history

[desert agate]

PANG meanwhile, in both layout and capabilities, will be far closer to a fleet combatant unit, with a high surge capacity

[strong plank]

afaik the Fords are set to serve for 70 years like the Nimitz class

[remote monolith]

Yo holy shit, a new bonebed in DC

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/07/12/dinosaur-bone-bed-maryland/

This is pretty major for paleontology

Considering eastern states is so denuded of good fossil beds

[manic latch]

Ah yes

Nimitz in 1953

Stalin likely had a stroke after seeing America build that already

[strong plank]

50 years starting in the 70s

got that confused

[manic latch]

Yeah 50 is better

Its the age of nuclear reactor usually

[tribal mortar]

Hoi4 research be like

[chilly osprey]

I mean, tbh, QE was also sort of designed to be blowing up technicals in the middle east more so than it was fighting a peer.

If you really want to compare the two, CdG is the one currently capable of putting up an AWACS, and has strike aircraft capable of using stand off land attack cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles.

On the other hand QE is currently not exactly in a great space, since Crowsnest is, uh, not brilliant in practice and eats into the ASW Helo fleet in a manner that is frankly unsustainable (and is a major driver behind them wanting to move to an alternative AEW platform) and is also really only a raid warning system rather than a real AWACS.

And at the moment with planned procurement strike options off of the QE boil down to 'Paveway IV, except when the Americans are aboard and bring something more interesting'.

Spear 3 will be a thing in the future, but, compare that to SCALP and AM39 Block 2 Mod 2 and it's not the most compelling argument for any reason other than 'it's an F-35 delivering it'

CdG is frankly much better suited to conducting operations against a serious opponent, even if she has to struggle with the limits inherent to her size.

[chilly osprey]

And frankly, both carriers are rated for a relatively similar sortie rates. The metrics can be kind of tricky, though, because many of the figures you will see for QE's sortie rate assume there are three squadrons of F-35B's aboard (i.e. 36 strike aircraft in addition to her helicopter compliment.

Cut this down to the more typical 24 F-35B + ~12 helo's she's likely to see in service (once enough F-35B have been delivered), and the numbers become generally more tame.

Likewise the same has to go for CdG. Even with her theoretical capacity to take 2-2.5 strike squadrons (24-30 aircraft), in practice her strike aircraft allocations tended to bounce between 18-22 when she was operating a mix of Super Éntendard's and Rafale M, and since she's run pure Rafale M wings (2016 and on), she's consistently carried 20 (save for one deployment with 24).

Her usual supporting aircraft are 2x E-2C and 3 helicopters, at least with her current Rafale M wings, but when her wings were mixed she used to more regularly carry 4-5 helicopters (plus, ofc, the two E-2C).

[tribal mortar]

The AR guy met with the AK guy

[frozen kestrel]

Brandon Herrera would be grinning right now if he saw this

[subtle prawn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gmc2Cm4XUA

[shrewd pecan]

I’d argue the abrams still has plenty of life stuck in it

Just needs some weight trimming

If abrams X can get weight down to base abrams levels I imagine it should be doable to get the max protection package weight down to M1A2 original levels

[chilly osprey]

Tbh, I think [REDACTED] and prior conflicts in the last ten years has generally indicated that the specific qualities of a lot of tank designs matter a lot less than situational awareness and using your tanks properly in the first place. No amount of excellent tank design will save a tank from improper use - though clearly it makes all the difference for the crew.

So tbh I think for a lot of the most capable existing tank designs, you're better off with digitization efforts and better C2 than, say, trying to figure out a radical next generation solution.

And, hey, if modern components are going to lighten your tank, then you can fit more armor anyways!

[shrewd pecan]

Honestly for the abrams switching out the M256 for the XM360 would shave off a ton while offering a gun with far more growth room

and digitalization would shave off another couple

Beyond that the [REDACTED] conflict has shown that crew/vehicle survivability is important

@humble mulch I’m assuming the ERA leopard 2 field mods are fine to post

[autumn sorrel]

We post that video last time and it was fine anyway

[autumn sorrel]

Honestly, field mod is the norm of the battlefield, calling it as "cope" is talking stupid

Hmm, the ERA brick placement on the side is a bit localized, what give?

[shrewd pecan]

localized to where the crew is

2A4 already has appliqué over the driver so

[autumn sorrel]

2A6 fix the hull ammo storage?

[shrewd pecan]

Nope

[autumn sorrel]

Crew afraid of side shot?

[shrewd pecan]

Likely

ERA will stop a rpg

[autumn sorrel]

Close range fire support at trench?

I see some video where tank get so close to trench

[shrewd pecan]

We’re probably straining too far into it

I don’t feel like eating a warn for more admin arbitrariness

[autumn sorrel]

Yeah

SEP4 have side ERA or is that SEP3?

[shrewd pecan]

Any abrams with TUSK

SEP3 has additional mounting points on the turret though

[autumn sorrel]

I remember Krem said Arena have problem with top attack munition, what about NATO APS system?

[shrewd pecan]

I can’t recall a situation where I’ve seen arena ever actually do it’s job in a combat situation against even standard munitions

[autumn sorrel]

I mean, they do work against RPG

[shrewd pecan]

Yeah but I’ve seen BMP-3Ms and T-90Ms equipped with it be knocked out by Carl Gs

I’m not sure if it’s just down to crew training or if the system just generally doesn’t work

[autumn sorrel]

Their radar in theory should have pick up incoming munition but unless we got our hand on their combat report, nothing is certain

[shrewd pecan]

There’s also the T-80UM2 with Drozd but I think that one got destroyed by artillery fire

[autumn sorrel]

Yeah, so sad, such a rare tank

And that one was a protoype, what the heck did they think sending it?

[shrewd pecan]

I've seen

pre production unmodernized T-72s get sent in so

considering the UM2 was in active service its not surprising

anyway

again we're probably straying too far in

I just wanted to post cool pictures of tanks

[grave ravine]

Currently Trophy is not rated for top attack

But they are working on that right now

[humble mulch]

Just photos of the vehicle and what they have should be fine, but talking about how well they are doing and etc is pushing it for the Grey zone on the whole topic

[shrewd pecan]

at somepoint

we need to make some type of compromise

since I'm gonna be frank

we discuss much more political subjects in much more partisan ways than we do that certain current event

[grave ravine]

Though that's in part cuz the moratorium

[shrewd pecan]

yeah buts it still subjects that bare heavily on modern politics

[grave ravine]

Yeah

[shrewd pecan]

like I am literally just asking for the ability to talk about the performance/use of certain pieces of equipment as long as its on topic with the discussion

[humble mulch]

[shrewd pecan]

I will literally write up a rules list on it and help moderate it if the other mods/admins are willing to hear me out

also have a cool photo

[humble mulch]

I'm willing to hear you out on it and run it by the team, I trust most of the guys here but I know it can lead the normal bickering. I feel the overall concern with this topic is how we don't want people jumping into the politics and reasoning behind it on the server, not just the channel

[shrewd pecan]

generally we've avoided it jumping into politics when its brought up

but its something that's 100% gonna need moderation effort behind it, I'm just tired of getting warned for mentioning it off hand for like 5 minutes despite attempting to steer the conversation elsewhere the entire time

[humble mulch]

Yeah I get that

[warm finch]

Alright to explain when something is cope, it means its a cheap, unofficial version of a tried concept. I believe this comes back all the way to that one photo of the T-34 with mesh or something added on. This is pretty much spaced armour but, well, cope, the crew couldn´t cope with the fact they were vulnerable to panzerfausts and decided to add a cope cage. Effective or not, it is cope. But cope is not necessarily a bad thing.

[humble mulch]

It's a weird thing and I do get your frustrations. I'll run whatever you write up by fish and the others

[grave ravine]

I think cope is best used when something is demonstrably ineffective, yet also sponsored by more than just vehicle crews

[shrewd pecan]

like generally I'm just thinking

• Allow discussion of performance of equipment if its on subject
• Allow posting of articles if its on subject
• Allow limited discussion on frontline activity if its on subject
  Obviously for the continued no no
• If the discussion dips either into politics or emotionally charged subjects obviously shut it down
• No posting of images or videos depicting combat footage, dead bodies, war crimes or politically/emotionally significant events
• No posting of articles or mentioning of the conflict unless it is on subject for the discussion
• No Server nicknames or profiles making reference to politically significant groups or symbols (such as Azov, Wagner Group, or ZOV symbolism)

I'll have to open up grammarly and write out something more detailed

[grave ravine]

Like for the cages on tops of tanks, Russian state media treated them in a positive light

[shrewd pecan]

but that's what I'm generally thinking

[grave ravine]

Whereas applique armor in WW2 was frequently ineffective, but given the nonstandard way it was implemented and the fact that it wasn't endorsed by militaries, I wouldn't necessarily call it cope

[humble mulch]

Wouldn't Schutzen count as a cope cage

It's the exact same thing

[warm finch]

It best used as that but is not used as that. 100% on you with this one.

[humble mulch]

But on sides

It's just spaced armor that's above you

[grave ravine]

There are a few different things to say

For one is that cage armor does not work by standoff

It's supposed to function by damaging warheads and preventing them from detonating properly

Indeed against HEAT extra standoff may actually benefit

Schurzen in contrast (even the mesh variant) was supposed to protect the lower hull sides from AT rifles

[humble mulch]

So I'm gonna be real with you, I will have a conversation with them, but I personally think it might be easier for you guys to make your own server cause idk how down the team it for this

[grave ravine]

Though due to the low quality of early HEAT warheads, when angled it could have a marginal effect against them

[shrewd pecan]

its gonna be easier for other servers but generally it just gets brought up here due to the nature of the chat

since we often discuss coldwar AFVs and other things where generally I'd rather just see

if we can get a compromise on it

[warm finch]

Props to private Kasparov for charging a medium tank with an AT rifle btw

[humble mulch]

Yeah, this is something that's just gonna regularly be alluded too

[grave ravine]

Schurzen was demonstrably effective against it's targets, while cage armor does work against certain types of warheads it doesn't against ATGMs generally

[shrewd pecan]

instead of having to deal with a random mod popping in at random and hitting everyone with a warn because it got briefly mentioned to describe the performance of a tank or piece of equipment

[humble mulch]

Ah OK I see

[grave ravine]

Because the warheads typically are not in the front of the missile, and use a different detonator than RPGs did

[shrewd pecan]

like we will go out of our way to change the subject to something else when its straying too far and still get warned

[grave ravine]

The cage armor is still somewhat effective against many of the drone dropped bomblets, but that was not the target it was designed for, and not what Russian media marketed it for

While it's cope to claim they will work against Javelins and the like, I would actually argue they have been more useful than many of us anticipated at the start of the conflict

[warm finch]

So it´s like setting up bear traps that actually catch a robber?

[tough quail]

based

[manic latch]

Of course they do

Trophy's designers never considered to be against top attack munitions eventually

So it lacks the capability currently

[manic latch]

Air superiority is important*

Or else it doesn't matter if you have a 40 ton tank from 1970 or a 60 ton tank from 2000

They will get destroyed or knocked out without air force dealing with artillery or such

Imagine Iraq without air force support for example

[warm finch]

*Air parity. What is air support if every time you use it is at a huge risk of being shot down

[grave ravine]

Akron dropping a Sparrowhawk

[grave ravine]

I mean generally speaking you try not to send people on suicide missions, there is always risk in war but no reason to assume it's particularly bad for aircraft in a vacuum

[subtle prawn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl_f73lWf_8

[lunar sand]

So we all know military wise the US has a lot of friends (and just as many enemies)

But who would you say is the closest ally of the United States as of today?

And why?

[manic latch]

%100 Poland and Philippines

If you see ever see hardcore US vehicle fan that's not American, I assure you there is %80 chance they are from Poland or Philippines

[manic latch]

Bingo

Philippines should be 90s like Poland

[manic latch]

Of course it is

1. Poland
2. Philippines
3. Israel

[neon oyster]

Looks a bit like a leclarc with the turret era

[manic latch]

ERA is likely done for Kornet threat

[neon oyster]

Hehehehe era on everything

Era on Chally and Abrams when

[manic latch]

Unlikely it's enough but it's their own "cope cage"

Cope blocks?

[neon oyster]

Not cope if it works

And looks cool

I quit like how that a4 looks

[manic latch]

Don't hope too much

It's Kontakt-1 as well

Rather old model by now

[neon oyster]

K1 isn’t the latest and greatest but against an rpg-7 it’ll work

[manic latch]

Bru Rpg-7 of course

It should work

But Kornet?

[neon oyster]

Slight improvement is better than none

[manic latch]

True

[neon oyster]

Kronet would absolutely fry it especially a side shot

Eh’ em Turkey

[manic latch]

Cursed fact

One of those was frontal hit

Side of front hull

It hit the ammo located there

[neon oyster]

Who’s idea was it to put ammo there💀

[manic latch]

Germans

[neon oyster]

And people think Chally has bad ammo placement

Which it kinda does

[manic latch]

Chally is two stage yeah

No blow out panel

Chal 3 will have it

[neon oyster]

Was it’s like war heads with blow out in turret and charge in the hull?

I don’t remember

[manic latch]

Let's see

[manic latch]

Ok

Charge is %100 inside hull

[neon oyster]

Yeah those cans

That make the turret go pop

Somewhat of a strange choice

But easier for the loader probably

Kaboom?

[manic latch]

Yup

Hull inside ammo= turret will fly

Unless your turret is too damn heavy

Then it my just lose neck

[neon oyster]

Cry

[manic latch]

Wonder what they used for Maus detonation

[manic latch]

They just copied Chieftain

[neon oyster]

Lots of scuttling charges (if that’s what u called them in tanks)

[neon oyster]

Chally is quite similar to chieftain in some ways

[tribal mortar]

F-105

[eager dove]

It’s an easy choice to go with Canada, we are literally neighbours with the largest undefended border, jointly operate NORAD and do countless joint exercises between all branches across the world.

For as much as people like to bicker about one another, we are very close military partners.

[manic latch]

And uhh

I don't see any reality where Canada would choose to be hostile against US

Crocodiles let Egyptian plover live because it cleans their teeth

Not because it pokes their eyes

[strong plank]

If you want to go by region, it’s probably something like

North America: Canada

Europe: Great Britain

Africa: Djibouti

South America: Colombia

Middle East: Israel

Indo-Pacific: Australia, with Japan as a very close second (this one really depends on how you define “closest”)

[zealous gull]

Australia doesnt have American ships stationed here (yet)

May change with aukus but would never be at the scale at which the japanese are willing to accommodate

[autumn sorrel]

@shrewd pecan goofy

[manic latch]

[floral oracle]

question for the history buffs out there

given IB and NP's track record of magicking up paper ships even outside of PR (see: Kursk, Magdeburg, Otto) that gives them longevity even as their paltry actually built ships are introduced, what similar options are available for the french and italians? Because I was doing some thinking, and it really seems like we're going to either imminently scrape the barrel, or repeat a bunch of ships from the same class

There's the Alsace and C-5/Saint Louis classes for the French, and for the Italians, what, UP. 41?

[manic latch]

We kinda have UP.41 with Marco Polo

Tho

We can get seperate UP 41 yes

The original

Her skills would have ability to also use NP guns like Kearsarge since she was designed for Soviets

But there is more options for Italy for UR

1. 8 456mm gun Battlecruiser design

2. 12 380mm BB design

3. 16 380mm BB design

These are all old design

But still strong

[eternal veldt]

Forgot the 4-16/16-40, have you?

[grave ravine]

For the French especially they will not be imminently scraping the barrel

There are a lot of French ships left to ad

[manic latch]

Colbert is ez UR CL

[eternal veldt]

France, truth be told, is nearly deplete of modern capital ships

[grave ravine]

I would probably pick the UK, we have had a very close relationship with them for decades, and they are the most likely country to come along on our military adventure and crap, and really they are one of our allies most able to contribute globally.

[eternal veldt]

Alsace, Normandie, Bourgogne, Painleve, and Strasbourg

And Italy just killed everyone already

Except Sparviero, methinks

[subtle prawn]

France still has their modern post-war destroyers, but are they willing to go that far? Probably not... but I would like to be wrong

[floral oracle]

We got L'Audaciuex and Le Fantasque for gold DDs, Clemencau is maybe a UR, maybe a SSR, then 3 Alsaces now that Flandre is taken, Strasbourg is probably going to be elite like Dunkerque

De Grasse is maybe a gold but more likely a purple given her armament,. Colbert UR, and that's about it unless we make up some C-5 prelims or Saint Louises, otherwise it's the Suffrens and Duquesnes, which at best rate elites if not outright just rare fodder

Then there I guess La Fayette, which could rate SSR based on namesake, and Bois Belleau which would probably be elite like the other Independences.

Arromanches would be an SSR, but it'd be a bit weird for the name ship of the Colossus class to belong to a different faction than the RN

Then of course for DDs there Mogador and Volta which would likely be SSRs but should really be URs, and the remainder of the Vauquelin, Le Hardi, and Adroit classes, none of which realistically rate higher than elite at best

So like, we could get French events that have like one UR and a bunch of fodder, or we get ships that could potentially be URs taken and turned into SSRs just to fill out an event

[eternal veldt]

Pointless to guess rarity

[manic latch]

Georgia would be UR for being cousin of Jersey

[eternal veldt]

Azur Lane has consistently demonstrated that rarity is whatever they want

[floral oracle]

And then the Italians seem like they've only got the unbuilt Capitani Romani left

[manic latch]

There is also Yorktown II as UR Essex

So sisters can be UR

[eternal veldt]

You dont need to tap into the T47/T53s for DDs

[junior trench]

stares at Hornet II

[eternal veldt]

The Mogador Type 1940 exists

Kleber, Marceau, Hoche, Desaix

Follow that up with Bayard, Du Guesclin, D'Assas, La Tour d'Auvergne, Turenne, and Bugeaud

[floral oracle]

Which is why Clemenceau could conceivably be a UR, but I really don't see an interwar DD or CA suddenly escaping Elite jail

[eternal veldt]

France is not at all a problem on the Contre-Torpilleur front

Or even the Torpilleur d'escadres with the modified Le Hardis

Its the capital ship front that suck dick, to nobody's surprise

[subtle prawn]

I see the Type 3 Alsace design being more UR-worthy despite the fact that it was likely not the design chosen and the Type 1 probably was instead

[floral oracle]

Anyways people say that rarities dint have logic to them, but they for the most part do

Like people say Shinano shouldn't be UR, but considering the whole Yamato class mythos it's not unreasonable. I suppose there's an argument that some CVLs shouldn't be SSR like the Colossus and Centaur class, but for the most part I don't think there's ever been an egregiously out of rarity ship in the modern game

[eternal veldt]

It could be a reasonable successor to Alsace

Keep in mind that only two ships were ordered

If satisfactory, nothing is realistically stopping France from modifying or even upping their dimensions further in the next tranche, as had happened with Clemenceau and Gascogne

Except fucking Germany, of course

[eternal veldt]

They have logic and story narrative behind it

But otherwise its absolutely inconsistent

If you throw ships that existed at launch in, the rarity system is outright insulting, even

[subtle prawn]

But John Jordan's book says that Type 3 was regarded as being a step too far despite the fact that it was an attractive choice and it probably would have outclassed almost all of the known battleships under construction at the time

[eternal veldt]

Nevada common>

[eternal veldt]

Precisely, it was a "a step too far"

So keep Type 1 as an interim design, if it works, up the game harder

[floral oracle]

Anyways, enough about France, what about Italy? Just mainly more esploratori and unbuilt Capitani Romani left right? Guess there's also the other condotierri, but they seem kinda boned on the backline front

I heard the 3x4 and 4x4 380 were total WG fabrications, is that incorrect?

