Saw this play out over on Reddit this weekend. I really dislike this trend of moving the goalposts instead of just admitting the mistake. This seems to be a trend among the youtubers- Admit fault and amend with a BUT...
AdamGillrie
adamgillrie-silentintrusion
Of course Kotaku won’t admit it, and will be on the side of the media (for obvious reasons), but the media who attacked Pewdiepie are scared of him. They actually do want to bring him down because the media are scared YouTube is taking over. They’re slowly dying, and they’re grabbing onto any story they can just to…
You start talking in Spanish!
Well the ship is in bad shape, there are more than one report of that. Though, its certainly a leap to go from that to “this just shows how bad we are off for icebreakers”. As far as I can tell from reading, there is no need for more than 2 heavy icebreakers in the fleet in addition to the medium one (healy) that we…
So I was just reading up on this ship and Im a little confused. She had a $57 million refit completed in 2012 and it was supposed to extend the service life of the ship 6-8 years. that would mean 2018-2020. The article makes it sound like its been chugging along on bailing wire and spit since the 70's. Doesn’t…
Nope, not at all. Icebreakers’ hulls have little in common with the shape and structure of any other military or commercial vessels. Small, light duty breakers needed to keep harbor channels open are a bit more common, but the medium and heavy icebreakers the Coast Guard needs are highly specialized vessels.
i just re-read the article about russia’s icebreakers. their shiny new nuke-powered one cost $1.74 BILLION!
How do you suppose the open sea lanes required for that were guaranteed?
Subs aren’t keepin up with a carrier at speed, the ships don’t go straight they are constantly turning and doubling back. The carrier CAP will take out the air recon planes or the guided missile destroyers Aegis systems will. A carrier is a tiny object in a vast sea. It also has jamming abilities and point defense…
They move quite fast, satellites are shit for constant target tracking as they don’t stay overhead, unless geostationary... which are too distant to provide the necessary resolution. Carriers are turning at forty miles per hour.
Investing in the carrier fleet is a large part of why we haven’t faced a near equal opponent...
Sinking a carrier is suicide for the attacker, even if not nuclear the response would be similar to Pearl Harbor or 9/11... Americans don’t ever say hey you got us so good we’re going to quit.
We haven’t faced a near equal opponent since WW2. I think that has a great deal to do with why our carriers haven’t come under attack.
The bombers need to be refueled. The pilots need rest. The missiles need to be reloaded.
By that (lack of) logic, no US carrier fought a battle in WWII either…
But once a carrier is there it can react much more quickly than Kansas.
Unless you count the planes that they launched. You know, their entire function...
The largest threats to the American military are not exactly next door... Carriers give the US a strategic advantage. Are carriers “easier” to take down these days? Perhaps
“Easy to sink.” People who don’t know what they are talking about shouldn’t write articles pretending to know what they are talking about.