USN Proceedings and FP Magazines on CV Invincibility

[armada1651]

It is the second article that got my head scratching a bit, in no way does artillery or UAV's replace current manned aircraft and to claim so is shockingly ignorant. Any experience in a combined exercise or current ops would have taught him that. Surprised that one got past the editors.

Well, he claims that "M777 and M142 HIMARS have maximum effective ranges out to 40,000 kilometers and 70,000 kilometers, respectively." If those aren't just typos and he actually thinks we can shoot artillery/rockets distances greater than the circumference of the planet with 10m accuracy, that would explain his bizarre overconfidence in those systems' capabilities.

He also claims that MQ-9 can carry up to 2000lb bombs. If I'm not mistaken, they don't carry anything heavier than 500lbs.

You can't expect great military theory out of someone who is completely out of touch with the basic facts.

 

[Jim123]

... ranges out to 40,000 kilometers and 70,000 kilometers, respectively." If those aren't just typos

Shoot the bad guys in the back- they'll never see it coming! (They'll hear the shot report about five minutes prior to impact, however...)

He also claims that MQ-9 can carry up to 2000lb bombs. If I'm not mistaken, they don't carry anything heavier than 500lbs.

Duct tape, man. It's got enough 500lb hardpoints to make 2,000.

You're not thinking transformationally.

 

[Randy Daytona]

Well, he claims that "M777 and M142 HIMARS have maximum effective ranges out to 40,000 kilometers and 70,000 kilometers, respectively." If those aren't just typos and he actually thinks we can shoot artillery/rockets distances greater than the circumference of the planet with 10m accuracy, that would explain his bizarre overconfidence in those systems' capabilities.

He also claims that MQ-9 can carry up to 2000lb bombs. If I'm not mistaken, they don't carry anything heavier than 500lbs.

You can't expect great military theory out of someone who is completely out of touch with the basic facts.

For the howitzer and rocket artillery, we should cut him so slack - that is obviously a typo by him (or possibly an editor.) Nobody has a cannon that can shoot that far - although Gerald Bull might have been able to do it if he had not been assassinated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon

 

[Spekkio]

Wait... there are people who have read past his 2nd paragraph?

 

[Flash]

...CDR S has a decent analysis and his overarching point that we should plan to loose CVs against a peer competitor is valid. At some point we as a country do buy warships to send them into battle with the knowledge that not all of them are going to come back home. And even more so during the "opening salvos" of a major war against a peer....

One of the things I do agree wholeheartedly with the first author is there would be considerable shock to the Navy and the century if a carrier was sunk. We should look at it like professionals like CDR S suggests but I doubt a war with a near-peer would last long nowadays and the political shock of losing a carrier may shorten it even more.