4 ms·
You're pretty dismissive, but I've read some pretty credible sources saying that exercise was quite the upset. You cannot possibly expect enemies to "follow rul
by venus 13y ago
You're pretty dismissive, but I've read some pretty credible sources saying that exercise was quite the upset. You cannot possibly expect enemies to "follow rules" either. In a real war Blizzard wouldn't be able to "reset".
Intuitively speaking, too, I have great difficulty understanding how carriers could possibly repel massed attacks of low value craft/missiles. And that's not even counting the Dong Fengs, etc. I have a romantic nostalgia for carriers as much as anyone but I can't see how they are anything other than gigantic sitting ducks in the microchip era.
- fit2rule 13y agoIn fact, the US Aircraft fleet is a huge sitting duck, just waiting to be sunk. It can project power, sure - but only as a policing tool. In time of total war, the carrier is useless - every potential American adversary has the ability to sink these carriers with cheap, fast weapons designed for the job. There is no defence currently in the field - the laser weapons (only possible defense against supersonic smart ballistic nukes) currently being tested won't make it in wide deployment for another 10 years. The moment open warfare is declared, America will loose its aircraft carriers, and trillions of dollars, thousands of lives. The only use for the Carrier fleet right now is for America to project its police force around the world.
- skyraider 13y agoI think carriers today are like the battleships of yesterday. They look imposing but modern tech (swarms in the former case and, well, enough Fairy Swordfish biplanes in the latter) defeats them. Submarines are what we need IMO.
- lesterbuck 13y agoI have a bunch of naval officers in my family. I recall the standard line is "During modern naval warfare, there are only two things: submarines and targets."