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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
03-23-2012, 01:17 AM
OP, in DS9, many a Miranda dies to one shot
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
03-23-2012, 05:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Spade View Post
Interesting thread. I like the debate. But...



Why do you think this is a waste of lives and money in war today? I spent 8 years in the US Navy in fighter squadrons. First with an F-14A squadron attached to the USS Enterprise and then an F/A-18F squadron attached to the USS Nimitz. Carriers are designed to project the US Navy's power of air superiority around the world. Not only are they a projection of power but they are vital in the support of ground troops where ever they are.

As for lives, an aircraft carrier is well protected. The following pic if of the USS Abraham Lincoln's battlegroup. All the ships surrounding the Lincoln have one mission, to protect the carrier at all costs (well, except for the supply ship :p).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...attlegroup.jpg


Though it has never come to that as the shear shock of the power projection of an aircraft carrier and its battlegroup has, at times, prevented the proverbial poo hitting the fan.

Just my $0.02
In fact, just one of our carriers has more air power than the entire Iranian Air Force... and we have 11 of them. It is our superior firepower that does protect lives on the ground. Many a ambush had been thwarted by an F-14.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
03-23-2012, 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophlogimo
Pretty much.

Now, imagine STO-type shield entering the scene. Suddenly, big ships are the way to go.
Haha well....cloaking devices were tested on a naval ship once...from what I recall the entire crew got server radiation sickness.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
03-23-2012, 09:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenor-Nyiad View Post
Haha well....cloaking devices were tested on a naval ship once...from what I recall the entire crew got server radiation sickness.
The Navy finally realized that when you have missles with ranges of several orbits, you don't actually need to put your ships near any actual danger.

Plus, we have lasers coming soon.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
03-23-2012, 09:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commadore_Bob
Plus, we have lasers coming soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pozlp_wnkRk

Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
03-23-2012, 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Spade View Post
Why do you think this is a waste of lives and money in war today?
Note the little world "real" in my statement. Carriers are great for beating up vastly inferior forces even if they are very remote from any allied bases. But that's it. In a war where both sides are at least in the same order of magnitude of force strenght and technology (such as in a hopefully-never-to-happen-US-Chinese war or something like that), carriers are big and vulnerable just like battleships of old ages

Quote:
As for lives, an aircraft carrier is well protected. The following pic if of the USS Abraham Lincoln's battlegroup. All the ships surrounding the Lincoln have one mission, to protect the carrier at all costs (well, except for the supply ship :p).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...attlegroup.jpg
[...]
Allow me to answer with another picture.

http://www.dutchsubmarines.com/pictu...ed_oct93_2.jpg

And this kind of pictures is extremely common from NATO maneuvers even in the last couple of years, or so I am told.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
03-23-2012, 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commadore_Bob
In fact, just one of our carriers has more air power than the entire Iranian Air Force... and we have 11 of them.[...]
Not one of which is as unsinkable as any Iranian air base, though.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
03-23-2012, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commadore_Bob
The Navy finally realized that when you have missles with ranges of several orbits, you don't actually need to put your ships near any actual danger.

Plus, we have lasers coming soon.
Can't waitt for those finished products...not the sissy crowd control ones. I met a retired officer in the airforce once who used to work on a laser system for planes under the Clinton admin. A fun talk it was....but so much science. :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
03-23-2012, 11:03 AM
It's true, AA lasers will very likely be a game changer regarding the role of airplanes on the battlefield everywhere, but they will remain less useful against attacks from beneath the surface.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
03-23-2012, 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophlogimo
Not one of which is as unsinkable as any Iranian air base, though.
Moving targets are harder to hit. Besides, we destroyed the Iranian navy in the early 80's. I'm sure we could do it again.
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 12:46 AM.