Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pabianice
Wouldn't it be cheaper and as effective to deliver cruise missles from surface ships, planes and land vehicles?
2 posted on 12/06/2002 10:54:14 AM PST by Gary Boldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gary Boldwater
Think of how many cruise missiles you could put on a converted Iowa class battleship.
3 posted on 12/06/2002 11:00:48 AM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gary Boldwater
Wouldn't it be cheaper and as effective to deliver cruise missles from surface ships, planes and land vehicles?

Not sure about the cost factor, but the Boomers represent a strategic advantage, since they are not as vulnerable as a surface ship.

A nuclear sub doesn't show up on enemy coastal radar, it just pops up and shoots.

4 posted on 12/06/2002 11:08:16 AM PST by Kenton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gary Boldwater; PAR35
How about an oil tanker with the holds filled with styrafoam/other foamed plastic and maybe some armor on the superstructure?

IIRC ULCC ships shrugged off Exocet hits during the first gulf war...fill 'em up with, hell, bags of ping-pong balls and they'd be pretty tough to sink- mount scads 'n' scads of tomahawk missiles, a bunch of CIWS...maybe even advanced 8" guns...automate the hell out of it...slow, but somewhat less expensive, difficult to kill...

any navy types care to comment?

5 posted on 12/06/2002 11:11:55 AM PST by fourdeuce82d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gary Boldwater
Wouldn't it be cheaper and as effective to deliver cruise missles from surface ships, planes and land vehicles?

Possibly, but surface ships can be spotted by commercial satellites. Submarines are much harder to spot, so they can surprise their enemies.

9 posted on 12/06/2002 11:33:51 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gary Boldwater
Wouldn't it be cheaper and as effective to deliver cruise missles from surface ships, planes and land vehicles?

It might be cheaper but the Boomers allow a whole lot of stealthy firepower in one package. Surface ships, planes and land vehicles are, potentially, more vunerable than subs.

11 posted on 12/06/2002 11:44:14 AM PST by scooter2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gary Boldwater
Wouldn't it be cheaper and as effective to deliver cruise missles from surface ships, planes and land vehicles?

It would certainly be cheaper to build a new surface ship to do this than to build a new submarine to do this, but as long as the submarines are already here and we're paying their operation costs and crews and support, etc., this might be a more "bang for the buck" way to use a few of them than to just have them waiting around for a full-scale nuclear war that may never come.

13 posted on 12/06/2002 12:08:07 PM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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