3 ms·
A carrier costs $10 billion. Without considering the crew and stuff in it. You can fire 50 $100 mil missiles simultaneously at it would still make a lot of sens
by 323 4y ago
A carrier costs $10 billion. Without considering the crew and stuff in it. You can fire 50 $100 mil missiles simultaneously at it would still make a lot of sense, especially considering the morale aspect.
- nradov 4y agoRegardless of missile cost, the hard part is getting an accurate targeting track and then data linking that back to a launcher. Satellites, aircraft, and submarines can all potentially accomplish that mission, but they only exist in limited numbers and are in turn vulnerable to the defensive weapons available in a carrier strike force.
- 323 4y agoYou only need general location data. The missile can do the final approach itself. It's hard to hide a strike group. Even civilians are tracking them these days with commercial sattelites: https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2020/05/07/the-realities-of-tracking-aircraft-carriers-with-civilian-satellites/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2020/05/07/the-realiti... US itself talks about sending out hundreds of cheapish drones in a swarm (5 km spacing) to seek out all naval assets over an area.
- nradov 4y agoBullshit. The missiles have only limited sensors and maneuvering capability. Commercial satellites don't provide real-time targeting data. And cheap drones lack the range for this mission. You obviously have no clue what you're talking about
- robertlagrant 4y ago> A carrier costs $10 billion. Without considering the crew and stuff in it. You can fire 50 $100 mil missiles simultaneously at it would still make a lot of sense, especially considering the morale aspect. It would make sense for equal economies fighting.