On 3/9/2015 1:58 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.”

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.

Aircraft carriers are there to project force against 3d world
countries. When Zumwalt was asked how long our carriers would last
against the Soviets he said "a couple days".

I will say, we have pretty good detection capability against subs but
that is not the only danger.

The Chinese have a truck mounted missile that could take out a carrier
from 2 thousand miles away. The opinion about how many the Aegis
screen could take down is mixed.


Unless nuclear, one, two or even several 500kg (explosive) missiles are
unlikely to sink an aircraft carrier. Damage? Sure. But permanently
disable or sink? Not likely.