"Wheelerguy" (wheelerguy)
05/12/2015 at 06:22 • Filed to: None
1
11|
"Wheelerguy" (wheelerguy)
05/12/2015 at 06:22 • Filed to: None | 1
| 11 |
So, yeah. If you have, say, !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! (5 gigawatt), !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , and a modified !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! that launches !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! (modified with rocket propulsion and with Skeets that can latch on hulls and fire underwater as well as regular detonation) in one ship (say, !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! that can be used to guard the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , which would look a bit like the lead pic), and paired with the most advanced and effective targeting systems and radar in the US arsenal, how rekt can an enemy get?
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
I’m guessing pretty damn rekt.
Weaponized vanilla cars for your time.
Hot Takes Salesman
> Wheelerguy
05/12/2015 at 06:49 |
|
And if the enemy is on land, there shall be F/A-18 rekage
Axial
> Wheelerguy
05/12/2015 at 07:44 |
|
Those be some power hungry weapons.
Power hungry weapons that are supposed to be installed on ships that are also not running nuclear.
WTF are we doing not running nuclear on all USN ships?
Emissions standards indeed.
guinessboy2013
> Wheelerguy
05/12/2015 at 09:03 |
|
All this stuff talking about the Ponce....yet nothing mentions what a monumental rust bucket death trap that thing is.
Racescort666
> Wheelerguy
05/12/2015 at 09:13 |
|
|
Wheelerguy
> Axial
05/12/2015 at 09:38 |
|
IKR? For my dream battleship to make some sense it’s gotta have a reactor or two. Or four.
|
guinessboy2013
> guinessboy2013
05/12/2015 at 10:07 |
|
Really good guys on there though.
|
Axial
> Wheelerguy
05/12/2015 at 10:07 |
|
In all seriousness, I’m wondering if we won’t see another paradigm shift for navies when lasers and rail guns come out in force. Right now the carrier is the centerpiece, but it’s going to be cannon-fodder for ships armed with very-long-range, small-caliber, hyper-sonic ballistics. While I’m not a person-of-interest in the field, I highly doubt there is any interceptor in the world that can stop that.
The aircraft are also going to become utterly useless because the ships themselves are stealthed and because you can hit-scan the planes out of the sky with laser batteries. No more chaff, no more flares, don’t even necessarily need radar to automatically direct fire because any Joe Schmoe can use a laser pointer. The safest aircraft would be very high altitude in nature, resulting in some restrictions in what tools they can employ. The altitude that makes the laser less effective on them precludes them from also using lasers, and smart-guided munitions are slow enough to get shot down. Going to have to stick with air-to-surface missiles, and it’s going to have to be a really fast one.
uofime
> Axial
05/12/2015 at 10:48 |
|
high speed surface skimming missile swarms will still wreck a big ship. They can't be seen over the horizon and there's not enough time to engage them all before it's tool late. There's also torpedoes and I doubt it'll take long before these weapons systems are fitted to aircraft.
|
Axial
> uofime
05/12/2015 at 11:02 |
|
Torpedoes have always been a threat to big ships since the time they were invented, and remain a key consideration in ship design. High-speed surface skimming missiles launched by aircraft still have to descend from altitude and require a lock, presenting two weaknesses that are addressed by lasers and stealth, respectively, though they also make carriers even more vulnerable since such missiles can be used against them, too.
That’s the thing with the weapons fitted to aircraft. The aircraft themselves might have to get into visual range to use them or will have to fly so high that many of them become much weaker or completely useless. If the aircraft has to get into visual, then it can be swatted down by lasers. If it has to wait for its munitions to descend to operational altitudes, then that increases the reaction window for the target.
Aircraft being hard to take down and being able to attack targets without the battle group getting into range of the enemy battle group’s ship-board weapons are the only reasons carriers are so dominant. If either one of those things becomes untenable, then aircraft carriers cease to be the dominant ship and that role switches back to gunboats and electronic warfare suites.
|
uofime
> Axial
05/12/2015 at 11:42 |
|
there will have to be a change in tactics for attaching ships with laser defenses, aircraft need to stay out of their engagement range, the easiest way is to stay low, don't launch the weapons from 30k ft if you're in the engagement zone for the ships weapons systems. Also at long range even at the speed of light the time between firing and impact is such that if the target is taking evasive maneuvers the weapon will miss.
|
Axial
> uofime
05/12/2015 at 12:00 |
|
No it won’t. Light travels at 300 million meters per second. The Earth is 1,270,000 meters wide. It takes less than half a second for light to go from one end of the Earth to the other. Even at an extreme engagement distance of 200 kilometers, the amount the target moves between the shot and the hit could be measured in fractions of a millimeter.
And that’s what I’m saying; you won’t have a lock on the enemy ship without visual because of stealth technology, and staying low won’t help you against point-defense lasers. Even if your aircraft is using stealth tech, there are LIDAR systems being worked on right now to counter that threat.
The only other weakness a laser would have is hazy atmospherics.