Return of the Cold War as Royal Navy confronts Russian aircraft carrier group in the English Channel - Polidicks

[QUOTE=maxumym;44806108]In my opinion, there has not been a cool-looking ship ever since cannons went out of fashion. I mean, there is absolutely no beating the sheer intimidation of a steel-coated behemoth with dozens of cannons a man's fist wide. [t]http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5829&d=1327553527[/t] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Yamato_during_Trial_Service.jpg[/t][/QUOTE]There's also no beating their enormous waste of resources and the way in which it can be ruined by something greatly cheaper. They stopped being built for many reasons, and one of them is missiles.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;44807486]There's also no beating their enormous waste of resources and the way in which it can be ruined by something greatly cheaper. They stopped being built for many reasons, and one of them is missiles.[/QUOTE] Back in the '20s though...

[QUOTE=codemaster85;44805451]Just look ar china, now they have bombs that can rip a fucking super carrier wide open.[/QUOTE] allegedly anyways. one or two tightly controlled test launches does not represent combat conditions or the response of active defense systems still the larger a ship the more you have to do to defend it [editline]14th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Reshy;44806707]Did anyone notice this bit?[/QUOTE] Russian ICBMs they got to test them often, anyway they're not building them that quick so every one they test lauch is one less we have to deal with

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;44807494]Back in the '20s though...[/QUOTE] If only we lived in the twenties again things would be so much better!

[QUOTE=ionuttzu;44806203][video=youtube;4ShACteRduY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ShACteRduY[/video][/QUOTE] Hahahahah, I laughed so much with this Vodkaaaa

[QUOTE=maxumym;44806108]In my opinion, there has not been a cool-looking ship ever since cannons went out of fashion. I mean, there is absolutely no beating the sheer intimidation of a steel-coated behemoth with dozens of cannons a man's fist wide. [t]http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=5829&d=1327553527[/t] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Yamato_during_Trial_Service.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] A man's fist wide? I've been on some battleships where you could crawl inside the cannons. I haven't been on a proper aircraft carrier, but I've been on an amphib assault ship (LHD-7) that carried helicopters, and that was still more impressive than the battleships. The aircraft hangar was MASSIVE - you just can't grasp that scale from pictures. And that was a *small* ship compared to a proper aircraft carrier. I still find it a bit funny that Battlefield 2 has you launching A-10s and F-16s from the deck of a Wasp-class LHD, which is absolutely impossible. The scale is completely off, too, or at least it feels that way.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;44808195]A man's fist wide? I've been on some battleships where you could crawl inside the cannons. I haven't been on a proper aircraft carrier, but I've been on an amphib assault ship (LHD-7) that carried helicopters, and that was still more impressive than the battleships. The aircraft hangar was MASSIVE - you just can't grasp that scale from pictures. And that was a *small* ship compared to a proper aircraft carrier. I still find it a bit funny that Battlefield 2 has you launching A-10s and F-16s from the deck of a Wasp-class LHD, which is absolutely impossible. The scale is completely off, too, or at least it feels that way.[/QUOTE] Battlefield 2's USS Essex was definitely small-scale.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;44807494]Back in the '20s though...[/QUOTE] Back in the '20s the submarine was still a cheap and effective anti-Dreadnought weapon, with the torpedo providing relative parity regardless of size. It meant that any battleship needed a destroyer escort to keep the subs and torpedo-boats away. Sound familiar to anything these days?

[QUOTE] Three inter-continental ballistic missiles were launched at test sites in the remote east of Russia, in what the military said was a test run for massive nuclear retaliation should Russia or its allies be attacked.[/QUOTE] I get that it's[I] remote[/I], but how do they make [I]absolutely sure [/I]that there are no stragglers living out in/near the area that they test this shit? Legitimate question coming from a very uninformed hippo here. Do they drop a letter by like, "hey man, gtfo we're gonna be testing nukes in your backyard next Tuesday."