[eternal veldt]

Italy on the vanguard front still has the Ansaldo CK design, Spanish export designs, and the Constanzo Ciano class

[eternal veldt]

Fake, yes - They saw Ferrati's 1915 design, simply took the gun arrangement and went ham with it

[subtle prawn]

They could theoretically do an Impero, but BB like they did with Kaga as a BB despite the fact she was never completed as one

[eternal veldt]

Both Lepanto and Colombo has some questionable elements

Wasnt that long ago that someone argued that Colombo is secretly a US ship

[subtle prawn]

Wait, where did you see that

[eternal veldt]

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/rtycwd/i_have_this_evolving_theory_that_cristoforo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1

Strap your tinfoil hats on

Ironic, we have the exact problem with Maine now

[autumn sorrel]

Well, at least hope there will be less loli

Krem, it isn't copium

[alpine onyx]

Biggest copium is hoping that the next German PR ship won't be some stupid lolified 1938A/Ac design, but rather a Type 1944

[spring briar]

Sirene you really can’t complain

[alpine onyx]

I can, just because the faction representing the ships I have the best resources on gets content en masse doesn't mean that it's actually good content

[spring briar]

You still can’t complain

I’m sorry Sirene

[strong plank]

mood

[shrewd pecan]

The only AL ships I even care to get anymore are the French ones and the most recent one they added is more pedo bait so I don’t really care enough to play AL anytime soon

[spring briar]

But what if you get nearly no content
And the content you do get is also a half arsed shitpost

[lime belfry]

Me still waiting for the gigachad fletcher class USS O'Bannon to be in the game

She gonna nuke sub with her potato skill

While having 30% EVA rate proc as Lucky O

Her luck gonna dab on Yukikaze

[grave ravine]

So lucky that she didn't have a single combat casualty

While fighting through Friday 13th, Kula Gulf, and Kolombangara

And getting damaged at Vella Lavella

Taylor, Nicholas, and O'Bannon would lead the US fleet into Tokyo Bay in 1945, in honor of their wartime contributions

[manic latch]

Tashkent dodging my hugs "Undef's protection spell"

She endured alot

[autumn sorrel]

She is carrying Soviet Naval Infantry?

[grave ravine]

O'Bannon's PUC: "For outstanding performance in combat against enemy Japanese forces in the South Pacific from October 7, 1942, to October 7, 1943. An aggressive veteran after a year of continuous and intensive operations in this area, the U.S.S. O’BANNON has taken a tremendous toll of vital Japanese warships, surface vessels, and aircraft. Launching a close-range attack on hostile combatant ships off Guadalcanal on the night of November 13, 1942, the O’BANNON scored three torpedo hits on a Japanese battleship, boldly engaged two other men o’ war with gunfire and retired safely in spite of damage sustained. During three days of incessant hostilities in July 1943, she gallantly stood down Kula Gulf to bombard enemy shore positions in coverage of our assault groups, later taking a valiant part in the rescue of survivors from the torpedoed U.S.S. STRONG while under fierce coastal battery fire and aerial bombing attack and adding her firepower toward the destruction of a large Japanese naval force. In company with two destroyers, the O’BANNON boldly intercepted and repulsed nine hostile warships off Vella Lavella on October 7, 1943, destroying two enemy ships and damaging others. Although severely damaged, she stood by to take aboard and care for survivors of a friendly torpedoed destroyer and retired to base under her own power. The O’BANNON's splendid achievements and the gallant fighting spirit of her officers and men reflect great credit upon the United States Naval Service."

[eternal veldt]

The potato thing is most likely a myth.

Still a highly decorated warship, nonetheless.

[grave ravine]

Second most decorated ship of the war

[eternal veldt]

Close, third.

Enterprise and San Diego both takes the first and second prize.

[grave ravine]

Wikipedia is wrong, San Diego only had 15 Battle Stars

[eternal veldt]

That so? Interesting.

[grave ravine]

O'Bannon and San Francisco are tied for second IIRC

[eternal veldt]

Yes, then tied with SF.

and NO and Minneapolis, it seems.

NOs are overworked to hell and back.

[grave ravine]

Nola and Minnie didn't get PUC

Also Nola only had 16

[manic latch]

She was mainly used as transportation of troops and civilians yeah

Being fastest ship of black sea

[eternal veldt]

Very odd with the inconsistencies.

[grave ravine]

I would believe the NHC over any other sources

But Wikipedia just uses the highest reported number

I actually found an accounting of all the battle stars awarded to San Diego and it only added up to 15

https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/s/san-diego-ii.html

NHC DANFS gives 15 for Sandy

[alpine onyx]

One more reason to consider them the best heavy treaty cruisers

when ignoring Wichita as she is unfair to the rest of the competition

[lime belfry]

Doesnt matter, being a myth still guarantee god tier asw skill

Being lucky just means high evasion rate, heal and what not

I still cant believe she isnt in the game

I would trade any imaginary ship for her

[grave ravine]

Wichita is a bit overweight, not as bad as Japanese cruisers, or god forbid the Admiral Hippers, but still overweight

Anyways, Desron 21 was hella cracked in WW2, and criminally underrated in game

And the Fletchers generally

[alpine onyx]

most of the ships people consider to be treaty cruisers were overweight, so I include a margin of error by default to account for that and potential conversion errors (for 10,000 ton cruisers, it's +10%)

Otherwise good luck finding a true 10,000 ton treaty cruiser

[grave ravine]

Anyways the US DD that nobody has heard of before that I really want is Sterett

[grave ravine]

The aforementioned Nola class

Were sub 10k

[dapper parcel]

Mfw two Wickes class are in the list

[grave ravine]

I see Schley, which is the other?

Oh it's Kilty

[alpine onyx]

As per Friedman the New Orleans were also above 10,000 tons

[eternal veldt]

fatshaming, smh

[alpine onyx]

not by much, but if one insists on the "1 ton over is immediate disqualifier" then she is out

[grave ravine]

Treaty uses long tons

Which puts her under

[alpine onyx]

Friedman states she is above treaty limits

I'd hope he knows what tons to use

[grave ravine]

Huh, can you send the relative passage

[dapper parcel]

USN ships are almost always in long tons

until very recently

[grave ravine]

It's just everything I am seeing online says 9950 Standard in long tons

[alpine onyx]

page 157

Unfortunately Friedman is awful at making easily digestable tables for ships

and leaves it up to the reader to dissect the 30 pages of content on a single ship for those things

[grave ravine]

Huh

[alpine onyx]

so I have no exact tonnage that he might be stating (or not)

[grave ravine]

I don't know then

[alpine onyx]

Cruisers of WW2 by Whitley backs NO being overweight

[grave ravine]

I would be inclined to trust Friedman

[alpine onyx]

10136 long tons do equal 10298 metric tons

[grave ravine]

Yep

[alpine onyx]

but in spirit they are still treaty cruisers, so my 10% margin of error gets them back into the boat (ehehe)

[dapper parcel]

Friedmann gives 10565 std for Wichita

[grave ravine]

This is the source Wikipedia gets 9950t from https://books.google.co.in/books?redir_esc=y&id=rp-jAAAAMAAJ&q=New+Orleans#v=snippet&q=New Orleans&f=false

[alpine onyx]

I wouldn't be surprised if that source is using official values. Of course the USN would not make them being a tad overweight public, just like they wouldn't be transparent about their other ships breaking treaty limits by a tad

[grave ravine]

Yeah

[dapper parcel]

At least they can actually fit within the limit with usable load

[alpine onyx]

standard displacement is arbitrary anyway, I'm personally more of a fan of loading the ships fully but the treaty makers decided against that

[grave ravine]

Ok yeah this source is no good, it lists Wichita as exactly 10k

[alpine onyx]

a ship without fuel or reserve feed water is not operational

[grave ravine]

I remember reading the Brits were shocked to get that concession at the WNT

[dapper parcel]

Light ship displacement still count usable fuel

Standard displacement actually count even more substantial amount of fuel

[alpine onyx]

in general I am not a huge fan of tonnages, because it did result in designers and navies just lying directly (write down lower number) and indirectly (give an accurate number, but have it not include things like a full ammo load)

[grave ravine]

From the treaty "The standard displacement of a ship is the displacement of the ship complete, fully manned, engined, and equipped ready for sea, including all armament and ammunition, equipment, outfit, provisions and fresh water for crew, miscellaneous stores and implements of every description that are intended to be carried in war, but without fuel or reserve feed water on board."

[alpine onyx]

so it just results in a neverending cycle of difficult to compare figures as everyone lays out the rules individually

[dapper parcel]

You know what? "Tonnage" in naval term is actually a measurement of volume

[grave ravine]

But anyways the truth is it meant navies had to stay in the general region

Nobody could go around making 20000t super cruisers, but keeping everyone at exactly 10k was a pipe dream

[alpine onyx]

not really a volume thing as the displaced volume will depend on water temperature

[grave ravine]

The fact the US and UK followed it as closely as they did is pretty shocking

[dapper parcel]

Due to complicated customary history, the relation of volume vs weight between tonnage and displacement are switched somehow

[alpine onyx]

regardless I think my point is clear

[dapper parcel]

Tonnage is enclosed volume, it's usually much higher than displacement

Just to make it clear, it's easy to confuse the two

[alpine onyx]

whatever displacement a ship has is a secondary thing to me, and I rather look at the rest of the ship before I pay attention to whatever fairy tales someone used to justify why half of the ammo should not be counted

[dapper parcel]

It's just that displacement are easy number to state and reaaaasonably verified without disclosing the exact details of the ship

It's the exact same problem with START treaty and their convoluted means of nuclear warhead counting

[grave ravine]

Displacement is a good shorthand for discussing the size of ships

Though standard is kinda fucked as mentioned

[alpine onyx]

for sizes maybe as rough indicator, but beyond that you need a load of context on a ship to properly discuss it

[dapper parcel]

Light ship is going to be even more abuse-able, while full load is hard to actually measure

[alpine onyx]

because displacement can be pushed up and down by significant margins without the cause being that easily apparent

[dapper parcel]

Gotta pick a compromise somewhere tho.

[alpine onyx]

Obviously, but when given the chance I'll drop the compromise

Instead of doubling down

[spring briar]

[alpine onyx]

Want a quick superficial bote talk? Can use it. Wanna go in depth? Then width and draft are way more interesting, because those actually impact the day to day usage of the ship

[spring briar]

[eternal veldt]

That's some heavy weather.

[spring briar]

Stretching her legs

[lunar sand]

During the 2nd world War

Did nations ever make hunting down very specific ships a priority often?

Or is Bismarck/Tirpitz more of an isolated incident

[desert agate]

It wasn't a particularly common thing to sortie ships in such low volumes that they could be individually sought out

The Germans were basically the only ones who did so and they was mainly out of necessity

However all German warships which made active sorties were targeted for elimination, all of the Deutschlands, the armed merchant raiders, the battleships, all were hunted down to varying degrees of success

When the Japanese navy was whittled down to the point where they too were incapable or sortieing large forces, they were subject to similar treatment, with Yamato being the more famous example

[subtle prawn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXVlz5fJvmk

[spring briar]

reads about the Paraguay war

damn

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1680624393087533057

U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute)

It's #NationalIceCreamDay! On a ship during WWII, two officers were trying to pull rank to cut in line for ice cream when someone barked at them to wait their turn. They turned to see who had dared to rebuke them and saw ADM Halsey waiting in line with the rest of the sailors.

Twitter · Jul 16, 2023, 5:04 PM

[alpine onyx]

I hear heavy see croosers?

[spring briar]

we sailin

[remote monolith]

isn't it FUN losing 60% of your male population thanks to your maniac of a general

[spring briar]

I mean

tfw 450.000 pop

loses at least 300k

fuck

[old lily]

Spee?

bridge looks like deutschland class

[alpine onyx]

Admiral Scheer

So correct class

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/TheRealBuzz/status/1680550923188273154

Dr. Buzz Aldrin (@TheRealBuzz)

54 years ago today, #Apollo11 launched…Eagle soaring from Earth atop the Saturn V, bound for the Moon. It seems like only yesterday that we embarked on the mission of a lifetime – a mission for all mankind, a mission I hope will continue to inspire well into our future.

Likes

9317

Retweets

1921

Twitter · Jul 16, 2023, 12:12 PM

[desert agate]

Oh shit I thought he died years ago

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/salisbot/status/1680226048460333058

Emma Salisbury (@salisbot)

Annoy a navalist in one tweet

Likes

145

Twitter · Jul 15, 2023, 2:41 PM

[subtle prawn]

Are you perhaps thinking about Neil Armstrong instead?

[manic latch]

Carriers are obsolete

[smoky marlin]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(nuclear_test)

On this day in History in 1945 we entered the nuclear age.

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1680678364141477889

U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute)

This is CDR Joseph "Jumpin' Joe" Clifton enjoying some well-earned ice cream in his F6F Hellcat on USS Saratoga after a successful raid in 1944.
#NationalIceCreamDay

Twitter · Jul 16, 2023, 8:38 PM

[manic latch]

Nightmare of Buffalo

[strong plank]

ah yes

the battleship Tone

[shrewd pecan]

I think I found

my new favorite ad

[tough quail]

fucking based

[shrewd pecan]

just the image in my head of some third world junta out there reading some defense magazine in english some point in the 1980s and just seeing that ad and going

"AH YES! AMX-13 MODERNIZATIONS, WHAT WE NEED!"

[strong plank]

@desert agate

[dapper parcel]

F-15 good
Fuck McDD tho

[desert agate]

Sucks that I never got to see an F-111 in the air

[dapper parcel]

Cries Laughs in Indonesian

It's a poor man's modern day waffenträger

[somber knoll]

Bro,

Pindad be like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZHfHzviA44

Where are the shiny Leopards

[limber dune]

The 3000 Leopard IIs of Indonesia

[tough quail]

they got the better tank

Have Leopard 2s been lost in mysterious current events in eastern europe? Yes.

Have AMX-13s been lost in mysterious current events in eastern europe? No.

[limber dune]

The wunderwaffe approach

[eternal veldt]

I find it funny this is a thing

[tough quail]

only the best from the lads in france

[eternal veldt]

No rear return roller, and long

[somber knoll]

my biggest disappointment with the IDN armed forces horse?

We cannot have a god damn carrier despite our archipelago nation status.

The Navy is kinda side-tracked despite our defense minister's myriad of programs.

or any capital ship, really.

I kinda get on how he prioritizes corvettes and frigates

but come on.

Even Thailand had one despite its "showboat/royal ferry" status

[tough quail]

to be fair like

the fuck would you even do with one

[strong plank]

Yeah unless Indonesia has aspirations of naval power projection

it’s kinda a big investment for little return

stuff like mda and eez defense is more pressing

[old lily]

real

maritime country with eh the navy exist

although i'd say carrier is too much

given we're archipelago

land based airfield will do the job just as fine

but sure i'd love to see more destroyers

[old lily]

and yeah the navy is expensive

[manic latch]

Brazilian Navy's Roraima-class river patrol vessel

[old lily]

wtf is that freeboard lmao

but i guess it only operates in the river

i doubt it would survive an ocean wave 💀

[limber dune]

Dont let the man above me see what riverine vessels look like

[old lily]

💀 theres more?

[limber dune]

Indonesian Carrier💀💀💀

The one Thailand has sits at port

I'm pretty sure that its something like a SEA version of Kuznetsov

[old lily]

yeah

forgotten the name

hmmm lemme check

[manic latch]

Freeboard danger is overrated

[old lily]

HTMS Chakri Naruebet

[manic latch]

Look at this girl for example

[old lily]

well monitor/preBB are fine

given they dont have that huge of a superstructure

but that thing superstructure

[limber dune]

Its on a river

[old lily]

yeah i know

[limber dune]

Rivers dont usually have high waves

[manic latch]

She passed pacific with this freeboard

[old lily]

brave men

[limber dune]

With great trouble if i remember

[manic latch]

True

[limber dune]

Yep

[somber knoll]

kinda true, but with the PLAN projecting their power to South China Sea our Navy looks gremlin in comparison.

Tho I wouldn't exactly hoping for the full size carrier for the TNI AL to operate considering in the past, as far as I can tell our biggest operational naval vessel was a Sverdlov. perhaps a 15-20k LHD/LHA is a bit more reasonable.

@old lily

[old lily]

yeah

we dont even have destroyers

and iirc one operationak sub

l

still though remember our citizens

spend money to the military, gets criticised
military gets shit, gets criticised 🤣

[somber knoll]

that's the citizen of Konoha for ya

[old lily]

Real

[strong plank]

yeah the smarter move is to go for more smaller vessels

rather than pooling your spending into a single, larger asset

[old lily]

the one frigate/corvette we build that went on fire one month after commissioning 💀

due to shit hull material used

[old lily]

but true though

[somber knoll]

that shit was fire yo

[old lily]

smaller vessel also allows us to navigate through the extreme archipelago places

[somber knoll]

[old lily]

[somber knoll]

but ye

[strong plank]

I mean basically the first priority should always be

"what tasks is our navy grappling with right now?"

[somber knoll]

imo for patrol purposes I would say 3-4 frigates with one destroyer as a sort of fleet leader would be ideal considering the natural split of our regions.

mostly to defer the CN fishing boats to just back off and not poach on our ZEE seas

[limber dune]

Went from non credible to slightly credible to credible within the span of a few comments

[strong plank]

I haven't been doing much reading on indonesia in particular

but assuming its situation (i.e. threats faced) are similar to that of, say, the Philippines

[limber dune]

The Philippines is much worse than Indonesia

Smaller navy and it has to contest more people not only in SCS but also its northern borders

[strong plank]

in terms of what role they need their navy to perform

patrolling, MDA, chasing off suspiciously coordinated Chinese fishing vessels, etc

[somber knoll]

yeh, we are not exactly a blue water navy material since we mostly focus on our internal security. The only time the TNI armed forces needed to do power projection was during the sixties (hence the Sverdlov purchase from the Soviets).

The Filipino Navy looks choked in comparison, in terms of their size to role.

[limber dune]

Choked is an understatement

[dapper parcel]

Eh, it used to be worse. They're steadily improving now

It was that bad to the point where the average age of their fleet, like halved, when they finally retire the old Cannon and Auk-class DEs

[limber dune]

They still use those

As propaganda pieces to pressure the government to give them better stuff

They give those who volunteered for ROTC in Manila a tour of the old ships they use(d) to raise public awareness at how awfully dogshit the navy is at carrying out its mission.

[dapper parcel]

At least they're properly decommissioned now. No more facepalming moment with WW2 minesweeper trying to fend off huge DDG

[limber dune]

I'm pretty sure the Navy doesn't even do those face-offs anymore, they leave it to the somehow better managed and run Coast Guard💀

(Well their reasoning was to prevent any escalation, but personally, looking at their track record? Its to also save face)

[desert agate]

Indonesia, given its economic and geographic position, would not benefit from a carrier

[dapper parcel]

It could utilize more LPD however. LHD is a bit luxury

[desert agate]

Indonesia would benefit far greater from utilising asymmetric maritime warfare strategies, modern diesel electric submarines, advanced mine laying capabilities and a strong ASW focused surface element would be ideal for Indonesian naval procurement alongside a solid element of landing ships, which can be easily supported with civilian ferries

[dapper parcel]

Amphibious capability is still a bit questionable (yeah, understatement here) given the defense strategy for outlying islands

[desert agate]

Indonesia's current arsenal of 4th generation aircraft meanwhile are more than capable of providing long ranged maritime strike

90% of countries have no real requirement for an aircraft carrier and most of those who seek to pursue them only do so as a vanity project, which any hypothetical Indonesian carrier, would end up being

Very few countries which do not currently operate carriers, have any reasonable need for one

[thorn trail]

Sort of. last I checked we had maintenance issues on our air force and navy equipment and from what I've heard from military members, maintenace is still a complete clusterfuck with our equipment

[strong plank]

air force was seriously underfunded for a spell too

[thorn trail]

There was like a decade or so where we had basically no combat aircraft when the F-5A's were retired

Wait forgot the Bronco's

But yeah our airspace was pretty much free for all

[limber dune]

The decade of neglect

[limber dune]

most efficient DOD branch

[remote monolith]

Indonesian AF talk huh

well, at least there's some improvements coming under Prabowo

the man is a war criminal, probably a sadist, and outright fascistic, but at he's pushing for massive procurements

[misty umbra]

My beloved

[somber knoll]

KRI Nanggala during patrols but decided to sink herself:

but yeah our U-Boats are in dire need of either refits or new ones.

[fierce sparrow]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzsBTUEupKs

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/368244534578118658/1086722679190593758/BurningMurmory.gif

[desert agate]

The C-5 is hungry

[old lily]

The Scharnhorst

more specifically, SMS Scharnhorst

[manic latch]

Nah

That's Kms Scharnhorst

From 1967

[old lily]

Nah

this is the 2019 Scharnhorst

[warm finch]

Correct, even most of the countries that do don´t actually need them. Take France and Great Britain, the formers air force is more than capable of redeploying around a flung off part of the nation while the latters economy barely took the hit from the second carrier that it is likely they won´t use anyway. Vanity projects. One named their carrier Charles de Gaulle and the other has a a long standing naval tradition

As for Russia... they put their only carrier into service after stealing it from the only shipyard able to properly service her in the ex-USSR. Her service record is a joke and the only reason they have not scrapped her is to say "our navy has a carrier!" No strategic interest justifies her existence either.

[manic latch]

Neither France needs carrier either

That's why Gaulle doesn't have large service record either

[warm finch]

Isn´t that what I said-

I called it a vanity project for a reason

[manic latch]

No British needs carrier if they will pull another Falklands in future

Main reason they lost 6 ships in Falklands war the lack of supercarrier but having small ones only

They can't send Awacs

Which is even more ironic that QE can't send awacs either

But at least it's much larger

[warm finch]

Well the only ones who would be pulling a Falklands would maybe be the Inds or Chinese, who did have carriers and known plans to make more with which Britains economy could not contend

Also known as "What two world wars does to an mf"

[manic latch]

No this wasn't about economy. Because ironic enough, British navy 10 years ago would do better in Falklands

They would have Ark Royal with F4s

With catapults

Choice of few small carriers > 1 big was bad

[shrewd pecan]

QEs will probably get their catapult retrofits at some point in the future

In terms of their actual need for them I wouldn’t really call the falklands as one of the leading reasons why the Brit’s need carriers

Especially considering the state of Argentinas armed forces right now

The Brit’s have always had a need for platforms for power projection

[warm finch]

fun fact this was actually the case with the Falklands, there was a whole class of carriers envisioned a fleet carrier design called the CVA-01 which would have catapults and would have the ability to operate about 36 Phantom IIs and Buccaneers

But this not being made was indeed a problem with money.

[shrewd pecan]

I keep forgetting that the South Koreans had M47s

[chilly osprey]

France has plenty of reason to want a carrier.

It massively extends the range of striking power or anti-ship capability of their fleet and comes with major force enablers (AWACS).

If you want to have a navy actually capable of fighting as a blue-water force, you need a carrier.

[warm finch]

Correct. But france is in no need of a blue water force as much as it is in need of a green water navy that can relocate over blue water. France does not need force projection to achieve its goal of staying relevant. And as a result, does not need a carrier

Now that I think about it a helicopter carrier/lightning carrier would be more practical

[chilly osprey]

In no need of it according to whom?

If the French deem that they need to have the capability of a blue-water force to meet their defense needs and foreign policy goals, that's up to them. The MN's Carrier Strike Group, in particular, is something that allows them to them to still be a serious combatant even when deployed well away from any of their own land air bases (provides air cover for the fleet, AWACS, and extends their offensive striking range far in excess of anything possible with surface-fired weapons), and plays a significant role in their nuclear deterrence, being one of the means of deploying their interimediate nuclear weapon (ASMP-A, the infamous 'warning shot').

[warm finch]

I disagree, but admittedly have a hard time arguing gainst the latter part of that point

[chilly osprey]

Restricting themselves to just a helicopter or lightning carrier would massively reduce the scope of operations the MN could actually engage in, particularly those independent of other nations.

It really should be noted that V/STOL carriers generally are at a massive disadvantage compared to land-based aircraft, or even other carriers with CATOBAR aircraft, unless a massive disparity exists between them. Ex, if you were running the AV-8B+ against an opponent that lacked radar equipped fighters or fighters that could answer AMRAAM.

The viability of V/STOL carriers in this era is somewhat skewed by just how capable the F-35B is, compared to the vast majority of other aircraft that are out there. It makes carriers reliant on 'jump jets' competitive in a way they never were in the past - and France is neither going to be buying F-35B nor developing a domestic equivalent.

Ex, should France ever need to defend any of its outlying territories, Falklands style, having a platform like Charles de Gaulle - or the eventual PANG - would be central to their ability to conduct that fight. Likewise, should they ever find the need to conduct strikes against ground targets far from their own air bases, the carrier is going to be the primary way of getting those aircraft into position (ex, de Gaulle's CSG has strikes against ISIS in Syria and Iraq on several occasions).

Heck, even when land-based aircraft are in range of a target, having a carrier to deploy remains hugely advantageous as carrier-borne aircraft can loiter over a naval force for much longer than land-based aircraft - the NATO intervention in Libya in 2011 was an excellent example of this, from both de Gaulle and the Italian carrier Garibaldi.

[shrewd pecan]

The French have multiple former colonies to cover, multiple overseas territories and interests across nearly the entire globe

yes they very much need a blue water navy

[warm finch]

Your last is flawed by the fact it was the "NATO" intervention the americans have what, 13 supercarriers as well as another dozen lightning carriers? But yes a carrier would be necessary for overseas territories.

[shrewd pecan]

the entire point of french doctrine

is strategic independence

they want to the US as a ally but they don't want to be solely dependent on the US

depending entirely on the US for carriers would go against both French doctrine and French foreign policy

[warm finch]

Nobody really does, us czechs still build some of our own planes from time to time the germans are well... the germans and the british are only giving in because of a less than stellar economy.

[warm finch]

It would, and I don´t really see the point in it.

[shrewd pecan]

then you clearly don't get the French prospective

[warm finch]

Yes. And I admit that.

[shrewd pecan]

the US usually isn't too interested in supporting France's neo colonial efforts beyond logistics support

[chilly osprey]

It became a NATO intervention.

Initially it was a French intervention with the British tagging along, and the scope expanded as time went on. In particular the Italians threatened to revoke the basing and logistical support for everyone if the operation did not get moved under NATO command.

[warm finch]

Making some very uncomfortable implications here. Are you calling pearl their fault?

[deep apex]

Lotta hooligandary on my screen

[chilly osprey]

Actually, to tack onto this.

The French and Italian carriers were the only fixed-wing carriers to take part in the operation. No American carriers took part.

[warm finch]

They could have pretty much ignored the germans, afterall the japanese also basically said "nuh uh" to a war declaration. And the whole point behind the Gulf war was to protect Kuwait... I mean they even ended it once the highway of death became a thing

[warm finch]

This is actually kinda incorrect if we consider VTOLs fixed wing aircraft and LHDs carrying them carriers.

Technicality, I know.

[chilly osprey]

Ah, yeah, no, fair, I forgot Kearsage and Bataan brought AV-8B's to the party

I believe they each had six went they were rotated through

VTOLs certainly count as fixed wing

Though LHDs are LHDs and often come with limitations for sustained operations of such aircraft unless specifically designed otherwise

[warm finch]

I struggle to disagree.

[deep apex]

I mean...

They didn't want to be a part of Iraq either

[warm finch]

Alright then, what country would protect another out of the goodness of their hearts?

Fuckin´ China?

[maiden citrus]

conspiracy theories and finger pointing huh

[strong plank]

Considering both have been playing a greater role in FONOPs in the pacific

[chilly osprey]

I mean, certainly oil prices figured into it. But that was very much a case of global stability. Most of the oil that Kuwait exported went East, to countries like Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, etc. And those that went west were mostly destined for Europe.

[strong plank]

Saying they don’t need carriers and that they’re merely vanity projects is pushing it

[chilly osprey]

It would have been incredibly dumb for the US to just allow Iraq to swallow up Kuwait.

[maiden citrus]

famed oil memes

[strong plank]

Highway of death wasn’t why the gulf war ended

The goal was to get Iraqi forces out of Kuwait and that was accomplished

[warm finch]

Which coincidentally happened at the same time.

[warm finch]

You going to defend the cost overruns on the PoW and how the British navy can barely support it?

[strong plank]

Man it’s almost like capability gaps are meant to be filled

[strong plank]

yeah if you’re Saddam Hussein

and you’ve just watched your newest territorial gains get reversed over the span of 100 hours

along with the decimation of your military

that is what we call a significant emotional event

Iraq was removed from Kuwait

and the ability to significantly threaten Kuwait was removed from Iraq

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1681018054489133056

U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute)

#OTD in 1969, a Honduran Corsair shot down two Salvadoran Corsairs and a Mustang during the "Football War". It was the last dogfight between piston engine fighters. The U.S. Navy had retired the F4U Corsair in 1953. The Honduran Air Force continued to fly the F4U until 1979.

Likes

225

Twitter · Jul 17, 2023, 7:08 PM

[warm finch]

It´s not a capability gap if the thing supposed to fill it has nothing to fill in.

[autumn sorrel]

[runic prairie]

The biggest problem with CDG and PANG is that there’s only one of them.

Especially with how CDG has gone multiple smaller/less capable carriers would likely leave France better prepared for a contingency.

This was the calculus that the U.K. came to when ditching CATOBAR for STOVL. It meant they could always have at least one carrier available.

The good thing about the QEs is that they can be refitted with CATOBAR stuff which, given British politics is a prudent decision.

[chilly osprey]

To be fair to the French, CdG was planned with the expectation there would be a follow-on.

Unfortunately that never happened because of the end of the Cold War.

Whether or not a second carrier will be procured under the PANG program remains to be seen, though it seems unlikely.

Though I'd probably say the choice is less down to smaller carriers, and more whether you opt for conventional power or not. And full-scale CATOBAR capabilities.

That tends to be a greater cost driver than size - so keeping a carrier smaller tends to make sense, especially given how much carrier capability scales up with cost.

This is part of the reason the British opted for a pair of >70,000 tonne carriers rather than a trio of 30-40,000 tonners.

[subtle prawn]

But there was an article about a study for a second PANG not too long ago, no?

[chilly osprey]

There were a few, iirc

As part of the new LPM they're officially studying procuring two

It's just really a question of whether or not they can afford to given the cost, both in monetary terms, manning, and also with the burden it would add on to the escort fleet.

[manic latch]

They are lucky US is giving them EMALS

For a high price of course

But it's cheaper to buy from other than do it yourself

That's why I'm very sus on F-35, it made Europe jump over whole domestic Fifth gen programs

And they will try to jump straight to Sixth gen from 4th gen because of this

[chilly osprey]

I mean, the money and industrial capacity bluntly did not exist in Europe at the time.

[manic latch]

Except Turkey

Turkey is trying Fifth gen, does have a frame

[chilly osprey]

What resources were available were being absorbed by the Typhoon program at the time

[manic latch]

Ah Typhoons

[chilly osprey]

So there was only really a relatively limited amount of resources that could be put into other projects, and certainly the money and technology for their own independent fifth gen did not exist.

Rather, being part of the JSF program that produced the F-35 helped put some of those European countries into a position where they could feasibly work on a sixth gen program.

[manic latch]

If Europe buys Sixth gen from US as well eventually, I don't see Europe ever doing new planes but turning full time customers of US

[chilly osprey]

I mean, that will sort of depend on the Europeans not screwing things up

FCAS/SCAF sits on pretty precarious grounds because of disagreements between the French and the Germans

[craggy kettle]

Many politicians dont like the fact that the gov. is buying from the US

[chilly osprey]

GCAP is progressing much more smoothly.

[manic latch]

French will also likely want Catapult variant when Germany doesn't need it

[chilly osprey]

Indeed

The French do plan to deploy FCAS/SCAF off of PANG

[manic latch]

Like PAK-FA( Su-57 with India) died because
with India wanting two seat variant and more stealthy features for Su-57, but this desire made it much more expensive. And one side (sources blame each other) refused to pay more money for such features. Which made India leave the program for their own

Either India wanted to keep the costing same despite these changes, or Sukhoi didn't wanted to pay for this changes since only Indian side wanted it

[chilly osprey]

Probably a bit of both

[tough quail]

its a shame because two seaters are based

and all planes should aspire to be them

[warm finch]

The name "sixth generation" is a marketing stunt. It doesn´t really mean anything because its supposed to mean either unmanned flight or no tail, or both. Which I don´t get since we already have UAVs, and the only reason for no tail would be to reduce the RCS which we already know how to substantially reduce.

You can see it in the case of European "6th" gens that they just look flashy but it´s basically the same old but looks newer I guess?

I mean, even F/A-XX is really just an unmanned tailless plane, it´s not going to be quite the jump as with a 4th gen to a 5th gen.

[manic latch]

What's the quite the jump on Fifth except stealth

[warm finch]

The fact a 4th gen is going to spot the missile first.

Coming right at them, in all its smoky glory

[strong plank]

lol wut

you do know Britain went the better part of a decade without any naval aviation capability

[strong plank]

Honestly I see NGAD falling into an F-22 situation where it’s not exported

[warm finch]

Correct. But that gap is easy to fill with one carrier.

Which they did

and then they made another

[strong plank]

…

Because one carrier can’t do everything

Ships require downtime for maintenance

Look at how many of the Nimitz’s are in port at any given time

[warm finch]

Maintenance will take that much longer if there are not that many funds left for maintaining the ships.

[warm finch]

So are we really comparing naval hyperpower America to "get the fuck off my rocks!" Britain?

[strong plank]

You do know the general rule of thumb right

[warm finch]

No actually, what is it?

[strong plank]

buying x of something, be it a jet, or a tank, or a ship, doesn’t mean you always have x many of that thing ready for deploy

Aircraft for example

With ships I believe the rule of thumb is 3

for every 3 ships you have, one is combat capable at a given moment

with one more in for maintenance and another for training/refit/other shit

Having more than a single carrier means that you can effectively stagger their availability to ensure one is available at a given time

[warm finch]

Ready to deploy immediately, yes that would be correct. But then you have to remember that organizing any force takes time anyway. And with a carrier being an inherently specialised vessel, I can´t help but say that it may be called up later on as support after the initial force scouts them out.

[strong plank]

“Later” isn’t good enough

not when repairs and maintenance takes from months to years

that’s how ships are

[warm finch]

So countries should throw their economies out the window for defence spending that´s really just gonna look good at a fleet parade

But I know you are not saying that so please elaborate

[strong plank]

I dunno what strawman you think you’re arguing against rn

[warm finch]

... are you saying that the PoW breaking down and costing 20 million pounds to repair is a strawman?

Also I asked you to elaborate, to present your point as it is.

[strong plank]

^ the strawman in question

[warm finch]

Because that is what you said! You said countries should have enough things to be able to stagger them so they always have atleast one.

The cost of these things is simply unsustainable for some countries.

[strong plank]

did I say that every country needs to invest in carriers?

[warm finch]

No.

[strong plank]

let me put it this way

let’s look at the Nimitz’s

[manic latch]

Rule is 3 or 4 as Reg said

1. For ship near your shore
2. For ship far away from your shore
3. for ship that's under maintenance
4. For ship that's being used as training teacher (not necessary but useful)

[strong plank]

The Nimitz’s are deployed for a long time

[warm finch]

The Americans actually have the money to sustain them without build defects like the PoW, which was apparently leaking.

Or well, flooding? I don´t know the details I just know something like that happened

[junior trench]

Prop shaft bearing

Went bye bye

[strong plank]

the Nimitz’s deployment cycle follows something like

[junior trench]

Which is... Actually kind of funny

Considering a prop shaft being broken is what killed BB PoW

[warm finch]

Some countries don´t have that kind of money though, like the UK, as with the aforementioned Prince of Wales.

[junior trench]

Torpedo struck near the stern and broke the shaft, which was still spinning and tore up pretty much every compartment along the way

Totally bypassing the TDS

And flooding the ship

[warm finch]

Atleast it´s not the average british battlecruiser

[strong plank]

Point is

Ships (or equipment in general) can’t be available 24/7/365

and when it’s out for maintenance it’s out for a while

[warm finch]

I know? That´s not what Iam talking about. Iam talking about how adding an additional carrier to the Royal Navy is unsustainable at best.

[strong plank]

The Nimitz’s take turns spending 6 months in port for maintenance

[shrewd pecan]

at a time there's only like

3-5 Nimitz's on deployment

[manic latch]

Britain is doing massive defense cuts for keeping the economy stable

[strong plank]

So if your one carrier is in port in the middle of a maintenance cycle

and something happens that requires the deployment of a carrier

[manic latch]

You are oofed

No carrier

[warm finch]

Then you´re fucked. But it´s too late because your country really doesn´t have the funds for another carrier to have prevented this. Or the second carrier you do have broke down and is also in a dry dock.

[strong plank]

I mean you could always ask very nicely for the enemy to wait for your carrier to finish repairs

since you’re really harping on POW’s problems

[warm finch]

The Americans have the money for it not to be an issue, the British don´t.

[strong plank]

The last carriers the British had built were made in the 70s

those being light carriers

[warm finch]

Yes, making it evermore egregious they made such a jump with such large ships which they barely even had the money for eh?

[strong plank]

What about the Fords then

They were quite the large leap themselves

[warm finch]

3rd class of supercarriers the Americans made with continuous practice for years as well as the Americans being so ridiculously rich they can afford any cost overruns anyway.

[shrewd pecan]

the QEs aren't really much of a leap

when you consider there just larger versions of what they previously operated

[strong plank]

I uh

[strong plank]

take objection to the “they’re rich so they can afford it” argument

[shrewd pecan]

same

[warm finch]

Am I supposed to guess why or?

[strong plank]

cost overruns aren’t magically made null by having a higher GDP

look at the zumwalts

or the FCS

or the MBT-70

[shrewd pecan]

A-12 avenger II

[manic latch]

Or the Crusader

[shrewd pecan]

crusader I wouldn't pin entirely on cost overruns

I'd pin its cancellation more on the FCS program existing

[manic latch]

[shrewd pecan]

and the US trying to develop you know

two SPGs at once

it was more program overlap

then you know

both programs failed

[manic latch]

CG(X)

[strong plank]

the branches have to argue and justify the funds they’re allocated

[warm finch]

Do I really need to elaborate that they can afford it within reason? I know about the Bonhomme Richard. And I know there´s a reason they waited for a new one instead.

[strong plank]

Any unforeseen funds that have to go into a program are funds diverted from something or someone else

Navy officials said that attempting to repair the damage and return Bonhomme Richard to service would take between five and seven years and cost an estimated $2.5 billion to $3.2 billion.

[warm finch]

To be fair the CG(X) was kinda wacky, the lead ship was supposed to cost as much in dollars as the prince of wales did in pounds for crying out loud

[strong plank]

the wasps cost around $2bil

[manic latch]

256 vls yes

[strong plank]

so yeah when replacing it costs less money and takes less time than procuring a replacement

[shrewd pecan]

CG(X) was intended to be a specialized ballistic defense ship able of equipping larger VLS cells than the standard zumwalt or other US ships

[warm finch]

(I secretly want the nuclear cruisers back)

[shrewd pecan]

she wasn't going to be nuclear

that was cut early on

[warm finch]

I didn´t mean that but okay?

[strong plank]

wait tato I need answers

[shrewd pecan]

QE?

[strong plank]

POW

[shrewd pecan]

the miniguns?

or the 30 MMs?

[strong plank]

the minigun -> browning replacement

[warm finch]

Iam kinda curious too

[shrewd pecan]

better penetration probably

that or cheaper to maintain

there's plenty of high rate of fire browning variants

[warm finch]

better penetration against what tho? They really gonna send a carrier to anti-piracy duties?

[shrewd pecan]

boats

[strong plank]

I mean I could see a weight argument if we weren’t talking about a carrier

[manic latch]

Ford also has 50 cal

[strong plank]

Yeah suicide boats are a concern

[shrewd pecan]

probably wanting to mount the miniguns on something else

idk there's probably some article out t here on it

[strong plank]

Yeah but the Fords are American

M2s are like bbq sauce to us, we put that shit on everything

[shrewd pecan]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_Energy_Interceptor
"The Kinetic Energy Interceptor program was developing new weapons against ballistic missiles, but the missiles would have taken up six times more space than SM-3s and a Zumwalt-sized hull could not carry a meaningful number.[10] They were considered to be dropped from the CG(X) program[10] before ultimately being canceled altogether in May 2009 due to "technical and financial" reasons.[20]"

could of been bother a hypersonic platform and a ballistic defense platform

[warm finch]

I will quote this from now on

[shrewd pecan]

damn you cost overruns

[strong plank]

I still wish the economy of scale hadn’t fucked the AGS

I know why it happened and that it was the right call but damn

It’s ironic bc I wonder how handy the zumwalts would be in a cross-strait shtf scenario as originally configured

[shrewd pecan]

personally the AGS in hindsight was just

was both redundant and badly planned out

[strong plank]

“Man stealth destroyers are such a dumb idea, who would invest in something like this?”
kid named Enemy A2/AD Network:

[shrewd pecan]

like

we have 127 MM shells able of equaling out the range

and the lack of any alternative shell just absolutely killed the thing

better use of the funds would of just been to either cooperate with the army to make a new 155 MM gun & shell set that way the AGS guns could fall back onto standard 155s

or to just make 127 MM LRLAP instead

if the navy a 155 MM it really should be jointly developing that gun & associated shells with the army

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1681098202542424065

U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute)

Flying an F4U-5N Corsair named for his wife, LT Guy "Lucky Pierre" Bordelon of the VC-3 Blue Nemesis shot down an La-11 Fang #OTD in 1953 to become the U.S. Navy's only ace of the Korean War. When he returned to USS Princeton, he was greeted by the ship's band.

Twitter · Jul 18, 2023, 12:26 AM

[cinder escarp]

If only the name was annie-may...

[tough quail]

i think i have a new favorite quora moment

[maiden citrus]

only if the launcher shot hits you point blank, otherwise you have to wait until the grenade explodes

[tough quail]

wheeze

[maiden citrus]

[tough quail]

im trying to think of a game i played recently where like

direct hits to the head even with flash bangs are instant kills

[desert agate]

France does have a solid capability requirement for a carrier, as being able to support expeditionary operations with fixed wing assets is vital, and France has invested heavily into its expeditionary capabilities, and has conducted operations where its forces did not have access to proper airfields, necessitating the assistance of CdG
the RN meanwhile has many far flung territories across the world to defend, and still operates one of the largest naval auxilliary forces in the world, giving the RN the rare capability of being able to move its assets globally and independently, a carrier fits very well into that capability

[desert agate]

the QEs were always built with cats in mind because the RN sensibly recognised that it would need them

[warm finch]

The RN does not need two. The PoW is mostly just a strain on the economy from what I have gathered.

[desert agate]

the RN absolutely needs 2

having a single carrier is a waste of time and resources especially for a nation with such vast overseas requirements as the the UK

[strong plank]

strain on the economy

[desert agate]

i would also note that all military hardware is a drain on financial resources

this is not unique to aircraft carriers

[strong plank]

my brother in Christ it has had 1 issue in its barely 3 years of service

Clearly North Carolina’s early hull vibration issues are vindication that the entire class should never have been built

[desert agate]

and if being a financial drain was the only reason we shouldnt build military hardware then we would all disband our militaries

[warm finch]

Still an issue whixh left her in a dry dock for almost 33% of her service.

[strong plank]

Consult chart above

[warm finch]

If you can support it, it wouldn't be a strain. The british seemingly can't support it.

[shrewd pecan]

where do you think on average carriers tend to spend 30% of their service life in

[warm finch]

They usually don't spend it there for repairs, do they?

[shrewd pecan]

what do you think tends to happen to a ship

as its used

and goes on multi month deployments

[desert agate]

It is very rare for such a massive piece of engineering such as a 40'000t warship to be built without issue

[strong plank]

Something something Ford not being fully capable until 5 years after delivery

[desert agate]

I would note that when the RAN first got the Canberra's, their engines shat themselves within 2 years and needed major repairs

Hell, just last year Adelaide lost power entirely when supporting disaster relief off Samoa

Doesn't mean the RAN should divest itself of the expeditionary capability which it spent decades forging

Just means the ships break and need to be fixed

[strong plank]

Key thing to remember is also that the QEs are meant to rebuild British naval aviation capability

[warm finch]

It gets worn down... and needs maintenance. Not the same thing as repair although a similar process.

[desert agate]

Things break on massive ships

All the time

Maintenance on a 40'000t ship generally requires replacing massive numbers of broken parts

[strong plank]

Bc when you don’t operate any carriers whatsoever for a few years, and your navy hasn’t operated non-jump jets for the last 40 years, you need to relearn how to do so

[desert agate]

Fuckwit Seaman Jimmy got drunk on shore leave and accidentally broke bulkhead door 4-20 well guess what that's a replacement

[strong plank]

Institutional and operational knowledge is slow to be built and easy to lose

[desert agate]

Rubber tubing running between the coolant and the engine snapped so engine crew had to do a bodge job to keep the ship going well that's gonna need replacing the moment you pull into port

Someone's coffee could have spilt on a bridge monitor meaning that needs replacement too

Hundreds of components on these ships break with every deployment

These ships are among the largest and most complicated pieces of engineering on the planet, they are neither easy to build, nor keep running

[strong plank]

the ford plumbing issue is another good example

though I imagine it’s going to be addressed for future members of the class

[desert agate]

First 3 will have the flawed system iirc

Since they were too far long construction to fix the issue

[strong plank]

you sure?

I can see JFK having it since it was laid down in 2015, but enterprise was just laid down last year

[desert agate]

Might just be JFK then

[strong plank]

and I can’t imagine there’s not pressure to fix it

since a lot of press was made about how expensive a mistake it is

[desert agate]

But just because Enty was laid down last year doesn't mean a lot of components weren't already procured

So who knows

[limber dune]

What does the bottom text fully say?

[chilly osprey]

I mean, I'd note that PoW's shaft line breaking isn't routine - that's extremely rare - but that's also not an issue inherent to the design.

As far as cost burden goes - it's arguably a strain for the British defense budget, but certainly not their economy.

Their economy is more than enough to sustain two carriers.

It could sustain more forces than it does currently, in fact, if their treasury was willing to make bigger uplifts to the defense budget.

But quite frankly, PoW's shaft issue is actually a good illustrator of why you want two carriers if you can get them.

Even though she was down for the count, QE was still around and took over most of her planed taskings for 2022-2023

Thus the RN didn't loose their carrier aviation capability in general in this period.

Another example is the Italians - their primary carrier, Cavour, is in drydock at Palermo at the moment for maintainence, and is scheduled to undergo some more work at Taranto in August.

But Garibaldi is still active, and can take over any missions Cavour would otherwise be filling - ex she is currently taking part in Neptune Strike 23-2 alongside an American CSG.

[lethal cobalt]

Best girl right here no cap

[spring briar]

[desert agate]

USS Canberra being led into Sydney harbour by HMAS Canberra

she is to be commissioned into the USN on the 22nd of July in Sydney, the first time the USN has commissioned a warship in an international port

[eager dove]

Shame it’s an LCS

😂

[desert agate]

i cant complain

built by a WA company

the Independence's are without a doubt the more capable LCS anyway, even if that isnt saying a lot

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1681338935417487362

U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute)

#OTD in 1926 during the U.S. occupation of Haiti, Marine Warrant Officer Faustin Wirkus was crowned Faustin II, king of the island of La Gonave, by the natives who believed he was the reincarnation of Emperor Faustin I. He reigned for 3 years before the Marines reassigned him.

Twitter · Jul 18, 2023, 4:23 PM

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/RCAF_ARC/status/1681362985707503623
https://twitter.com/RCAF_ARC/status/1681362988656123904

Royal Canadian Air Force (@RCAF_ARC)

French @Armee_de_lair and #RCAF air traffic controllers clear the launch of French Rafale B fighters as they depart for a mission during Exercise #MobilityGuardian in Palau on July 12.

Twitter · Jul 18, 2023, 5:59 PM

Royal Canadian Air Force (@RCAF_ARC)

The RCAF is taking part alongside 🇦🇺, 🇫🇷, 🇯🇵, 🇳🇿, 🇺🇸, 🇬🇧 in multiple locations across the Pacific spanning a 3,000 mile exercise area.

Photos by Emma Le Rouzic / armée de l'Air et de l'Espace

Twitter · Jul 18, 2023, 5:59 PM

[wintry moat]

I severely hope It's real

[manic latch]

Korean War in 1 minute

[warm finch]

Ah yes the "who won that one again?" war

[maiden citrus]

those two months in 1950 look like fanfiction

[deep apex]

Oh yeah I'm subbed to this guy on YT

Dude is immensely talented

[strong plank]

This ad isn’t military-related but it is history-related

[shrewd pecan]

throw it into the thread

[subtle prawn]

https://twitter.com/Konwashi_2/status/1681220521583837185

帝政サギシ (@Konwashi_2)

✪Fletcher class Aerial Destroyer
全陸地が浮遊大陸だった世界線のフレッチャー級駆逐艦。175隻が作られ、史上最も量産された飛行駆逐艦とされる。

Likes

1907

Retweets

396

Twitter · Jul 18, 2023, 8:33 AM

[maiden citrus]

[subtle prawn]

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2023/july/upgun-cutters-meet-todays-naval-threats

[manic latch]

https://www.army-technology.com/news/uk-mod-no-new-ships-tanks-or-jets-in-defence-command-paper-refresh/

wtf

[humble mulch]

[warm finch]

... I hereby retract my statement about the british having no money and replace it with them not wanting to spend any more money

[desert agate]

Just means the MoD isn't expanding its procurement

It's buying what it's already committed to buying and not much more

Which in some ways is fair enough, and on the bright side it does mean they aren't cutting capabilities

[runic prairie]

Be quiet before you ruin it.

[desert agate]

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-super-hornet-flies-on/

Ah fuck

[manic latch]

Ah

F-35 deal is delayed then

[desert agate]

Less delayed and more RAAF is sceptical

On the bright side it opens the possibility towards RAAF acquiring 6th gen fighters

[manic latch]

From whom

[desert agate]

[manic latch]

@spring briar explain this

[spring briar]

Rebated boat tail

Has the same benefits as a normal boat tail bullet (higher ballistic coefficient) but solves the issue of gas getting in front of the bullet when it leaves the barrel

[grave ravine]

Aus is already building drones for NGAD...

[desert agate]

Ghost bat isn't for NGAD

It's for F-35

[grave ravine]

While the RAAF is looking at it for F-35, the USAF is looking at a derivative of it for NGAD https://breakingdefense.com/2022/08/raaf-head-wont-be-deterred-by-unsafe-plaaf-us-ponders-aussies-loyal-wingman/?_ga=2.96939551.1406662759.1661178109-355712310.1658224166

[strong plank]

Wonder if the RAAF would go for F/A-XX

obviously it’d have to depend on how that program pans out

[manic latch]

I would like to purchase one

[desert agate]

USAF already has its own airpower teaming drone

[desert agate]

Given that F/A-XX is intended to replace Super Hornet in USN service, I'd say it's probably a good fit to replace Super Hornet in RAAF service

Canning the present plan for F-35 acquisition and keeping the Super Hornets to the mid 2030s does indicate that RAAF wants 6th gen

Evidently operational experience with F-35 has shown RAAF that it isn't the Super Hornet replacement they wanted

[strong plank]

Could also be a result of the money being needed elsewhere

like what happened with the MQ-9B acquisition last year

[desert agate]

Well they're opening a new fighter competition

[strong plank]

Ah

[desert agate]

So it's likely that they've reassessed the F-35 and it's fit within 1SQN

Finances are an obvious concern but given that the RAAF is arguably the most influential force in ADF, and army has already received cuts to its procurement, I don't think RAAF will take a major hit from AUKUS

[strong plank]

the main thing the RAAF would want is anti-ship capability right

so I could see F/A-XX being a better choice than the Air Force’s NGAD, assuming it was down to those two

[desert agate]

That's what 1SQN uses it's Super Hornets for yeah

[grave ravine]

The USAF doesn't want to put all its eggs in one basket with airpower teaming

[strong plank]

They’d probably also be competing against uh

it’s called Tempest right

[grave ravine]

But yeah I could see F/A-XX being a better fit for cost reasons too

[strong plank]

Cost reasons and a more similar mission set

[desert agate]

If USAF does buy MQ-28 it would be a bonus for our defence aviation industry

[grave ravine]

I actually find it likely that they will buy both XQ-58 and MQ-28

[desert agate]

Tempest is the only real competition I can see for F/A-XX in RAAF service

[strong plank]

The navy’s talked about how XX will be sixth generation and feature an open architecture similar to NGAD and the Raider

[desert agate]

Tempests issue is that it's a multinational program, therefore subject to delays

XX meanwhile, is American only and if we buy in, our input would only accelerate matters

[strong plank]

but from what little I’ve heard F/A-XX’s ambitions aren’t meant to be quite as lofty as NGAD’s

and I’d imagine that would help the price

[desert agate]

Given that B-21 was under budget and ahead of schedule, I'm hopeful for XX entering service in the early 2030s

Which lines up neatly with the retirement of the Super Hornets in the mid 2030s

Unfortunately it leaves RAAFs maritime strike capability in a very vulnerable position until then

[grave ravine]

I mean I wouldn't say in a very vulnerable position