Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The U.S. Navy’s Big Mistake; Building Tons of Supercarriers
War is Boring ^ | May 27, 2015 | David W. Wise

Posted on 05/28/2015 6:52:21 AM PDT by C19fan

“History,” it has been written, “does not repeat itself, but it rhymes.” Today it’s rhyming with Gen. Billy Mitchell. In the 1920s, Mitchell challenged conventional thinking by advocating air power at sea in the face of a naval establishment dominated by battleship proponents.

The hubris of the “battleship Navy” was such that just nine days before Pearl Harbor, the official program for the 1941 Army-Navy game displayed a full page photograph of the battleship USS Arizona with language virtually extolling its invincibility.

Of course, the reason that no one had yet sunk a battleship from the air — in combat — was that no one had yet tried.

(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: carrier; navy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-156 next last
To: Jim Noble
Seriously. Five carriers are vaporized in a BOOB attack one day in 2017, followed by a massed amphibious assault on Taiwan. Wargame it for me.

WWIII follows. Our forces throughout the world would be mobilized including in the region inplaces like Guam and Japan. The nuclear triad of land based missiles, submarine launched nuclear weapons, and aircraft and cruise missiles armed with nuclear weapons would retaliate.

Taiwan would be an afterthought. You don't wipe out five carriers without the subsequent Armageddon. The Japanese learned that after Pearl Harbor.

101 posted on 05/28/2015 8:44:24 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
As for Lord Nelson’s quote about a ship attacking a fort, I wonder if he would change his mind if he had an aircraft carrier. They and submarines changed the whole character of naval warfare.

When Nelson made that statement, ships did not carry guns powerful enough to readily knock down fortress walls, while forts had guns much bigger than a ship could carry.

I wonder what his thoughts would be upon seeing a WW2 battle ship with 16" guns able to toss a 1,000 pound explosive shell several miles?

102 posted on 05/28/2015 8:44:27 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

We used to have a 600 ship navy during the days of Vietnam.


103 posted on 05/28/2015 8:47:49 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
Tell me what part of our force, or for that matter, anyone else’s, can't be shot at? Our Carriers operate with lots of AAW protection and submarines.

Tell me what can we do to be completely invulnerable?

104 posted on 05/28/2015 8:48:06 AM PDT by Sea Warrior (Who's the enemy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpirituTuo

There are two kinds of ships:

SUBMARINES...........and...............TARGETS.

Take it to the bank.

An aircraft carrier is a.... big.... fat....TARGET!!


105 posted on 05/28/2015 8:48:06 AM PDT by submarine571 (Submariners do it deeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Shamrock498

Satellites are all fine and dandy, but even if they can effectively locate a carrier there needs to be effective integration to systems capable of targeting and hitting it.

Cruise missiles are going to be range limited. And the longest ranged versions will be subsonic and take a long time to reach a target at distance. Over water they’ll be easy pickings for AMRAAMS.

Ballistic missiles aren’t easy to guide once they’re launched. There’ll be a time lag between when the CVN is located, when the missile is targeted and launched, and when it hits. The carrier will be miles away from where it was at that point, meaning that the targeting will require a predictive element on where the carrier will be. THEN the missile needs to survive Aegis, which is proven to work against ballistic missiles. While a ChiCom nuke will be bigger than the Bikini bombs, the Bikini tests (Able Shot, specifically) did show pretty conclusively that anything other than a really near miss is going to be not only survivable but also not a mission-kill.


106 posted on 05/28/2015 8:49:35 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

I’m convinced that the next paradigm will be shipbased drone swarms as the leading edge. The ships will be drones that are submergible nucs that can launch swarms of smaller airbased drones that are similar to tomohawks in that they can be programmed to arrive at a GPS location following a certain route at a certain time, but instead of just detonating they will launch their arms and then return to the ship or another location for refurb/refuel.

Personnel and maintenance costs would be much less, need for logistics is greatly reduced, and the ships and drones can be engineered to perform at specifications that would not be possible if they were manned. It’s coming.


107 posted on 05/28/2015 8:50:07 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
And that means we cannot afford missions we previously could. The money to pay for them, our wealth, is going to welfare.

It is the classic battle of Guns versus Butter that all Great Powers in decline have faced, Butter usually wins out because it has more constituents. You just have to take a look at Europe and what they spend on defense. The US has provided the security umbrella to allow them to feed their welfare state. We won't have that luxury as our power declines.

108 posted on 05/28/2015 8:53:28 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: kabar

At its peak, the U.S. Navy was operating 6,768 ships on V-J Day in August 1945, including 28 aircraft carriers, 23 battleships, 71 escort carriers, 72 cruisers, over 232 submarines, 377 destroyers, and thousands of amphibious, supply and auxiliary ships - from “Ship Force Levels 1917-present”

Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Eight.....


109 posted on 05/28/2015 8:54:17 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

Go to Ft. Pulaski outside Savanah GA to see the effects circa 1863 rifled cannon had against the kinds of forts Nelson described.

Then think of what a single broadside of 16” superheavy armor piercing shells travelling at Mach 2 after being fired from an Iowa Class BB would have. Followed up by a broadside of HE shells.

THEN think of what a dozen 2000lb JDAM penetrators dropped from six F/A-18s operating from a carrier several hundred miles away (if not more, with inflight refueling) would have.


110 posted on 05/28/2015 8:58:07 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

“Supercarriers are great against an enemy that can’t shoot back but against a legitimate military they are sitting ducks. There will be a repeat of the British losing the Repulse and Prince of Wales off Malaysia.”

They may look like sitting ducks but our carriers are always in a task force protected by destroyers, subs and cruisers, all with the most modern missile technology.


111 posted on 05/28/2015 9:01:42 AM PDT by kenmcg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

In WWII at the end we were producing a Liberty ship a day. We were producing them faster than they could be sunk.


112 posted on 05/28/2015 9:02:41 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

In WWII at the end we were producing a Liberty ship a day. We were producing them faster than they could be sunk.


113 posted on 05/28/2015 9:02:55 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: kabar

“In WWII at the end we were producing a Liberty ship a day. We were producing them faster than they could be sunk.”

Quantity has a quality all its own.

I’ve read some books about how much of the final stuff was built internally underway - wiring, weapons systems, etc. Even plumbing.

Yamamoto was right.


114 posted on 05/28/2015 9:04:39 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
China doesn't need to pearl Harbor us. They need to plan to come in and clean up, take what they want.

This country is over. It was never as clear to me as last night.

I was at my daughters high school graduation. Mind you I live in one of the top 10 "wealthiest" zip codes in this metro area. My daughters high school is not only one of the top performing in the state, it's one of the top performing in the country. It's also heavily Mormon. My daughter is also in the top 5% of the class. So every function I go to revolves around the top 5%, NHS, etc. That is what I see. Again, heavily Mormon because their children excel.

Well, last night was the "general population" graduation.

Holy crap.

It was a sea of third worldism. And you could cut the tension with a knife. Everyone was sectioned off with their own "kind" (with a few exceptions like the multigenerational Mexican-American families--who have incidentally lived here for generations without strife). That was what was so concerning--the complete balkanization of the people in the crowd.

I can't even imagine what the other schools look like in less desirable areas.

115 posted on 05/28/2015 9:06:32 AM PDT by riri (Obama's Amerika--Not a fun place.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: submarine571

That assumes a carrier sails someplace alone. It doesn’t as you well know. It has its own concentric rings of submarines, cruisers, destroyers, as well as ASW aircraft. Let’s not forget sonar, and other counter measures.

A carrier battle group is nothing to toy with, even if you are a very sophisticated Russian boat, diesel or otherwise.


116 posted on 05/28/2015 9:06:42 AM PDT by SpirituTuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Sure a battleship could sink our carriers but they’d never get close enough to get them in range. Stupid article.


117 posted on 05/28/2015 9:13:10 AM PDT by Baltimore ken (Baltimore Ken and business opportunities from North and South alik)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rockingham
For example, in a clash with China, we would do well to sweep the seas and seize or force the internment of all commercial vessels and require neutrals to respect a US embargo and blockade of commerce with China and seizure or shut down of all Chinese commercial properties overseas. Carriers would be ideal for such duty and to apply leverage because several carrier task forces could control the oceans around both Africa and South America.

The OMFG class of submarines (USS Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Georgia) have been modified to each carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles in their former Trident missile tubes. We used to have an anti-ship version of the Tomahawk. Perhaps it's time to resurrect it.

118 posted on 05/28/2015 9:16:46 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

If the writer of this article wanted to convince me that we don’t need that many Supercarriers anymore, this is one thing he could have said. One day we’ll have the U.S.S. Clinton and U.S.S. Obama. At that point, he would have had me sold. No more carriers!!!


119 posted on 05/28/2015 9:17:42 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Yes, now that would be a good discussion.


120 posted on 05/28/2015 9:19:26 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-156 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson