As assymetrical warfare and non state actors continue to be main US enemy the importance of these things is diminishing. Burger navy is desperate to justify the cost of getting new ones as them being multipurpose platforms ready for any challenge. Meaning they will continue to strut around the world seas, begging for another IS to pop up so they can be of some marginal use again for a time.
13 billion $ to build one, 25 mil $ a week for maintaining one task force...military jew truly rules you
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
navy.mil
twitter.com
wrong board. go to /k/
they don't care about the money.
the system is rigged in their favor.
their national debt goes up but it doesn't matter.
they'll just print more money.
they're going after hard assets giving worthless paper notes in return.
...
Shut the fuck up faggot.
Fox and grapes post.
Feel free to fuck yourself anytime.
Honestly they don't seem particularly useful now considering anti-ship missiles can just be zerg spammed and the cost of maintaining and using them in conjunction with carrier support fleets is insanely high. The future of the world is much more about economic war and manipulation than physical war.
>As asymmetrical warfare and non state actors continue to be main US enemy the importance of these things is diminishing
the opposite is true, aircraft carriers are more important than ever due to asymmetrical warfare. They operate as a mobile airfield capable of resupplying ground forces AND bombing the shit out of enemy positions.
Due to it being mobile, and at sea, the current enemy cannot seize it or destroy it.
Aircraft Carriers are the single most useful tool in any nation's arsenal today.
Esti prajit...
Think many air missions in Afghanistan came from carriers?
this
Go make this thread on and maybe I will answer that for you.
>the most ineffective easiest to shoot down thing ever made
They will stop being a thing when guns stop being a thing or we all get nuked.
Cheap and effective VTOL tech.
e ma ta, jegarete. romanas culegator de capsunele.
Take our example amerifats. Our speedboat fleet is the stronkest in Europe. We will sink your meme carrier with 50$ rubber boat with a warhead strapped on it.
There is a lot to be said for having 100K sq feet of sovereign American kick ass that can be positioned anywhere in the world.
>No name country sinking a billion dollar carrier
lmao he bought his own third world militarys hype
We have fucking ANTI TORPEDO TORPEDOES A THING SCIENTISTS SAID COULDN'T BE DONE NOW THEY HAVE A 95% SUCCESS RATE NIGGER.
...
Woah raule, ce te-ai aprins, pacat ca te trezesti vorbind despre subiecte care se pare ca nu prea le pricepi... Stai...tu nu esti tot romanas? Sau esi "Ion" doar in buletin dar te identifici John cand te privesti in oglinda?
im a trained aiplane sniper US Marine Corpse ok faggot, and I'm telling you you're wrong
>americans run war game
>red team is a, ahem, certain country in the middle east (that totally isn't near iraq)
>blue team is america
>red team destroys it's own electronic command and control structure and replaces it with a simple bike courier based system
>yes, motorcycle couriers
>finds american carrier, spams it with 100+ small boats with guns and explosives
>completely blows the fuck out of said carrier, 5,000+ dead
>blue team loses their shit and changes all of the rules so that they know where all of the red team's forces are, and specifically bans boat swarm tactics
>blue team wins, go america!
i'm a trained crocodile wrangler
>How long will carriers be a thing & what comes after?
There will always be a need for staging flying objects that conduct strikes on the enemy. Sure, missiles can be more effective but technology cap is so big that missiles arent necessary, planes are cheaper. There will always be a poor farmer you want to get bombed.
Carriers also offer force projection that cant be achieved in any other way. Maybe theres another way in the future in the form a spaceship but carrier itself will be vastly cheaper option. This means it wont get replaced, just downgraded in terms of importance. Instead of comparing military power in carriers, we will do it some other way
The form of aircraft carriers will change however. They might have only drones in the future. Maybe the carrier itself is completely automated at some point?
Rods from God/Satellite Bombs
Nope testing has came from trials where they fire the fucking torpedoes at the fucking system on a test barge you fuck tard, Out of 350 torpedos fired from our subs at the fucking barge, only 15 hit out of 350 which is a hit percentage of less than 5%
So kys.
Also during the war games with NUMEROUS countries including your shit Navy not a SINGLE enemy boat could touch our carrier with the anti torpedo system installed, we were firing our most advanced torpedo at that barge and only 15 hit out of 350, meanwhile not a single one of your shitholes could hit us with theirs.
that wasn't what i was talking about. a bunch of small boats and some ambush tactics can BTFO an entire CSG.
you yanks really should stop believing that your carriers are invincible, in a war one of them will inevitably be taken out.
God you're retarded, a Carrier group as a battle ship right there that is trained to take out small boats at water level and it can target up to 100 boats before they get within 3500 yards where they wont even get close to the carrier, next time you try to think you know something, shut the fuck up retard. We train for that exact circumstance, plus we have a little thing called AIRCRAFT that can blow you the fuck out too ~ Someone who worked on a Battleship from 18 years old to 29 years old.
>a Carrier group as a battle ship right there that is trained to take out small boats at water level and it can target up to 100 boats before they get within 3500 yards where they wont even get close to the carrier
[doubt]
>We train for that exact circumstance
yes, because of the scandal that resulted after one of the US Navy's most senior officials cried like a toddler because he got BTFO by a bunch of imaginary iranians
>Carrier launching aircraft 300+ nautical miles away
>goatfuckers on jet skis holding beam rider rockets supposed to ski for hours unabated by high seas to accurately fire on a war ship by evading the rest of the support vessels (1 cruiser + 3-4 destroyers)
Ok.
Iranians do train with Jet ski's btw. Doesn't matter.
1 CIWS = 100 small boat jet ski's
My money is on it, regardless of whatever RT told you about crying admirals.
Hey, I don't give a shit what the higher ups do, I have seen the training first hand where they have trained and fired at the fucking targets, most little fake boats we have hit that were moving was 54, which was all of them with a extremely high one hit kill rate. Besides, if we seen 100 boats coming at us, we would have the carrier scramble F 18's and they'd do cannon runs on the boats and Blow Them the Fuck Out
>in a war one of them will inevitably be taken out.
That's why we have more than one.
might be cheaper to build artificial islands.
ooh, i get it. nicely played china
> one of them will inevitably be taken out.
We fought korea, vietnam, iraq, the afghani's, international terrorist cells and we haven't lost a carrier since Japan. Nice try small fry
can you handle the inevitable political holocaust once it does happen? you're going to have 10,000 parents coming out of the woodwork to cry about how they thought carriers were safe, you can't get around that without being in a world war.
>YES LET'S BOAT CHARGE THE BOAT WHEN IT'S 300 NM AWAY
have you considered that maybe they would do it when the carrier was closer? it's not always advisable to launch from 300 nm.
>I have seen the training first hand where they have trained and fired at the fucking targets, most little fake boats we have hit that were moving was 54, which was all of them with a extremely high one hit kill rate.
>54
and when they simply attach dummies to unmanned boats?
>we haven't lost a carrier since we last went up against an actual formidable enemy
They become obsolete in the first hallf hour of World War III. What comes after?
Space lasers and armed autonomous drones.
Your borders will be buzzing with drones like thousands of bees. There will be large motherships to launch drone strikes. The drones and motherships will all be vulnerable to the space lasers, but since their unmanned nobody gives a shit if you lose a shitton of them, so you have a shitton of them.
Nah they're essentially drones, they do simple maneuvers while approaching the boats from over the horizon, during my whole time in the Navy only a single one got thru and that was because the dude who was manning it simply fucked up because it was a surprise drill at 3 AM and he was half drunk, got in a fuck ton of trouble too.
>be America
> Create multipurpose fighter
> Gets BTFOD by anything russian
You cant make this shit up America does not supply good aerial defense weapons anymore
>have you considered that maybe they would do it when the carrier was closer? it's not always advisable to launch from 300 nm.
Considering the longest range Iranian ASCM's have a range of less than 300 nm, yes it would be. Considering their missile load in the straights of Hormuz, it wouldn't make any sense to get that close either. The carrier wouldn't get close, nor would it have to.
>a bunch of small boats and some ambush tactics can BTFO an entire CSG.
no they can't, dumbass
F22 >>>> F35
I'd rather have the F22 replace the F 18 or F16
...
Fuck you got us there. The Russians really do have the best missiles and soon aircraft. If they had the money they'd have a quality Navy too. Plus that next generation tank, Armata.
The Leader/Lyder class nuclear destroyer would have been amazing. And they have the Sarmat/Satan II. Soon Hypersonic missiles on top. Meanwhile we're dicking around with railguns and F35's. And the drone tanks now that I think about it.
What happened to us fellow burgers?
An aircraft carrier is basically just a floating airfield. So aircraft carriers will be obsolete when airfields are obsolete. AKA never.
>Soon Hypersonic missiles on top.
carriers btfo, have fun sinking an iranian boat going mach 9
A modernized f16 or f18 is that too much to ask for America jesus fucking christ this new age shit is garbage
cruise missiles are getting better and aircraft are getting more expensive
high value targets are getting hit with missiles because they aren't as risky
we could have a bizarre situation in the near future where supercarriers become outdated while the smaller helicopter carriers and amphibious ships still have a role to play
The slavaboo is strong in this one.
This is Sup Forums though. You're supposed to pretend third world commie tech is better than anything the world superpower has.
what comes after is weaponized satellites.
This, dumb fucking retards thinking 100 jet skis can sink a fucking aircraft the size of a city block.
Fucking Lithuania of all places said they could 'wipe out our entire navy' with their third world military lmao.
They're all larping jealous faggots.
If the Iranians figure out long range hypersonic ASCM that can chaff discriminate and jive through active jamming before Russia, China, or the US- we're living in a world where Iran already rules it.
That's true. You'd think we'd have missileer nuclear battleships. Or nuclear airships with missiles, buoys, and torps on them for speed and immunity to torps.
user what the fuck
the future of aircraft carriers
the iranian boat bit was a joke.
We've already put it through 40+ years of modernization. From LHMs website:
Increase in range and payload
Infrared sensors and laser targeting devices
Enhanced survivability with more advanced warfare sensors and sophisticated decoys
Increased engine thrust to retain aerodynamic performance
Conformal fuel tanks
All-glass cockpits with large color displays, hands-on throttle and sidestick switch controls, night vision goggle-compatible lighting, a color moving map, and a large head-up display
Improved Datalinks, satellite phones and helmet-mounted cueing systems
>implying if you weren't a rich fuck you wouldn't buy that
HAHAHAHAHA
Billionaires yachts are getting bigger and bigger, its just a matter of time until they buy a decommissioned carrier.
It's to collect (you)s.
don't be insensitive user, that is an A-10 with downs syndrome
>trusting shekelheed martin
> su35 is 85 million dollars cheaper than the f35
> Su35 can fly 1940 NM vs 1650 NM
F35
Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A2 Vulcan 6-barrel Gatling cannon in right wing root, 480 rounds
Air to air loadout:
6× AIM-120 AMRAAM
2× AIM-9 Sidewinder
Air to ground loadout:
2× 1,000 lb (450 kg) JDAM or 8× 250 lb (110 kg) GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs
2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
2× AIM-9 Sidewinder
Hardpoints: 4× under-wing pylon stations can be fitted to carry 600 U.S. gallon drop tanks or weapons, each with a capacity of 5,000 lb (2,270 kg).
su35
Guns: 1× 30 mm GSh-301 internal cannon with 150 rounds
Hardpoints: 12 hardpoints, consisting of 2 wingtip rails, and 10 wing and fuselage stations with a capacity of 8,000 kg (17,630 lb) of ordnance and provisions to carry combinations of:
Rockets:
S-25L laser-guided rocket
S-25 unguided rocket
B-8 unguided S-8 rocket pods
B-13 unguided S-13 rocket pods
Missiles:
Vympel R-27R/ER/T/ET
Vympel R-77 – the proposed R-77M, R-77T
Vympel R-73E/M, and R-74M
Vympel R-37M[156]
Kh-29T/L
Kh-31P/A
Kh-59ME
Bombs:
FAB-250 250-kilogram (550 lb) unguided bombs
FAB-500 500-kilogram (1,100 lb) unguided bombs
KAB-500L laser-guided bomb
KAB-1500 laser-guided bomb
Other:
buddy refueling pod
What happened America?
General Fuckwit of the Chair Force claims the F35 has a low radar cross section. So did the F22 and the T50. Future tech means it'll be obsolete here when the Russians get their plasma radomes.
How much did we spend again?
Program costs: US$1.508 trillion (through 2070 in then-year dollars), US$55.1B for RDT&E, $319.1B for procurement, $4.8B for MILCON, $1123.8B for operations & sustainment (2015 estimate)
I still don't get why my country bought that piece of shit
Think whatever you need to sleep at night. The reality is that our navy is why there are only little flare ups in 3rd world shitholes.
Obama was asleep at the wheel and China went island building and Russia stole part of Ukraine (personally I think it was semi-legitimate seizure of Crimea) but those days are over.
Obama was the this generation's Chamberlain, and if there is a minor conflict between world powers in the next decade it will be because fallout from the failure of his foreign policy
Basically any nation with diesel-electric subs can incapacitate one. They lose basically every exercise. All you need to do is aim at this slow piece of shit, let off a couple of torpedoes, and then you're free to wait for the other idiots to swarm in to rescue it before you bomb it all to hell. I'd like to see a HD video of a Ding Dong 21D hitting a carrier deck before they're decomissioned, but I doubt it'll happen.
The future? Drones. Drones with drones in them, everything's a drone. Humans only in armored exoskeletons like in Fallout, radiation-proof armored airconned super-strong mech suit tanks, basically, but small enough to enter normal doors. But yeah, 95% drones, humans only to make sure the AI doesn't screw us over, by delegating real important stuff to humans.
It reminds me of that star wars quote
"Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?"
>I still don't get why my country bought that piece of shit
Because you're in NATO and are effectively our bitch, bitch.
We tell you to buy, you buy.
They're practically nukes that can be near any nation that threatens to attack us. They're not going out of style anytime soon because of their capabilities and versatility.
3m^2 RCS kek
Remember when we cut the F-22 production lines to save money like the F-35 was going to?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
We couldve bought Swedens shit as well though
>Wanting to bomb ships that are powered by nuclear reactors
There's a reason no one has done what you propose since the Vietnam War.
How many nations in the world are landlocked vs bordering the ocean?
Answer : you're an idiot
Nobody wants Swedish shit.
Open the bomb doors an an Immigrant falls out.
My dad works at Nintendo and he says carriers are here to stay
>Basically any nation with diesel-electric subs can incapacitate one
Here we go again. The same Sven who raved when his country bought a 216 PoS and it made him so proud.
Reminder here: electric subs are still shit. So are midget subs.
Airships ; P
...but seriously, laser/ray in satellites. Man-less battlefields. Drone, all cost, high effect weapons.
BPS does a review of military evaluation on aircraft carriers being taken out by mass Iranian speedboats. Far too many planes, people and investment.
Outer space frigates, destroyers and orbital kinetic cannons comes next. But the world has to unite first because nobody else wants another nation to 'own' space.
>space frigates
to fight who?
roflmao
right. I forget the military industrial complex is here for the big bucks.
Reminder that automated drones are as easy to fool as any machine. A man needs to be in the loop to make sense of the data.
those fucking russians on the ISS
>you will see EVA suit gunfights in your lifetime
>implying physical force will ever be deemed irrelevant in the future of warfare
lol. Stay cucked, Croat.
