Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Is the Navy’s $13 Billion Aircraft Carrier Obsolete?" video.

@somedudeonline-i3t Lay off the potato their ivan China likes to say DF-21 and DF-26 but fail mention that CVNs can easily operate outside their range and still strike China and its ship When you fire DF-21 and DF-26s at CVN, long range works for the US because in order for missiles to stay on target, require constant updating By jamming their communication, its harder for China to control missile and even harder for it to stay on target DFs are over 30,000lbs in weight. Thats 15 tons of material per missile, can only use them sparely As for Russia Ukraine has already shown enough about the Knzhal that no one is worried about it and has even fewer assets able to use ZIrcons As for the US the US has several defenses options in work but the most substantial is testing F-18s as missile carriers with SM-6s An air launch SM-6s would give the US a massive advantage in countering missiles using aircraft
38
Submarines remain the carriers and surface ships one true problem but we are starting to see the first generation of hard kill torpedo defenses Hitting a torpedo with another torpedo is the easy part. The problem is that sensors are not accurate enough yet to distinguish between ocean and torpedo Active sonar can easily do so but keep ing active sonar on is like ringing the dinner bell says come and get it. So the trick is passive system able to distinguish between ocean and torpedo so active sonar use limited to targeting similar to aircraft. Only used when they need to lock on Newer torpedo likes subs are getting quieter but it can be done
8
@Birdylockso More like highly unlikely Carriers are moving targets In order to hit a moving target, its seeker has to lock on which is first vulnerability Jamming the missile itself In order to counter, the missile has data link which allows China to put the missile on the right target which again goes back to jamming communication so its datalink can't be used In order to counter, China equips the missile with Digital Scene Matching Area Correlator (DSMAC) which has picture of CVN and missile seeker looks for the CVN The CVN uses smoke generators to conceal itself On the US side The USN is testing SM-6s carried by F-18s F-18s carrying a pair SM-6s would be able intercept hypersonic long before they reach the fleet
8
@Birdylockso The Asia times seriously In 2016 SM-6 Dual I missiles launched from USS John Paul Jones (DDG-53) against a “complex, medium-range ballistic missile target” at the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF), Kauai, Hawaii. As far back as 2015, the USN has been testing the SM-6 against complex threats Second The SM-6 missile uses an explosive warhead to defeat ballistic missile threats, differing from other missile defense interceptors, such as the Standard Missile-3, which use non-explosive hit-to-kill technology” read the MDA statement. The SM-6 carries 140lbs warhead so it doesnt need to be hit to kill it just need to get close enough
5
@douginorlando6260 How about no
4
@Birdylockso The other issue with DF is that they are over 15 tons in weight, in short massive targets So whats stopping F-18s and F-35s from destroying them The F-35s uses stealth an sensors to locate the launcher as sensor Then sends the data to F-18s which in its role as the shooter launches missiles against it The F-35 can also send data to other assets for targeting the launcher China problem is that putting up planes works for the USAF and USN favor As for Russia's Kinzhal and Zircon Same issue jamming and targeting launching asset The Kinzhal can be launched from over 1000 miles but the USN can easily jam comn between the missile and launching asset The USN needs to make the SM-6 from F-18 a reality
3
@logicomega7 Same for goes for China DFs are over 15 tons , thats not something you can fire in salos
2
@newsieboys1171 Simple because range does not matter You keep saying half the range but keep forgetting aerial refueling
2
@sirshade222 Very true, it has to say afloat but whats stopping the US fro destroying the launchers What stopping a Virginia class sub from closing to 400 miles off China's coast and firing LRHW. At that range, the missile will be on target in 2 mins or HACM from the air from 1000 away miles on target in 13 minutes
2
@newsieboys1171 No you havent The DF-21 range is 900 miles whereas the F-18 is 444 miles. The F-18 can launch JASSM-ER from 600 miles away From 1000 miles away., the F-18 only needs 1 aerial refueling to get within JASSM-ER and even then its only 155 miles that it needs to get in range and leave As for returning home, its not issue, China lacks the tankers need to project its planes that far out In order to prevent CVN aircraft from attacking, Chinese aircraft would have to be positioned at 700 miles away which they can't do So no there is no badly jeopardizing (hilarious statement) As far the CSG, goes, they have several ways to hold DF-21s at risk Whats stopping a Virginia class sub from close to 400 miles nominally and launching TLAMs against DF-21s Whats stopping a Zumwalt class from firing LRHW from 1000 miles away
