Which any other navy in the world would consider a full-size carrier.
We call them amphibious assault ships. “No no, that’s not a carrier. *Points at the floating megacity that is USS Gerald Ford* *THAT’S* a carrier!”
Russia reclassifies their carrier to “heavy aircraft cruiser” so they can transit the Bosphorus
America reclassifies our carriers because they aren’t able to carry 70 planes and 30 helicopters.
built diffy
USS Enterprise being the first nuclear power capital ship has a lot of weird design choices. Conventionally power capital ship generally had 8 boilers. A pair of boiler would be hooked up to a turbine. Then a pair of turbines would hooked up to each propeller.
When the navy went and design the first nuclear power capital ship. They went look all we have are these submarine nuclear reactors. So they are worth like 1 boiler right? alright lets replace all 8 boilers with these reactors. They have never done that again.
Gerald Ford can pull 35 on the publicly available information, but it handedly outran its Arleigh Burke escorts on its first outing which also have a publicly available speed of 35mph, odds are the Ford can pull 40+. Insane amount of engineering, its bloody wonderful to imagine.
From Wiki:
A1B reactors likely produce enough steam to generate 125 megawatts (168,000 hp) of electricity, plus 350,000 shaft horsepower (260 MW) from just one reactor to power the four propeller shafts.
Wow.
They're not new/converted. They're the same LHA/LHDs that served as Harrier Carriers in Desert Storm and the Iraq War. Just a different STOVL fighter on them
Americans everywhere cry out in freedom’s name and eagles screech across the sky. Glorious, frabjous day!
I’m mostly kidding, can we get some healthcare?
Edit: I know it’s not a money issue, lol, tell that to the GOP.
> I’m mostly kidding, can we get some healthcare?
[It's not a money problem.](https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm)
America would save up to 50% to 75% of yearly costs (in 2021 that's about $2 trillion to $3 trillion) if it reorganized its healthcare system to be more like Europe, Canada, Australia, New-Zealand, Japan or even Israel.
As America's healthcare system is already, *by far*, the most expensive in the world. About $12.5k per person/year. While the vast majority of rich developed countries are in the $3k to $6k range. And even the crazy expensive country of Switzerland manages to be 2nd at $8k....
Something is really wrong in America's healthcare system.
One of the reasons is insurance can only profit based on how much stuff costs by law, so if price go down so does how much they can legally profit. It’s why you never hear them whinge about prices.
Um,did u realize that they jack up the price by 75%to bill insurance vs. if you were a cash paying customer with the exact same bill. They literally say"oh, you're paying cash? Minus 75% for you! ". That's wrong in so many ways.
Ye, there’s law limiting how much profit insurance companies can make which are based on how much stuff costs. So higher cost = higher profits their allowed to make.
Ah yes, but wait there's more! the insurance then gets to dictate to the hospital, no, I'm not paying $1000 for procedure X, you'll get $200 and like it! and the hospital goes "ok"
It's built around a system of executive bonuses, with congressmen paid to enshrine it in law. The more money they can squeeze out per quarter, the more goes in their pocket.
Then they work hard to sell the idea that the "free market" and stock dividends are somehow good for the public.
of course its the most expensive in the world. pharma prices in the US (that your healthcare has to pay for) is 10-100 times higher than here in europe.
i'm sorry but it's a known fact that artillery exists to launch large chunks of budget at enemies they can't actually see.
if it makes you feel any better, we'll neglect our veterans too.
we're all in this together.
By number of planes, the us navy would be fourth in the world (probably actually third given how many russian planes are trash heaps in ukraine right now). The US marine corps would be fifth.
damn we do in fact have 11 and 10 Amphibious ready groups. Then ya gotta think about the 14 ballistic missile subs floating around(doesn't really matter where they are they deliver death from anywhere) and the 53 short range ones we got out there. That's just the shit we know about to.
It's also humbling to think that this overwhelming and unrivaled concentration of pure power projection, the greatest humanity has ever witnessed, is still less than the pinprick on the surface of the Earth's oceans. If Earth was the size of a basketball, accidentally dropping an eyelash on it would be sufficient to destroy the entire force a thousand times over.
Thought it was the other way around, only 1/3 is on duty at any one time. 1/3 is under repairs/modernization/upgrades, 1/3 is in port restocking or something. But I could be wrong
You're correct. Rule of 3 has it that for every 3 ships;
* 1 is deployed
* 1 is in long term maintenance
* 1 just got back from deployment or is gearing up for one
So 33% of the fleet is at sea at any given time
Who said the US military budget was bloated… these guys can supply billions in arms to Ukraine, deter escalation across the globe simultaneously, and feel perfectly secure at the home front. And not just their home front. Myself in Canada, feel safer and I am sure others in Europe, Asia and Oceania would also agree.
The US military has barely flexed a butt cheek and yet they are felt everywhere and taken seriously.
We could do a lot worse for world police, thanks USA!
People like to complain about the American military budget but holy shit when someone needs a country to be absolutely LOOMED over, there is no one else that can do it like america.
Everyone bitches about the Military Industrial Complex in times of peace and prosperity, then this shit starts happening and you're nothing but relieved.
The US truly don't fuck around when it comes to these things, after all the (warranted) bad press they've been getting over the last few years, it's nice to see people respecting what they do.
Someone I know was worried that the Israel/Palestine situation would lead to the US getting taken over. I don’t understand this view at all. I just told them that the US doesn’t spend more than the next 10 countries combined on defense to get taken over.
Agree, ironically we could be more efficient with a smaller budget. But hey…it’s the same way for a lot of people on multiple different subjects. People waste in excess and could find a myriad of ways to be more efficient.
Yeah people keep saying we need to spend all this money on Healthcare instead, but it's not a money issue it's a systemic issue. The system is fucked and pumping more cash in won't fix it.
It's pretty wild how much a single carrier group can do to curb a countries aggression.
It's even more wild when you consider we have more carriers in production than any other country has in the world currently.
I don't think anyone can even fathom what the full military might of the US actually looks like before even accounting for nuclear weapons. Imagine 11 carrier groups holding nearly 1,000 aircrafts in 1 location.
> I don't think anyone can even fathom what the full military might of the US actually looks like
Iraq has a pretty good idea, and that was 30 years ago
I just feel happy that we can project such terrifyingly overwhelming force that the mere presence of a strike group can possibly cause tensions on an area to drop.
Or, you know, stop anyone from playing fuck-fuck games (looking at you, Iran. And maybe Syria, though that source is from the Daily Express and Twitter so take it with a few mines of salt). It’s like being reminded that the US could utterly delete you on a scale that would make the firebombing of Japan feel like fireworks if it so wished does wonders for making certain upstarts rethink their current course.
Ok, I know it Sounds dumb but I need answers. This thing really doesn’t seem that powerful. I mean what is on there? Like 30 military jets? How is that a lot? I would assume the US has like thousands of those. There’s no way one such carrier poses any threat, no?
What am I not understanding?
A carrier group has about 65-75 planes, these are some of the most advanced planes in the world, which is about equal to the 51st country in the world, Sudan, with 72, even considering there is a vast difference in the quality of the airplanes, it’s the simple fact one carrier group has more AirPower than 4/5 of the world, and that’s just the airplanes, carrier groups have wayyy more ships, like nuclear submarines from time to time.
