Teh Gerald R. Ford Supercarrier - Mankind's First! by arsin - Page 3 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Teh Gerald R. Ford Supercarrier - Mankind's First!
Page 3 of 9
Thread Tools
Rooster128
VeteranXV
Old
41 - 03-03-2017, 21:18
Reply With Quote
We already spend enough on the military. If people really cared about 'defense' we'd be investing in things that'd actually defend our nation from attack.

"Gotta defend our freedom" is code for "Gotta have dat oil"

Our military is big enough- we need to stop spending on this like this.
 
Rooster128 is offline
 
Sponsored Links
Captain Tele
Veteran³
Immigrant
Old
42 - 03-03-2017, 21:20
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent View Post
You can't defend surface ships against a modern diesel-electric submarine with modern torpedoes. These things make no sound and are undetectable by sonar due to coating and electric fields and magnets. .
better article on this

Sweden's Super Stealth Submarines Are So Lethal They 'Sank' a U.S. Aircraft Carrier | The National Interest Blog
 
Captain Tele is offline
 
Captain Tele
Veteran³
Immigrant
Old
43 - 03-03-2017, 21:26
Reply With Quote
every measure has a counter measure or soon will

how tech works

Mi-24 helicopter said **** you Afghanistan

Stinger shoulder fired missile said **** you Mi-24

also said **** you to US helicopters two decades later

soooooooooo.....counterme asures

first flares

then DIRCM......etc, etc,

but this is like saying that helicopters shouldn't exist and serve no purpose

now is this supercarrier a good deal or even needed? that is a better question/concern
 
Captain Tele is offline
 
Edofnor
VeteranXV
Old
44 - 03-03-2017, 21:31
Reply With Quote
yes it is a good deal yes it is needed it is v cool ****, just like battleship
 
Edofnor is offline
 
arsin
Veteran++
Old
45 - 03-03-2017, 22:03
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent View Post
Surface ships are fish food in the age of the diesel-electric submarine. Sorry.
I read the link Capt. provided this was in 2005:

Quote:
In 2005, USS Ronald Reagan, a newly constructed $6.2 billion dollar aircraft carrier, sank after being hit by multiple torpedoes.
Fortunately, this did not occur in actual combat, but was simulated as part of a war game pitting a carrier task force including numerous antisubmarine escorts against HSMS Gotland, a small Swedish diesel-powered submarine displacing 1,600 tons. Yet despite making multiple attacks runs on the Reagan, the Gotland was never detected.

This outcome was replicated time and time again over two years of war games, with opposing destroyers and nuclear attack submarines succumbing to the stealthy Swedish sub. Naval analyst Norman Polmar said the Gotland “ran rings” around the American carrier task force. Another source claimed U.S. antisubmarine specialists were “demoralized” by the experience.


Surely they've made gains in mir or sonar?
 
arsin is offline
 
LawnDart
VeteranXV
Old
46 - 03-04-2017, 03:19
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyCat View Post
Scooby actually thinks a giant carrier would survive against supersonic missles or subs

Guy is a moron
Actually you are the moron and that idiot arsin/ellen
 
LawnDart is offline
 
MC Hamster
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
47 - 03-04-2017, 03:49
Reply With Quote
Over the years, US carriers (yes, always in carrier groups) have repeatedly been sunk by subs. Usually diesels. British, French, Canadian, Dutch, Swedish, Australian.. even Chilean subs have all taken turns sending the pride and glory of the US fleet to the bottom in wargames. From the 80s, right through to 2015 is the latest example I can find (a 30 year old French nuclear sub, that time).

IMO The Aircraft Carrier in 2020 will be what the Battleship was in 1940. Sub-launched cruise missiles allow for sudden deep strikes, drones can operate from much smaller amphibious assault craft, which can follow up to land the required ground forces to go along with an operation, not just be a floating airport. Smaller UAVs can be operated individually by battlefield units, larger ones from FOBs and semi-prepared advance airfields. Air defence can be provided by ground units, recon & ELINT by UAVs & satellites, strike missions by UAVs & cruise missiles. Navy doesn't do strategic bombing, and naval CAS is generally done by Marines off amphib ships, with rotary and V/STOL (Harriers & F-35B).

I really can't think of anything that a carrier can do and will be doing in the near future that can't be done by something else, and that justifies the price tag.

Though yes, they're still cool as ****.
 
MC Hamster is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
48 - 03-04-2017, 04:25
Reply With Quote
Sure in total war you would lose carriers, just like you did in WW2. But that's not really the point of a Carrier at the present time. It gives the US the capability to do whatever it wants in every part of the world. In a real war scenario we probably wouldn't send Carriers into danger zones immediately, you would see large forces of smaller ships and subs go in neutralize the enemies submarine force first.

The difference between the war game and real life is a lot as well. At any given time we have a general idea of where every submarine is in the world. You simply don't deploy your carrier into the areas where you know the subs are. With modern day surveillance and intelligence the Navy can tell you the location of every Russian/Chinese submarine within a 100 miles.

We also have ways to detect them. Now you let the submarine inside your 50 mile radius, you're going to have problems, you've already lost. You counter the current submarine threat by knowing where they are from the time they leave port until they return. You send out hunter killer groups of MH-60s, P-8's, and LA Class Attack Subs. You eliminate the submarine threat and then you move your carrier into the area for sustained operations.

How many jobs did the government provide in building that carrier? Or do we not care about that either?

People always want to ***** about the military industrial complex, but it provides jobs to millions of people, good paying jobs they wouldn't have otherwise.
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
49 - 03-04-2017, 04:31
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MC Hamster View Post
Over the years, US carriers (yes, always in carrier groups) have repeatedly been sunk by subs. Usually diesels. British, French, Canadian, Dutch, Swedish, Australian.. even Chilean subs have all taken turns sending the pride and glory of the US fleet to the bottom in wargames. From the 80s, right through to 2015 is the latest example I can find (a 30 year old French nuclear sub, that time).

IMO The Aircraft Carrier in 2020 will be what the Battleship was in 1940. Sub-launched cruise missiles allow for sudden deep strikes, drones can operate from much smaller amphibious assault craft, which can follow up to land the required ground forces to go along with an operation, not just be a floating airport. Smaller UAVs can be operated individually by battlefield units, larger ones from FOBs and semi-prepared advance airfields. Air defence can be provided by ground units, recon & ELINT by UAVs & satellites, strike missions by UAVs & cruise missiles. Navy doesn't do strategic bombing, and naval CAS is generally done by Marines off amphib ships, with rotary and V/STOL (Harriers & F-35B).

I really can't think of anything that a carrier can do and will be doing in the near future that can't be done by something else, and that justifies the price tag.

Though yes, they're still cool as ****.
Most air strikes done in Iraq and Syria have been done from CAGs.
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
50 - 03-04-2017, 04:49
Reply With Quote
lol. WarButtha thinks the USN keeps embarrassing itself in these war games on purpose (and also let the Chinese sub surface within kill distance in 06 for the same reason), but really the US always knows where every sub is. Delusional, totally brainwashed by the MIC propaganda they're feeding him 24/7 I am sure. Fact is, you can't detect modern subs. The USN has no idea where they are. That's why the subs always win the war games.
 
absent is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
51 - 03-04-2017, 04:53
Reply With Quote
I wonder what it does to a military drone's psyche to know that ****ing Sweden has a superior weapon of war capable of sinking your super expensive welfare dollhouse any where, any time? Must suck. Hooah.
 
absent is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
52 - 03-04-2017, 04:54
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent View Post
lol. WarButtha thinks the USN keeps embarrassing itself in these war games on purpose (and also let the Chinese sub surface within kill distance in 06 for the same reason), but really the US always knows where every sub is. Delusional, totally brainwashed by the MIC propaganda they're feeding him 24/7 I am sure. Fact is, you can't detect modern subs. The USN has no idea where they are. That's why the subs always win the war games.
War Games puts a sub you know is in the area against a CSG. You have already lost in that scenario as I've already stated. The only way to defeat modern submarines to to track them from the moment they leave port until they return to port. That is your only shot.

What propaganda? You're an idiot. Go look up magnetic anomaly detectors you stupid ****.
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
53 - 03-04-2017, 05:03
Reply With Quote
Modern submarines counteract magnetic anomalies with degaussing, you mouth breathing welfare leech. Don't they teach this **** to you naval grunts? I guess knowing about it would shatter your propaganda.
 
absent is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
54 - 03-04-2017, 05:05
Reply With Quote
That only reduces it you retard, it doesn't completely eliminate it. I wonder who probably has seen submarines be tracked in this thread?
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
55 - 03-04-2017, 05:07
Reply With Quote
No, it totally eliminates the magnetic signature, which is why these submarines continue to pop up right smack dab in the middle of your prestigious carrier battle groups, you dull ****face. I love your logic by the way: yeah, they can't track them within 50 miles, but once they're 200 miles out, we can see them where ever they are in the world!
 
absent is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
56 - 03-04-2017, 05:07
Reply With Quote


Ok. Believe what you want to bro. I actually do this job.
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
57 - 03-04-2017, 05:10
Reply With Quote
Looks like you don't know your job. I wonder what wires went wrong in your brain to think that a carrier battle group that can't detect a submarine within 50 miles with all of their ASW systems running at full speed trying to find the ****ing thing just means that the sub can be easily caught when it's not that close?

What a dummy.
 
absent is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
58 - 03-04-2017, 05:16
Reply With Quote
Why don't you try reading what I said?

You ever think maybe you don't know everything about our capabilities?

But I'm sure some random Finnish Nazi knows more
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
WarBuddha
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
59 - 03-04-2017, 05:19
Reply With Quote
I tell you what, you find me one article in the world that says degaussing completely eliminates a submarines magnetic field I'll say I'm wrong.

Here's a prediction, you won't, because it doesn't.
 
WarBuddha is offline
 
absent
VeteranXX
Old
60 - 03-04-2017, 05:30
Reply With Quote
Yep, they can't eliminate the magnetic signature, which is why a Swedish sub can sink your multibillion dollar welfare dollhouse.
 
absent is offline
 
Page 3 of 9
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Teh Gerald R. Ford Supercarrier - Mankind's First!

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
alex dare levert , alex knapik-levert , psycho pentagoners


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:14.