I have always wondered…since the probability of any of these things being deployed is close to nil, what happens with all this toxic/explosive material when it becomes obsolete or past its best-use-by-date? Sell to 3rd world countries and make them lords over their neighbours??
Yeah, your right. The Chinese could just as easily be lying. They cheat on the CFA.
I’ll sleep better though knowing that we have undeniable air superiority, tech, and stealth capabilities (that have nothing to do with Nimitz class aircraft carriers or the crotch rocket jets on them) with air bases and logistics chains spread across the globe.
Oh…AF threads. Somebody post a pic of an HCB to complete the circle.
Nah, that’s what the Middle East is for. Plenty of nice deserts to blow up your extra ordinance. Rinse and repeat.
Like we needed 100 tomahawks to blow up 20 targets in Libya.
Is not. (Then you say is too.)
Drones are launched and recovered using extremely secure links (trust me I know what I am talking about here.) They cannot be hacked into while doing launch or recovery using LRE links. So “having them take off, make a quick circle and completely decimate their own militaries and nations. … A single defector can cause scaled damage on a level not possible before.” - this scenario is impossible (if I wanted to hedge, extremely unlikely.) Not to mention the AVO (“pilot” sitting at the GCS controlling the UAV) will be shot instantly, but I will concede that that’s not an obstacle to a deeply embedded guy on a suicide mission. [**]
MCE links (mission control i.e. when they are cruising), can be easier[*] to hack into because they go over satellites. By the same token, we have plenty of chances to destroy our own drone, should that happen.
[*] Easier, not easy. The encyrption algorithms are quite strong. There are other precautions as well.
[**] An easier way to gain control of the drone (of course not on an aircraft carrier) would be to attack the GCS (ground control station) where the LRE operators including the pilot sit. But they are well protected. MCE guys are typically far removed from the drone and cannot be attacked.
Yeah, you’re focusing far too tightly on one part of the scenario and kind of reinforcing my point on how the military will view risk vs the private sector (compartmentalizing). I actually meant circling around (as in after take off, which you admited is possible - nothing in war is ‘easy’), but viewed the difference as sort of a moot point. In other words, if you don’t split hairs about before or just after take off, the situation still stands. And regarding a defector, I more or less meant someone with the access to encryption keys and access technology. Not one guy piloting the drone at take off.
Where is this superspy located?
The reason for hairsplitting about takeoff vs not takeoff, is that the UAV uses two different types of links. And once it gets “close enough” to the recovery site (i.e. the aircraft carrier), it is expected to use the super-secure LRE (takeoff/landing) link. Your response seems to say that this superspy is controlling the UAV using the other (satellite = MCE) link. In that case, the guys on the carrier will know something is wrong and take steps to protect themselves and/or override the MCE link with the stronger LRE link.
“someone with the access to encryption keys and access technology” - easier said than done. Without going into details, you’d pretty much have to be a well-cleared member of the US military to get either of those.
About “quickly turn around” - today’s UAVs are as graceful as a hippo on land. Let’s say they got as good as F-22s and F-35s. Even then, they would not be able to outrun a missile launched at them from a carrier group a few nautical miles away.
So anything is possible, but the expected value of your outcome is very low.
What is the best way to fight against a hypothetical invasion from hostile aliens and is any government prepared for to lead the resistance on behalf of humanity?
Independence Day.
Ha. I don’t know if ct is serious, but his ability to get swans panties all bunched up on this topic is comical.
Well played gentlemen. This thread took a turn from unusual to hilarious.
I’m dead seriously. Air craft carriers and the planes stored on them are toys for admirals with big budgets. Slash those budgets O B won Obama, it’s our militarys only hope.
Join the dark side. more drones, more stealth. You know? Stuff actually useful at killing bad guys.
That stuff is all good too. You’re right from one perspective. Carriers don’t help all that much against terrorist cells and dudes in caves in the Afgan countryside. But, they are remarkably effective at keeping China from leveling Taiwan, and oil flowing through the gulf.
Edit: All the stealth bombers are based right outside of KC. They fly over Royals and Chiefs games all the time. Incredible to think those guys are going from KC to Iraq and back. That’s a long flight.
How much do these things cost to operate anyway? For a few billion a year if it helps keep the commies and towelheads in check I am fine, but if it takes 20-30B/yr per carrier then we might have to rethink the strategy…
Also what happened to the floating cities idea that was in the works where you would have these platforms that would come together like a jigsaw puzzle and make a mini city in the sea, which you can use to operate out of.
I don’t think the stealth bombers fly to Iraq. There is no need for stealth bombers there. I doubt they’ve ever actually been used in combat.
Carriers can get even more important in the next century as they can be platforms for drones, they are even developing drones that can take off and land autonomously on carriers. When it comes to projecting naval power against states, there is no comparison to a carrier battle group. Look for emerging nations like Russia, India, and Turkey to really beef this up.
I think Russia already learned its lesson. Last I heard was that their nuclear subs were sinking in Siberian ports since they couldn’t afford the maintainenance costs…
Turkey is like Israel without the unconditional US support. They aren’t going anywhere
India is still bragging about decommissioned war planes that it bought from Russia and US.
Carriers are less expensive than you’d think.
The issue is the logistics to support them (scale of navy, training, etc are difficult to develop). Anyhow in direct costs (PER CARRIER), it’s roughly $400MM per year in salaries, aircraft parts and maintenance and about $5-8 billion to build each one (not including planes) with a 50 year service life. It’s been said that if you amortize build and maintainance costs across average # of launches, it’s like $80k per launch to have that capability.
If we assume an average aircraft on a carrier is $60M and there are about 60 aircraft, then the value of the air wing is about $3.6B.
They’ve used those stealth bombers in pretty much every major conflict in the opening stages, and yes, they do fly them from the US. The F-117’s are typically used over the B2’s because they can spread out and hit a wider array of targets, and they put much less value at risk than the B2’s. If you watch an event like Libya unfold on the news next time, watch closely. It’s a pretty well scripted process as I outlined before.
-
Cruise missiles to hit key nodes
-
Stealth bombers to widen the cracks
-
Full carrier based air strikes to clear everything out.
The last you heard was ten years ago. Putin’s russia is not Yeltsin’s russia of 98. Turkey is a rapidly growing economy with a large educated group of people and will be primed for a lot of growth in the future, they will be going “somewhere”. I don’t know which “decomissioned warplane” India is bragging about. India is building an aircraft carrier though and should be in comission by the end of the decade.
He was referring to the B-2. You’re right though, I didn’t realize they had been used in Operation EF.
America has iron man