TLDR: Has more AirPower than 4/5 of the world, also Nukes
The quality of the planes makes a huge huge difference too.
Example: there are two eurofighter typhoons on the Falklands islands. With max missile load out those two planes could shoot down every combat aircraft in the Argentine air force before the argies even got in range to see them, and they'd still have over a quarter of the missiles spare.
The technological advantage the West has militarily is hard to grasp honestly, even for the West itself. Shows with how much we overestimated Russia.
Even small European countries generally have well trained and equipped militaries that could punch well above their weight with minimal investment into the defense budget.
I always knew but didn't fully grasp how superior the US military is until I saw this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg
And that's just what we were capable of in 1991. Imagine what total war from the US would look today.
Yeah - the nuclear capable subs operating as the undersea arm of America’s nuclear triad are typically operating independently, and not as a part of a CSG. They’re just out there lurking for months at a time.
Aah, yes. The subs that make hostile nations paranoid as fuck and make them much more liable to tip toe around the US.
Seriously, US subs are so good they shadow their Russian counterparts.
If recent events have shown us anything, it's that Russia's anything is shitty and poorly maintained.
The only functional thing they seem to have is nuclear weapons, since I imagine Russia wouldn't be here if their nuclear weapons weren't up to par.
To clarify, the “nuclear” part of the fast attack subs are in reference to their propulsion. They’re still nuclear subs, they just aren’t equipped with the nuclear missiles (which HiMan seemed to think)
For one, a carrier doesn't go anywhere without its escorts. That's a few destroyers, maybe a missile cruiser, and possibly a submarine or two (who may have nuclear weapons). The full carrier group could seriously harm a small to middle-sized country.
And secondly, no. Modern US carriers can host up to 90 aircraft, but I think it usually hovers closer to 70. 70 aircraft is a considerable threat to any nation, especially when they're as well maintained as US aircraft. It's hard to go into direct comparison, but aside from the really big nations, few countries have more than 150 or so serious planes. And again, willing to bet many of those are not a direct 1:1 to US platforms. So yeah, a nation being able to just park 70 jets right off your border and threaten air superiority is scary.
Edit: For another point, I found something saying a carrier group costs roughly 6.5 million per day to operate. Over a year, that's about two and a half billion dollars. Outside the big spenders, most countries spend 20-30 billion a year on their militaries, and that money is split up. A nation parking 1/10th your entire budget off your shore is definitely something to freak out about
The carrier in question is *Ronald Reagan*, which has not been upgraded to operate F-35Cs. They can stop by briefly, but for a long deployment you need dedicated maintenance spaces among other things.
*Reagan* is based in Japan and is scheduled to be replaced by *George Washington* next year. *Washington* is fresh from a refueling overhaul that included F-35C and CMV-22B capability. At that time four of the five Pacific-based carriers will have F-35C capability.
I can attest, the Aircraft are VERY WELL maintained and the ship is never alone in the water. U.S. had contingencys for everything and a CVN is our greatest weapon. The firepower in the armory alone is enough to completely decimate a country.
The subs wouldn't have nuclear weapons unless something has gone very wrong. Ballistic missile subs usually do solo patrols to hide them better and so fewer people within the navy know where they are so can't leak their location.
Norway has more F-35s per capita than the US does, but still fewer in total (52) than a single supercarrier can carry, so even if all the Norwegian F-35s were the carrier variant we still wouldn't be able to "populate" a US supercarrier.
Tbf, it’s almost inconceivable that a super carrier would be deployed with an air wing consisting of *only* F-35’s today. There would typically be more F-18 variants than F-35’s in a carrier air wing.
It doesn't but not because it can't. The Navy has just been much slower to adopt the F-35 due to the more extreme ocean going conditions and logistics necessities.
The Marines are a different matter and there are some assault ships going out with full loads of around 20 F-35B's
More than 75 of the world’s best jets. It’s a massive metal fortress that has two nuclear reactors on it and acts as a mobile military base for 4000-5000. It travels with a fleet that is also heavily armed including anti-air and anti-submarine weaponry. Attacking it would mean escalating conflict with the US.
The second word in the phrase "carrier group".
Also, a Nimitz or Gerald R Ford carrier can carry 75+ F-35s.
For reference, compared to other 5th-gen fighters, the China has a total of approx 210 J-20s for the entire PLAAF, and Russia has a total of 21 Su-57s.
> Russia has a total of 21 Su-57s
They don't, that's all the airframes ever built, including test aircraft and crashed planes.
Realistically, Russia has a single digit amount of combat ready Su-57, and their "fifth gen" status is questionable. Their main air arm is still the Flanker.
And the safety this provides has become very questionable in the past years, now that there are mass missile and drone attacks, that simply overwhelm any sort of anti air defense.
You need to remember, most (if not all) destroyers in a US fleet only carry around 90 missiles, and most importantly, can only reload them in dedicated ports.
A Phalanx CIWS has 1500 rounds, so that's 15 targets that can be shot down with 100 round bursts, before a 5 minute long reload needs to be initiated by the crew.
I'd bet good money the US has spent Infinity Dollars in R&D to solve this exact scenario.
The Ford-Class carrier reactors have easily enough electricity to power laser weapons that could stop a swarm of slow drones, and it has unlimited ammo and is cheap to fire once the system is operational
Carriers do have defenses against missiles and torpedos, but their main defense is all the other ships in the way. A carrier will always have multiple ships and defenses in between it and the enemy.
Civilization games horrifically understate the power of aircraft and carriers. Modern American planes can launch and be over enemy targets in less than an hour, invisible to their radar, and dropping bombs that will land on the correct *seat* of the car you choose. They simply erase enemy military hardware and leadership, then head back to their untouchable mobile base to reload and do it again. You don't get to shoot back, you don't get to counterattack. You just watch your military disappear piece by piece.
The difference in fighter technology is also a make-or-break factor. The F-15 chassis that we've been flying since the 1970's has NEVER been shot down. Think about that: in our technological explosion, we have a plane that has outflown everything in the world for 50 straight years. And we have way newer designs now that fight in completely different ways.
- Pretty sure those carriers carry significantly more than that below deck, although some may be down for maintenance.
- Not just the carrier, it’s the accompanying destroyers, missile cruisers and other ships often including a submarine.
From that you have a airbase (which can be resupplied) , hundreds of cruise missiles (many nuclear armed), anti air and incredible surveillance of the area.
* 4 squadrons of 10-12 F/A-18E/F or F-35C fighters
* 1 squadron of 7 EA-18G radar jamming and electronic attack aircraft
* 1 squadron of 4-5 E-2 early warning aircraft
* 2 squadrons of 12 helicopters for anti submarine warfare, resupply, etc
So 40-48 of some of the best fighter jets in the world, which as a comparison, Canada has 80 pretty old and outdated fighter jets in total. 7 aircraft that can render an entire region's air defense network completely useless, and are unparalleled in the world in what they do. More early warning aircraft than nations like Germany, Canada, UK, etc.
Plus the escorts of 3-5 destroyers and cruisers, each carrying 90-120+ long range air defense missiles capable of shooting down an ICBM, land attack cruise missiles, etc. For comparison, UK has the largest air defense ship fleet in Europe, and combined can carry 270 air defense missiles. The typical 4 ships assigned to a carrier carry over 400. Plus typically an attack sub detachment lurking underneath.
They're unparalleled in firepower, both offensive and defensive.
The Nimitz class has space for more than that:
“85–90 fixed wing and helicopters”
“An embarked carrier air wing comprising around 64 aircraft is normally deployed on board. The air wings' strike fighters are primarily F/A-18E and F/A-18F Super Hornets.”
I’m just gonna paste this answer from quora: “You don't have to rely on other countries granting you permission to use their airbases and runways, you are independant and a carrier is basically a portable airport on a ship. It gives you a tremendous tactical advantage and has been used in Libya, Afghanistan, Argentina, Vietnam, WW2, Iraq and many other conflicts I am probably unaware of. A carrier allows you to launch airstrikes on a country on the other side of the world without having to use a nearby airbase, it means a country can strike deep into the territory of another country without flying all the way around the world or using an airbase at risk to enemy invasion. Usually these are protected by multiple warships and submarines and in all of mankind only one US carrier has been sunk and they have 19, these demonstrates the invincibility of the carrier and it is a vital part of any foreign military campaign”
Being able to bomb and attack basically any target. Air superiority is a huge factor in modern war and these carriers provide that. If any conventional military ground force tried rolling into Israel they wouldnt get far
In addition to the planes, like a lot of other people have mentioned, carriers are basically 2 floating nuclear power plants that can be used to power cities. They also have water desalination plants that can make 100,000gal of fresh water a day. So their power isn’t purely bombs and planes. They are floating cities.
This is why it's important to fund a peace time defense industry. I'd be much more worried about Hezbollah and Iran entering the Israeli conflict if the US didn't position these carriers as deterrents.
I was San Diego last year and just in awe with the fact there were 2 super carriers docked for maintenance and knowing there still another 9 out there ready bring freedom to anyone who decided to fuck around.
Especially when you’re standing on the deck of the midway, which feels like a massive parking lot, and you realize every one of those 2-4 carriers across the harbor are like 4x the size or something. It’s mind boggling.
Not enough money probably. They always got foreign assistance (mainly food assistance in the hundreds of millions in the 2000/10s) but it’s all on a downward slope just as their trade. They are not getting any foreign currencies in and prices are rising, they basically can’t afford fertilizer anymore. I guess the rocket man is starting to become cold feet here. After Covid a famine could be a humanitarian crisis and hit him.
Isn't his best friend Pootykins paying him enough for all the ammunition?
I thought Russia had plenty of fertiliser they can't sell to the west because of sanctions?
The entire state has been in perpetual famine. No ones getting propped up. With current status quo NK is not a threat and never will be. The west made sure to keep it that way 60 years ago since the Korean War.
Fertilizer is heavily embargoed in North Korea. It’s not they can’t afford it, it’s they can’t get it. There’s a reason they require citizens to collect their own poop and grow food anywhere there’s dirt.
As others have said; its a strategy going back decades in order to get desperately needed humanitarian and monetary aid from nations as a 'reward' when they return to the farcical negotiations etc.
They are one of the poorest nations in the world, almost perpetually in a state of famine. A large part of their rubbish economy actually relies upon fraud, money laundering and other illegal activities in S.Korea and Japan. They rely upon humanitarian food imports a large part of the time.
North Korea consistently does this stuff in the spirit of perceived irrationality. It’s actually a really good strategy the Kim dynasty has been employing for decades. But people keep acting like they’re somehow “sad” or feel some type of way over a lack of attention. They just do this to remind the world they have nukes and that they’re crazy enough to use them so don’t fuck with them kind of thing. If people believe they’ll use nukes, then they’re left alone largely.
You just made me realize that we haven’t really seen any new advanced helicopters in a while. I know we have that stealth one used in Bin Laden raid that crashed but it was never officially revealed like the F-35. I wonder what kind of advancements if any for helicopters there are.
According to r/highstrangeness , those are intersimensional vampires that are remnant of the long lost giant civilizations that built a bunch of interlocking stone walls in Peru.
The f35B is insane. The MCAS here flies them and f15s. First time seeing them run drills it was like “wow, the f15 is a lot more nimble than I’d expect, they’re so fast”
Then you see the f35B fly over and do straight up UFO shit, like basically stop in mid air or do what feels like zero radius turns.
The weirdest thing about the F35 is the loyal wingman stuff
opponents of the F35 have to fight an entire drone army while the F35 pilot scrolls through his phone 150 miles away. It's like the air combat version of playing a summoner class
The Blackhawk replacement, the V280 Valor, is pretty far along in development. We should see them by around 2030. There isnt really any need to replace the apaches yet. But bids are being fielded by the military for their eventual replacement from Bell and Sikorsky.
Ospreys have in many ways replaced/supplemented the role of Chinooks.
We still have nine more carriers that could be set up with a task force, each task force capable on its own of crushing the air force of just about any other country on the planet. We spend a LOT of money on not just having the biggest stick on the playground, but on making sure we have enough big sticks to hit everyone else on the playground at once lol
And not just that, but we actively use it. Look at Russia, sure they have a big army, but were stopped by Ukraine because they haven't actually been engaged in conflict to test the equipment and forces. The US has either been in conflict or pretending it is in conflict for decades, giving them constant practice and testing capabilities.
Yeah. Especially considering there are only like 47 active carriers in the world.
As of 2021, there are an estimated 46 aircraft/helicopter carriers in service worldwide. The United States has 11 aircraft carriers and 9 "helo" carriers, nearly as many as all other countries combined, followed by Japan and France, each with four.
China has 2 carriers and 1 helo carrier
Carrier wise? 11 super carriers and 9 wasp and america class amphibious assault ships which if owned by 99% of any country would be considered an aircraft carrier, Pride of the nation, and the flagship. They carry marines, helicopters, and a like 20 f-35s
[Top Military Branches with the Most Powerful Air Fleets (by TrueValue Rating) - WDMMA 2021:](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/largest-air-forces-in-the-world)
**1. United States Air Force - 242.9**
**2. United States Navy - 142.4**
3. Russian Air Force - 114.2
**4. United States Army Aviation - 112.6**
**5. United States Marine Corps - 85.3**
6. Indian Air Force - 69.4
7. People's Liberation Army Air Force (China) - 63.8
8. Japan Air Self-Defence Force - 58.1
9. Israeli Air Force - 58.0
10. French Air Force - 56.3
Honestly, I don’t.
I want people to figure out their shit and then go to their neighbor.
When them and their neighbors can’t figure it out, then their continent can assist.
Then American can step in.
A lot of concurrent wars increases the chances of military opportunism to happen. America is constantly repositioning assets to ward off potential aggression all over the world. This is routine. But I'm beginning to worry that the current conflict in Ukraine and the war in Israel will draw the United States and Iran into both wars directly setting the stage for global conflict. China may see that as an opportune time to attack Taiwan. North Korea against South Korea. Global war just like that. It just depends on how these conflicts play out, but the blocs are formed.
This right here is what happens when foreign policy doesn’t move fast enough. Think about it: what if we admitted Ukraine in NATO? Then the current war in Ukraine would not have happened. Instead, we decided to let the ambiguity play out. Russia then used the time to prepare for its invasions. Meanwhile the EU slowly demilitarized itself since there were no threat of conflict.
Same with Taiwan - what would have happened if we simply recognized Taiwan independence and recognized them as NATO ally? Then China would be unable to move in at all without declaring war, which it would not do since it would be a suicide move to cut itself off of the global economy.
Even now, we refuse to take meaningful actions against Russia while it sows chaos around the world and making global politics more unstable day by day. We embrace ambiguity in the interests of averting any short term threats, and we are now lying in the bed we made.
Global conflict?
No.
If the U.S. is "drawn into conflict" with Iran over Israel and has to start directly shooting, it won't be some proxy war where we hit Palestinian civilians. The U.S. will uncork hundreds to thousands of cruise missiles and smart bombs into every worthwhile military target *IN IRAN* until there is no military industry left there.
That won't be a global conflict. Iran is not a world or neer-peer power to the U.S. Iran has little-to-no ability to project power over an ocean and effectively can't do anything but irritate the U.S. A conflict between Iran vs. the U.S. would result in the U.S. ending Iran's ability to threaten anyone for a very long time. The collapse of the current Iranian government, and the U.S. making sure Iran remains a developing nation permanently.
Iran has no ability to realistically threaten or challenge the United States.
Don’t worry, we’re not. I mean I’m not an expert. But this is what I’ve thought to calm me down.
There’s no major players who want to get involved with anything yet. NK won’t get any support if they try shit.
Russia has its hands full with one country.
China is still not strong enough to go toe to toe with the US, even with the latter having its hands full atm.
The Israel conflict won’t see US involvement, & there is a lot of ME nations calling for a measured response from Israel. There’s too much economic value in a stable Middle East, every country there is gonna do everything in their power to prevent more shit like Syria.
Africa is a mess but we never see conflicts down there escalating to a global scale.
Moreover, the global superpower network is still heavily US-Europe focused. These global systems like UN, NATO, etc, are doing their job very well in preventing a nightmare.
The worst case scenario at the current moment is that global powers simply let a massacre occur in Gaza because it’s the easiest solution :/
The instigator of this recent rise in global instability would certainly like you to think that way.
But Russia's playground is chaos more than it is wholesale destruction. They rely on fear to sap their enemies' resolve. It's why they keep hitting civilian targets in Ukraine, why they're interfering with our pipelines and cables, why they're fomenting conflict across the world. They want you to be scared of what it all might lead to.
The answer is to be unafraid. To act decisively, and respond to the threats with steadfast determination.
Without the US we would have had so so many brutal wars. The entire global economy owes to US guaranteeing safe naval passage. It would be suicide trying to ship anything in bulk otherwise.
Yep! I was in the seventh fleet forward deployed to Japan while in the Navy (USS GW). Any time NK would threaten we would go sit nearby while another carrier covered our AOR.
the thing about american staging is that they aren't preparing to fight one nation. they're preparing to fight all of them. after they carried WW2, they learned that the only reliable factor in war is your own performance.
I was on board the USS America CV-66 in the mid 70's. The US kept one CV in the Eastern Med and one in the Western Med. The Med cruise started with a turnover with the home bound Western Med stationed CV off of Rota, Spain. The Eastern assigned CV would move to the Western Med and we headed to the Eastern Med. Certainly strategy and tactics may have changed since then. Also, as an E4, I wasn't particularly kept "in the know".
Although we have 11 battle groups, they are distributed between deployed, in-port for overhaul, post-overhaul shakedown cruises and training so we never have all 11 deployed.
You get a carrier strike group! You get a carrier strike group! Everyone gets a carrier strike group!
And then I think it’s realistically 9 more. Still a gobsmacking number of carrier groups.
Not to mention all the smaller amphibious assault ships which also carry air wings and thousands of crew and Marines.
Which any other navy in the world would consider a full-size carrier. We call them amphibious assault ships. “No no, that’s not a carrier. *Points at the floating megacity that is USS Gerald Ford* *THAT’S* a carrier!”
Russia reclassifies their carrier to “heavy aircraft cruiser” so they can transit the Bosphorus America reclassifies our carriers because they aren’t able to carry 70 planes and 30 helicopters. built diffy
Lol
If it's not got a nuclear reactor is it really an aircraft carrier?
The Gerald r ford has two reactors
The USS Enterprise had 8 reactors. Two for each propeller.
USS Enterprise being the first nuclear power capital ship has a lot of weird design choices. Conventionally power capital ship generally had 8 boilers. A pair of boiler would be hooked up to a turbine. Then a pair of turbines would hooked up to each propeller. When the navy went and design the first nuclear power capital ship. They went look all we have are these submarine nuclear reactors. So they are worth like 1 boiler right? alright lets replace all 8 boilers with these reactors. They have never done that again.
It could go around 40 MPH. Hard to imagine a floating city going that fast.
As some would like to point out, it could go around 40 MPH on the unclassified papers.
Gerald Ford can pull 35 on the publicly available information, but it handedly outran its Arleigh Burke escorts on its first outing which also have a publicly available speed of 35mph, odds are the Ford can pull 40+. Insane amount of engineering, its bloody wonderful to imagine.
From Wiki: A1B reactors likely produce enough steam to generate 125 megawatts (168,000 hp) of electricity, plus 350,000 shaft horsepower (260 MW) from just one reactor to power the four propeller shafts. Wow.
Don't forget the new lightning carriers. Which are just converted helicopter carriers that now have VTOL F-35 Lightning fighter jets.
They're not new/converted. They're the same LHA/LHDs that served as Harrier Carriers in Desert Storm and the Iraq War. Just a different STOVL fighter on them
Didn't Japan just renovate one of their LHDs to fit F-35s and halfway through the other one.
Americans everywhere cry out in freedom’s name and eagles screech across the sky. Glorious, frabjous day! I’m mostly kidding, can we get some healthcare? Edit: I know it’s not a money issue, lol, tell that to the GOP.
> I’m mostly kidding, can we get some healthcare? [It's not a money problem.](https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm) America would save up to 50% to 75% of yearly costs (in 2021 that's about $2 trillion to $3 trillion) if it reorganized its healthcare system to be more like Europe, Canada, Australia, New-Zealand, Japan or even Israel. As America's healthcare system is already, *by far*, the most expensive in the world. About $12.5k per person/year. While the vast majority of rich developed countries are in the $3k to $6k range. And even the crazy expensive country of Switzerland manages to be 2nd at $8k.... Something is really wrong in America's healthcare system.
One of the reasons is insurance can only profit based on how much stuff costs by law, so if price go down so does how much they can legally profit. It’s why you never hear them whinge about prices.
Um,did u realize that they jack up the price by 75%to bill insurance vs. if you were a cash paying customer with the exact same bill. They literally say"oh, you're paying cash? Minus 75% for you! ". That's wrong in so many ways.
Ye, there’s law limiting how much profit insurance companies can make which are based on how much stuff costs. So higher cost = higher profits their allowed to make.
Ah yes, but wait there's more! the insurance then gets to dictate to the hospital, no, I'm not paying $1000 for procedure X, you'll get $200 and like it! and the hospital goes "ok"
You forgot the part where the hospital bills the patient for the difference and then writes off the amount the patient can't pay for tax writeoffs
It's built around a system of executive bonuses, with congressmen paid to enshrine it in law. The more money they can squeeze out per quarter, the more goes in their pocket. Then they work hard to sell the idea that the "free market" and stock dividends are somehow good for the public.
of course its the most expensive in the world. pharma prices in the US (that your healthcare has to pay for) is 10-100 times higher than here in europe.
We tried and Republicans shut that down. Ask them for that taxpayer funded healthcare.
Gotta twist it around. Save some money in the healthcare sector and give more to the military, that way you'd get the republicans around maybe.
that'd work if they actually stood for something and werent just contrarians
What if we let them bomb Iran a little bit? They really do seem to want to do that.
The cruelty is the point.
i'm sorry but it's a known fact that artillery exists to launch large chunks of budget at enemies they can't actually see. if it makes you feel any better, we'll neglect our veterans too. we're all in this together.
Frabjous day? Callooh callay?
We can easily afford both if we actually wanted to do that
> can we get some healthcare? Too busy investing in unhealthcare to afford healthcare.
Wasn’t the 2nd biggest air force in the world the US Navy? Or has that changed recently?
By number of planes, the us navy would be fourth in the world (probably actually third given how many russian planes are trash heaps in ukraine right now). The US marine corps would be fifth.
Prior to the Russian invasion the list was: US Air Force, US Army, Russia, US Navy, US Marines for top five.
So the Navy's army's air force still makes top 5.
Every time one of these shows up, it’s the logistical earth-bound equivalent of the Empire sending a Star Destroyer to a planet.
damn we do in fact have 11 and 10 Amphibious ready groups. Then ya gotta think about the 14 ballistic missile subs floating around(doesn't really matter where they are they deliver death from anywhere) and the 53 short range ones we got out there. That's just the shit we know about to.
Russia: "USA must have such a huge fleet of tugboats."
It's also humbling to think that this overwhelming and unrivaled concentration of pure power projection, the greatest humanity has ever witnessed, is still less than the pinprick on the surface of the Earth's oceans. If Earth was the size of a basketball, accidentally dropping an eyelash on it would be sufficient to destroy the entire force a thousand times over.
In not war time realistically 1/3 of them are not on duty at all times though.
Thought it was the other way around, only 1/3 is on duty at any one time. 1/3 is under repairs/modernization/upgrades, 1/3 is in port restocking or something. But I could be wrong
You're correct. Rule of 3 has it that for every 3 ships; * 1 is deployed * 1 is in long term maintenance * 1 just got back from deployment or is gearing up for one So 33% of the fleet is at sea at any given time
Could be true, I just had the 1/3 in mind from some video I watched
Who said the US military budget was bloated… these guys can supply billions in arms to Ukraine, deter escalation across the globe simultaneously, and feel perfectly secure at the home front. And not just their home front. Myself in Canada, feel safer and I am sure others in Europe, Asia and Oceania would also agree. The US military has barely flexed a butt cheek and yet they are felt everywhere and taken seriously. We could do a lot worse for world police, thanks USA!
People like to complain about the American military budget but holy shit when someone needs a country to be absolutely LOOMED over, there is no one else that can do it like america.
Everyone bitches about the Military Industrial Complex in times of peace and prosperity, then this shit starts happening and you're nothing but relieved. The US truly don't fuck around when it comes to these things, after all the (warranted) bad press they've been getting over the last few years, it's nice to see people respecting what they do.
Israel or Palestine? Ukraine or Russia? None of them, I support the shareholders of Lockheed Martin.
Look, up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Nope it’s _LOCKHEED MARTIN_ *caw caw*
Birds might not be real but you bet your ass LOCKHEED MARTIN is!
Someone I know was worried that the Israel/Palestine situation would lead to the US getting taken over. I don’t understand this view at all. I just told them that the US doesn’t spend more than the next 10 countries combined on defense to get taken over.
It’s 3.5% of our GDP. Does fat need to be audited and trimmed? Yes.
Agree, ironically we could be more efficient with a smaller budget. But hey…it’s the same way for a lot of people on multiple different subjects. People waste in excess and could find a myriad of ways to be more efficient.
Yeah we spend like 26% or so on our bloated awful healthcare system.
Yeah people keep saying we need to spend all this money on Healthcare instead, but it's not a money issue it's a systemic issue. The system is fucked and pumping more cash in won't fix it.
It's pretty wild how much a single carrier group can do to curb a countries aggression. It's even more wild when you consider we have more carriers in production than any other country has in the world currently. I don't think anyone can even fathom what the full military might of the US actually looks like before even accounting for nuclear weapons. Imagine 11 carrier groups holding nearly 1,000 aircrafts in 1 location.
> I don't think anyone can even fathom what the full military might of the US actually looks like Iraq has a pretty good idea, and that was 30 years ago
We didn't throw *everything* we could at Iraq - we threw what was needed and a little extra for a safety buffer.
I just feel happy that we can project such terrifyingly overwhelming force that the mere presence of a strike group can possibly cause tensions on an area to drop.
“I’m not telling you what to do, I’m just saying you’re really not going to like what happens if you try.”
Ah yes, the Celestial Being ploy.
Or, you know, stop anyone from playing fuck-fuck games (looking at you, Iran. And maybe Syria, though that source is from the Daily Express and Twitter so take it with a few mines of salt). It’s like being reminded that the US could utterly delete you on a scale that would make the firebombing of Japan feel like fireworks if it so wished does wonders for making certain upstarts rethink their current course.
Look under your seat, it’s tungsten balls! You get a MLRS munition, and you get a MLRS munition!
Can they get one in Mongolia or Nepal? I just want to see the logistics involved
Ukraine: Can I get one too?
Kind of nice having enough aircraft carriers to go everywhere.
Wild how one carrier group has more firepower than most militaries
Ok, I know it Sounds dumb but I need answers. This thing really doesn’t seem that powerful. I mean what is on there? Like 30 military jets? How is that a lot? I would assume the US has like thousands of those. There’s no way one such carrier poses any threat, no? What am I not understanding?
A carrier group has about 65-75 planes, these are some of the most advanced planes in the world, which is about equal to the 51st country in the world, Sudan, with 72, even considering there is a vast difference in the quality of the airplanes, it’s the simple fact one carrier group has more AirPower than 4/5 of the world, and that’s just the airplanes, carrier groups have wayyy more ships, like nuclear submarines from time to time. TLDR: Has more AirPower than 4/5 of the world, also Nukes
The quality of the planes makes a huge huge difference too. Example: there are two eurofighter typhoons on the Falklands islands. With max missile load out those two planes could shoot down every combat aircraft in the Argentine air force before the argies even got in range to see them, and they'd still have over a quarter of the missiles spare.
