Comments by "Herp Derp" (@herpderp1662) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds"
channel.
-
15
-
11
-
10
-
4
-
4
-
@scudb5509 well right, i didnt mean that to such an extent. Subs are not the primary threat to a carrier. The main way a torpedo sinks a ship is not by impacting it, the explosive force or anything else. Its MEANT "in modern times, not wwII" to explode UNDER A SHIP, and the explosives used detonate in such a way that it creates as much of a cavity under water as it possibly can under the keel of a ship, causing the ship to be suspended in the water by its bow and stern "breaking its back" with first an upward force, then with gravity. This DOES NOT WORK on a super carrier. Even a mod 7 mk48 adcap cant do it. And you can slam them into the side all day long, carriers are so compartmentalized sinking them the traditional way is nearly impossible do to having a COMPLETELLY DIFFERENT structure to a frigate, destroyer or any other ship. Every nation has known this for decades. It is FAR more effective to take out a carrier from eliminatings its crew, or destroying the top, or penetrating the sides and getting to munitions and planes. Sinking them takes an absolutelly overwhelming cartoonish hollywood onslaught that simply would never happen in real conflict. I know all about that stupid exercise of sweeden in 05. First, diesel subs are almost impossible to find when running on battery, so dont think the sweedish sub is superior, it isnt. Nuke subs are way louder, but superior in all other ways. Diesels are shore fighters, they cant go long distance fighting, WWII was different as recon prop planes and manual spotting sucked. Now if a sub pokes up to snorkle its like ringing a dinner bell for extremely fast planes to get on site before they even have enough time to ventilate and charge. The games changed a lot. Besides, its common knowledge if you see a carrier, even without its battle geoup "which is never" it always has a min of 2 subs with it. I partook in so many of those stupud simulations with our allies in the asian pacific region, its a JOKE. Results are usually always the same. Especually when modern diesels are involved.
3
-
@John Grigg well the issue with china is they are so ingrained in our society. Every college is hyper left, spies and informants are getting caught constantly giving away research data from universities and places like lochead martin, rathion etc etc. And even our politicians are bought and paid for by the CCP, hell one of them is MARRIED to a known, active proven CCP MEMBER "democrat of course". So they dont have to do their own R and D. They dont have to rely on captured intel or equipment. We have "americans" exclusivelly on the left willingly selling them straight up keys to the secret kingdom. So their tech is SOMEWHAT similar to ours already, the main advantages we have is its like dropping a cellphone in 1880, they are tasked with then understanding tech they didnt develop. Their build quality is absurdly low, and their training is an absolute joke. We ran seapack events, drills, war sims, and fire exercises literally weekly to bi weekly when we werent directly in the enemies back yard "cant confirm nor deny". This applies to all branches. Yes they have nukes, they arent as good as ours. Yes they have "same gen" planes and tanks, arent as good as ours. But their training is the primary issue. Its so poor to the trained eye it almost appears they have no idea what they are dping. Because they DONT. china hasnt been in a hot war since the 50s, and that was with soviet tech. They have never fought a modern naval battle, they have never engaged with tanks, they have no experience with long range missiles or bombers, and thier recent ground war has been punching and kicking eachother in the face on the indian border. Even when china launched that brand new sub a few years ago they were so proud of and thought was a secret, we were in its baffles the moment it left the harbor learning everything about it. Its not that their equipment cant detect us, its that we are so much better trained and experienced with literal never ending wars since our coubtries conception that we run circles aroubd them. Its like if you give an F1 driver a volkswagon golf R, and some normal every day average joe a corvette ZR1. Around a racetrack the f1 driver in the slower car is going to thrash the inexperienced driver with the "superior" car. But in this instance the chinese equipment is less than, or equal too at best, with quality issues. So even if they surpass us technologically thats not the whole picture. But to answer your question, they wont surpass us with nuke boats, we have been doing that since the nautilis. They WILL surpass us with conventional diesel boats. Every country has already. A nuke boat cannot, and never will compete with a battery powered diesel sub if its 1 v 1 and they are in coastal waters. But diesels cant go open ocean or long distance without auxilery support. They are so quiet, that even if your 200 yards away the sonar array on my boat couldnt hear it, and to put that into perspective, we can hear surface ships OVER THE HORIZON, meaning 20, 30 miles or more depending on water temp, depth, conditions etc. So for the unanniciated that "victory" by the sweedes is not uncommon. Diesels could do that for decades. Nuke boats cant. But nuke boats are superior in EVERY other aspect, hense why we use them. We have diesels too for defense.
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2