Are nuclear aircraft carriers going to be completely outclassed by something like mixed-armament battleships were done in by Dreadnoughts?
Will it be something simple like a missile? Some new class of aircraft? Space weapons? A fucking virus?
In 2016, I can't believe that so much of our naval fighting strength rests within such juicy friggin' targets.
BILLIONS of dollars, thousands of sailors, and dozens of high-performance aircraft.
Something just doesn't seem right about this when I think about current and projected levels of technology.
Am I being dumb?
>pro-tip: No
>>30447224
Bump. No one up for a carrier discussion?
Only ship that could make a carrier obsolete is a space carrier.
>>30447224
whatever makes careers obsolete will have to be a force projection platform of some other design. maybe a giant unmanned drone carrier floating in the sky or a new class of transports, possibly hypersonic.
in a hundred years it might be a space station with rapid response teams ready to drop back to earth.
short answer is no, probably not in our lifetime. carriers work too well and have become the literal centerpiece of too much military doctrine to go away quickly.
>>30447224
>In 2016, I can't believe that so much of our naval fighting strength rests within such juicy friggin' targets.
The main strength of your enemy is always a juicy target. On the other hand, it's also your enemy's main strength. That makes it a very dangerous target, if you don't have the opposing strength to defeat it.
Also, in 2016 our naval fighting strength doesn't rest with the carrier. It rests with the *carrier group*.
The carrier group is a juicy target the same way Lee's Army of Northern Virginia was a juicy target: It's a powerful fighting force that can wreck your shit, but if you can beat it you win the war.
Right now, there's really nobody out there that can beat a carrier group. And there's not really any current or projected technology that will change that. Remember that any new tech will go to the carrier group as well. You'd basically have to un-invent jet airplanes, to make carrier groups obsolete.
>>30447224
>Are nuclear aircraft carriers going to be completely outclassed by something like mixed-armament battleships were done in by Dreadnoughts?
Come up with something that can kick ten kinds of ass while serving as a floating FOB at the same time
It's not like carriers just cruise around by themselves.
>>30447514
>tfw we will never have space marine battles as space marines are launched in pods down to the surface in atmospheric entry vehicles, with silent explosions ripping through space
>>30447817
>unmanned drone carrier
This feels like it would be a stalemate, at best, with the carrier group, to me.
>>30447224
>Am I being dumb?
Short answer: yes
Long answer: extremely dumb
>>30448260
Don't lasers and hyper velocity cannons have the potential to reduce air traffic quite dramatically?
>>30448322
>You will never be an ODST
it hurts.
>>30448826
It's your scenario, anon. Make your case. Start by solving the radar guidance problem.
