home.Sometimes it was at the O Club,sometimes from an officer house.
One night I asked him if he didn’t get tired of going to parties 4-5 nights a week.He replied “ yes,I do but that’s how you get ahead in this man’s Navy.”
I didn’t say it but I thought what about merit,job performance.His reply made an impression on me ( not a good one).
My point is we have all these “gee whiz “ weapons but do we have the military leadership to fight effectively in event of a war,they might just all panic and piss their pants.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News