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 CarbonBase
reply to post by MConnalley
Nice. That's a lot of firepower, and a lot of sensors! But there are things on the CVN that you didn't list, because, hey presto, they are classified! Anyway, I'm still trying to figure out which 'real' Navy the OP is pitting against the US Navy, in which I served for 20 years, and had an 'above top secret' clearance. Yeah, it's like that. I'm thinking the 'destroyer' fleet he's referring to belongs to a dominant naval power, currently in existence, possibly France or the Carnival Cruise line, after that, I have no other idea's !
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
lets see : the capability to independantly position itself off the coast of any land mass then .
1 - the ability to enforce a no fly zone upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
2 - the ability to provide CAS [ close air support ] to ground operations upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
3 - the ability to conduct stategic and tactical strikes against both sea and land based targets
4 - the ability to lauch a ground forces strike against inland targets [ even if opposed ]
5 - the ability to recover ground forces or civilian refugees from an inland extraction site [ even if opposed ]
no other single platform can replicate all 5 - and none can do it on the scale that a carrier can
Originally posted by CarbonBase
reply to post by MConnalley
Nice. That's a lot of firepower, and a lot of sensors! But there are things on the CVN that you didn't list, because, hey presto, they are classified! Anyway, I'm still trying to figure out which 'real' Navy the OP is pitting against the US Navy, in which I served for 20 years, and had an 'above top secret' clearance. Yeah, it's like that. I'm thinking the 'destroyer' fleet he's referring to belongs to a dominant naval power, currently in existence, possibly France or the Carnival Cruise line, after that, I have no other idea's !
Originally posted by MConnalley
reply to post by Jepic
room, cant have missiles and artillery to. plus the ships will never get in range to fire those guns, im right and your wrong. might as well just build a battleship, no common sense you have, absolutely none.
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
What's to stop the Russians from mounting 20 pieces of 5 inch guns on each side of their destroyers...
the laws of physics - specifically archemiides principal
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
lets see : the capability to independantly position itself off the coast of any land mass then .
1 - the ability to enforce a no fly zone upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
2 - the ability to provide CAS [ close air support ] to ground operations upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
3 - the ability to conduct stategic and tactical strikes against both sea and land based targets
4 - the ability to lauch a ground forces strike against inland targets [ even if opposed ]
5 - the ability to recover ground forces or civilian refugees from an inland extraction site [ even if opposed ]
no other single platform can replicate all 5 - and none can do it on the scale that a carrier can
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
2. See above.
3. See point 1.
4. See point 1.
5. Each destroyer can have two helicopter bays.
A destroyer fleet can do all 5 and on a bigger scale and much more efficiently.
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by MConnalley
reply to post by Jepic
room, cant have missiles and artillery to. plus the ships will never get in range to fire those guns, im right and your wrong. might as well just build a battleship, no common sense you have, absolutely none.
Of course you can. There is plenty of room in this Earth. We are now 7 billion but still plenty of room. Don't believe that overpopulation stuff.
With a 60 km range, the guns will make it happen.
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
Originally posted by MConnalley
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
lets see : the capability to independantly position itself off the coast of any land mass then .
1 - the ability to enforce a no fly zone upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
2 - the ability to provide CAS [ close air support ] to ground operations upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
3 - the ability to conduct stategic and tactical strikes against both sea and land based targets
4 - the ability to lauch a ground forces strike against inland targets [ even if opposed ]
5 - the ability to recover ground forces or civilian refugees from an inland extraction site [ even if opposed ]
no other single platform can replicate all 5 - and none can do it on the scale that a carrier can
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
2. See above.
3. See point 1.
4. See point 1.
5. Each destroyer can have two helicopter bays.
A destroyer fleet can do all 5 and on a bigger scale and much more efficiently.
lol you mean two of these helicopters lol, there range is less than 450 nautical miles.
lol cruise missiles can only enforce a no fly zone if they an kill the carrier first lol which they cant, read thread.
Those sea hawk helicopters will get no were near ground forces in a non secured LZ cruise missiles don't secure LZs. destroyers dont carry a compliment of Marines ready for ground insertion.
Your wrong wrong wrong.
Originally posted by MConnalley
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by MConnalley
reply to post by Jepic
room, cant have missiles and artillery to. plus the ships will never get in range to fire those guns, im right and your wrong. might as well just build a battleship, no common sense you have, absolutely none.
Of course you can. There is plenty of room in this Earth. We are now 7 billion but still plenty of room. Don't believe that overpopulation stuff.
With a 60 km range, the guns will make it happen.
5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun
"Type Naval gun
Place of origin United States
Service history
In service • Mod 0: 1971[1]
• Mod 1: 1980[1]
• Mod 2: 1988[1]
• Mod 4: 2000[2]
Used by See users
Production history
Designed 1968[1]
Manufacturer United Defense[1] (now BAE Systems Land & Armaments)
Produced 1971[1]
Specifications
Weight • Mod 2: 21,691 kg (47,820.5 lb)[1]
• Mod 4: 28,924 kg (63,766.5 lb)[1]
Length • Mod 2: 8.992 m (29 ft 6.0 in)[3]
• Mod 4: 10.008 m (32 ft 10.0 in)[2]
Barrel length • Mod 2: 6.858 m (270.0 in)[3]
Rifling: 5.82 m (229 in)[3]
8,000 rounds (barrel life)[3]
• Mod 4: 7.874 m (310.0 in)[2]
Rifling: 6.836 m (269.1 in)[2]
7,000 rounds (barrel life)[2]
Shell Conventional: 31.75 kg (70.0 lb)[1]
Caliber 5.0 inches (127.0 mm)
Barrels Single barrel (progressive RH parabolic twist)
Elevation • -15°/+65°[3]
Maximum elevation rate: 20°/sec[3]
Traverse • ±170° from centerline[3]
Maximum traversing rate: 30°/sec[3]
Rate of fire 16–20 rounds per minute automatic[4]
Muzzle velocity • Mod 2: 2,500 ft/s (762.0 m/s)[1]
• Mod 4: 2,650 ft/s (807.7 m/s)[1]
• 1,500 ft/s (457.2 m/s) reduced charge for defilade fire or illumination rounds
Effective range 13 nmi (24.1 km)[4]
Feed system 600 rounds (Ticonderoga class)
680 rounds (Arleigh Burke class)
475–500 rounds (Other classes)"
range 13 damn nautical miles not 60. holy crap!
