Iowa’s faster and outranges the, hypothetically (not including fire control) Iowa can take out a ton before it runs out of ammunition.
If they’re fighting close Iowa losing to 8 pre dreadnoughts with 14 inchers sounds right. 👍
Battleship Aircraft Carrier Hybrids?
-
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about5369.html&highlight=soviet
check out this page. I forget who posted it, but it was posted in the thread on new A&A pieces.
check out the Russian carrier design just above the word Italy. It’s a CV with 406mm guns!!! :-o A lot of the Italian carriers are crazy, too. These are brilliant designs. If the carrier wasn’t obsolete from a military point of view, I’d say the US ought to build one.
-
If the carrier wasn’t obsolete from a military point of view, I’d say the US ought to build one.
:?
Is not the US currently building the George H W Bush?
I need to know why the carrier is obsolete?
-
Yes, we are building the George H. W. Bush, the last Nimitz-Class carrier. After that, there are three new Ford-Class stealth carriers.
Carriers are fine when fighting WWII battles and going up against armies in third world countries. A single modern super carrier has more air power than the entire Air Force of most countries. However, if a real modern war were to break out, all of the US’s surface ships would be sitting ducks for cruise missile attacks. The Phalanx Missile Defense System has its glitches, and even if it worked perfectly, it could be overwhelmed be shear force. Also, carriers are very visible and can easily be tracked by satellite, meaning all that expensive stealth counts for squat.
Also, power projection has no place in 4th Generation Warfare, which is actually 0 Generation Warfare. The best description of this I could find is here: http://www.antiwar.com/lind/index.php?articleid=1702
Future warfare will not be fought by states, but everyone else: violent political/religious/ethnic groups, wealthy families, mercenaries, gangs, companies and individuals; all of them fighting for something different, making and breaking alliances, leaving groups and joining others, splitting, merging, changes in goals, chaos. Think Somalia. The more the US intervenes and blows stuff up, robots or not, the more people get angry and want to shoot something.
-
The Hybrid Battleship Aircraft carrier would have made an awesome commerce raider in WWII.
-
Imo it’s not a good strategic decision to build the George H. Bush carrier, not the Ronald Reagan Carrier either.
Thinking like A&A strats,
US should build something like this:
-
@ABWorsham:
The Hybrid Battleship Aircraft carrier would have made an awesome commerce raider in WWII.
That’s an understatement. :-D One thing I thought about, though. Could an aircraft carrier design take the recoil of big guns? Battleships merely rock from side to side. You certainly couldn’t fire those things while landing aircraft. Perhaps if it were a very large ship, like the H.M.S. Habbakuk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Habakkuk
I agree with the arsenal ship concept, and I think a retrofitted Ohio-class sub is the best way to go about it. You could defend the whole country with just six of those things.
-
Also, imagine being on the flight deck when you fired those things off. Say good buy to sound.
With the Russian design, you would also have to be careful not to fire the guns pointed over the flight deck, or you’d blast away the deck with just the fireballs. :-D
Suggested Topics
