patrick.net

I'd think that for a country which is separated from its potential enemies (which can actually threaten it) by large oceans, its Navy and flotilla are the most vital part of its defense! Any power that could invade must do so from sea, so a Navy is the first line of defense.

However we haven't been invaded since 1812, so I guess it's been all attack attack.

You gotta be kidding me. The US military budget is probably about 10x what it should be. Let the Navy complain all it wants.

The LoserF-35 and the Loser LCS have the same Loser contractor.

anonymous says

The U.S. Navy is Screwed

That's OK. It's the good kind of screwing.

www.youtube.com/embed/nmGuy0jievs

And if that's not good enough, they have a new marketing campaign to increase enlistment.

www.youtube.com/embed/Y4bbocBQ_0s

The US navy would defeat all other navies in the world put together.
I mean EASILY.
Just count the aircraft carriers groups of each countries. I think the US has about twice as many than the rest of the world put together.

Plus, in an age where China will simply use dynamically guided supersonic nuclear missile to target such aircraft carriers, and where underwater automatic drones will probably dominate maritime warfare in the next century, one should question the wisdom of investing heavily in old style ships.

Heraclitusstudent says

... one should question the wisdom of investing heavily in old style ships.

For older ships I agree, but the newest trial ships are beyond incredible. I'm sure you remember Trump's criticism of things needing to be steam as the newer class aircraft carrier catapults are electro mag.

There is another big change floating around out there that isn't very apparent ... yet. Let's just say that the point defense systems, like CIWIS, are the things that are really about to become obsolete ...

www.youtube.com/embed/i737rM6FxqE

... as the types of ballistic/kinetic weapons we have are about to push missiles down several pegs on orders of effectiveness and ability. Sub surface drone threat will still be a major issue for the navy but the air defense issues are greatly reduced right now. Give it 10 years, and no one is going to be fearing missiles anymore. As weird as it may seem, a supersonic slug of metal is about to be the apex of conventional arms and a naval vessel is going to be the best ticket to anywhere in the world for deployment.

The trick is that these types of elector mag systems need massive power generation on the boat. Typical current high end (90s, 00s) ships put out about 7MW. Things like the Zummwalt generate 58MWs of power! (That's for all their fancy electronics to get their over-costed, and now canceled, rocket assisted ordnance on target). It's only on platforms like that, that you can generate the amount of electrons to use 'rail guns'.

We will see a mixed fleet with traditional missiles (with skeleton crew ordinance ships alongside), current traditional missile defense (CIWIS, anti-missile missiles), and then these ultra high tech mega power plant metal flingers protected in the middle, with the carrier. Those will be the main air shield for the fleet when under attack, and they can also reach out and hit at ranges very close to the Tomahawk when they want to project power ashore.

If you are a 'globalist cuck', like me, Navy remains where it is at.

Rew says

Sub surface drone threat will still be a major issue for the navy but the air defense issues are greatly reduced right now

One really good diesel electric sub can ruin a carriers whole day.

Still can't figure out what the LCS is for. It's a ludicrously priced patrol boat totally vulnerable to any aerial threat. Seems major pricing overkill to deal with very low threat or low tech environment. They say that's what it's for, then why the expensive stealth design and coating? Goatfuckers with RPG-7s and AKs don't have naval radar or ASMs in the first place.

This.
In the age of modern weaponry, all ships are just hugely expensive sitting ducks.
Any kind of war against a country with tactical nukes that can be delivered anywhere in the vicinity of a ship will render that ship useless.
The only reason for owning warships is to project power against a vastly inferior enemy.

Heraclitusstudent says

Plus, in an age where China will simply use dynamically guided supersonic nuclear missile to target such aircraft carriers, and where underwater automatic drones will probably dominate maritime warfare in the next century, one should question the wisdom of investing heavily in old style ships.

anonymous says

Let's hope they don't put F-35s as the main aircraft on these new and improved carriers. What could possibly go wrong with that ?

Word is the Navy is pushing for Super, Super Hornets and only buying a minimum number of F-35s to get it through the next decade or so.

Heraclitusstudent says

Plus, in an age where China will simply use dynamically guided supersonic nuclear missile to target such aircraft carriers, and where underwater automatic drones will probably dominate maritime warfare in the next century, one should question the wisdom of investing heavily in old style ships.

