First, a few basic facts. Our investment in our military has grown to an incredible level. In 2011, not counting our little IraqNam invasion, as well as our pointless waste of life in Afghanistan, (an additional $37 billion), our military budget was an unaudited $668 BILLION dollars. Money well spent? Heh, I have a bridge in New Jersey to sell you. More about the legally required "audits" of the pentagon in another post. It will cause too much anger.
Here are just two weapons that our purported future enemies have.
SS-N-30s, the kind used by the Soviets, eh, Russian Navy in its latest attack on US allies seeking to depose Syrian leader Assad, were thought to be limited to a range of 150-250 miles. It turns out that these puppies were a bit longer legged, flying more than 1,000 miles from a surprisingly small naval ship. For a brand new weapon, which Putin clearly is showing off, 22 out 26 missiles hitting accurately is not bad. The first US cruise missiles had a far worse start up ratio. For sale? For use against the US? To support Assad? Any way you look at it, these missiles reflect a big step up for a aged, bloated military that was basically useless after the Cold War ended.
China has the The WU-14 hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV). It is released at 62 miles up, then accelerates to 7680 miles per hour, or Mach 10. Allegedly, its internal nav and guidance system is supposed to make it good enough to find and hit a large ship. Given its incredible speed, it needs no explosive. At Mach 10, the inertia alone will destroy anything it hits.
Ineffably stupid navy spending? You decide.
The US is not lagging behind. Much. The often maligned Tomahawk missile has a range of 1200-1500 miles, and can carry a warhead weighing 1000 lbs. but it is limited to 550 MPH. These missiles can and will be shot down with Russia's latest anti-aircraft weapons. These babies run $1.3 million a copy. We have unsuccessfully tested our own hyper cruise missiles, but we cannot get them to work yet.
OUR MAGINOT LINE
The US Navy is a resource hog. Your standard US carrier fleet consists of Nimitz carrier ( soon to be replace by the Gerald Ford class, at $9- 14 BILLION a pop), one Ticonderoga class cruiser ( $1 billion each), two guided missile cruisers ($1 billion each), a guided missile destroyer (the Areligh Burke class runs $1.43 billion, not including the missiles), an anti sub destroyer, and at least one frigate. Also tagging along are two attack subs, intent on providing the big momma some anti-sub protection. They each cost more than a billion each.
The jet plane assigned to the Gerald Ford is the horrible, terrible, untrustworthy, overpriced F-35, which cannot do what it was promised to do, and has terrible range and payload issues, complicated by useless software, weapons systems that don't exist, is slower than planned, and is unfortunately far less stealthy. In fact, it is a mess, probably one that cannot be fully cleaned up.
One big argument for the F-35 was a promise of far lower maintenance costs, and much more readiness. In a pig's eye. The unexpected maintenance issues are several times the F-22's. and its down time is more than 10x the F-22 after one hour of flight. Not to mention that most of its promised weapons don't even exist.
So, a military carrier group (which congressional TeaBuggerers want to increase in number) runs in excess of $20 BILLION each and carries, or will carry, a useless bucket of shit that cannot do what it was designed to do. Each F-35b costs more than the entire State of Illinois budget for its court system, i.e., $325,000,000 each. The fleet has four major dangers, of which only the anti-sub and anti- manned aircraft attacks can be defended.
Aircraft carriers are slow, noisy, bulky, resource demanding, and face four major threats. Manned aircraft, including some 5th generation jets that will match or exceed what the F-35 can do; cruise missiles, including hypersonic weapons - which we cannot spot in time, much less put up any viable defense; submarines, as both China and Russia have some elegant silent propulsion subs which rely on stolen US designs, especially in their drive technology. Both have extremely sophisticated anti-ship weaponry, including the latest generation torpedoes, which can run silent and/or extremely high speeds. Lastly, high tech mobile mines - silent, but deadly stalkers that are all but invisible to detection. These monsters can take down a carrier without anyone knowing it is under attack.
THE ORIGINAL MAGINOT LINE
The French decided to prevent any attack on their soil after the incredible death toll of The Great War, which we call World War One. It was also called the "war to end all wars," a comment which is now laughable, given how many wars of choice we have started.
It consisted of many miles of fortified, tunnels, barricades, and defensive weaponry, and was assumed by all military experts (western, non-German) to be impregnable. Its size was monstrous, stretching from Belgium to the Ardennes forest (which was believed to be impassible by the top French Generals) and consisted of 45 major forts, 97 smaller forts, hundreds of kilometers of tunnels, and spacious living areas for thousands of soldiers.
"Although the name "Maginot Line" suggests a rather thin linear fortification, it was quite deep, varying (i.e., from the border to the rear area) from between 20 to 25 kilometres (12 to 16 miles). It was composed of an intricate system of strong points, fortifications and military facilities such as border guard posts, communications centres, infantry shelters, barricades, artillery, machine gun and anti-tank gun emplacements, supply depots, infrastructure facilities and observation posts. These various structures reinforced a principal line of resistance, made up of the most heavily armed ouvrages, which can be roughly translated as fortresses or major defensive works."
Wiki
The Maginot line was the most modern, extremely expensive answer to war. No one would dare attack France because to do so through the Maginot would be suicide.
"While the Maginot Line was impervious to most forms of attack (including aerial bombings and tank fire), and had state-of-the-art living conditions for garrisoned troops, air conditioning,[1] comfortable eating areas and underground railways, it was strategically ineffective. Although it prevented a direct attack, the Germans invaded through Belgium, going around the Maginot Line. The German army came through the Ardennes forest and the Low Countries, completely sweeping by the line, causing the French army to surrender and conquering France in about six weeks."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...
It was also the greatest military blunder outside of Pearl Harbor. Not only did the Nazi war machine easily skirt the entire defensive network, they removed the massive weapons and transferred them to the English Channel, to defend against any invading force.
Today's modern aircraft carrier is Ameica's contribution to out-dated military theories, our version of the Maginot Line. It is monstrous, carries thousands of military personnel, and can only travel with all of its ships together. It is also impossible to defend.
One hyper cruise missile would use its velocity and mass to demolish (or render useless) any ship it contacts, including a carrier. Not that it matters much, given the many F-35 issues which render it less than useful today. One manned pilot, with long range, stealthy missiles could take out at least some ships, because a cloud of missiles will overwhelm even our best automatic defenses. One sub, stealthy, powerful, deadly, could not just take out the big momma, but several other ships, as well. And lastly, if the Russians or Chinese have any military Intel, including stuff stolen from a formers excretory of State's private mail server, they will know where the fleets are going. Sat Intel is extremely good, and it is frankly impossible to hide a carrier fleet. One well placed guided underwater mine could make your day quite miserable, unless you like swimming in the ocean. Of course, if the gloves are off, the expected paths of our fleets will be well mined. Unlike those bobbing iron balls with spikes, the modern mines hide on the bottom, invisible to everyone, until they are activated and sent after a ship
Even discounting space based weapons, which both the Chinese and Russians have been working with, your modern carrier has four major threats, and few options with which to defend itself. A savvy opponent will exploit those threats, and render this $20 BILLION homage to the last world war totally useless.
The whole idea of a carrier fleet was to have a mobile military base. It would carry jets a month distance and act like a floating island, armed to the teeth, and able to travel to hot spots. But given the short legs that the F-35 has (unbelievably short, unless you add drop tanks, which destroys the remaining stealthy design), the carrier fleets have to move in far closer than they would like, getting ever closer to the enemy, with the obvious increased risks that such positioning poses. But technological advances can render the entire fleet useless. If one fleet is successfully attacked, how long would it take before the Navy pull the carriers out of the fleets and hide the remaining ships close to home, perhaps even benching the carriers?
But, you have to hand it to the GOP, not only are they forcing weapons systems upon our military, which it often does not want but they want to increase the number of carrier fleets. Absolutely, let's build more Maginot lines. Let's take what is based on WW2 warfare and theory, and make more of them. At over $20,000,000,000 per fleet. Each of which can be defanged, if not sunk by a couple of millions dollars of missiles, torpedoed, and mines.
If any pro-military TeaBugger tells you we need a bigger navy, ask him/her/it what to do about our carrier problem.