Last Nimitz-Class SuperCarrier started....

[ZokesPro]

Originally posted by mmp121
What you saw Zokes was probably the USS Intrepid. Its a floating museum of sorts.

http://www.intrepidmuseum.org/I

That's it! Thanks for the link dude.

[Wombat]

So that an old one can retire, Red. It's not so much about enlarging the fleet as it is updating it.

[KvHagedorn]

I wonder what Jacky Fisher would have thought about having to face this lineup 100 years ago..

[Technoid]

The Final countdown

One of my favorite movies

[Greebe]

Actually Doc that was an exclusion to the rule... something Reagan did (and my grandmother was ever so slightly ticked about)

[Technoid]

Originally posted by Greebe
Actually Doc that was an exclusion to the rule... something Reagan did (and my grandmother was ever so slightly ticked about)

Why ?

Any special reason other than that reagan did it

[Dr Mordrid]

Well then, they must have made an exclusion FOR the USS Reagan too since he's technically alive...at least as alive as terminal Alzheimers lets you be.

Another thing on the new and still active ships: they are being highly modified for the new world situation.

Even the nuclear sub fleet is being modded. Several boats are having their MIRV'ed nuclear missiles removed with each being replaced by 7 advanced cruise missiles, mostly with conventional but highly advanced warheads and at least some with highly advanced guidance and stealth features.

End result: over 180 individually targetable advanced cruise missiles per sub.

On each of these boats at least two of the missile silos are being converted to facilitate the landing of SEAL teams. These teams will either come to shore using mini-subs lashed to the deck or by their usual rafts.

There is also word that there will also be remotely controlled attack drone subs (unmanned) that have advanced miniature torpedos; something like an underwater Predator attack drone.

Then there are the super-cavitating torpedos coming into service that go supersonic shortly after being fired

Yeah....supersonic torpedos, leaving the target NO time to evade them or launch countermeasures.

Dr. Mordrid

[Corran Horn]

Originally posted by RedRed
why bother building another?

RedRed

Numerous reasons having to do with defense, and at least one to do with logistics/production. The ship builders that build these vessels have to be working on one at all times IIRC. With USS Ronald Reagan due to be completed next year there has to be one in the pipe for them to work on when it's completed. If not, the yard would have to close and the workers would get laid off.

Then, when it came time for another to be built (through need or whatever) we'd be stuck.

I hadn't seen that the next Nimitz class was named yet, but I guess it has been.

[[GDI]Raptor]

On NATO exercies, for the last three years when US cariers have perticepated they have been "sunken" the first day!

They are perhaps armed to the teeth, but not protected against anti-ship missiles!

[GNEP]

Originally posted by RedRed
why bother building another?

RedRed

Just in case all the others are sunk by "little boats" called out from the minarets off the Gulf shore... (j/k)

Anyone read about that US "exercise"? (If you don't know what I'm talking about, you didn't)

g

[Dr Mordrid]

Originally posted by [GDI]Raptor
On NATO exercies, for the last three years when US cariers have perticepated they have been "sunken" the first day!

They are perhaps armed to the teeth, but not protected against anti-ship missiles!

That's why the new cruisers, and even some retrofitted Aegis cruisers, are getting anti-missile defences including missile and laser based technologies. To this end there is a big push for a new solid-state laser capable of shooting down theater missiles by 2007.

Dr. Mordrid

[GNEP]

Lasers shooting down "sight-seeing" tours? I'd like to see the press take on that one!

[RedRed]

The fact remains that noone is going to attack a carrier or feck all else with a missile strike. the enemy nowadays dosent have the capability. its not like you are playing wargames with the warsaw pact. The newest enemy is someone who will ram a ship with a fishing boat - and there is no way that they will get close to a carrier. the problem with a carrier in the gulf is that there is little room to manuver - !!!!
the only way that a carrier will get lost is by someone launching or dropping a nuke within 20Klicks of it - then all the agaes crusers in the world would also be scrap metal.... - not that believe that it will happen.... the argument about maintaining the military complex is lthe closest to a legimitate excuse for building more of these monsters... However would it not be cheaper and as effective to refit the things instead? I mean they are nimitz class cities for gods sake - while the technology might have moved on some - the basic shell surely hasnt.... These things cost more than most countries earn ! couldnt the tax dollars be better spent on improving your own country? - it must be a significant percentage of your GDP to produce....
RedRed

RedRed

[GNEP]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,786992,00.html

[GT98]

Originally posted by RedRed

the argument about maintaining the military complex is lthe closest to a legimitate excuse for building more of these monsters... However would it not be cheaper and as effective to refit the things instead? I mean they are nimitz class cities for gods sake - while the technology might have moved on some - the basic shell surely hasnt.... These things cost more than most countries earn ! couldnt the tax dollars be better spent on improving your own country? - it must be a significant percentage of your GDP to produce....
RedRed

Problem being is that the main reason newer carriers are being designed is to have smaller crews. They have at least 3000 People on them now and that saps the Navys strength in Manpower. The DDX21 Zuwmat Class Destroyer has grand total of 95 people to run it compaired to almost 300 on an Bruke Class Destoryer which is the US Navy's current Pride and Joy when it comes to Destoryers. Also if you quit building them it also means that you lose the people that know how to make them...from the shipworkers to the Naval Archtechics.

Also people say we have only X amount of carriers and say thats too much...well when you add in end of deployments and refits of them that means you loose about 3-4 Carriers just in "transit" that aren't an effective weapons platform for use in a crisis.