The carriers also suck all the funding from everything else, and we barely have enough escorts - many of them aged - to guard the carriers. Leaving us with few auxillary and patrol craft needed to supply fleets and patrol for subs.

If the Chinese deployed their subs aggressively, we'd have a hard time chasing them. Patrol Aircraft are inadequate as well.

But Carriers are "Sexy".

Much of our weaponry is dysfunctional or ill-designed and will fail in a major war. The Russian systems are now mostly superior to ours and are produced at one-tenth the cost. The real problem with our military (aside of its antidemocratic function of defending our corrupt government from its people if push comes to shove) is the corruption of the misnomered "defense" contractors, with all the concerns Eisenhower foresaw in the Military Industrial Complex. This is a huge problem and I haven't the time to document it or detail my comments. Briefly, one of our biggest problems is our corrupt and Byzantine General Officer Corps, and the "revolving door" between military "service" (actually careerism and parasitism) and the defense contractor corporate boardrooms. There is also more direct corruption such as the Fat Leonard scandal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Leonard_scandal -- 28 persons criminally charged, many convicted or pleading guilty, including many officers and even an Admiral!

Numerous weapons systems are stillborn or marginally operable, such as the stealth destroyer which cannot fire its main armament because the shells each cost $800,000, or the Osprey, the F-35, the carriers that can't catapult planes properly, the obsolescene of our anti-tank weapons with the emergence of the Russian MBT Armada-14, and so on. This is primarily because of the smothering corruption in the US today. The "weapons programs" are not "weapons programs", they are "job programs"

TwoScoopsMcGee says

If the Chinese deployed their subs aggressively, we'd have a hard time chasing them. Patrol Aircraft are inadequate as well.

Forget escorts. Why can't we built cheap, small, semi-automated, remote controlled submarines that will act essentially as long range torpedoes, and navigate the seas in schools of tens of thousands (for the price of 1 large ship). Once you remove the requirement of human presence, this is what you will get.

What are escorts gonna do against that kind of threat?

Republicans must raise taxes to protect America.
Taxes or security,ASSHOLES!

Heraclitusstudent says

Forget escorts. Why can't we built cheap, small, semi-automated, remote controlled submarines that will act essentially as long range torpedoes, and navigate the seas in schools of tens of thousands (for the price of 1 large ship). Once you remove the requirement of human presence, this is what you will get.

Interesting! I was thinking in terms of ASW but that might work... I suppose you could program them to periodically dive under the thermocline layer and snoop for deep enemy subs...

A few Chinese sub-launched conventionally-armed cruise missiles aimed at West Coast infrastructure, esp. the big power facilities and oil tanks, will be a bigger blow than anything.

But sadly that is what it will take before people say "We spent $500B/year but didn't have the least defense of our own coastal infrastructure aside from a handful of fighters for the whole entire coast?!"

YUP.

Have you guys ever considered General Victor Corpus' article "The Assassin's Mace"?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15348.htm (there are fuller versions of this on-line)

or seen this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Might it be that carriers are, in the modern battlefield environment, as obsolete as battleships were at the start of World War II? And could it be that cunning smaller opponents with the right tactics could largely eviscerate seemingly unsurmountable US advantages in a serious war?

Herb says

And could it be that cunning smaller opponents with the right tactics could largely eviscerate seemingly unsurmountable US advantages in a serious war?

Asymmetrically, yes. Anything resembling a nation state against us, nope.

Airspace is about to change significantly as much higher speed unmanned drones dodge rail gun projectiles as the primary AA defense. From that perspective, the carrier will be degraded in role: drone launcher mother ship. Give it 5-10 years though.

Rew says

much higher speed unmanned drones

Basically missiles: various types thereof. Cruise, ballistic etc...
And they are launched from subs, much less vulnerable than aircraft carriers.

"U.S. Navy Warships Need More Armor?
***
The damage to Fitzgerald—though not directly applicable to combat—highlights the fact that modern warships are not quite as resilient as their heavily armored forbearers—such as World War II-era battleships, for example. Even relatively minor damage can render a modern warship incapable of combat operations.

“Their best defense is their combat systems, their speed, and maneuverability.”"

Compare photos of the USS Fitzgerald, which "nearly sank", and the ACX Crystal: