Defense spending: Gates would permane...

Defense spending: Gates would permanently trim carrier fleet to 10

There are 133 comments on the Hampton Roads Daily Press story from Apr 6, 2009, titled Defense spending: Gates would permanently trim carrier fleet to 10. In it, Hampton Roads Daily Press reports that:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates wants to stop production of the F-22 Raptor that flies from Langley Air Force Base and decrease from 11 to 10 the number of active aircraft carriers by slowing production at Northrop Grumman Corp.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hampton Roads Daily Press.

Shkval torpedo

Yorktown, VA

#104 Apr 8, 2009
March 31, 2008 USS Oriscany
I Call BS wrote:
<quoted text>
When is the last time somebody sank a US carrier?
Shkval torpedo

Yorktown, VA

#105 Apr 8, 2009
1. Carriers are far from the fastest ships in the navy.
2. A bubble burst will tear the ship in half.
3. aircraft are launched from destroyers and submarines every day.
Smitty wrote:
<quoted text>
Hate to burst your bubble there, dude, but:
1. carriers are the fastest ships we have in the Navy (top speed is classified), and
2. the larger the ship, especially a combatant, the more compartmentalized it can be, thus reducing its likeliness to sink, and
3. you can't launch and recover planes from a destroyer

Since: Jul 08

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#106 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
March 31, 2008 USS Oriscany
<quoted text>
The USS Oriscany was sunk (purposely) in 2006. This is a common thing. When is the last time a US carrier was sunk by a foreing navy?

Since: Jul 08

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#107 Apr 8, 2009
sorry, foreign navy
Southern Rube

New York, NY

#108 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
March 31, 2008 USS Oriscany
<quoted text>
Perhaps I phrased my question improperly. When was the last time that a US carrier was sunk as the result of enemy combat operations.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#109 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
March 31, 2008 USS Oriscany
<quoted text>
I think he was referring to the last one sunk by enemy action. Not by strategically place explosives.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#110 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
1. Carriers are far from the fastest ships in the navy.
2. A bubble burst will tear the ship in half.
3. aircraft are launched from destroyers and submarines every day.
<quoted text>
1. What ship, not a "boat", is faster than a carrier? Please provide source and speed.

2. Only if the bubble is big enough to remove enough water to where the ship's keel cannot support its own weight. On a small ship, I will agree with you, having witnessed a sink-ex myself. But a carrier is simply too large and compartmentalized to be sunk by a single shot.

3. We are talking fighter aircraft here...not small UAV's or single helo's or VTOL's (vertical atkeoff & landing). Sheesh.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#111 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
March 31, 2008 USS Oriscany
<quoted text>
I believe it was the USS America that was purposely sunk by the US Navy in 2008...not the Oriskany.
Shkval torpedo

Hampton, VA

#112 Apr 8, 2009
That would be WWII. Munitions and shipbuilding have advanced considerably since. It's apples and oranges.

Tactical thinking needs to change. Large targets containing massed troops are easy pickings for modern munitions.

Tomorrow's wars will be fought with remotely piloted or autonomous devices that are launched in mass. These can carry nukes. Not big $500 million dollar aircraft - swarms of miniaturized disposable devices, each intent on reaching it's target.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#113 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
1. Carriers are far from the fastest ships in the navy.
2. A bubble burst will tear the ship in half.
3. aircraft are launched from destroyers and submarines every day.
<quoted text>
Also, a bubble burst does not "rip a ship in half". It blows the water out from under the hull and the ship's own weight breaks the ship in half, because now the ship's weight is only supported from under the bow and the stern. In other words, the ship's weight breaks its own back.
Shkval torpedo

Hampton, VA

#114 Apr 8, 2009
Quite so -- thanks
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe it was the USS America that was purposely sunk by the US Navy in 2008...not the Oriskany.
Capitalist

Virginia Beach, VA

#115 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo wrote:
That would be WWII. Munitions and shipbuilding have advanced considerably since. It's apples and oranges.
Tactical thinking needs to change. Large targets containing massed troops are easy pickings for modern munitions.
Tomorrow's wars will be fought with remotely piloted or autonomous devices that are launched in mass. These can carry nukes. Not big $500 million dollar aircraft - swarms of miniaturized disposable devices, each intent on reaching it's target.
I agree. The concept of an aircraft carrier seems outdated to me. I think the US can impose her will anywhere in the world via land bases.

