Originally Posted by
Heathrow Harry
Ken
Of the " high altitude heavy bombers, torpedo bombers, dive bombers, kamikazes, land based jet aircraft, nuclear weapons, biological weapons, EMP weapons, nuclear submarines, air independent submarines, anti-ship cruise missiles, super sonic anti-ship cruise missiles, anti-ship ballistic missiles" how many have actually been targeted at a carrier since 1945?
Land based jet-aircraft & anti-ship cruise missiles - in the Falklands - and that's it. And they were enough to give the RN a serious attack of the vapours
The rest have never been used - I suspect that the USA would not take kindly to anyone nailing a CVN so unless you are very small, or intend to kick off a major war you stay clear of them - but that doesn't make them invulnerable
Selective as ever. Number one, I don't think anyone is suggesting that carriers are invulnerable. Instead it's merely being pointed out that they're nowhere near as vulnerable as some would make out and more importantly, their relative vulnerability compared to fixed airbases is a lot closer than those same people would care to admit.
Secondly, last time I looked, no carriers were sunk or even damaged despite the best efforts of the Argentine air force and navy and despite the absence of AEW cover for those carriers at the time.
Lastly, one might reasonably argue that STRKFLTLANT was prepared and trained to go up against SSN, plus fast heavy bombers toting supersonic ASM in their own backyard - and win. Not a service renowned for kamikaze tactics......
Standing by for whataboutery.....