Final Voyage for USS Enterprise

[vshah]

Still curious about a Red Storm Rising (Clancy) scenario where hundreds of anti ship missiles were launch against a carrier battle group to see if Aegis/Phalanx (are these still the current defense systems or is there something newer yet?) would be able to handle it.

if it was actually hundreds then it's quite possible some would get through. But the logistics required to get 100s of missiles in place would be difficult, especially with a carrier group breathing down your neck.

 

[jagec]

This calls for the Picard song.

 

[MotionMan]

Ryback is not amused.




Oh, wait, that was the USS Missouri.

Never mind.

MotionMan

 

[BladeVenom]

That's why the US Navy could wipe out any other navy in the world in a blink. As we learned in WWII, it's all about the air power. Russia and China would at least pose a challenge, but the outcome wouldn't be in doubt.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

That's why the US Navy could wipe out any other navy in the world in a blink. As we learned in WWII, it's all about the air power. Russia and China would at least pose a challenge, but the outcome wouldn't be in doubt.

i strongly disagree - the balance had shifted to the attacker long, long ago, and huge capital ships might as well sink themselves for all the good they'll do against a competent enemy. in any large naval battle today, losses would be massive and swift. post-ww2, the carrier's sole purpose is to push around countries with no carriers.

 

[irishScott]

Still curious about a Red Storm Rising (Clancy) scenario where hundreds of anti ship missiles were launch against a carrier battle group to see if Aegis/Phalanx (are these still the current defense systems or is there something newer yet?) would be able to handle it.

Well first you need to amass hundreds of anti-ship missiles and get them all into range of a carrier battle group without being detected. Good luck.

 

[Bacstar]

Is there even such a thing as a competent enemy to pit against the US Military?

Russia back in its hay day of the USSR, were more sheer numbers they can throw at the US vs technical superiority which eventually bankrupted the country and led to their demise. China is trying to get there but I remember reading somewhere they're still a decade or more before the USA needs to worry...

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Is there even such a thing as a competent enemy to pit against the US Military?

Russia back in its hay day of the USSR, were more sheer numbers they can throw at the US vs technical superiority which eventually bankrupted the country and led to their demise. China is trying to get there but I remember reading somewhere they're still a decade or more before the USA needs to worry...

of course there is. you're thinking a war against someone that can fight back (and there are those still left) would go on for years, but it would be all over in a day or 2.

like i said, the balance of power is firmly on the attacker's side. there is so much firepower widely available that there is very little that can be done against an attack in progress, from anyone. a single cruise missile hit would cripple a carrier, and the resulting fire might just finish it off. a single torpedo would break it in half. i'm speaking of conventional weapons, but it's safe to assume a military that intends on killing US carriers would make use of nuclear weapons as well.

do the math - it takes a single weapon to eliminate a carrier, compared to a fleet of ships, worldwide network of bases and a constellation of satellites to defend it.

 

[marvdmartian]

It's about 100 feet longer, but more narrow. Had a higher top speed than the Nimitz class. 8 smaller reactors vs 2 larger reactors, but didn't run all reactors at once. Hull was more curved as well, so not quite as stable as the Nimitz(would start rocking in rough waters, and had to chain down the aircraft).

I was on the Big E in 1996, during the last cruise of the A-6 Intruder.

More like 30 feet longer (than the Nimitz, the current class of carriers), narrower at the waterline (but not the flight deck), but lighter displacement (by ~7000 tons, or roughly the displacement of the old destroyer escorts/fast frigates).
Enterprise
Nimitz

The original bow was replaced, shortly after she entered the fleet, because it had a tendency to deform at speed.....that's right, she could go fast enough to start deforming steel, and they were afraid she'd suffer permanent damage!
She was one of 3 carriers used to film Top Gun, and I believe that all the flight deck footage was done on board the Enterprise (I was on leave during that at-sea period, in fact).

Not sure where you worked, but down on the 2nd deck (and below), we didn't ever feel much rocking, even when in the rough waters of the Northern Pacific, with 30 foot swells going on. So far as I know, it's standard practice to chock & chain aircraft which aren't going to be in use.

Oh, and we could go fast enough, and conduct flight ops, on 5 or 6 reactors, we normally ran all 8, for redundancy. Trust me, commanding officers do NOT like to hear that they're not going to have all of their reactors churning and burning!

I was a 3-plant reactor mechanic, from 82 to 87.