Russians New Hypersonic Missile -- so much for USNAVY

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Court Jester, Apr 3, 2017.

  1. Court Jester

    Court Jester Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Gold Coast QLD
    Fantastic news there should be more like it, again 1 misle is a lot cheaper than an aircraft carrier. So much for US's NAval superiorty that OldFool constantly crows on about.

    http://www.news.com.au/technology/i...h/news-story/26dc91bb90924b76dccdb1e445d6e332

     
  2. Skyrocket

    Skyrocket Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2014
    Messages:
    5,571
    Likes Received:
    543
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Melbourne
    U.S. aircraft carriers are only meant for terrorizing, intimidating and attacking 2nd and 3rd world nations. To Russia and most 1st world nations they are big slow sitting ducks.
     
  3. Ipv6Ready

    Ipv6Ready Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    North Sydney
    Court Jester,

    The moment, any of these nations France, UK, USA, Israel, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and North Korea, declare war and there is a large build up of forces, it will go nuclear.

    Do you think that if US was amassing an invasion force against Russia, and are at their door steps in Nato country that Russia wont drop the bomb?

    Do you think that if Russia was amassing an invasion force against USA, and are at their door steps in Alaska that USA wont drop the bomb?

    Do you think that if US, Korea and Japan was a massing an invading force to North Korea, that North Korea wont drop a nuclear bomb into South Korea?

    Do you think if US fleet and marines landed in South China Seas, that China wont drop a nuclear bomb on them?

    The only nuclear armed countries in a direct conflict maybe not going Nuclear is Pakistan and India, since they look at it like a 50 year sports.
     
    Holdfast likes this.
  4. Court Jester

    Court Jester Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Gold Coast QLD
    notnescessarly,

    the USA / Russians / Chinese are all nuclear armed and have fought proxy wars previously without any use of Nuclear weapons being used.( think Korean, Vietnam wars and more recently in Syria)

    and as you said there HAVE been instances where nuclear powers have directly gone to war and nukes were not used.
     
  5. Currawong

    Currawong Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Honestly, why spend billions on maintaining and developing carriers anymore when ASMs are getting so good. Aircraft carriers are the literal embodiment of the proverbial pissing contest and as missile systems get better and better we'll see the death of them soon enough.
    Just like we did the dreadnought.
     
  6. Ipv6Ready

    Ipv6Ready Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    North Sydney
    True once Russia sell these to Syrians, Chinese, Libyans and other tinpot dictators, USNavy better stay 400km from land.

    On further reflection Americans only used AC against weak opponents, so I guess it wouldn't matter. Against Iraq surrounded by destroyers and frigates, US navy could have had converted merchant ships as air strip and a passenger cruise ship for soldiers lashed together.

    Interesting the last naval battle that had big warships at risk was Falklands and it showed how warships can be destroyed by relatively cheap $50,000 missile.
     
  7. phrenzy

    phrenzy In Memoriam - July 2017 Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,550
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    R.I.P
    First BRAHMOS and the DF-21d already exist, more hypersonics coming too...But, the AEGIS sm-3 has demonstrated anti sat capability (operation burned Frost?) That would have a fraction of the IR signature of an air breathing RAM or SCRAM jet so tracking is easier and they are very very close to moving to directed energy with similar tracking speed isn't an issue. Further something big enough to take down a super carrier is going to be seen far enough away to be taken out before it drops it's load.

    The US has been dealing with this car and mouse game since the Tu-95 became a cruise missile carrier in the 60s.

    Carrier groups are outdated in a modern war, but the wars they will be faught in the next 50 years they'll do just fine. Even if a country has some rq-180 will find it and whatever platform will carry it and the B-21 will take it out day 1.
     
  8. Holdfast

    Holdfast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Australia
    Many of you guys forget that Carrier Groups are supported by under water stealth, Air Stealth, Land stealth and Low orbit space stealth (Forget the crap and stuff you think you know about) and like I've said in an earlier post, "AIR" no one, not the Russians, Chinese NK will know what and where the new "system" came from. Some will call it Alien technology; why do you think Trump is so cocky?
     
  9. goldpelican

    goldpelican Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    17,892
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Court Jester, your use of the Current Affairs forum for US bashing is growing very thin - particularly given this forum is hosted out of the US and my personal family connections. Your avatar has also just earned you a 7 day ban.
     
    Shaddam IV likes this.

Share This Page