• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Navy’s Shipbuilding Plan Doesn’t Meet Congress’ Needs, Lawmakers Say

Can everyone please take the time to read and understand what a ballistic missile is? WIki is a good source.
A ballistic missile is one that uses Newtonian ballistic physics to determine where it lands. There is no control after it launches just like the old German V2. Once launched it has no way to change its course (if it is truly just ballistic).
 
Peter said:
Fair enough I'm just saying it won't sink the ship.
I agree it'll be out of action and steaming for the nearest friendly port at top speed.

I'm unsure how much ability the other ships in a group will have to tow a carrier if it is crippled?
Click to expand...

To be eaxact.....

A aircraft carrier relies on compartmentalization
 
Monica33 said:
A complete Compliance Gullible .
What you are told is exactly what you believe .
DYOR .
I estimate that you are 20 years adrift of what is available now .


Hint . You won't get smart if you just bow down to MSM . And, out of interest, what exactly do the 5000 satellites that point to earth do? Not just the weather aids . rofl .
Click to expand...

The majority of them are communication satellites.

You understand there’s no such thing as stealth in space, right? You can’t hide weaponized satellites. Anyone with a telescope would be able to see them.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Norfolk has had it's carriers in port all at the same time. I know this because I drive by them almost every day.
Click to expand...

You’d think someone who was supposedly in the Navy would know the difference between “in dry dock” and “in port”.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Extremely capable.
Click to expand...

Name a single ballistic missile system ever built that could hit a moving target from over the horizon.

Not even China did it. Their only tests were static ones at a known fixed location on a painting of a carrier on the ground.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Are you ****ing kidding me?

Try staying away from subjects that you know nothing about.

www.japcc.org

Will the Aircraft Carrier Survive? - Joint Air Power Competence Centre

Introduction Since the First World War, the importance of sea-based aviation has evolved, including the increasingly diverse mission sets aircraft carriers provide. Expert opinions on the future effectiveness of air power from the sea have also changed dramatically.1 Decades ago, most experts in...
www.japcc.org www.japcc.org
Click to expand...

And still absolutely nothing in that article on the main things I bring up over and over again.

How are they going to acquire the carrier from over the horizon mixed in with the other ships of the fleet.

How are they going to get the specific coordinates to the missile.

How are they going to be able to steer it onto a moving target?

People talk over and over about this, but for some reason always seem to ignore the practical reasons why it will never work.
 
Peter said:
To be fair Aircraft carriers are bloody huge and slow compared to missiles.
It will be the job of the air defence ships in the group to save its bacon.
If they can shield the carrier then it should be ok but the carrier may take a hit.

I just don't think a single hit would sink a carrier of the size of a Nimitz as it just has so many compartments.

It's not going to be much fun for the crew though if it is hit even if it isn't sunk.
Click to expand...

A single missile would not even take out a WWII era carrier, let alone a more modern one.

And do not forget that the carrier also has defenses. Typically 2 CIWS systems, 2 MK57 Sea Sparrow launchers (16 missiles), and 2 RIM-116 RAM missile launchers (42 missiles).

That is not even counting all the systems on the AEGIS class cruisers and destroyers that surround the ship.

I always laugh when people try to talk about how easy it is to "sink a carrier", completely ignoring all the other ships that are with one everywhere it goes.
 
fortune said:
A ballistic missile is one that uses Newtonian ballistic physics to determine where it lands. There is no control after it launches just like the old German V2. Once launched it has no way to change its course (if it is truly just ballistic).
Click to expand...

Which is why those that actually understand missile systems largely laugh at the DF-21D. At most, it is a propaganda pipe dream, and intended to cause some confusion as one if one was ever launched, with a nuclear payload.

I have been discussing this in here for over a decade, since they first announced it. And nobody has ever even once answered how they are going to acquire an exact location on a carrier from over the horizon, and then guide the missile onto such a moving target. Keeping in mind that the CEP of that missile is larger than the flight deck of the carrier even when it is static and not moving at all.

All of those that believe in it are really like Elron Musk groupies, and give no answers, simply saying "it works".
 
Oozlefinch said:
Name a single ballistic missile system ever built that could hit a moving target from over the horizon.

Not even China did it. Their only tests were static ones at a known fixed location on a painting of a carrier on the ground.
Click to expand...
www.thedrive.com

Chinese Long-Range Ballistic Missiles Struck Moving Ship In South China Sea: Report

The test could represent the first full demonstration of a real Chinese long-range anti-ship ballistic missile capability.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com

www.navalnews.com

China's New Aircraft Carrier Killer Is World's Largest Air-Launched Missile - Naval News

H I Sutton sheds some light on China's latest aircraft carrier killer: The CH-AS-X-13 air-launched anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM).
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com


And they are getting better every year.
 
RetiredUSN said:
www.navalnews.com

China's New Aircraft Carrier Killer Is World's Largest Air-Launched Missile - Naval News

H I Sutton sheds some light on China's latest aircraft carrier killer: The CH-AS-X-13 air-launched anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM).
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com


And they are getting better every year.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, wrong. We were air launching missiles bigger than that over 40 years ago.

Still no answer on how they would acquire a carrier from over the horizon, isolate it from the fleet, and actually hit it. They hit a slow moving ship at a fixed speed, in waters they completely control, big deal.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Uhhh, wrong. We were air launching missiles bigger than that over 40 years ago.

Still no answer on how they would acquire a carrier from over the horizon, isolate it from the fleet, and actually hit it. They hit a slow moving ship at a fixed speed, in waters they completely control, big deal.
Click to expand...

And when it becomes routine, what will your argument be then?
 
RetiredUSN said:
And when it becomes routine, what will your argument be then?
Click to expand...

You still avoid how they will acquire, track, then somehow magically hit an object that can not be seen. Especially one that as soon as a launch is detected will immediately go to emergency speed and start taking evasive action.

Even conventional artillery can only do that with a lucky shot, and it is firing at ranges of only up to around 20 miles. Not over 1,000 miles. And has a much greater rate of fire, and the advantage of shrapnel.

Tell me when a cannon firing a non-explosive projectile can strike a moving vehicle with no form of external tracking and guidance, then you will see the real issues. Or even better, hit a moving 18 wheeler dual trailer, that is surrounded by a dozen other moving trucks and vehicles. None of which can be seen by the artillery. Only at most given an azimuth at which to fire upon, and a range that is plus or minus half a kilometer.
 
Oozlefinch said:
You still avoid how they will acquire, track, then somehow magically hit an object that can not be seen. Especially one that as soon as a launch is detected will immediately go to emergency speed and start taking evasive action.

Even conventional artillery can only do that with a lucky shot, and it is firing at ranges of only up to around 20 miles. Not over 1,000 miles. And has a much greater rate of fire, and the advantage of shrapnel.

Tell me when a cannon firing a non-explosive projectile can strike a moving vehicle with no form of external tracking and guidance, then you will see the real issues. Or even better, hit a moving 18 wheeler dual trailer, that is surrounded by a dozen other moving trucks and vehicles. None of which can be seen by the artillery. Only at most given an azimuth at which to fire upon, and a range that is plus or minus half a kilometer.
Click to expand...

Today is not tomorrow.

It's coming, and very soon.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Norfolk has had it's carriers in port all at the same time. I know this because I drive by them almost every day.
Click to expand...
I drive by Barksdale Air Force Base all the time and watch B-52s land and take off.

That doesn't make me an expert in strategic bombing does it?
 
eohrnberger said:
"US Navy’s Shipbuilding Plan Doesn’t Meet Congress’ Needs, Lawmakers Say"
Wouldn't the Navy leaders be more knowledgeable about what's needed?
Click to expand...

Only if you're worried about all the wrong things. If you know what I mean.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Today is not tomorrow.

It's coming, and very soon.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, something magical that will let something be observed where it is out of line of sight, and be tracked to an accuracy of millimeters per meter.

Transporters and mind control rays are coming also, you still avoid what I say every single time.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Norfolk has had it's carriers in port all at the same time. I know this because I drive by them almost every day.
Click to expand...

And when exactly was that, sometime in maybe the late 1950's?

There are currently 4 Carrier Strike Groups stationed out of there. 2 (USS Dwight D. Eisenhower), 8 (USS Harry S. Truman), 10 (USS George H.W. Bush), and 12 (USS Gerald R. Ford).

So please tell us the amazing time that all of the carriers were in port at one time. At any one time, roughly half of them are in port, that is normal. One is at sea, as another is in port, refitting and onloading and offloading crew and supplies.

It has been that way since even before WWII, so you really are not saying anything. At any one time, half our ships are on average in port. But you are apparently trying to imply that all of the carriers were in port at once. And that would be such a historic event that I think it would have been front page news all over the planet.
 
Oozlefinch said:
And when exactly was that, sometime in maybe the late 1950's?

There are currently 4 Carrier Strike Groups stationed out of there. 2 (USS Dwight D. Eisenhower), 8 (USS Harry S. Truman), 10 (USS George H.W. Bush), and 12 (USS Gerald R. Ford).

So please tell us the amazing time that all of the carriers were in port at one time. At any one time, roughly half of them are in port, that is normal. One is at sea, as another is in port, refitting and onloading and offloading crew and supplies.

It has been that way since even before WWII, so you really are not saying anything. At any one time, half our ships are on average in port. But you are apparently trying to imply that all of the carriers were in port at once. And that would be such a historic event that I think it would have been front page news all over the planet.
Click to expand...
Please stop with your nonsense. It is far from a historic event.

breakingdefense.com

All 6 East Coast Carriers In Dock, Not Deployed: Hill Asks Why - Breaking Defense

As the Navy scrambles to get enough parts and people to move carriers back out to sea, it's facing a crowded waterfront at Norfolk.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

Norfolk-768x456.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom