It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Military News/Veterans => Topic started by: patentlymn on January 17, 2025, 01:51:04 PM
-
I always assumed it was the best in the world but now wonder if we get what we pay for.
US can project power better than anyone else.We have lots of aircraft carriers and aircraft for them. Also cargo planes and aerial tankers. We have tanks but not sure how they compare. We have lots of new F-35 fighters.
I was impressed but that is in the Gulf wars many years ago.
Now US carriers have to maintain distance even from the Houthis. In any battle near China they are said to have an expected lifetime under one hour. They do not have to be sunk just have the deck cratered.
Russia has a small number of new fighters mostly prototypes and not sure how good they are.
I got fed a video on the new Russian ballistic missile subs with new missiles. US subs are old but still work I hope.
Russia has some nuclear powered cruise missile. It does not spew radiation from what I understand. They have that new hyper-sonic missile just demonstrated in Ukraine operating as a kinetic energy MIRV warhead delivery vehicle. They have a huge missile "SATAN" that can attack the US from around the south pole. Their EW systems and ground to air missiles are very good.
That is a lot of weapons development for a country said to have the GDP of Italy. Where are such US weapons? Also weapons like aircraft carriers and tanks may be obsolete.
-
Other than a nuke it's boots on the ground that will determine the outcome
-
Dude, nobody has an old fleet like Russia...they're the oldest... We have new classes of carriers, destroyers & subs rolling out every year...the new Columbia class boomers are coming out with first 3 in production...
Yeah they have advantage right now in hyper-sonic but they are behind us in energy weapons, rail guns...they and China are still far behind in stealth despite what they might want to project....
And both China & Russia navies choose volume over quality...same for aircraft...
And no the carriers are not afraid of the Houthis, the fleet protection system is designed for open waters not choke points...
Our tanks etc keep getting upgrades, Abrams just had one and like other platforms we keep the full meal deal in our hands only...
And we dwarf anybody else's R&D, not everything gets to production stage as there is a lot of competition for funding...
We have more logistical support than anybody in air and sea and we could use more...
Keep nukes off the table...it gets to that point all life on Earth is forfeit...
I don't know what you read but ya gotta sh*t-can it. Are we perfect? No, nobody is, but we are not as bad off as people think.
Fortunately our chief problem is a lot easier and quicker to solve than waiting on something to roll off the assembly line - our un-warrior-like woke Obamafied/Bidenfied leadership and the stupid socialist social-engineering BS that comes with them.
Job #1 is cashiering the rot and getting back to meritocracy and ass-kicking!
In the meantime play with this...
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php (https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php)
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-states-of-america&country2=russia (https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-states-of-america&country2=russia)
https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-states-of-america&country2=china (https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-states-of-america&country2=china)
One can...and you should spend hours pouring over this stuff. And don't get bogged down in the margins...like we all know China has a sh*tload of souls to waste...doesn't mean that matters in modern warfare...
Enjoy!
-
Other than a nuke it's boots on the ground that will determine the outcome
And how they are trained, equipped, supported and led...
-
I never thought that USSR or Russia had a blue water navy.
Under Stalin calling for a blue water navy got you to siberia or a bullet in the head because it meant you were a trotskyite.
In Ukraine tanks are taken out with drones.
Lots of US retired military say that in every war game against China we lose quick and carriers are taken out early.
I assume the F-35s are good because everyone is buying them. I hope.
I posted here earlier that javelins suck. That according to US results from Ft. Benning.
Then Ukr said they sucked and were not wanted.
A few months ago Ukr figured out how to make them work.
I saw a video.
They put the javelin warhead on a drone and threw the rest away.
-
First, not aware of any Benning test, got a link?
Second, there are at least 8 variants, not sure which ones we are talking about.
Third, it is a tertiary anti-tank weapon behind attack aircraft and tanks and anti-tank artillery.
Fourth, why is Ukraine saying they suck when the Pentagon says they hit targets 100/112 attempts?
Fifth, Rus did get their hands on one through Taliban or Syrian clown or somebody in return for a sh*tload of crap that goes bang...so perhaps they can upgrade armor to mitigate...IIRC some Rus vehicles had a lot of dangling plates jury-rigged on them...but what stops a Javelin won't stop a 120mm depleted uranium armor-piercing round. (The XM1202 will replace the Abrams M1A2)
Sixth, I seriously doubt the provenance of a video putting a Javelin warhead on a Rus-operated drone, but even if true...so what?
As for the carriers...
If they are so awful, why does China have 3 with one in production? Why does Russia have 1 and 4 decommissioned at sitting around?
Also, being capital ships...they are in a special class all by themselves... Carriers, Amphib carriers (fixed or rotor), ballistic missile subs (boomer's)...any nation wounding let alone sinking one...triggers a guaranteed escalation.
Besides, nobody but us can operate them properly and in an integrated manner with screening vessels...I would rate the Chinese and Russians near the bottom of the list behind the UK, India...heck even the cheese-eating surrender-monkeys!
And, tactically, I think Chi-Com's are ignorant of how we would use them...in a hypothetical Taiwan invasion scenario by the red devils...they are not going to parked within easy reach of their land-based aircraft or missiles or surface fleet. If Russia joins the fray with hypersonics...well escalation goes way up. And forget subs, any deployment has them around, always...on a war footing there's be several hunting adversaries...they could not take a carrier down easily or without taking serious risks and getting harshly spanked with more spankings coming.
-
The Ft Benning paper was about some exercise involving already trained soldiers. It said they hit the target 3 of 8 times. That was not where the other side was shooting at them. After reading that paper I paid more attention.
I recall the Ukr troops complaining that the javelins were expired. Not sure if it was the batteries or the explosives had degraded.
I also read that the RU found phones where the Ukr had been searching on how to use them and ask why they were overheating. Also I read that they did not have manuals in Russian or Ukr for them.
I also read that the Ukr brass said they did not want javelins so the US sent 100.
So the Chinese need rocket ranges from land longer than below?
F-35A (Conventional Takeoff and Landing - CTOL):
Combat Radius: ~590 nautical miles (1,093 km) on internal fuel during a high-subsonic profile.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~1,500 nautical miles (2,800 km) with external fuel tanks, depending on the configuration.
F-35B (Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing - STOVL):
Combat Radius: ~505 nautical miles (935 km) on internal fuel.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~900 nautical miles (1,670 km), as it has less internal fuel capacity compared to the F-35A
F-35C (Carrier-Based Variant - CATOBAR):
Combat Radius: ~615 nautical miles (1,139 km) on internal fuel.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km).
.
-
The Ft Benning paper was about some exercise involving already trained soldiers. It said they hit the target 3 of 8 times. That was not where the other side was shooting at them. After reading that paper I paid more attention.
I recall the Ukr troops complaining that the javelins were expired. Not sure if it was the batteries or the explosives had degraded.
I also read that the RU found phones where the Ukr had been searching on how to use them and ask why they were overheating. Also I read that they did not have manuals in Russian or Ukr for them.
I also read that the Ukr brass said they did not want javelins so the US sent 100.
So the Chinese need rocket ranges from land longer than below?
F-35A (Conventional Takeoff and Landing - CTOL):
Combat Radius: ~590 nautical miles (1,093 km) on internal fuel during a high-subsonic profile.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~1,500 nautical miles (2,800 km) with external fuel tanks, depending on the configuration.
F-35B (Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing - STOVL):
Combat Radius: ~505 nautical miles (935 km) on internal fuel.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~900 nautical miles (1,670 km), as it has less internal fuel capacity compared to the F-35A
F-35C (Carrier-Based Variant - CATOBAR):
Combat Radius: ~615 nautical miles (1,139 km) on internal fuel.
Maximum Ferry Range: ~1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km).
.
Well, saying isn't proof.
As for ranges...it's just not air range...it ship range...and penetrating the task force defenses...