And don't get me wrong - if I were CinC we'd be killing Arabs by the thousands, and once we killed all of them, we'd start at anyone else who felt a little surly...
Shkval torpedo

Hampton, VA

#116 Apr 8, 2009
1. Can't supply top speeds. Almost any current submarine can out run a carrier. Boats can be quite deadly as well, which is the way to go.
2. How about five hits, or ten? Mabye a nuke or two... subs will fire more than one torpedo.
3. Need to think beyond fighter aircraft. Think of swarms of miniature unpiloted and disposable devices, each intent on sinking your ship.

Miniature flying bombs, too small for radar, too fast to shoot down, each with its own artificial intelligence intgent on it's own destruction.
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
1. What ship, not a "boat", is faster than a carrier? Please provide source and speed.
2. Only if the bubble is big enough to remove enough water to where the ship's keel cannot support its own weight. On a small ship, I will agree with you, having witnessed a sink-ex myself. But a carrier is simply too large and compartmentalized to be sunk by a single shot.
3. We are talking fighter aircraft here...not small UAV's or single helo's or VTOL's (vertical atkeoff & landing). Sheesh.
Picking at straws

Hampton, VA

#117 Apr 8, 2009
Either way the ship ends up in two pieces. Both ends may float for awhile, but it's over anyway
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Also, a bubble burst does not "rip a ship in half". It blows the water out from under the hull and the ship's own weight breaks the ship in half, because now the ship's weight is only supported from under the bow and the stern. In other words, the ship's weight breaks its own back.
Metallurgist

New York, NY

#118 Apr 8, 2009
Picking at straws wrote:
Either way the ship ends up in two pieces. Both ends may float for awhile, but it's over anyway
<quoted text>
The only instance of which I am aware of a rash of ships breaking in half were the Liberty Ships of WW II, which turned out to be caused by improper steel alloy specification for North Atlantic ambient temperatures.
Be serious

Huntsville, AL

#119 Apr 8, 2009
Metallurgist wrote:
<quoted text>
The only instance of which I am aware of a rash of ships breaking in half were the Liberty Ships of WW II, which turned out to be caused by improper steel alloy specification for North Atlantic ambient temperatures.
My dad is a metallurgist, you guys crack me up! But, good stuff you can come up with!
Proud American

United States

#120 Apr 8, 2009
TidewaterLibertarian wrote:
How refreshing -- defense spending based on defense needs.
As opposed to what Nancy" Political Witch" Pelosi and Harry"I'm an Idiot" Read need for their freinds?
Bubble burst

Hampton, VA

#121 Apr 8, 2009
Shkval torpedo

Hampton, VA

#122 Apr 8, 2009
Dont forget about the concrete ships!
http://www.concreteships.org/ships/ww2/
Metallurgist wrote:
<quoted text>
The only instance of which I am aware of a rash of ships breaking in half were the Liberty Ships of WW II, which turned out to be caused by improper steel alloy specification for North Atlantic ambient temperatures.
little creek

Williamsburg, VA

#123 Apr 8, 2009
The Predator is not just a new tool or weapon or platform.

It's looking like a learning tool to decide a new way of obtaining intelligence, monitoring and targeting, delivering precision ordinance, spending time over a battlefield or zone, assessing damage and making immediate clean-up strikes, flooding the area with many unmanned - remote piloted - considerably cheaper, widespread available assets with no lose of life.
Just to name a few battle options. There are many more capabilities. How many thousands of these could be operational just for the cost of a battle groups food or fuel or 1 or 2 ships?

Maybe the future -
Maybe the military should give out free software for gamers and recruit online winners.
They wouldn't even have to be young boot camp material who wouldn't have considered the Military.
Heck - you could even work from home! LOL

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jim Webb Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Only 19 Months Until Election Day, And Over 19 ... (Apr '15) Mar '16 Three Days 79
News Jim Webb: 'I would not vote for' Clinton (Mar '16) Mar '16 Harry 21
News Today in History (Feb '16) Feb '16 Billy Ringo 2
News Obama smears Iran deal critics and liberals las... (Aug '15) Jan '16 Ritual Habitual 3
News Distinguished pols of 2015 (Jan '16) Jan '16 Black Annie 4
News Chafee quits 2016 presidential race (Oct '15) Oct '15 Le Jimbo 5
News Jim Webb Abandons Bid For Democratic Party... (Oct '15) Oct '15 Cat74 8
More from around the web