|
DancingShade posted:Min maxing my force posture like its a Chinese gatcha mobile game. lmfao like seriously
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 03:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
FirstnameLastname posted:china can turn half the world's steel into boats and artillery right now you retard it's over Yes, China has very impressive manufacturing capability.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 03:58
|
|
|
This is actually something I have seen battleship hat guys argue about quite a bit, as the composition of US carrier air wings has changed since 1991. There was even a senate hearing on it
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:02
|
|
|
Bring back the days of like 100 propeller aircraft each flying off several carriers, like WW2. Sure, they can't fly far, and they only have MG/cannon and small-ish bombs, but the enemy SAM site will be surprised by the size of the incoming formation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:05
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Unless you were raised to believe America is something worth dying for within your family, where would you possibly get that idea? There are funky ways the idea can pass through non-service families, my first childhood reading was hand-me-down adventure novels with very that point passed down from grandfathers a couple years too young to be drafted into WW2 to a father a couple years too young to be drafted into Vietnam and I kind of feel like the selection carried a bit of awed envy of upperclassmen and older cousins. Didn't completely work even then, I started to ask questions around the anthology about the Pacific war that was nine tales of the perfidious, life-is-cheap banzai charge or kamikaze raid and one reflective story about the brother who ran up and dropped a grenade through the slot of a pillbox on Iwo Jima to save his squad. E: mlmp08 posted:Bring back the days of like 100 propeller aircraft each flying off several carriers, like WW2. Sure, they can't fly far, and they only have MG/cannon and small-ish bombs, but the enemy SAM site will be surprised by the size of the incoming formation. this is like the one good argument for (US-priced) drones in a peer industrial war, isn't it. Mandoric has issued a correction as of 04:17 on Jan 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:06
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yes, China has very impressive manufacturing capability. they will trade it back when its time for war, 4 to 6, years before u need new ships  
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:19
|
|
|
I deploy my 500 fixed wing reaper-plus drones, each 50 million dollars alone. Cutting edge. Fully networked. Integrated. Centrally controlled. Target coming over the horizon now. The giant widescreen taking up one whole wall of my operations room suddenly goes blue. "Installing Windows updates, this may take a few minutes. Please do not turn off your computer."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:21
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Bring back the days of like 100 propeller aircraft each flying off several carriers, like WW2. Sure, they can't fly far, and they only have MG/cannon and small-ish bombs, but the enemy SAM site will be surprised by the size of the incoming formation. From what I gleaned, They mostly want to make sure a wing has dedicated attack aircraft like the Intruder and Corsair II, ASW aircraft like the S-3 Viking, counterparts to the Prowler as a EW platform, and a capable interceptor like the F-14. The F-18 wings did actually please most of these people, as the aircraft proved it could handle multiple roles in a way no Cold War aircraft, even the Phantom, could. I'm assuming this was the Super Hornet, because the Cold Warriors continued to fill critical roles when the F-18 first came into service. The problem is that the F-35 is not really up to the task(s).
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:21
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:This is actually something I have seen battleship hat guys argue about quite a bit, as the composition of US carrier air wings has changed since 1991. the Nimitz in 1991: two squadrons of F-14B's - VF-211 and -24 two squadrons of FA-18C's - VFA-146 and -147 one squadron of A-6E and KA-6D - VA-165 one squadron of E-2C - VAW-112 one squadron of SH-60F/HH-60H - HS2 one squadron of EA-6B - VAQ-138 one squadron of S-3A - VS-33 the Nimitz in 2005: one squadron of FA-18E - VFA-14 one squadron of FA-18F - VFA-41 two squadrons of FA-18C - VFA-94 and VMFA-232 (Marine air wing) one squadron of E-2C - VAW-117 one squadron of SH-60F/HH-60H - HS3 one squadron of EA-6B - VAQ-135 one squadron of C-2A - VRC-30 Det 3 so they lost the Tomcats, and they lost the Intruders, and presumably those roles are now all filled by the Hornets and then they also lost the ASW Vikings and the tanker Intruders for nothing in return
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:26
|
|
|
Yeah, it is telling that the plan is never for the F-35C to take over the F/A-18E/F roles entirely, but to become a minority portion of the carrier air wing while something else entirely replaces the F-18E/Fs someday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:27
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah, it is telling that the plan is never for the F-35C to take over the F/A-18E/F roles entirely, but to become a minority portion of the carrier air wing while something else entirely replaces the F-18E/Fs someday. They've only had since 1995 to develop the F-35. How could they have known they would need a two seater version or the capability to use those specialized stores?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:32
|
|
|
quote:The last Intruders were retired on 28 February 1997.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:35
|
|
|
Is the F-35 capable of buddy tanking?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:36
|
|
|
The F/A-18s can buddy tank to top off the F-35s, but not vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:39
|
|
|
You don't need flight range when you're fighting people who can't shoot down a tanker plane and have no ASM's History ended, s'all good
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 04:39
|
|
|
capital cannot win in the coming world war because the manifestations of individualist ideology has made an anemic little diarrhea poop like it did with the fascists in the second one because the institutions and structures are where strength is as a group and that's where being good at war comes from, this is why china has already won as much as the Soviet Union has as much as vietnam and corea and Gaza and every place they just drop bombs like pussies things some people will kill for will never beat things all the other people will die for in capitalist wars they do not understand that lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:28
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Armaments can’t just choose not to enlist. you obviously havent seen the sizzle reel for Northrop Grumman's new fully self-aware 57mm round
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:36
|
|
|
My father's family is the opposite of a military family. A giant broke redneck family with 25+ dudes during the 20th century and I recall none of them ever being drafted or joining except my brother (funny considering he's the only one in the immediate family to physically resemble my mother's smaller family where 4 of 6 20th century men joined/drafted). Over the years I always heard evasive answers about medical deferments during the war years. Respect to my Polish draft dodging ancestors lol 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:37
|
|
|
it seems like winning a world war isnt about what you look like institutionally going in, its about what resources are in the ground and how you actually reform institutionally in the ensuing months and years to make use of them to fit the war you are in. the next world war - which america is losing rn - probably wont get far enough for that sobered up sort of reflection and action tho before america cant deal with a defeat and escalates into nuclear war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:40
|
|
|
My uncle got kicked out the army during Vietnam before he deployed then became a literal mountain man squatting on oil company land. Cool dude. Made better decisions than me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:41
|
|
|
Weka posted:Everything I see says different. Fitting 130 Hornets on a US carrier is a terrible/awesome idea but US carriers are definitely not at full capacity (unless to redefine full to mean less than full). Some reading straight from the US Naval institute. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018/october/increase-carrier-air-wing-size quote:There is enough space on board a CVN to accommodate the increase in aircraft. U.S. carriers currently deploy with about 70 aircraft, well below their maximum complement. During the Cold War, carriers routinely deployed with well over 80 aircraft. Thus there is room for a new F/A-18 squadron and another EA-18G detachment. I think it might be less than 70 nowadays. Here's another interesting part of the article quote:The fighting power of the CVN today is concentrated in its four squadrons of F/A-18s. Because each one comprises 10–12 aircraft, the total number of strike fighters in a typical CVW ranges between 44 and 48. The F/A-18 will still need to perform the strike attack mission, even in a heavily contested air defense environment, so it is likely some will continue to be allotted for offensive tasks. In addition, approximately one-quarter of the CVW F/A-18s’ flying time is currently delegated for aerial refueling, which significantly reduces the CVW’s combat power. This is unlikely to change anytime soon, given that the MQ-25 will not be in the fleet until at least 2024. The MQ-25 will not be in the fleet until at least 2026. The numbers I'm getting for modern carriers seem to be in the mid 60s range. Wikipedia claims 64, though without a direct citation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimitz-class_aircraft_carrier Edit: The citation should probably be from https://www.seaforces.org/usnships/cvn/Nimitz-class.htm quote:[In order for a carrier to deploy, it must embark one of ten Carrier Air Wings (CVW).[Note 3] The carriers can accommodate a maximum of 130 F/A-18 Hornets[38] or 85–90 aircraft of different types, but current numbers are typically 64 aircraft. Although the air wings are integrated with the operation of the carriers they are deployed to, they are regarded as separate entities. As well as the aircrew, the air wings are also made up of support personnel involved in roles including maintenance, aircraft and ordnance handling, and emergency procedures. Each person on the flight deck wears color-coded clothing to make their role easily identifiable.[39] Center for American Security claims 60-plus in 2015. https://www.cnas.org/publications/commentary/the-future-of-the-carrier-air-wing-looks-dim quote:To assure its continued role as a strong guiding power within the global international system of governance that it has labored to build over the past 70 years, the United States in general, and the Navy in particular, will need to reinvest and “buy back” range for its carrier air wings in order to present a credible deep strike capability to its competitors. The air wing must regain the ability to operate comfortably beyond 1,000 nautical miles from the carrier, much as it did from the mid-1950s to the mid-1990s. Also, an emphasis must be placed on growing the carrier air wing from its present complement of 60-plus aircraft to its historic average of 80-plus planes per air wing. Mass provides the carrier air wing with the ability to range far and wide in search of targets, and then to combine with overwhelming numbers at the moment of attack: Range and mass have characterized the carrier air wing since its inception in the early 1920s for a reason. The present era can only be viewed as an aberration and rejection of the lessons learned from the fleet problems of the 1930s, in the Pacific theater of the Second World War, and during the Cold War. The ability to project power against vital political and economic centers from long range to end wars quickly has been, and must remain, the strategic focus of the nation and its Navy. This video from Battle Order claims 66 aircraft + 8 helicopters on other ships. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B06kuFF5R3A So it looks like a lot of people are saying 60ish aircraft per carrier air wing. Luckily the F-35 will be able to fulfill the role of 5 aircraft so the USN will able to do more with less aircraft. So the flagships of the American empire are unable to maintain enough planes to keep their carriers full and they're launched understrength in order to save money. Maybe it's just the carriers and all the other ships are fine, but I suspect otherwise. BearsBearsBears has issued a correction as of 06:03 on Jan 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:42
|
|
|
Considering how nerdy people can be about military hardware stat wise I'd be surprised if there wasn't a web utility or wargame somewhere with realistic options to fiddle with the amount of aircraft based on size/etc you can fit on a carrier. Like there have to be 30 page arguments on some wargame forum about this
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:53
|
|
|
Command: Modern Operations?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 05:59
|
|
|
It is something that is both possible but also probably need some actual information to back up, just because a destroyer is just kind of useless without its VLS tubes. As far surging fighters on a carrier, it is something that is physically possible but also impractical just based on not only the support aircraft you need but those f-18s have to come from somewhere and it is pointless unless they are combat operational. Admittedly, probably not all of an air wing is going to combat operational at a given time but you probably want to put your best foot forward. ——— It does speak to the limits of a battle group though, the escorts of a carrier are mostly there for anti—air and anti-submarine defense, they are going to carry some tomahawks but they have to only be a portion of their munitions. Otherwise, the f-18s have access to some standoff munitions, like JASSM but there also are only going to be so many on board. There are probably still a bunch of JDAMs and iron bombs but they are more more complicated. ————- The Houthis very likely still have fairly advanced AD in ambush positions but 1. they don’t want to reveal these positions for obvious reasons and 2. they probably have somewhat limited in munitions. It makes a lot more sense to move around assets into better positions then actually try to shoot incoming US missiles down. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 06:30 on Jan 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 06:21
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:Command: Modern Operations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 06:26
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The Houthis very likely still have fairly advanced AD in ambush positions but 1. they don’t want to reveal these positions for obvious reasons and 2. they probably have somewhat limited in munitions. It makes a lot more sense to move around assets into better positions then actually try to shoot incoming US missiles down. If I was them I'd keep poking just enough commercial shipping to guarantee the US can't disengage and has to keep shooting Tomahawks to make Number happy. The Navy eventually is going to get complacent, cost-sensitive, desperate to show results to political leaders, or all of the above and start trying to substitute some strikes by standoff weapons on gps coordinates with manned tactical aircraft that can actually look for and try to drop weapons on a visually identified target. And it has to be manned aircraft since slow turboprop drones already eat poo poo over Yemen. When that happens I assume they roll the more capable systems out of tunnels or bunkers or whatever and try to bag some hornets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 07:30
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:If I was them I'd keep poking just enough commercial shipping to guarantee the US can't disengage and has to keep shooting Tomahawks to make Number happy. The Navy eventually is going to get complacent, cost-sensitive, desperate to show results to political leaders, or all of the above and start trying to substitute some strikes by standoff weapons on gps coordinates with manned tactical aircraft that can actually look for and try to drop weapons on a visually identified target. And it has to be manned aircraft since slow turboprop drones already eat poo poo over Yemen. Granted, the US really doesn’t want to lose Hornets. I would say the there is still the chance they just say “mission accomplished” and act that the Houthis have been suppressed even though they are still going to be hitting shipping. Otherwise, a land invasion is off the table, and I don’t think the Saudis and the Emirates are looking for round two. Even losing a single f-18 would be humiliating and show the US’ cards. Basically we will see how desperate they actually are in this case. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 07:47 on Jan 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 07:38
