Gleeman: Pubby: That being said, we still need more, newer carriers. They're the ultimate in global force projection. A mobile floating fortress armed to the teeth with all sorts of things that make a helluva lot of mess when they hit their target is not something sane countries fark with and when one parks itself in your waters, you listen real close to what the guy ordering it around has to say.This. How is any President going to ask "where are the carriers?" whenever an international incident happens, if there aren't any carriers. When the Air Force wanted to contribute to the first Libyan bombing (under Reagan) they had to fly hours out of their way to avoid the airspace of all the European countries that didn't want to get involved in any way. The Navy planes had a 10 minute flight from the bird farm.In Libya 2.0 the French flew the highest percentage of air support missions, and almost all of the on call missions. Guess which country out of the 14 participating brought a carrier to the party?And speaking of the Phalanx CIWS, there is a mod out now that enables it to engage small craft. 4,500 rounds per minute of 20mm is going to tear some new orifices in any attackers. The Navy has also been beefing up the small craft defenses of ships deployed over seas, adding extra .50s, hand operated mini-guns (think 'Painless' the Gatling gun from Predator, but mounted) and 25mm auto-cannon to the ships.
Allen262: Millennium Challenge 2002. Sixteenships including one aircraft carrier sunk with over 20,000 US dead in the first attack alone from mass missile attack. Than what was left was sunk using small boats using conventional and suicide attacks.The US carrier fleet has not be at any risk of being sunk since the end of WWII. They are nothing but large slow moving targets for Zerg rushs and Kamikazes attacks.George S. Patton said that "Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man." and some day some one will say that Fleet Carriers are monuments to the stupidity of the US Navy.
kyleaugustus: $13 billion. We could have ~13 Apollo-type moon missions for the cost of this thing.
Allen262: Real ships didn't sink and real people didn't die but Van Riper not only beat the US Navy at it's own game than came back and raped it's dead corpse. His way of beating the US Navy works just as well in the real world as it did in Millennium Challenge 2002 as the US Navy didn't learn a farking thing after being smacked around like cheap hooker.
uber humper: Pubby: kyleaugustus: $13 billion. We could have ~13 Apollo-type moon missions for the cost of this thing.In 1969 money? Yes.In 2013 money with the cost of labor, design bids, bureaucracy overhead, design testing, appropriate palms of appropriate members of Congress greased, disputed testing, re-testing of the design, design modification, crew training, mission PR, and finally launch...you're looking at maybe 1 moon landing if you can convince the trained moneys to get out of the lander.It was $24 billion. The largest investment by any nation in peace time. 400,000 workers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_program#NASA_expansion
Clash City Farker: We have to keep making them or we will forget how to make them.
fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x422]Looks like the wolves have been chewing on it.
If you like these links, you'll love
$5 a month since 19 aught diddly.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Sep 25 2017 21:00:08
Runtime: 0.239 sec (239 ms)