Aircraft carriers poorly armed?

You'd think something worth tens of billions would have alot more in the way of self-defense weaponry. Why can't we line the decks and catwalks with CWIS, RAM, and ESSM launchers like we used to on our older ships? Surely more is better right?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because stuff like CIWS is a last resort, a truly desperate final attempt to save a carrier from an odd missile that somehow got through everything else. The cost, effort and capability tradeoff is so much more than the benefits that I'd give you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If you don't have guided missile destroyers as escorts for your carrier you are doing it wrong.

      this, everyone go home.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The cost, effort and capability tradeoff is so much more than the benefits that I'd give you.
      >40 extra CWIS are too expensive, not worth the cost
      >better let the $13,000,000,000 carrier sink
      >not worth the effort

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The cost, effort and capability tradeoff is so much more than the benefits that I'd give you.
        the cost that could have gone to extra point defense went to area defense instead
        namely CAP and AWACS

        >40 extra CWIS are too expensive, not worth the cost
        they were installed, just dispersed among the carrier and all of its escorts, not just on the carrier
        and they work in conjunction with the AA missiles on their escorts, air-launched missiles from their planes, and electronic warfare also from their planes to cover multiple ranges
        the cannons are just there to cover the closest range

        >not worth the effort
        it really isnt, concentrating all your defenses on the terminal approach is less than ideal because these weapons control very little battlespace and have seconds to react to targets

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nobody's suggesting that sort of tradeoff. What OP suggests is that more CIWS on a carrier -- or on anything -- would be cheap and easy.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            the cost and effort that could go to lining the entire sides of a carrier with vulcan guns is better spent on having more escorts and more long range interception instead

            point-defense only protects the ship its on, so investing in defense there is a much lower priority than investing in defenses that protect a wider area
            which is what they did, carriers are more likely to rely on their 24/7 air patrol to catch threats when they are further away rather than on their point-defense, which will catch them only when they are about to hit

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Do you have any idea how many GMs you would have to add to the crew to get 40 CIWS operational? Like 90% of their time on a DDG is taken up with keeping 2 running. Imagine 40.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you don't have guided missile destroyers as escorts for your carrier you are doing it wrong.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/gnxPtqp.jpg

      Yeah, it frickin turns out aircraft are fricking huge and require large amounts of fuel to operate. Not to mention require large amounts of space for support equipment, munitions storage and space for aircrew and maintenance personnel.

      The self defense of a carrier comes from the battlegroup you frickin newbie.

      The US piled so much defense systems on the carrier that they had to have a separate boat to carry them all. Then they added even more missiles and guns so it ended up with carriers having multiple boats jam packed with missiles and guns following along wherever it sails.

      Because we have something better than deck mounted guns, guided missile destroyers.

      Fun fact, Carrier escorts are under orders to block any torpedo headed for the Carrier with their own hulls if necessary.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because we have something better than deck mounted guns, guided missile destroyers.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US piled so much defense systems on the carrier that they had to have a separate boat to carry them all. Then they added even more missiles and guns so it ended up with carriers having multiple boats jam packed with missiles and guns following along wherever it sails.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, it frickin turns out aircraft are fricking huge and require large amounts of fuel to operate. Not to mention require large amounts of space for support equipment, munitions storage and space for aircrew and maintenance personnel.

    The self defense of a carrier comes from the battlegroup you frickin newbie.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You lower the lifeboats if you hear the CIWS spinning up.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >You'd think something worth tens of billions would have alot more in the way of self-defense weaponry.
    its called CAP
    its also called having an escort

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >self-defense
    it's called the carrier battle group you blibbering nincompoop. why put it on the carrier when you can put it on ships that surround the carrier and give it more space for planes and fuel?
    >also they have like, 4x29 shot RAM launchers and 2x8 shot seasparrows, plus decoys, plus fighter wings, plus AWACS planes, plus satellite coverage, plus jammers and towed decoys.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Aircraft carriers are poorly armed, but heavily armoured. A Tomahawk isn't going to pierce the deck of the Gerald Ford, while a carrier's fighter complement can sink whatever launched it trivially.

    I'd be more worried about submarines hitting one in the keel with a torpedo.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Not one of these guys are wearing hearing protection. How the frick did they function after they got out?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      they had significant hearing loss.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >You'd think something worth tens of billions would have alot more in the way of self-defense weaponry.
    It does have billions in self-defense weaponry, namely the rest of the carrier strike group.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If something manages to get close enough to shoot at the CSG without being detected or intercepted, you're probably not dealing with something of terrestial origin.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *