3 ms·
I really wonder what the next 20-30 years might hold for the US Navy. This entire Supercarrier business looks just like the Dreadnoughts pre-WW1 where in the sp
by NikolaeVarius 10y ago
I really wonder what the next 20-30 years might hold for the US Navy. This entire Supercarrier business looks just like the Dreadnoughts pre-WW1 where in the span of a decade, these ultra heavy ships became completely worthless and unusable because they were so expensive that no one could ever justify fielding them in combat.
Can you imagine the political repercussions of even losing a single Carrier?
- remarkEon 10y ago>Can you imagine the political repercussions of even losing a single Carrier? Yes. A Third World War.
- bluedino 10y agoHe's talking about taking one out of service, not being destroyed by an enemy state.
- purple-again 10y agoIt doesn't read that way to me. I interpreted it as a combat loss as well.
- Noughmad 10y agoConsidering the Enterprise has just been decomissioned, I doubt that.
- NikolaeVarius 10y agoI meant combat loss.
- purple-again 10y agoComplete nuclear holocaust. Without a doubt.
- rhino369 10y agoSuper carriers are still useful even if they become increasing vulnerable. Most US military conflict is with developing countries who lack access to cutting edge weapons But their vulnerability is overstated imo. It's easy to build a missile that can physically get through an AEGIS defense. It's hard to accurately target ships during a time of war. Over the horizon targeting is tough. The US would destroy or jam satallite. If the US were dumb enough to put a carrier in the middle of the Taiwan straight during a shooting war, then it will at a minimum be disabled. But 200 miles off shore?