US big mad

  • zephyreks [none/use name]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Isn't modern US doctrine that aircraft carriers are the dominant force in the navy? China has limited aircraft carrier capability and lacks the self-sufficiency of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.

      • UmbraVivi [he/him, she/her]
        ·
        1 year ago

        The lesson here is the same one all of you suckers should have learned from watching the financial news this year: the people at the top are just as dumb as you are, just meaner and greedier.

        Amen

      • zephyreks [none/use name]
        ·
        1 year ago

        If someone can build a hypersonic missile, someone can also build a hypersonic missile interceptor missile... And you can fit a lot of missiles in a CVBG.

        Sure, the CVBG doctrine only really works against the Japanese (where both babies are fighting over small islands that are far from their respective homelands)... But I don't think that hypersonic missiles obsolete carriers in that role.

        I do think that that role is useless against China or Russia given that they aren't really colonial imperial powers with territory around the world, but...

          • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            We don’t even have the technology today to intercept (fixed) ballistic missile trajectory at an acceptable rate

            IIRC the US' missile interception system has a 40% success rate when the ballistic missile has a known origin and a normal parabolic trajectory

            so yea, that nuke is hitting whether ppl like it or not, even if we went back in time 50 years people would still be able to nuke today's US, only half as effectively

            • PosadistInevitablity [he/him]
              ·
              1 year ago

              The whole point of hypersonic cruise missiles is that they don’t have a fixed flight path while also moving 10 times the speed of sound.

              Intercepting such a target is physically impossible.

              • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I know

                I'm just saying that even 1970s China could still nuke 100 US cities (assuming the US knows the exact origin point of each Chinese nuke, if they don't then it goes up to 200)

          • zephyreks [none/use name]
            ·
            1 year ago

            What even is the turning radius of an HGV? Sure, you're not constrained by silly things like pilot blackout and whatever, but that doesn't mean it can zig zag at will.

        • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don't think hypersonic missile interception is possible, unless the US gets laser weapons working or something like that. Hypersonics are incredibly fast, and Russia's fighter jet launched hypersonics easily defeated the Patriot air defense systems in Ukraine, when they targeted them. Even intercepting normal supersonic and subsonic cruise missiles is a crapshoot, the iron Dome in Israel gets defeated by homemade rockets at times. Interception technology is very overrated currently.

        • sysgen [none/use name,they/them]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Interceptors are more difficult to make than the missiles themselves, and often are more expensive. They also don't have 100% interception chance so you need to fire 2-4 just to be sure.

    • GaveUp [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Aircraft carriers are only good for shows of force against vastly inferior militaries where the US can easily enforce complete air superiority

      Otherwise, they're just a massive sitting defenseless duck against modern anti-ship missiles