The only reasons carriers are still around is because they're useful against primitive shitskins and most of the navy recruits wouldn't have joined if they didn't get to serve in their comfy floating hotel. Submarines are the only large navy vessels that aren't obsolete.
In 2012, German and American pilots conducted mock dogfights in Alaska using Eurofighter Typhoons and F-22 Raptors. It left both sides impressed with each other at the very least.
"Yesterday, we have had a Raptor salad for lunch."
Said a German pilot from the Alaska exercises in 2012.... mmm lecker!
Americans BTFO from all sides
I think the general internet wisdom that its easy to sink a carrier always fails to take into account the carrier battle group of ships and subs that surround it. Maybe in the future carriers could be broken up into a group of smaller ships with aircraft/drones so that the target is decentralized.
Those commie fucking aliens?
>We have fucking ANTI TORPEDO TORPEDOES A THING SCIENTISTS SAID COULDN'T BE DONE NOW THEY HAVE A 95% SUCCESS RATE NIGGER.
The fact you posted this, and not know you have had these things since the 50's (shittier ones, but still there), nor know success rate isn't the same as kill rate, tells me you are a massive idiot. I hope someone supercavitates your ass.
>and people like you wonder why our vassal states are trying to bolt
You think China invented a missile for that specific goal because they have a lot of money to spend on R&D? ""Invented"", re-purposed old tech someone sold them, but you know.
It's either that, or have a carrier causing damage to your assets. You don't really need to sink it either, just hit the deck with a few missiles and it's more or less worthless. Hit it with one Ding Dong 21D and it's back to Japan for a year's worth of repairs.
>Bomb country
>Wait 100 years
>It's now like the US
Considering your own navy admitted that our last generation subs could do it while you used active sonar, I'd say go fuck yourself. I'm not that guy either, no.
youtube.com
navy.mil
>Reminder that automated drones are as easy to fool as any machine. A man needs to be in the loop to make sense of the data.
Yeah, for now. But artificial intelligence is rapidly improving, and in the near future we'll have semi-autonomous robots, especially in the military.
>and in the near future we'll have semi-autonomous robots, especially in the military.
And this scares me....
>Airships ; P
Why joke? We can stack jet engines and/or counter rotating helo blades powered by mini nuclear reactors. Toshiba 4s generates 10 MW electric or 30 MW thermal. Could just rely on heat exchangers for more electrical transmission. It wouldn't even need lifting gas- although you could incorporate that as well as the counter rotating blades method.
The Graf Zep II had a payload of 33k lbs
that's enough for:
-x6 Kh102 450kt long range nuclear missiles(2700 miles)
-CIWS systems
-short range (>22 miles) anti-air missiles
And that's without nuclear reactors or powerful lifting engines. Just loose gases.
Ha! Perfect. I want one.
>Battleship
Gulf War I? You on the Missouri?
Reminds me of Snowcrash where that billionaire owned the Enterprise and called it "The Raft".
1) Subs
2) Land-based drones
3) Torpedo boats
4) Converted trawlers
>B-But muh missiles it's not about close encounters
So you're saying that the Russians will fuck you up with their superior missile tech (Americans)?
General internet wisdom is "YOU ESSÉ, YOU ESSÉ, YOU ESSÉ!", ignoring that full US aircraftcarrier battle groups constantly lose exercises against things like diesel-electric subs, and that you couldn't possibly track something like the Ping Pong 21D if they just swarmed the target. You've been fighting third worlders since the 50's, why would you have a good navy?
See you in the singularity, friend.
The future of aircraft carriers is putting schools on them.
>Brilliant fuctard from neutral country has strategic military insight.
Did you ever ponder that for every one carrier you see on top of the water, there are 2-3 subs below the water?
Please jewgle "cvbg", and then go back to reading your Quran
What will the USS Donald Trump be?
>Pic related
Add a space elevator and get cheap orbital drops of whatever, wherever.