Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > Ten Forward
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
08-05-2011, 10:05 PM
I'm not sure a carrier 2.0 would be generally effective in today's military climate. How many long distance sea accessible hotspots does a larger nation really need to plan engagement with when currently they're most localized to specific hard-to-mobilize to areas? In other words, maybe less trireme and maybe more war elephant.

Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
08-06-2011, 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klingorion View Post
I'm not sure a carrier 2.0 would be generally effective in today's military climate. How many long distance sea accessible hotspots does a larger nation really need to plan engagement with when currently they're most localized to specific hard-to-mobilize to areas? In other words, maybe less trireme and maybe more war elephant.

Carriers are still a more cost effective way to operate. The cost of flying aircraft from an airfield to a hotspot can be extremely expensive when you include refueling costs and 'rent' for using other countries airfeilds (something the British have very painfully found out in Libya since they retired the carrier fleet). The carriers we have today are certainly large enough though,
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:17 AM.