2
@PancakeBoi Close but no The issue with the US military was the micromanagement from the civilian leadership coupled with the egg head officers By this time, most of the combat experienced commanders from WWII and Korea had already retired so they were left with egg heads who fly desks
2
Ukraine is simply exposing how badly Russian forces conventional capabilities are lacking if the US was in Ukraine, it would have been over a long time ago What Ukraine has show is that Russian lacks Persistent Air Support (PAS) , SEAD, and intel For SEAD, the US has EA-18Gs, F-16CJ, and EC-130s for dealing with air defense So far ,Russia has been able to neutralize Ukraine's Soviet Era SAMs but not the newer Western systems The US would be actively hunting and destroying SAMSs With SAMS out of the picture, PAS with MQ-9s would actively hunting MLRS and artillery unlike loitering munitions, the MQ-9s carries Hellfires ,and JDAMs which will 100 percent destroy would they hit If Russia made drones like the MQ-9, HIMARS launchers and other SPAs would have been destroyed long ago Lastly Russian intel Ukraine's president has been traveling back and forth with ease The US would have been had F-22s or MQ- waiting Others areas that Russia is lacking is aircraft capabilities All US aircraft have targeting pods for precision strike Russian aircraft dont have pods and that is why so many of their strike aircraft have been lost they are getting within MANPAD range and getting smoked 22 Su-34s lost The F-15E across 7 conflicts is fraction of that its possible for carriers to come under attack but impossible for that to be destroy as easily as others claim Lockheed has developed 500kW DEW for the Army and the DDGX is planned to have 600kW if the USN commits to SM-6s launched by F-18s, 500-600Kw laser weapons to DDG and CVNs, PAC-3s along SM-6s from VLS and Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP) from Mk-45 guns and an working Countermeasure Anti-Torpedo (CAT) system with Anti-Torpedo Torpedo Good luck with that
1
@somedudeonline-i3t Again ivan lay off the potato juice The US has 11 CVNs plus LHA/D class as light carriers for total of 20 ships , thats plenty Lets break it down for you as you are slow In fight with Iran, the USN will have EA-18Gs jamming with USAF F-22s hunting for the Iranian air force. 1 Ohio-class SSGN from 500 miles , well outside Iran's defense capability will lay waste to Iran's defense As long as the EA-18Gs are jamming, Iran defenses will be degraded so they have to no choice but to go after EA-18Gs and F-22s will be waiting The US will target Iran's defenses ,command and control air fields and MRBM sites What can Iran do, literally nothing B-1s can carry up 24 JASSMs with 600 mile range which again make every part of Iran easily targets Fun fact, is that Israel will welcome US forces operating as Iran to Israel is only 1100 miles or come from Diego Garica Russia and China pound for pound can't match the USN The backbone of the USN is Burke class with its 90 cell VLS, China has VLS ships but only 20 ish Russia has only frigates Key part of VLS is that ships can carry anything what is Russian strongest surface combat, only 2 Kirovs which are easily matched by Ticos and Burke China's 8 Type-55 again matched by the Burkes and Ticos
1
@hyokkim7726 Very much so
1
@Mrwizard-ck7oe lets see US based in Iraq and Afghan were attacked by insurgents using VIED and mortars What can insurgents do against a CVN, nada. Due the USS Cole bombing, All naval ships were upgraded with Mk-38 to counter threats from small boats The CVN can attack at will and insurgents cant do anything about it
1
@logicomega7 Its called reality there ding ding The USN knew the threat of H-6 with YJ-12 was real one H-6 carries 4 missiles and multiple H-6s can attack from various directions thats was a real threat DFs on the other hand are not For starters there is no hiding when one is launched point blank
1
@newsieboys1171 How about no Ballistic missile have long range however they are one use items. The DF-21 ASBM claims 900 miles however CVN can destroy DF-21s with ease while the DF-21 cannot While the CVN current level of capabilities makes this process very resource intensive but impossible, future weapons make the DFs moot A carrier based hypersonic weapon will F-18s to service DF- sites from as far 1000 miles away
1
@kabbythedog9409 Russia's supposed weapons aint doing shit in Ukraine
1
@Birdylockso The US uses retired ICBM and MRBM first and second stages
1
Carriers will never be obsolete even when facing advanced weapons
1