Quote:
Originally Posted by TLAM Strike
So I can confermn they have no Harpoons canasters but that 5 in Gun is quite nasy as a anti-ship weapon. They were out having target practace on an old Anphib about 6 months ago, he was sitting next to the gunner when the target was listing. HE shells from the 5in gun scoring bulleyes on well a bulleye painted on the deck. Aparently they took some pictures and sent them to the commander of their DESRON.
|
Yeah, that 5 in gun is great. But it's range is very short. That alone would do no good against another modern OPFOR destroyer with anti-ship missiles and a reasonable ability to target them. I was thinking more along the lines of anti-ship weaponry that can reach out beyond the horizon to kill a target. Somewhere along the lines of 120 km to 500 km. The USN has the ability to target over the horizon. And there are potential enemy warships afloat. So why not keep that ability intact. I realize the USN can bring back the TASM, or develop a newer dedicated anti-ship weapon if the need arises, and anytime they want. And do it better than anyone else. And I also know that the USN can destroy surface targets from the air (USAF and USN carriers) and from the depths with submarines. But why not keep the ability for long range anti-ship warfare on the Flight IIa's? I've heard that the latest version of Tomahawk may have an ability to target surface ships. But I don't think the USN would ever consider using them that way unless they absolutely had to. Therefore, any potential capability of Tomahawk to do this is moot. I have to trust that if the need arises, the people in charge will make the right calls.