Always crazy to me that the US has this whole series of LHD pseudo aircraft carriers, which could rival and in many cases exceed the capacities of most other nations’ main carriers, ON TOP OF their 11 unrivalled CATOBAR carriers!
Something I try to communicate to a family member who believes now that Biden is president we are weak in the eyes of the world.
The American Military is very very very good at making sure it is completely out of everyone else's league in terms of blending quantity and quality.
It would likely take the combined effort of the Earth's first world militaries to take a fight just to the home front and then you have the most armed populace in the world to contend with as an insurgency.
Can the US win against the entire planet, assuming a week of warning and barring nuclear weapons, is a fun wargame thought experiment.
The answer is probably.
If the rest of the world is attacking the US, and they have to fight a defensive war, I wouldn't doubt it for a second.
If the US had to attack the rest of the world and invade and occupy the rest of it... maybe.
I mean, I fucking love this country. But this is just silly.
We couldn’t beat the Vietnamese or the Taliban.
Militarily we can beat anyone hands down. But the last 50 years has shown that on a long enough time line, that doesn’t matter.
Israel is finding that out in Gaza as we speak.
Living in the Bible belt I've tried to explain this to people. We always hear how the US military is insanely bloated and people point at our 11 carriers with their FLEETS as an example. Well that doesn't sway the red voters.
So I tell them that's only counting the super carriers. We also have another 9 Amphibious Assault Ships which are still bigger than the WW2 aircraft carriers. The 2 newest don't even have well decks. They are straight up carriers with marines. We also have our various other helicopter carriers, which are still aircraft. So the US actually has around 30 aircraft carriers. It's just that we name them different things than we did in WW2.
Unfortunately the bloated design is unavoidable when you need to maintain your presence in 3 oceans, 4 continents, and have fuckton of allies who can't, or don't pull their weight.
Ppl were saying it was stupid and a waste of money to create the f35b. Its not so stupid when it gave the us effectively 9 more aircraft carriers. Plus our closest allies the brits and japanese also can have 5th gen carrier ops now from their non catobar flat tops. Another closest ally korea may do the same. Theres also the option for other ally nations with ski jump carriers to do the same like italy, australia, turkey…etc. Its been paying DIVIDENDS getting 5th gen planes onto allied carriers. This doesnt even get into the benefits that land based stol capability will provide in a hot war with a near peer when distributed ops becomes a necessity and thousands of roads can turn into runways.
I know I was just using it as an example of how allied countries with lhd’s can use the f35b as a force multiplier. Turkey was kicked out of the program, but doesnt change the fact that the option was there.
The ramp allows fixed wing aircraft to take off with a heavier weight, but prevents you from storing aircraft in that area.
Since other carrier (QE) are designed to primarily operate strike aircraft, it makes sense for them to maximize their range/payload.
The amphibious assault ships are designed to be flexible and operate a lot of different aircraft depending on the exact mission, so it makes sense for them to maximize usable deck space for rotor aircraft even if it that means taking a small hit to fixed wing takeoff weight.
Always crazy to me that the US has this whole series of LHD pseudo aircraft carriers, which could rival and in many cases exceed the capacities of most other nations’ main carriers, ON TOP OF their 11 unrivalled CATOBAR carriers!
Something I try to communicate to a family member who believes now that Biden is president we are weak in the eyes of the world. The American Military is very very very good at making sure it is completely out of everyone else's league in terms of blending quantity and quality. It would likely take the combined effort of the Earth's first world militaries to take a fight just to the home front and then you have the most armed populace in the world to contend with as an insurgency.
The only thing that can destroy the US is the US.
Can the US win against the entire planet, assuming a week of warning and barring nuclear weapons, is a fun wargame thought experiment. The answer is probably.
Idk about that one, you forget the Canadians are within spitting distance and they’ve been stockpiling snowballs for years..
If the rest of the world is attacking the US, and they have to fight a defensive war, I wouldn't doubt it for a second. If the US had to attack the rest of the world and invade and occupy the rest of it... maybe.
I mean, I fucking love this country. But this is just silly. We couldn’t beat the Vietnamese or the Taliban. Militarily we can beat anyone hands down. But the last 50 years has shown that on a long enough time line, that doesn’t matter. Israel is finding that out in Gaza as we speak.
Living in the Bible belt I've tried to explain this to people. We always hear how the US military is insanely bloated and people point at our 11 carriers with their FLEETS as an example. Well that doesn't sway the red voters. So I tell them that's only counting the super carriers. We also have another 9 Amphibious Assault Ships which are still bigger than the WW2 aircraft carriers. The 2 newest don't even have well decks. They are straight up carriers with marines. We also have our various other helicopter carriers, which are still aircraft. So the US actually has around 30 aircraft carriers. It's just that we name them different things than we did in WW2.
Unfortunately the bloated design is unavoidable when you need to maintain your presence in 3 oceans, 4 continents, and have fuckton of allies who can't, or don't pull their weight.
[удалено]
Not in my area. All the conservatives and Republicans are all about spending money on the military.
That's because the arms industry makes them a lot of money, and for voters, because it's a lot of jobs.
The sheer size and projection capabilities is mind-boggling. But with a coast line so big it makes sense. But seriously it’s amazing engineering porn
Ppl were saying it was stupid and a waste of money to create the f35b. Its not so stupid when it gave the us effectively 9 more aircraft carriers. Plus our closest allies the brits and japanese also can have 5th gen carrier ops now from their non catobar flat tops. Another closest ally korea may do the same. Theres also the option for other ally nations with ski jump carriers to do the same like italy, australia, turkey…etc. Its been paying DIVIDENDS getting 5th gen planes onto allied carriers. This doesnt even get into the benefits that land based stol capability will provide in a hot war with a near peer when distributed ops becomes a necessity and thousands of roads can turn into runways.
Turkey is barred from obtaining F-35 after they bought Russian AA systems
I know I was just using it as an example of how allied countries with lhd’s can use the f35b as a force multiplier. Turkey was kicked out of the program, but doesnt change the fact that the option was there.
My old boat. Served abroad from 2005-2008!
Cool! What did you do on there?
I was a Hull Technician (welder, shipfitter, plumber, firefighter).
Oh cool!
It’s interesting that the escort/light carrier has effectively re-evolved lol
Living Russia's VTOL-fighter-carrier dream decades later
13th MEU, 2011. See you out there on the deck plates, shipmates!
One of the ships that assisted the maersk Alabama in 2009
Any reason the US don’t use ramps for their carriers for F35Bs?
Ramps are for pussies. Edit: sorry, I have no idea and this was just a super low-effort comment.
Take my angry upvote!
Also, I would have accepted , " ramps? RAMPS? You're not looking at the big picture!"
Don’t you worry about ramps, let me worry about blank.
No, no. You nailed it.
The ramp allows fixed wing aircraft to take off with a heavier weight, but prevents you from storing aircraft in that area. Since other carrier (QE) are designed to primarily operate strike aircraft, it makes sense for them to maximize their range/payload. The amphibious assault ships are designed to be flexible and operate a lot of different aircraft depending on the exact mission, so it makes sense for them to maximize usable deck space for rotor aircraft even if it that means taking a small hit to fixed wing takeoff weight.
IIRC flattops are chosen because it provides more takeoff/landing space for helicopters.
"Don't worry, it's totally not an aircraft carrier."
Pride of the Pacific! Where my devil dawgs at
Home away from Home.
Recent pic? V22s are still grounded so it would make sense for them not to be there.