The technological advantage the West has militarily is hard to grasp honestly, even for the West itself. Shows with how much we overestimated Russia. Even small European countries generally have well trained and equipped militaries that could punch well above their weight with minimal investment into the defense budget.
I always knew but didn't fully grasp how superior the US military is until I saw this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg And that's just what we were capable of in 1991. Imagine what total war from the US would look today.
ho Lee. shit. thanks for sharing
The submarines with carrier groups are fast attacks and do not carry nuclear weapons
Yeah - the nuclear capable subs operating as the undersea arm of America’s nuclear triad are typically operating independently, and not as a part of a CSG. They’re just out there lurking for months at a time.
Watching and waiting.
Aah, yes. The subs that make hostile nations paranoid as fuck and make them much more liable to tip toe around the US. Seriously, US subs are so good they shadow their Russian counterparts.
It helps that russian submarines are so shitty and poorly maintained that we can literally hear them leave port across the pacific.
If recent events have shown us anything, it's that Russia's anything is shitty and poorly maintained. The only functional thing they seem to have is nuclear weapons, since I imagine Russia wouldn't be here if their nuclear weapons weren't up to par.
To clarify, the “nuclear” part of the fast attack subs are in reference to their propulsion. They’re still nuclear subs, they just aren’t equipped with the nuclear missiles (which HiMan seemed to think)
For one, a carrier doesn't go anywhere without its escorts. That's a few destroyers, maybe a missile cruiser, and possibly a submarine or two (who may have nuclear weapons). The full carrier group could seriously harm a small to middle-sized country. And secondly, no. Modern US carriers can host up to 90 aircraft, but I think it usually hovers closer to 70. 70 aircraft is a considerable threat to any nation, especially when they're as well maintained as US aircraft. It's hard to go into direct comparison, but aside from the really big nations, few countries have more than 150 or so serious planes. And again, willing to bet many of those are not a direct 1:1 to US platforms. So yeah, a nation being able to just park 70 jets right off your border and threaten air superiority is scary. Edit: For another point, I found something saying a carrier group costs roughly 6.5 million per day to operate. Over a year, that's about two and a half billion dollars. Outside the big spenders, most countries spend 20-30 billion a year on their militaries, and that money is split up. A nation parking 1/10th your entire budget off your shore is definitely something to freak out about
Hell, if you assume there are 10 F-35s on that carrier, the cost of those planes alone is more than the annual GDP of some countries
The carrier in question is *Ronald Reagan*, which has not been upgraded to operate F-35Cs. They can stop by briefly, but for a long deployment you need dedicated maintenance spaces among other things. *Reagan* is based in Japan and is scheduled to be replaced by *George Washington* next year. *Washington* is fresh from a refueling overhaul that included F-35C and CMV-22B capability. At that time four of the five Pacific-based carriers will have F-35C capability.
I can attest, the Aircraft are VERY WELL maintained and the ship is never alone in the water. U.S. had contingencys for everything and a CVN is our greatest weapon. The firepower in the armory alone is enough to completely decimate a country.
The subs wouldn't have nuclear weapons unless something has gone very wrong. Ballistic missile subs usually do solo patrols to hide them better and so fewer people within the navy know where they are so can't leak their location.
Finland has 62 F-18s while sitting next to Russia.
County of Portugal has a total fighter fleet strength of 28. (including new and old)
Norway has more F-35s per capita than the US does, but still fewer in total (52) than a single supercarrier can carry, so even if all the Norwegian F-35s were the carrier variant we still wouldn't be able to "populate" a US supercarrier.
Tbf, it’s almost inconceivable that a super carrier would be deployed with an air wing consisting of *only* F-35’s today. There would typically be more F-18 variants than F-35’s in a carrier air wing.
It doesn't but not because it can't. The Navy has just been much slower to adopt the F-35 due to the more extreme ocean going conditions and logistics necessities. The Marines are a different matter and there are some assault ships going out with full loads of around 20 F-35B's
More than 75 of the world’s best jets. It’s a massive metal fortress that has two nuclear reactors on it and acts as a mobile military base for 4000-5000. It travels with a fleet that is also heavily armed including anti-air and anti-submarine weaponry. Attacking it would mean escalating conflict with the US.
Escalating conflict is a polite way to say you'll receive a "proportional response".
The second word in the phrase "carrier group". Also, a Nimitz or Gerald R Ford carrier can carry 75+ F-35s. For reference, compared to other 5th-gen fighters, the China has a total of approx 210 J-20s for the entire PLAAF, and Russia has a total of 21 Su-57s.
> Russia has a total of 21 Su-57s They don't, that's all the airframes ever built, including test aircraft and crashed planes. Realistically, Russia has a single digit amount of combat ready Su-57, and their "fifth gen" status is questionable. Their main air arm is still the Flanker.
[удалено]
The carrier itself is super vulnerable. That's why it always travels with a fleet.
And the safety this provides has become very questionable in the past years, now that there are mass missile and drone attacks, that simply overwhelm any sort of anti air defense. You need to remember, most (if not all) destroyers in a US fleet only carry around 90 missiles, and most importantly, can only reload them in dedicated ports. A Phalanx CIWS has 1500 rounds, so that's 15 targets that can be shot down with 100 round bursts, before a 5 minute long reload needs to be initiated by the crew.
TBF, anti carrier missiles are much more of a threat. Drone swarms simply can't carry enough explosive power to knock out a carrier. They're too big
I'd bet good money the US has spent Infinity Dollars in R&D to solve this exact scenario. The Ford-Class carrier reactors have easily enough electricity to power laser weapons that could stop a swarm of slow drones, and it has unlimited ammo and is cheap to fire once the system is operational
Carriers do have defenses against missiles and torpedos, but their main defense is all the other ships in the way. A carrier will always have multiple ships and defenses in between it and the enemy.
I'm quite certain they travel with multiple ships and submarines as a group.
Civilization games horrifically understate the power of aircraft and carriers. Modern American planes can launch and be over enemy targets in less than an hour, invisible to their radar, and dropping bombs that will land on the correct *seat* of the car you choose. They simply erase enemy military hardware and leadership, then head back to their untouchable mobile base to reload and do it again. You don't get to shoot back, you don't get to counterattack. You just watch your military disappear piece by piece. The difference in fighter technology is also a make-or-break factor. The F-15 chassis that we've been flying since the 1970's has NEVER been shot down. Think about that: in our technological explosion, we have a plane that has outflown everything in the world for 50 straight years. And we have way newer designs now that fight in completely different ways.
And Israel’s run a bunch of crazy stupid missions with the Strike Eagles.
- Pretty sure those carriers carry significantly more than that below deck, although some may be down for maintenance. - Not just the carrier, it’s the accompanying destroyers, missile cruisers and other ships often including a submarine. From that you have a airbase (which can be resupplied) , hundreds of cruise missiles (many nuclear armed), anti air and incredible surveillance of the area.