[QUOTE=hippowombat;44808363]I get that it's[I] remote[/I], but how do they make [I]absolutely sure [/I]that there are no stragglers living out in/near the area that they test this shit? Legitimate question coming from a very uninformed hippo here.[/QUOTE] No warhead/small warhead. Only the really really big nukes can flatten cities, most warheads do a few city blocks. It's still leaps and bounds over standard explosive ordinance, but the explosive radius is not further than you can see. EDIT: Not saying they didn't use big nukes, who knows what they're testing but the a nukes yield can vary hugely depending on how much material is in it.

[QUOTE=Ta16;44805713]For the uninitiated, Kirov Class Battle-cruisers are designed to engage entire NATO fleets alone, and Pyotr Velikiy never goes alone. The Royal Navy can send all the ships it wants to meet the Velikiy and her carrier escort, in actual combat it wouldn't do them any good and Russia knows it and isn't afraid go where it pleases. [/QUOTE] Wouldn't be so sure about that to be honest. [QUOTE=Camundongo;44806093]Well, the Russian fleet would have to sail right past HMNB Devonport in Plymouth, which is where all our active submarines are based, soooo....[/QUOTE] Yep - every RN submarine is always sat in Devonport doing bugger all. Never some out and about.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;44808363]I get that it's[I] remote[/I], but how do they make [I]absolutely sure [/I]that there are no stragglers living out in/near the area that they test this shit? Legitimate question coming from a very uninformed hippo here. Do they drop a letter by like, "hey man, gtfo we're gonna be testing nukes in your backyard next Tuesday."[/QUOTE] They only fired the missiles, they didn't have any warheads in them. Above-ground nuclear testing was banned by the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963 (China and France didn't sign, but they eventually stopped testing). After that, all tests were underground. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty further banned underground tests; while it is not legally enforced due to non-signatories, no tests of any sort have occurred since 1998 except for North Korea's three.

Thank you gman and empty, thorough answers. :)

[QUOTE=hippowombat;44808363]I get that it's[I] remote[/I], but how do they make [I]absolutely sure [/I]that there are no stragglers living out in/near the area that they test this shit? Legitimate question coming from a very uninformed hippo here. Do they drop a letter by like, "hey man, gtfo we're gonna be testing nukes in your backyard next Tuesday."[/QUOTE] If it's anything like the US, the target area is under military control, and off-limits to civilians. That's the nice thing about having enough territory to span the continent.

[QUOTE=Useful Dave;44808358]Back in the '20s the submarine was still a cheap and effective anti-Dreadnought weapon, with the torpedo providing relative parity regardless of size. It meant that any battleship needed a destroyer escort to keep the subs and torpedo-boats away. Sound familiar to anything these days?[/QUOTE] thats actually still exactly how it works.

[QUOTE=Useful Dave;44808358] Back in the '20s the submarine was still a cheap and effective anti-Dreadnought weapon, with the torpedo providing relative parity regardless of size. It meant that any battleship needed a destroyer escort to keep the subs and torpedo-boats away. Sound familiar to anything these days?[/QUOTE] Vehicles such as tanks and APC's need infantry support the same way Bombers need fighter support. No different to Battleships needing frigate support. Same way anyone with an RPG or Mortar needs someone with an assault rifle to keep him covered. If anything Battleships are massive mobile artillery platforms. As in, they can remove beaches and anything beyond them from Existence, and it's what they do very good at. They can't take on absolutely everything by themselves, they'd need help getting from A to B. Same as an an artillery gun being moved to the frontlines.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;44807486]There's also no beating their enormous waste of resources and the way in which it can be ruined by something greatly cheaper. They stopped being built for many reasons, and one of them is missiles.[/QUOTE] Yea but I'm not talking about how effective they are, obviously building something as huge as that is a worthless idea in our age of precise missiles and fuck, even drones. I'm talking about how COOL they look.