The U.S. Navy's Newest Class Of Aircraft Carriers: The Gerald R. Ford Series. (sound, Google)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Neither.....just smart mouthed posts!!!!(with no reputations).
Ummm...since you are not averse to people wasting YOUR hard-earned money how about giving me some and I'll buy something flashy and unnecessary that costs a fortune to keep up?
Like a Bentley.
Most of us are concerned where our tax dollars are going.
And most don't want something that this country can't afford and doesn't need.
You could have said we don't need carriers in right before WW2 as well.
They offer the US a power projection capability that is unique among the nations on this Earth, and have proven their usefulness time and time again.
Actually at the start of WWII, the Navy saw carriers as support craft, handy cause planes could scout large areas, but battles would be won with battleships.
The fact the Japs sunk many battleships turned out to bit them in the butt, as we had to go with what we had, a few carriers. But soon it was realized that the carrier was the foremost weapon with which to wage war at sea.
Another more interesting scenario, if OP doesn't mind me further hijacking his thread (I'm kinda new don't know protocol for threads around here) is how about a modern non-carrier surface combatant versus the Japanese Pearl Harbor strikeforce. Either a Burke or a Tico.
The Japanese had what six carriers, over 400 aircraft, and I have no idea how many cruisers/destroyers/etc.
This is interesting because supply of available munitions does start to come into play. How would the modern ship approach this problem?
Another more interesting scenario, if OP doesn't mind me further hijacking his thread (I'm kinda new don't know protocol for threads around here) is how about a modern non-carrier surface combatant versus the Japanese Pearl Harbor strikeforce. Either a Burke or a Tico.
The Japanese had what six carriers, over 400 aircraft, and I have no idea how many cruisers/destroyers/etc.
This is interesting because supply of available munitions does start to come into play. How would the modern ship approach this problem?
You're not hijacking the thread...it's cool/fine. That was my concern since modern fleets/task forces have hundreds of resupply vessels...eventually those conventional supplies would run out...however the carriers would have adequate power for many years...20.....IF I remember correctly...before having to refuel their Nuclear Reactors.
Interesting added scenario you bring up....How about a few Ticonderoga Class Guided Missile Cruisers taking on the Pearl Harbor Task Force....before reaching Hawaii???
Another more interesting scenario, if OP doesn't mind me further hijacking his thread (I'm kinda new don't know protocol for threads around here) is how about a modern non-carrier surface combatant versus the Japanese Pearl Harbor strikeforce. Either a Burke or a Tico.
The Japanese had what six carriers, over 400 aircraft, and I have no idea how many cruisers/destroyers/etc.
This is interesting because supply of available munitions does start to come into play. How would the modern ship approach this problem?
O.k. i did some digging on the specs of the Nimitz class and her aircraft although Asheville Native would be the expert here for us since he served on a carrier and i served on destroyers.
The Japanese invasion force launched a total of 353 planes to attack Pearl Harbor and the USS Nimitz in the movie had 90 aircraft although some were non combat i.e. P-3 Orions and Helicoptors etc. as i'm going to assume that the CO had around 75 F-14's and A-7's total to attack the Japanese planes?? Also i believe that each plane carried 4 missiles i.e. 2 Sidewinder and 2 Sparrow along with thousands of rounds of 20 mm ammo and so i assume that the USS Nimitz and it's combat aircraft in that movie would have had enough armament to confront the entire dec 1941 Japanese air attack force on Pearl Harbor had they gone back in time as they did in the movie.
So my thoughts are yes the USS Nimitz could have taken on the Dec 7, 1941 Japanese attack force that bombed Pearl Harbor that day.
Actually at the end of the movie the CO launched everything he had to destroy them and his planes had visual with the Japanese planes and they were getting ready to fire missiles on them and then ............. i can't tell as i'd give away the movie
Interesting added scenario you bring up....How about a few Ticonderoga Class Guided Missile Cruisers taking on the Pearl Harbor Task Force....before reaching Hawaii???
Okay, first I think the obvious advantage still remains with the tico in that it can hide from the Japanese task force while knowing exactly where they are. The Japanese would be using scout planes which a tico could easily knock those out of the air from 50 miles away, while utilizing the search radar on its helos to track the Japanese.
Problem is how to engage 'em? Tico doesn't want a gun battle and it's only got eight harpoons. SM-2 has a secondary anti-ship role, carries a relatively large warhead for an anti-aircraft missile, and the tico has a lot of 'em so that might end up being a very important weapon to be able to use outside the range of their heavier guns. With ESSMs and the wiz-guns tico probably doesn't need them for SA role anyway.
Maybe use harpoons to try to take out the carriers first, since once they have no aircraft could also use the helos to help plink off some of the escort ships?
You could have said we don't need carriers in right before WW2 as well.
They offer the US a power projection capability that is unique among the nations on this Earth, and have proven their usefulness time and time again.
Actually...NO...I couldn't (nor wouldn't) have said that.
There was no real history of naval aviation prior to WWII and by that I mean combat history.While the European theater didn't see any real carrier action, the war in the Pacific was decided,in part, by carrier-based aircraft.
I see a use for carriers in the future. But when your military technologies and abilities surpass that of your closest potential rival by almost 30 years (China) what would building additional weapons platforms do for you?
No, I expect you might well have seen those silly flat ships and wondered why we need to spend money on them.
You build additional weapons platforms because technology is constantly evolving, as are your potential rivals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
