Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by goldorak
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zachstar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kapt Z
I'm a sub buff, but in this economy.....why?
|
Because the carrier is more and more useless. A serious attack using diesels is likely more than enough to bring one down in a serious war. (Look at how close they get when it is not a war)
We need more subs to replace the lost ability of the supers. |
If you loose the supercarriers, you loose much more than could ever be compensated by tens of new SSN. An attack sub has no strategic value, it cannot project force as a CVN battlegroup can. The strengh of the us navy is not in its submarine force, but in its 12 supercarriers dislocated throughout the world. |
I thought they had 15?
-S |
11 actually until CVN-79 is commissioned. And it's unlikely the planned number of Gerald Ford class's will be completed IMO. 15 is the number that lots of people consider ideal, though.
PD