|
|
|
Calculated rationality vs heated emotions. A tough choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 07:42
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:Calculated rationality vs heated emotions. A tough choice. Granted, how much of this is about heated emotion rather than open but calculated brutality? I would argue in the case of the US isn’t that they are going off the hook but rather DC just doesn’t know how just how limited their capabilities actually are. (Also, there is only so much of a sustained air campaign that is going to happen with US/UK assets in the area. If far more USAF assets starting moving in (I am talking 100+ fighters) that would be a much bigger tell.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 07:51
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Granted, the US really doesn’t want to lose Hornets. I would say the there is still the chance they just say “mission accomplished” and act that the Houthis have been suppressed even though they are still going to be hitting shipping. Otherwise, a land invasion is off the table, and I don’t think the Saudis and the Emirates are looking for round two. I'm not sure the US has an option politically to back out of this and no one with any say whatsoever actually wants to
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 07:52
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:I'm not sure the US has an option politically to back out of this and no one with any say whatsoever actually wants to The question is if they may have to just because the political and military liability of getting deeper into Yemen is so costly. They want to be as violent as possible but the question is about capabilities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 08:02
|
|
|
Anyone who isn't a yes-man/woman isn't going to be in a position to say or do much of anything. I am not expecting any sudden changes of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 08:04
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The question is if they may have to just because the political and military liability of getting deeper into Yemen is so costly. It's a whole soup of bad options, really.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 08:14
|
|
|
Either way, we are going to see in not too distant in the future based the on munitions being sent in. It is also why I am not really trying to make a prediction but just saying there are a lot of different but terrible options on the table. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 08:19 on Jan 22, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 08:17
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I don't buy this entirely. You can't see a ship's magazines, but you wouldn't assume in a wartime cruise they only brought 50 76mm rounds for the main gun. history is supposed to be over, so there's no need to maintain actual wartime readiness and the purpose of a warship is to wave your hegemonic dick around rather than do effective military poo poo then it turns out that the imperial schlong has a bad case of ed, but what can you do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 10:31
|
|
|
also the us always is the aggressor, so you don't necessarily have to load up the magazines until its time to blow up some weddings
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 10:32
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I was reading a book about this phenomenon from the Crisis of the Third Century onwards, but in more immediate and practical terms, I think it's more simple. Cultural norms and ideals can be perpetuated and transmitted within families even when the mechanisms to do so in the wider community have collapsed. If you're raised in a family that believes in the ideals of the service, nobility, chivalry, whatever, you're an anachronism, sure, but you're also likely to be resistant to the "post-heroic" cultural programming in the wider society. It's like a subculture, or how religious traditions can survive in family units after the wider community no longer transmits them. FF as modern day Don Quixote. I'm not clever enough to come up with a modern day equivalent of tilting at windmills.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 10:34
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:FF as modern day Don Quixote. I'm not clever enough to come up with a modern day equivalent of tilting at windmills. Pushing Biden To The Left after voting Blue No Matter Who ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 10:53
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Bring back the days of like 100 propeller aircraft each flying off several carriers, like WW2. Sure, they can't fly far, and they only have MG/cannon and small-ish bombs, but the enemy SAM site will be surprised by the size of the incoming formation. Didn't we bring those days back? Except it's aliexpress drones now
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 10:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
yeah, conventional AAA got retired, replaced by bespoke SAM launchers that have 4 missiles ready to launch on a good day, because modern air threat is supposed to be $billion dollar stealth jets and $million dollar reaper drones or patriot missiles except oops, people are now building rockets out of kitchen supplies and you can get long range drones in bulk from alibaba. lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2024 11:20
|
|
