Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: only 10 50. cals on a modern aircraft carrier!
stinger    11/4/2007 8:12:19 PM
now somethings got to be wrong with this, they have missiles and then they have small arms nothing in between. i know they can out run any boat in the world in the open waters but what about in the straits. they shoulnt rely on the destroyers to protect them. they are just asunder guned if you call it that. lets get some real weapons back on our ships..
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
gf0012-aust       11/4/2007 8:28:18 PM
the area of transit defines the ROE and protection level for that transit (thats one of the results of the post USS Cole assessment)
 
they also have Phalanx
they also have organic CAP via rotors
they also have light skimmers (eg RHIBS) deployed depending on area of transit.
 
the rules changed after USS Cole, so I'm not sure why you think that they have less capability to deter - let alone the fact that the area of transit heavily influences tolerance and response levels.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

stinger       11/4/2007 8:34:45 PM
think about it carriers never changed there mtoe on small arms ,, I'm just saying phalanx is being phased out hellos give a little support, but lets get some fire power on there some 30mm the new 57mm that give you better dead space protection.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/4/2007 8:52:31 PM

dead space protection.


dead space protection in transit or in port?
as I said prev, the SOPs for vessel protection are defined by the location.
if the issue is one of transit in restricted waters, then that also is defined by location.  In restricted transit areas, the organic air will be up, and local authorities are also involved.
 
I'm confused as to what general scenario you have in mind.
 
You can stick a mini typhoon on anything, the issue is relevance in light of other systems already in play. - or do you just want cross calibre overwatch/overmatch?

 
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       11/4/2007 9:10:10 PM
TOW could be a cheap addition and a swell solution if needed.  It isn't.  See gf's posts as to the why.

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

Crazyhorse    Guns on Carriers   11/9/2007 4:19:10 PM
   

There are several things to consider, space, logistics, and extra crew. Also if something gets past it's escorts, and air cover there is little chance anything can be done about it any way. A small craft with explosives would also present a minimal threat to a carrier, other than having to send the bosn?s mates over the side to repaint her.

 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith       11/20/2007 10:06:35 PM
The lesson from WWII was that you could not depend entirely on your screening destroyers.  The only place to stop the leakers is from the target itself.  That said, I can't much imagine a boat or small plane threat that could deal with a Phalanx.  And anything with a gun, that seems to drive the opening comment, will be toast against fighters, helos and the destroyer screen.  A carrier is not going to get into a gun fight with a surface combatant.
 
Quote    Reply

KlubMarcus       11/21/2007 10:47:33 PM

now somethings got to be wrong with this, they have missiles and then they have small arms nothing in between. i know they can out run any boat in the world in the open waters but what about in the straits. they shoulnt rely on the destroyers to protect them. they are just asunder guned if you call it that. lets get some real weapons back on our ships..
The air defense systems on aircraft carriers should be able to hit boats. If they can hit missiles traveling at supersonic speed at wave-top height, them hitting a much slower and bigger boat should be a whole lot easier. Don't underestimate the .50 cal because an aircraft carrier is very high above the water. Approaching vessels are slow targets on an open field with a gunner shooting down at them from behind armor plate.
 
Quote    Reply

larryjcr    CLOSE WEAPONS   11/22/2007 3:05:19 AM
I know that the RAMs are supposed to be better, but I'm opposed to taking the Phalanx off, exactly because it can be used against thing besides a/c.
As for the suggestion on installing TOWs, there may have been some changes in the last decade or two, but when I knew 'em, TOW wasn't very useful shooting across water due to the guidence wires shorting out.
 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith       11/23/2007 12:47:05 PM
What would be the advantage of a TOW over a Phalanx?  TOWs are armor peircing.  There is no armor on a small boat or plane.  A Phalanx would turn either into matchsticks, and probably at greater range.
 
Not sure how effective a RAM would be.  RAM uses a Sidewinder hot spot tracker.  Would it be able to reliably pick out a boat?
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       11/23/2007 5:51:15 PM
So it's a ship specialized for a specific task?

Deviating away too much from that might make it less effective for what it's supposed to do in my opinion.








 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics