Posted on 05/30/2015 7:52:30 AM PDT by ckilmer
Edited on 05/30/2015 9:54:43 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
as i was reading i wondered are submarines protected from EMP? does anyone know. Could EMP wipe out a task force?
a knot is, be definition, a nautical mile per hour.
“knots per hour” is landlubber talk.
I don’t mean to sound snarky, but is your assumption based on how well they’re (the government) doing everything else? The author gave several examples of how our military always fights the last war.
How many of our naval personnel would be lost if just one carrier group was successfully attacked?
The loss of life, not to mention the equipment lost in a successful attack is beyond my ability to comprehend.
Right now the strike group has all three.
Hitting Beijing from the sea is something to think about, right Sun Tzu?
5.56mm
I’m just like the average joe. little knowledge of the military and it’s strategies, and I just assumed aircraft carriers had lots of anti missile defenses and other ships around it and jets to protect it.
and I read about these startling laser and electronic beam weapons that sound futuristic.
it’s easy to get confused.
Whatever became of the “if it flies, it dies” slogan used by the Navy?
not to be pedantic but:
1 knot = 1 nautical mile per hour (speed)
1 knot per hour = 1 nautical mile per hour per hour (acceleration)
BTW 1 Nautical mile is 6000 ft vs statute mile (5280 ft)
I always did as well, until I read this article.
I suppose this is the consequence of having completely lost faith in this government.
I forgot to add that knot per hour makes no meaningful sense and no one uses it
bkmk
Well spotted. But perhaps it’s like gravity, and they go faster and faster the longer they go ;-).
Active Duty ping.
We could learn a lot from history.
http://www.wired.com/2014/08/the-wwi-battleships-that-saved-and-doomed-the-british-empire/
Today, it is not the United States but the Republic of China which has the vertical infrastructure with which to manufacture a multitude of ships. Their ships need not be substantially inferior to ours, like their jets the Chinese will soon become capable of turning out satisfactory warships, no doubt cloned in many respects, but they will have the advantage of having multiple shipyards in which to build them while the United States will be reduced to a couple of shipyards.
I fear that we are debating the wrong issue. Misplaced allocation of precious resources for the defense of the nation is the result of a dysfunctional political operation in Washington. There is no reason to believe that defense lobbyists have any less influence over our elected representatives than do domestic lobbyists. We should think that we are defending ourselves not with taxpayer dollars but with borrowers' dollars. That means that we are running out of the infrastructure, not just the manufacturing and distribution infrastructure, but the financial infrastructure to support superpower defense operations. Our ability to borrow into infinity is illusory.
Let me hasten to add that the military budget has been cut by sequester and we have seen that politics have made those cuts politically less unpalatable but not militarily logical. Even in spite of those cuts we still maintain a military budget far in excess of our rivals. Politics will make further cuts inevitable. If politics alone does not do so, the implacable laws of economics will.
The single best thing we can do to preserve our security is to get our fiscal house in order so that we can maintain the world's foremost defense capacity. The problem is the Democrats will sellout the country to get their hands on defense money and the Republicans have sold out long ago on just about every issue. There is nowhere to turn. The defense establishment, like entitlements, is out of control making decisions based on politics or rather than readiness.
That which cannot go on, the sage said, will not go on and the American ability to borrow its way into tomorrow will end tomorrow or the day after. Our greatest danger is not the rise of Isis, nor the brazen aggression of Putin, not even the far more sinister plans of the Chinese, the major threat to the security of the United States is fiscal irresponsibility.
The author asks, how vulnerable will these carriers be in 50 years? I ask, never mind the carriers what sort of country will we have in 50 years?
Strongly worded.
Might be accurate.
I do not, however, trust the “Pentagon” to decide properly nor accurately. Since 1956-58. And it has gotten only worse since Reagan left.
Sad, but true.
I heard this stuff in the 80s. It’s always the same crowd, the defund/liberal groups that want us to “do more with less” and who are afraid of the power projection that carriers allow. There is a reason every nation in the world who considers itself our enemy is seeking to BUILD carriers.
I've heard the vulnerabilities of carriers for 30 years, yet the technology always seems to stay a step ahead and there is nothing else like them.
that makes sense.
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.