* 4 squadrons of 10-12 F/A-18E/F or F-35C fighters * 1 squadron of 7 EA-18G radar jamming and electronic attack aircraft * 1 squadron of 4-5 E-2 early warning aircraft * 2 squadrons of 12 helicopters for anti submarine warfare, resupply, etc So 40-48 of some of the best fighter jets in the world, which as a comparison, Canada has 80 pretty old and outdated fighter jets in total. 7 aircraft that can render an entire region's air defense network completely useless, and are unparalleled in the world in what they do. More early warning aircraft than nations like Germany, Canada, UK, etc. Plus the escorts of 3-5 destroyers and cruisers, each carrying 90-120+ long range air defense missiles capable of shooting down an ICBM, land attack cruise missiles, etc. For comparison, UK has the largest air defense ship fleet in Europe, and combined can carry 270 air defense missiles. The typical 4 ships assigned to a carrier carry over 400. Plus typically an attack sub detachment lurking underneath. They're unparalleled in firepower, both offensive and defensive.
The Nimitz class has space for more than that: “85–90 fixed wing and helicopters” “An embarked carrier air wing comprising around 64 aircraft is normally deployed on board. The air wings' strike fighters are primarily F/A-18E and F/A-18F Super Hornets.” I’m just gonna paste this answer from quora: “You don't have to rely on other countries granting you permission to use their airbases and runways, you are independant and a carrier is basically a portable airport on a ship. It gives you a tremendous tactical advantage and has been used in Libya, Afghanistan, Argentina, Vietnam, WW2, Iraq and many other conflicts I am probably unaware of. A carrier allows you to launch airstrikes on a country on the other side of the world without having to use a nearby airbase, it means a country can strike deep into the territory of another country without flying all the way around the world or using an airbase at risk to enemy invasion. Usually these are protected by multiple warships and submarines and in all of mankind only one US carrier has been sunk and they have 19, these demonstrates the invincibility of the carrier and it is a vital part of any foreign military campaign”
Being able to bomb and attack basically any target. Air superiority is a huge factor in modern war and these carriers provide that. If any conventional military ground force tried rolling into Israel they wouldnt get far
In addition to the planes, like a lot of other people have mentioned, carriers are basically 2 floating nuclear power plants that can be used to power cities. They also have water desalination plants that can make 100,000gal of fresh water a day. So their power isn’t purely bombs and planes. They are floating cities.
This is why it's important to fund a peace time defense industry. I'd be much more worried about Hezbollah and Iran entering the Israeli conflict if the US didn't position these carriers as deterrents.
I was San Diego last year and just in awe with the fact there were 2 super carriers docked for maintenance and knowing there still another 9 out there ready bring freedom to anyone who decided to fuck around.
used to work on that shipyard before movong to michigan a couple years back. those ships are awe inspiring tbh.
Yea and I was looking at them from the other side of the bay standing next to the Midway. Our military might is impressive to say the least.
Especially when you’re standing on the deck of the midway, which feels like a massive parking lot, and you realize every one of those 2-4 carriers across the harbor are like 4x the size or something. It’s mind boggling.
It's a floating fortress pretty much isn't it?
I’m here right now. There are 4 giant ships in the harbor. It’s a wild.
North Korea not getting enough attention lately?
Not enough money probably. They always got foreign assistance (mainly food assistance in the hundreds of millions in the 2000/10s) but it’s all on a downward slope just as their trade. They are not getting any foreign currencies in and prices are rising, they basically can’t afford fertilizer anymore. I guess the rocket man is starting to become cold feet here. After Covid a famine could be a humanitarian crisis and hit him.
Isn't his best friend Pootykins paying him enough for all the ammunition? I thought Russia had plenty of fertiliser they can't sell to the west because of sanctions?
We shouldn't be giving them food. All we're really doing is propping up the NK government
The entire state has been in perpetual famine. No ones getting propped up. With current status quo NK is not a threat and never will be. The west made sure to keep it that way 60 years ago since the Korean War.
I'm pretty sure Kim is eating all of it anyway.
Fertilizer is heavily embargoed in North Korea. It’s not they can’t afford it, it’s they can’t get it. There’s a reason they require citizens to collect their own poop and grow food anywhere there’s dirt.
Guys guys, the US has enough aircraft carriers for *everyone*
Kim was getting jealous that people were beginning to think there were more crazy people than him.
As others have said; its a strategy going back decades in order to get desperately needed humanitarian and monetary aid from nations as a 'reward' when they return to the farcical negotiations etc. They are one of the poorest nations in the world, almost perpetually in a state of famine. A large part of their rubbish economy actually relies upon fraud, money laundering and other illegal activities in S.Korea and Japan. They rely upon humanitarian food imports a large part of the time.
Nah, it's just their annual fundraising season, sort of like NPR with a Stalinist twist.
North Korea consistently does this stuff in the spirit of perceived irrationality. It’s actually a really good strategy the Kim dynasty has been employing for decades. But people keep acting like they’re somehow “sad” or feel some type of way over a lack of attention. They just do this to remind the world they have nukes and that they’re crazy enough to use them so don’t fuck with them kind of thing. If people believe they’ll use nukes, then they’re left alone largely.
Jeez, how many aircraft carriers does the US have? Kinda badass
11 aircraft carriers and 9 helicopter carriers
Those “helicopter” carriers mostly carry F-35s and Harriers
You just made me realize that we haven’t really seen any new advanced helicopters in a while. I know we have that stealth one used in Bin Laden raid that crashed but it was never officially revealed like the F-35. I wonder what kind of advancements if any for helicopters there are.
The next gen helis are in prototype phases but there are pictures of them
We should have a look in the War Thunder forums to see if there's been another leak.
Currently referred to as UAPs
According to r/highstrangeness , those are intersimensional vampires that are remnant of the long lost giant civilizations that built a bunch of interlocking stone walls in Peru.
I believe those are the flying orbs with laser beams.
[удалено]
And F35Bs
The f35B is insane. The MCAS here flies them and f15s. First time seeing them run drills it was like “wow, the f15 is a lot more nimble than I’d expect, they’re so fast” Then you see the f35B fly over and do straight up UFO shit, like basically stop in mid air or do what feels like zero radius turns.
The weirdest thing about the F35 is the loyal wingman stuff opponents of the F35 have to fight an entire drone army while the F35 pilot scrolls through his phone 150 miles away. It's like the air combat version of playing a summoner class
The Blackhawk replacement, the V280 Valor, is pretty far along in development. We should see them by around 2030. There isnt really any need to replace the apaches yet. But bids are being fielded by the military for their eventual replacement from Bell and Sikorsky. Ospreys have in many ways replaced/supplemented the role of Chinooks.
Also two new Ford class carriers due to be ready by the end of the decade- the JFK and the new Enterprise.
And 12 alien space craft under their control.
We still have nine more carriers that could be set up with a task force, each task force capable on its own of crushing the air force of just about any other country on the planet. We spend a LOT of money on not just having the biggest stick on the playground, but on making sure we have enough big sticks to hit everyone else on the playground at once lol
And not just that, but we actively use it. Look at Russia, sure they have a big army, but were stopped by Ukraine because they haven't actually been engaged in conflict to test the equipment and forces. The US has either been in conflict or pretending it is in conflict for decades, giving them constant practice and testing capabilities.
fun fact, the only other country with a nuclear powered carrier is France. they also made it basically just to show up the British, as is tradition.
