Yeah, that's going to happen. They could save their money and just piss into the wind instead.

Mong that FEAR!

Blue Water Navy- A giant hole in the ocean into which you throw money.

From everything I've read about that thing, it's more or less useless and needs to be accompanied by tugboats to make up for the crappy engines that are prone to breakdowns

Exactly. Gotta keep those defense dollars rolling in! Actively seeking enemies for the next cold war.

Meh, I bet we have a very quiet sub researching it.

downpaymentblues: Isn't this a natural by-product of our non-stop defense spending at a rate almost as much as the rest of the world combined?

We go to war in multiple countries. Isn't it natural for other countries to build up to protect themselves against us?

They're "building up" with equipment that would only be fit to be blown up for a Die Hard movie or something.

It's like that moron cousin we all have... They tell you they're building up their commodities portfolio when they buy three silver eagles at the coin store.

downpaymentblues: I should have paid more attention to the details of the story. Purchased from Ukraine in 1998?

Which was a hand-me-down from the soviets that built it in 1970 or something.

I'm petty sure 7th fleet is more concerned about China's submarine force. Hell now days, I'm sure a good sized nuclear tipped cruise missile can take out a Nimitz class carrier much cheaper then that old Russian POS......k/dar

DAR: I'm petty sure 7th fleet is more concerned about China's submarine force. Hell now days, I'm sure a good sized nuclear tipped cruise missile can take out a Nimitz class carrier much cheaper then that old Russian POS......k/dar

When they have to buy an aircraft carrier from the Russians that was built when Carter was president... I highly doubt they are sophisticated enough to build anything that can evade/destroy a Virginia, LA, Boomer Sub.

Hell, I doubt they could out-build a wooden PT boat.

I doubt it stays buoyant long enough to get a fighter wing.

violentsalvation: I doubt it stays buoyant long enough to get a fighter wing.

Shows what you know! China stole plans for fighters that have TWO wings!

They're already more advanced than you know.

Came for the hubris, leaving satisfied.

Subby has obviously not laid eyes on this Chinese abomination of a Russian abortion of an "aircraft carrier".

/LOL

violentsalvation: I doubt it stays buoyant long enough to get a fighter wing.

I bet the crew succumbs to lead poisoning first.

I clicked on the link, and I have to say that was clever of them. It looks like a real live aircraft carrier from that angle. Ohhh, scary.

Try this angle:

Ohhhh, scary in a "Pirates of the Caribbean" sort of way.

THIS is an aircraft carrier.

Marcus Aurelius: THIS is an aircraft carrier.


Let's order two dozen more.

Or mind our own business.

2wolves: Marcus Aurelius: THIS is an aircraft carrier.


Let's order two dozen more.

Or mind our own business.

At a delivered price of $5.2 billion each, not including airplanes, jet fuel, and personnel, food, toilet papaer, taxes, tags, title, and delivery charges, maybe we shouldn't go crazy here. We've got 11 so far, and another 5 would round it out nicely, yes?

Marcus Aurelius: I clicked on the link, and I have to say that was clever of them. It looks like a real live aircraft carrier from that angle. Ohhh, scary.

Try this angle:
[thelastcolumnist.com image 640x376]
Ohhhh, scary in a "Pirates of the Caribbean" sort of way.

I just can't take those angled ramp carriers seriously.

DAR: I'm petty sure 7th fleet is more concerned about China's submarine force. Hell now days, I'm sure a good sized nuclear tipped cruise missile can take out a Nimitz class carrier much cheaper then that old Russian POS......k/dar

China has nothing that can deliver a nuke cruise missile. Those are best done by subs, and their missile subs are terrible and can be heard from Hawaii.

Not really, but they're badly out of date. The Kilos are the problem and they aren't good for cruise missiles.

Welcome to 1941.

Mentat: Welcome to 1941.

Researching how to take on a Nimitz class??

I can save China the time and money:

You don't.

GAT_00: I just can't take those angled ramp carriers seriously.

Neither can I. They look like they ran into something.

violentsalvation: GAT_00: I just can't take those angled ramp carriers seriously.

Neither can I. They look like they ran into something.

It says to me 'Hey, we want to pretend we're a real carrier, but we don't have the technology to make it work, so we have to pretend we have skateboards.'

SchlingFocker: Researching how to take on a Nimitz class??

I can save China the time and money:

You don't.

Also, you aren't just taking on a carrier, you're taking on an entire carrier strike group, which is designed with defending the carrier in mind.

Sid_6.7: Also, you aren't just taking on a carrier, you're taking on an entire carrier strike group, which is designed with defending the carrier in mind.

After I posted that, I figured someone would either point out the weaknesses of a lone carrier or point out the fact that carriers travel with a posse.