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by MConnalley
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
lets see : the capability to independantly position itself off the coast of any land mass then .
1 - the ability to enforce a no fly zone upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
2 - the ability to provide CAS [ close air support ] to ground operations upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
3 - the ability to conduct stategic and tactical strikes against both sea and land based targets
4 - the ability to lauch a ground forces strike against inland targets [ even if opposed ]
5 - the ability to recover ground forces or civilian refugees from an inland extraction site [ even if opposed ]
no other single platform can replicate all 5 - and none can do it on the scale that a carrier can
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
2. See above.
3. See point 1.
4. See point 1.
5. Each destroyer can have two helicopter bays.
A destroyer fleet can do all 5 and on a bigger scale and much more efficiently.
lol you mean two of these helicopters lol, there range is less than 450 nautical miles.
lol cruise missiles can only enforce a no fly zone if they an kill the carrier first lol which they cant, read thread.
Those sea hawk helicopters will get no were near ground forces in a non secured LZ cruise missiles don't secure LZs. destroyers dont carry a compliment of Marines ready for ground insertion.
Your wrong wrong wrong.
You missed the part where we are speaking of a destroyer fleet. Which means not 2 but a power of 20 helicopters integrated with a combination of anti-submarine, electronice/cyber warfare and surface attack capability.
Yes they can kill a carrier group. It's called a massive missile strike. It just overwhelms your lasers. Not that those will be any good with the smoke and all. Besides I don't even know why you mentioned lasers seeing as how they are not even in service. I do agree that lasers are the future but not in the primitive stage they are at now.
You can secure an area with GUESS WHAT! MISSILES! AND GUES WHAT ELSE! ARTILLERY!
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
utter twaddle
a cruise missile can only attack runways or other known infrastructure points
a cruise missile has zero capability to do anything against an enemy that can get its forces airborne
a cruise missile cannot loiter or interdict an area
as for your other " points "
cruise missiles have only 2 warhead types - they cannot provide CLOSE air support - nor can they attack an armoured target , or interdict an area [ cluster bombs ]
cruise missiles have zero flexibility - they cannot strafe a single infantry platoon with canon , or rocket - a f/a18 strike aircraft can carry 16 250kg bombs - thats 16 targets - and the ability to loiter - ie it can protect a besiged position
i am getting the feeling you are confusing " destroyers " with " battleships " - because put 20 extra " passengers " on a destroyer - and there is ZERO rom left
PS - how many cruise missiles do you envision your " destroyers " carrying ?
Originally posted by MConnalley
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by MConnalley
Originally posted by Jepic
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by Jepic
lets see : the capability to independantly position itself off the coast of any land mass then .
1 - the ability to enforce a no fly zone upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
2 - the ability to provide CAS [ close air support ] to ground operations upto 500 miles from the nearest blue water
3 - the ability to conduct stategic and tactical strikes against both sea and land based targets
4 - the ability to lauch a ground forces strike against inland targets [ even if opposed ]
5 - the ability to recover ground forces or civilian refugees from an inland extraction site [ even if opposed ]
no other single platform can replicate all 5 - and none can do it on the scale that a carrier can
1. Cruise missiles can enforce no fly zones as seen in Libya.
2. See above.
3. See point 1.
4. See point 1.
5. Each destroyer can have two helicopter bays.
A destroyer fleet can do all 5 and on a bigger scale and much more efficiently.
lol you mean two of these helicopters lol, there range is less than 450 nautical miles.
lol cruise missiles can only enforce a no fly zone if they an kill the carrier first lol which they cant, read thread.
Those sea hawk helicopters will get no were near ground forces in a non secured LZ cruise missiles don't secure LZs. destroyers dont carry a compliment of Marines ready for ground insertion.
Your wrong wrong wrong.
You missed the part where we are speaking of a destroyer fleet. Which means not 2 but a power of 20 helicopters integrated with a combination of anti-submarine, electronice/cyber warfare and surface attack capability.
Yes they can kill a carrier group. It's called a massive missile strike. It just overwhelms your lasers. Not that those will be any good with the smoke and all. Besides I don't even know why you mentioned lasers seeing as how they are not even in service. I do agree that lasers are the future but not in the primitive stage they are at now.
You can secure an area with GUESS WHAT! MISSILES! AND GUES WHAT ELSE! ARTILLERY!
lol I just feel like your a dumb ass im sorry but there nothing else i can say, force bent on destruction by any means necessary even non self preservation can do a lot of damage but honestly ever single one of those men will know they are throwing away there lives because there dumbass commander told them to "get into gun range with a carrier and engage" there are so many simultaneously defenses on a carrier that its negligible any missiles will stop a carriers combat ability. and your destroyer group would never get into range ever there will be 90 aircraft slamming warheads against all your hulls before you were even in visual range.