Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Just when will aircraft carriers become obsolete?" video.

  1. Carriers will never be obsolete. Battleships became obsolete because their weapons limited their scope of operations. They can only attack targets with ranges of its guns. The power of their guns was too much for sensitive electronics. Carriers can perform a wide range of operations compared to BBs. Hypersonic weapons and ultra quiet subs are threats but they are threats that can be countered. https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/2014-archive-naval-exhibitons/sea-air-space-2014/1737-huntington-ingalls-industries-showcases-its-ballistic-missile-defense-ship-based-on-lpd-17-class.html HII proposed a BMD ship based on the LPD-17 288 missile capacity, plus provisions for LAWS and EMRG One the problems with the MK-41 vls is the size of VLS tube limits the size of the missile. An LPD-17 could carry normally MK-41 vls tube but plus larger ones to accommodate larger missiles. In theory, you could double the range of the SM-3 and SM-6 or even quad pack SM-6s. With space once used for cargo, generators for LAWS and EMRG so they can maintain high rates of fire even when used at max power. Hell, you could even upgrade CIWS from 20mm to 30mm. Newer programmable rounds like the XM813 or even an upgrade to 57mm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxVOclDHI9Y watch at 350 The size of the LPD-17 gives plenty of growth options. 20 ships total Hard kill anti torpedo defenses are starting to be fielded but false positives are still a problem. Once that wrinkle is fixed, Ships will have true defenses against Subs. As weapons evolves , defenses will too
    9
  2. Never, carrier's ability to power project is essential for warfare
    6
  3.  @yaz2928  That would be false Battleships limitation was the range of its guns and limited firepower Carriers are only limited by the range of their aircraft which with aerial refueling is well over 1000 miles Neither hypersonic weapons nor subs are threats to carriers Subs main weapon is their ability to silently torpedo targets Many countries are working on developing hard kill anti-torpedos Effectively torpedos capable of intercepting torpedos Many of the systems are still in R/D but they getting close to having an operational hard kill defense against torpedos Laser weapons are maturing faster than expected and megawatt class are expected by 2025 The current 150 kw is only useful against drone but once they go pass 500 kw, the countering missiles becomes a reality Lastly Hypersonic weapons like everything else is limited by its range The PLAN claims the DF-21 can hit target from nearly 1100 mile away but forget to mention that at the range , CVNs have nearly 8 minutes to work with Hypersonic weapons are only effective at 100 miles on down because at the range react time is seconds A normal subsonic cruise needs roughly 9 minutes to cover 100 miles while hypersonic missile at mach 10 does in 46 seconds CVNs will operate at 700 to 1000 miles away hell weapons like the JASSM-ER can be launched from 600 miles so again hypersonics are no real threat
    3
  4.  @yaz2928  DDG-51s generate 25MW while DDG-1000s generate 78MW. The USN plans for their successor to have at the minimal 58 MW in reserve which is ample for Laser weapons. As for hypersonic defenses, there is more to it then just shooting down. First , there is destroying the missile before hand by attacking where they are stored. .Secondly destroy the launching ship or aircraft before it has time. Subs can destroy ships without warning as can stealth aircraft. A F-35C sea skimiming is virtually impossible to spot till too late Third soft kill measures like electronic warfare can stop it in tracks. As the US pointed with China and Russia both their weapons require complicated kill chains that if disrupted, will cause the weapon to miss The seeker aboard the weapon can only resist so much jamming before it fails As for subs using ballistic missiles how about no CSG wont send ships after it , they will send aircraft which depending on the range can be on station in minutes and secondly how is the missile going to guide is no is giving it course up data and what happens when jamming starts so not happening
    3
  5. @ @ineednochannelyoutube5384  Thats why their different ship classes CVNs carry the planes, while LPDs /LHA/D carry troops and materiel So while the CVNs planes are bombing the enemy back to the stone age, the troops can land unopposed. The movie "Saving Private Run" Normandy landing scene is exactly why the military changed its tactics for landing troops.  The USMC/USN operates the complete package of planes, helicopters and troops on LHA/Ds but the jets and helicopters can't operate at the same time. Furthermore, the landing craft requires the ship to be a certain speed so they can depart. So with different ship class, everyone is working at the same time. CVNs planes are striking targets while LHA/D are launching helos. LPDs are launching landing craft Once the LHA/D has launched its aircraft , its own landing craft can leave Another factor is the MV-22 and F-18E/F Both are equipped for aerial refueling so that allows to keep the larger KC-10/46/130/135/ in reserve or have them orbit in locations that well protected In a conflict , tankers will be key in extending the striking or defending forces ability to conduct operations its much easier to have an F-18 tanker which can manuever better than KC-10/46/130/135/ and recover on nearby carrier or an MV-22 which can literally land anywhere versus a large KC that has travel hundreds of miles back and forth
    1
  6. @ @ineednochannelyoutube5384  Completely necessary Light carriers can function the same as CVN but they are still limited in capability CVN can operate E-2s AWACS, C-2 cargo, SH-60 Anti sub plus a mix F-18s /F-35 for multi role missile. MV-22 can be added as tankers or F-18E/F can buddy store ,either way, you have space for all the capabilities you need and space for if you need more Light carrier can't operate that mix , its much capability for their size Arsenal ships are only useful in the ballistic missile defense role An arsenal ship can carry 300 TLAM but those missiles are still limited in range and target. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11355/this-syria-bound-super-hornet-is-carrying-a-uniquely-massive-bomb-load Super Hornet with ten 1000lbs JDAM Example, The USN fired 59 TLAMS at a Syria base. It would have taken 9 Planes to do the same the difference is the 6 planes would have been carrying bombs while 2 provided top cover and one EA-18G provide EW suppression one of 6 planes could have SHARP pod equipped so commanders could look at the best and see the damage in real time So if follow up strikes are needed TLAM can be used to precisely strike what the SH missed or vice versa
    1