For as awesome as our Army, Marines, and Air Force are, the Navy is just ridiculously powerful.

SchlingFocker: Sid_6.7: Also, you aren't just taking on a carrier, you're taking on an entire carrier strike group, which is designed with defending the carrier in mind.

After I posted that, I figured someone would either point out the weaknesses of a lone carrier or point out the fact that carriers travel with a posse.

For as awesome as our Army, Marines, and Air Force are, the Navy is just ridiculously powerful.

It's hilarious that the Navy has not only the best nuclear deterrent known to mankind but is ridiculous on offense as well. And not to pick nits, but the Marines are Navy. And the Navy deserves them.

/we have not yet begun to fight
//go navy

carrier air groups are expensive. they're incredibly useful...but ye gods, they cost!

Weaver95: carrier air groups are expensive. they're incredibly useful...but ye gods, they cost!

Like commodities, the cost of world domination goes down over time (after inflation of course). If you compare what the Romans needed to control their "world" on an area basis versus what it costs us to truly control the entire planet from a military standpoint, you'll appreciate the advancement we've made. Economically speaking, of course.

/a bond market maker and a credit default swap walk into a bar
//you've heard this one before

You can't blame folks for wanting a cool navy...

SchlingFocker:

For as awesome as our Army, Marines, and Air Force are, the Navy is just ridiculously powerful.

Here's the Army's latest huge 155mm SP artillery, capable of firing rounds with base bleed out to 10 miles or so... while even in WWI a 6" gun for the Navy was rapid-fire, secondary armament on capital ships meant to kill little fast things like destroyers and torpedo boats. Except for nukes, no matter what kind of boom ground forces have had, navies have had something an order of magnitude larger.

Marcus Aurelius: 2wolves: Marcus Aurelius: THIS is an aircraft carrier.


Let's order two dozen more.

Or mind our own business.

At a delivered price of $5.2 billion each, not including airplanes, jet fuel, and personnel, food, toilet papaer, taxes, tags, title, and delivery charges, maybe we shouldn't go crazy here. We've got 11 so far, and another 5 would round it out nicely, yes?

Carrier capability is not linear. The difference in capability between 12 and 20 is effectively zero. To fight three Major Theater Wars at the same time, you need somewhere around 34-36. To fight two at the same time, you need roughly a dozen. To fight one, you need something like 4-5.

SchlingFocker: Sid_6.7: Also, you aren't just taking on a carrier, you're taking on an entire carrier strike group, which is designed with defending the carrier in mind.

After I posted that, I figured someone would either point out the weaknesses of a lone carrier or point out the fact that carriers travel with a posse.

Less so than you might think. But then, the CVN is probably safer without having to worry about its escorts.

Red Shirt Blues: FLY NAVY



always remembered

Blast from the past. He's probably flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog shiat out of Hong Kong these days.

It's about logistics, C4I, esprit de corps, aerial refueling, and the ability to repeatedly land on a pitching deck on a small, moving target at night in foul weather.

Let me know when they master any one of these.

Trucker: Looks like an LST to me.

Large Slow Target.

Having a carrier, and knowing what to do with it, are two different things.

Gotta crawl before you can walk.

doyner: You can't blame folks for wanting a cool navy...

They had the best navy in the entire world.

In 1481. They could have ruled the world, beaten Europe to the Americas, and conquered the entire Pacific before there was a "British Empire", if only their Emperors hadn't been a bunch of cowardly reactionary fools.

So far, I've yet to see any evidence that anything in China has changed, government-wise.

vygramul: Marcus Aurelius: 2wolves: Marcus Aurelius: THIS is an aircraft carrier.


Let's order two dozen more.

Or mind our own business.

At a delivered price of $5.2 billion each, not including airplanes, jet fuel, and personnel, food, toilet papaer, taxes, tags, title, and delivery charges, maybe we shouldn't go crazy here. We've got 11 so far, and another 5 would round it out nicely, yes?

Carrier capability is not linear. The difference in capability between 12 and 20 is effectively zero. To fight three Major Theater Wars at the same time, you need somewhere around 34-36. To fight two at the same time, you need roughly a dozen. To fight one, you need something like 4-5.

That depends entirely on what you call a "war", baby.

Sid_6.7: you aren't just taking on a carrier, you're taking on an entire carrier strike group, which is designed with defending the carrier in mind.

Came to say this, and, AFAIK, carriers don't really go head-to-head anyway. If I had to take out a carrier (or at least make a reasonable try of it), I'd use submarines and aircraft with anti-ship missiles. Carrier vs. carrier just seems...weird.

I'm sure the Navy's thought of this, and submarines are part of carrier groups. And clearly, a carrier has air-to-air and the group also has sea-to-air capability, so I'm not saying it'd be easy...but it'd be easy.

/No it wouldn't.