Re: [MV] Carrier's, the future

From: Mil-Veh Co. (milveh@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Wed Apr 13 2005 - 09:28:27 PDT


In the age of the stand off and shoot weapon...using a
million dollar bullet to sink a multi-billion dollar
ship it probably makes sense to build smaller
carriers.

Don't see that happening, instead I see them going to
larger carriers as this "offensive bullet" technology
gets better by quantum leaps. The defense of said
carriers is only marginally improving, not good if you
own carriers.

The prevailing wisdom says the three defense
perimeters around carriers is secure enough to justify
the obvious risk of putting so much on one ship. I
don't believe that for a second. It's incredible
stupid. In a true determined all-out effort by any
number of technologically advanced enemies, we would
lose. It will probably take the sinking of a super
carrier to change minds...always does.

Thoughout history sensible minds rarely prevail, i.e.
French taxpayers protesting the expensive Maginot line
to the rank and file enlisted that protested against
fighters parked in neat rows, presumably to better
guard them from possible sabotuers at Pearl Harbor
said their Admiral!

   

--- dgrev <dgrev@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> Ryan
>
> > It does however look like the UK is returning to
> the fold of more
> > standard fixed wing carrier (60,000 tons est)
> sometime in the next 10
> > years.
>
> I am in the dark, what has happened with the Harrier
> concept? I know
> that the US is moving towards 2nd generation VTOL
> and that the Brits
> were not. What are the Brits going to use on this
> big carrier if not
> VTOL? They would have to develop something
> themselves or alter an
> existing design for carrier use F-22/Eurofighter,
> which would not be fun?
>
> Regards
> Doug
>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:42:54 PDT