It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: MessageforAll
And this isn't considered a hostile engagement? Hey you there China, you seem to be doing well, you might actually become a problem one day, here let me fix that for you.
Shrugs;
originally posted by: Davian
Why? What's the point? We have over three-thousand more aircraft than they do... ....................the world is run by idiots, people.
originally posted by: Davian
Why? What's the point? We have over three-thousand more aircraft than they do... ....................the world is run by idiots, people.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TDawgRex
The largest a cruiser could operate is a pair of helicopters. The smaller carriers, like the America, can carry 20 F-35s, as opposed to a full deck carrier. That is a pretty small strike package, considering you have to have escorts, as well as strike aircraft. You'd need at last two smaller carriers for every one full deck carrier to get near the same strike package size.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Kukri
The boomers are far from obsolete as far as stealth. But they're starting the new replacement program for them that will incorporate technology from the Virginia class.
originally posted by: TritonTaranis
originally posted by: Davian
Why? What's the point? We have over three-thousand more aircraft than they do... ....................the world is run by idiots, people.
I think the whole point is to reassure friends in the region with disputes with china and North Korea, not so much make war threats with China
originally posted by: musicismagic
originally posted by: Davian
Why? What's the point? We have over three-thousand more aircraft than they do... ....................the world is run by idiots, people.
The Chinese and Americans have joint training exercises.
news.xinhuanet.com...
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Acousticsasylum
The link is 2 years old.
The point that is missed is it's the military's job to provide packages/options, "in case of" scenarios. Considering the already mentioned turf fights with it's neighboring nations and occasional war rhetoric directed at the U.S., the U.S. military would be remiss in not having packages ready to deploy, if necessary.