Originally Posted By: Astro14
Well..Al..let's see...Tomahawks ARE cruise missiles and are carried by the cruisers and destroyers in a USN strike group. So, they're with the carrier. The USN has already bought stealth aircraft in the form of the F-35.
You don't need a 14 billioin dollar platform to launch a cruise. Currently there are no stealth aircraft on carriers.
Quote:
On the subject of strike planning in general and O-plans in particular, I could write a book, but it would still be very, very classified. I really won't comment further.
lol..
Quote:
Of the two of us, one has planned actual combat missions, and flown them from the deck of a carrier in a fighter.
One has not.
Hopefully they don't send you in to take out aircraft defenses. Well maybe back in the day they did.
Quote:
The carrier that China built, with its current Sukhoi and MiG aircraft, is more capable than the entire air forces of most of the World's countries. THAT is what matters when executing "presence" missions. The ability to strike, to project power.
This carrier is better than those of all, ALL, of the World's Navies.
Of course..bc of the aircraft it carries. BTW there is serious consideration to buildiong smaller carriers.
Quote:
Not one country in the world has ever responded to being shown a picture of a B-2 in Whiteman AFB. Powerful, but irrelevant and distant. However, dozens of countries, on hundreds of occasions, in the last few decades alone, have responded to the presence of a carrier off their coast.
Well they can't respond to Fast attacks bc they don't know where there the are..How can NK complain about a fast attack(s) when they don't know where they are. They can only respond to visible threats. Put a dozen
VISIBLEcruisers and guided missle destroyers off their cost and see if they respond. Ships and missles and can be out of harm's way (unkike a carrier) ..B52comes to mind.
Quote:
If stealth bombers thousands of miles away enabled presence operations, then the Chinese would be building those, too. But B-2s are an incredibly expensive way to deliver ordnance. Short of delivering ordnance, they have little influence. They're good for high-end conflict against a peer adversary...but they aren't useful across the spectrum of military operations, particularly on the non-kinetic, low end of the scale, where presence and influence exist. Where carriers excel.
I am not a huge stealth of stealth. But we have them. Again..cruise missles (launched from anything) can do the same job as stealth. BTW..we have 4 Ohio Class boomers that carry 154 cruise missles each. That's (again and again) what you will see first when we attack NK. I don't need to have taken off of a carrier to know that.
BTW what was the weapon of choice in syria?? And yea they were lauched by lowly Destroyers..out of harms way.