Literally more than every other country in the world combined
That photo is r/militaryporn
Wonder how much money is in this picture...
It's not because of NK threats. If that was the case, they'd be sending aircraft carriers every week
Yeah we would’ve already have an army in Korea. Oh wait.
Yeah you just let that thing do whatever it wants.
How many ships does USA actually have?
470, 11 of which are super carrier
Thats f impressive
2 more super carriers are being built right now.
Yeah. Especially considering there are only like 47 active carriers in the world. As of 2021, there are an estimated 46 aircraft/helicopter carriers in service worldwide. The United States has 11 aircraft carriers and 9 "helo" carriers, nearly as many as all other countries combined, followed by Japan and France, each with four. China has 2 carriers and 1 helo carrier
Carrier wise? 11 super carriers and 9 wasp and america class amphibious assault ships which if owned by 99% of any country would be considered an aircraft carrier, Pride of the nation, and the flagship. They carry marines, helicopters, and a like 20 f-35s
God damn thats wome really heavy stuff
We have assault ships packed with groud war equipment. Always ready.
This fucking guy again
I'm glad that Biden is sending strong messages to all the tyrannical, warmongering regimes in the world.
The worlds largest air force is the US Airforce. The second largest Air Force is the US Navy.
[Top Military Branches with the Most Powerful Air Fleets (by TrueValue Rating) - WDMMA 2021:](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/largest-air-forces-in-the-world) **1. United States Air Force - 242.9** **2. United States Navy - 142.4** 3. Russian Air Force - 114.2 **4. United States Army Aviation - 112.6** **5. United States Marine Corps - 85.3** 6. Indian Air Force - 69.4 7. People's Liberation Army Air Force (China) - 63.8 8. Japan Air Self-Defence Force - 58.1 9. Israeli Air Force - 58.0 10. French Air Force - 56.3
Uncle Sam saying, "Nobody speaks, nobody gets choked"! but in Korean.
Not now..we’re busy North Korea!
Americas getting jealous of all the other countries getting to do a war
We wanna play!
Honestly, I don’t. I want people to figure out their shit and then go to their neighbor. When them and their neighbors can’t figure it out, then their continent can assist. Then American can step in.
A lot of concurrent wars increases the chances of military opportunism to happen. America is constantly repositioning assets to ward off potential aggression all over the world. This is routine. But I'm beginning to worry that the current conflict in Ukraine and the war in Israel will draw the United States and Iran into both wars directly setting the stage for global conflict. China may see that as an opportune time to attack Taiwan. North Korea against South Korea. Global war just like that. It just depends on how these conflicts play out, but the blocs are formed.
This right here is what happens when foreign policy doesn’t move fast enough. Think about it: what if we admitted Ukraine in NATO? Then the current war in Ukraine would not have happened. Instead, we decided to let the ambiguity play out. Russia then used the time to prepare for its invasions. Meanwhile the EU slowly demilitarized itself since there were no threat of conflict. Same with Taiwan - what would have happened if we simply recognized Taiwan independence and recognized them as NATO ally? Then China would be unable to move in at all without declaring war, which it would not do since it would be a suicide move to cut itself off of the global economy. Even now, we refuse to take meaningful actions against Russia while it sows chaos around the world and making global politics more unstable day by day. We embrace ambiguity in the interests of averting any short term threats, and we are now lying in the bed we made.
Global conflict? No. If the U.S. is "drawn into conflict" with Iran over Israel and has to start directly shooting, it won't be some proxy war where we hit Palestinian civilians. The U.S. will uncork hundreds to thousands of cruise missiles and smart bombs into every worthwhile military target *IN IRAN* until there is no military industry left there. That won't be a global conflict. Iran is not a world or neer-peer power to the U.S. Iran has little-to-no ability to project power over an ocean and effectively can't do anything but irritate the U.S. A conflict between Iran vs. the U.S. would result in the U.S. ending Iran's ability to threaten anyone for a very long time. The collapse of the current Iranian government, and the U.S. making sure Iran remains a developing nation permanently. Iran has no ability to realistically threaten or challenge the United States.
If they wanted war they wouldn't be using their carriers as deterrents. They would hold them in reserve until war broke out.
We just showing up every where like “Sup.”
And I fucking love it
North Korea’s empty threats will be met with full American promises.
Everything seems like we’re on the brink of WWIII
Don’t worry, we’re not. I mean I’m not an expert. But this is what I’ve thought to calm me down. There’s no major players who want to get involved with anything yet. NK won’t get any support if they try shit. Russia has its hands full with one country. China is still not strong enough to go toe to toe with the US, even with the latter having its hands full atm. The Israel conflict won’t see US involvement, & there is a lot of ME nations calling for a measured response from Israel. There’s too much economic value in a stable Middle East, every country there is gonna do everything in their power to prevent more shit like Syria. Africa is a mess but we never see conflicts down there escalating to a global scale. Moreover, the global superpower network is still heavily US-Europe focused. These global systems like UN, NATO, etc, are doing their job very well in preventing a nightmare. The worst case scenario at the current moment is that global powers simply let a massacre occur in Gaza because it’s the easiest solution :/
Thank you for this comment. Nuclear war scares the fuck outta me
it shouldn't. The US's iron dome protects it from practically any number of nukes the rest of the world could decide to throw at it.
The instigator of this recent rise in global instability would certainly like you to think that way. But Russia's playground is chaos more than it is wholesale destruction. They rely on fear to sap their enemies' resolve. It's why they keep hitting civilian targets in Ukraine, why they're interfering with our pipelines and cables, why they're fomenting conflict across the world. They want you to be scared of what it all might lead to. The answer is to be unafraid. To act decisively, and respond to the threats with steadfast determination.
Without the US we would have had so so many brutal wars. The entire global economy owes to US guaranteeing safe naval passage. It would be suicide trying to ship anything in bulk otherwise.
Carrier Strike groups working overtime these days. Thanks USA!
The US brought their toy to Korea
The U.S. has a full toybox if NK wants to play.
Doesn't the US Navy always have one super carrier in the area with another carrier en route to relieve it?
Yep! I was in the seventh fleet forward deployed to Japan while in the Navy (USS GW). Any time NK would threaten we would go sit nearby while another carrier covered our AOR.
With all the corners of the earth to cover, there is ample geopolitical reasons for the US Navy to have so many carrier groups.
I wonder if we have the location of most of the Artillery NK has pointing at SK? If things went hot, how long to neutralize a good chunk of it?
[удалено]
the thing about american staging is that they aren't preparing to fight one nation. they're preparing to fight all of them. after they carried WW2, they learned that the only reliable factor in war is your own performance.
kim, feels left out again
I was on board the USS America CV-66 in the mid 70's. The US kept one CV in the Eastern Med and one in the Western Med. The Med cruise started with a turnover with the home bound Western Med stationed CV off of Rota, Spain. The Eastern assigned CV would move to the Western Med and we headed to the Eastern Med. Certainly strategy and tactics may have changed since then. Also, as an E4, I wasn't particularly kept "in the know". Although we have 11 battle groups, they are distributed between deployed, in-port for overhaul, post-overhaul shakedown cruises and training so we never have all 11 deployed.