Realistically speaking, what are the chances the USS Gerald Ford is sunk?
Do the muzzies have missiles capable of sinking a modern carrier?
What if they use swarm tactics with hundreds of kamikaze speedboats?
Realistically speaking, what are the chances the USS Gerald Ford is sunk?
It's not the muzzies that are going to sink it.
>Not using facts and logic as weapons
ngmi
fpbp
also an excellent post
>brownie /misc/ outcasted screeching da jooz
I am now demoralized from supporting Ukraine
I support Ukraine. I am White. You are not.
If you stand against Israel, you stand against freedom and democracy which means you support Russia
Ideologically, I support the the subjugation of the Arabs by our viscous, ill-disciplined attack dog in Mideast. However, right now I am started to support a Hamacaust of the entire nation of Israel so long as it includes you.
*the Mideast, starting
Russia supports israel.
It seems that only works one way now. Russia is besties with Iran.
>Zigger pretending he's not /misc/
Oy vey, can you believe this schmutz? Where does a mensch like him get the chutzpah to come up with narrischkeit like this? Any reasonable person knows the USS Liberty incident was an accident; the whole thing could've been avoided if whatever shlemiel working the radio had just set it to the right channel.
>USS Libtard
OK that one got me to chuckle
The Israelis are going to sink it with terrible arguments and dumb logic?
Unironically, what the frick is up with Ben Shapiro right now? He's literally losing his fricking mind and has gone beyond the usual "OY VEY IT'S ANNUDAH SHOAH GOYIM" kvetching and dived straight into Solovyov-tier NOOK threats.
https://twitter.com/lporiginalg/status/1712958931612680387
Calm the frick down dude.
he's always been a bit of a schizo
>help Israel genocide its subject peoples or they'll be forced to noook Iran!
Because he is realizing that Israel is facing much more difficulty than ever. Asymmetric drones and cheap rockets versus super expensive iron dome, 2 billion Muslims on earth, +45 million Muslims in europe, more muslins in USA , less Israel supporters outside of boomers. Ben was at least smart enough to see how stupid policies and trends are but now its clearer. Israel attacking into Gaza is no longer a winning strategy and will create huge long term blowback. The war for Israel is tough already.
Just strategically it's probably occuring more and more to hard liners that the aggressive actions and harsh revenge is self defeating in the long run because of optics and changing opinion. So the last key pillar is their nuclear arsenal and threatening with it.
>last key pillar
>Samson Option
heh
>Schizo rant about WW3 and regime change and nukes and death.
>that reflexive goalpost pivot at the end to “this is why Israel needs more aid”
Why are they like this?
why does he insist on keeping a beard when he cant grow one
About as much of a chance as the warrior has of hitting a point target while on the move
exactly 0, swarm threats have been the precise concern of the USN for decades and every ship has been equipped to deal with them, from missiles to aircraft to boats.
just try it you fricking turdies, see what the end of the fricking world feels like it when you swing and miss.
Someone got rejected by a girl today
I'm married
At least he tried
I mean they could swing and hit, they'd just become like Serbia going
>SORRY I DIDN'T KNOW X WAS UNSINKABLE
While crying in their burned out hovels.
People always talk about the swarm war game that started this shit but never mention that it involved having infinite boats that spawned from thing air.
0.00%
Short answer, slim to none
The Ford is going in with 1 Ticonderoga and 4 Arleigh Burkes. That's some siginifcant firepower keeping the USS Gerald R. Ford safe.
>1 Ticonderoga and 4 Arleigh Burkes
I don't understand burger units. What is that in Iron Domes?
Each ship is probably equivalent to two Iron Done batteries. The standard loadout is probably 16 VLS with quad-packed ESSM missiles. That leaves 74-80 cells with some combination of Tomahawks, SM-2 SM-3, SM-6. Safe to say each ship has a combination of SAMs exceeding 100. Don't forget they also move and have massive countermeasures.
That's not much Hamas supposedly launched over 5000 rockets in just a few minutes in the last attack. It sounds like that carrier is a sitting duck against even moderate amounts of missile spam.
You know the carrier can move, right?
Damn you're right, carriers that are parked within 100m of hostile shoreline are really vunlerable to mortars and rockets. I can't believe no one has thought of this. Better stop producing them ASAP.
You do realize, carriers can move and aren't going to be sitting in visual range off the coast to be easily sighted in. And the rockets Hamas uses have such terrible accuracy they have trouble even hitting entire residential neighborhoods.
Rockets designed to terror bomb Tel Aviv are not really suitable as AShMs. Notice that despite the 5000 rockets fired they've done approximately frick all in damage.
carriers are generally always moving during with operations not only to avoid attacks, but also to aid in the launching and recovery of planes
>he doesnt know the difference between unguided rockets and ASHM
ngmi
>unguided short range home made rockets ever being any kind of threat to a naval unit
>sea skimming super sonic active radar guide missile with a 1000lb warhead
Vs
>80lb rocket made mostly of a dug up watermain that has trouble hitting an entire city 15 miles away
Yeah I totally see this being an issue
The rockets used by Hamas are unguided and inaccurate. No to mention that they don't have nearly the range required to get anywhere close to the US carrier group.
Have you seen the footage of their launch volleys? Shit's less accurate than a shotgun with a barrel cut so short that the shell is poking out the front.
Well yes, if they magically get into range 5000 unguided missiles with a CEP the size of a small town could probably even get a random hit in.
>a bargain bin missile that mostly cant even hit/destroy stationary civilian homes will totally frick up a moving gigantic warship with tons of defensive messures
>It sounds like
lol what else in life "sounds like" so it must be true
>sounds like you should get your booster
Damn the vaccine must of melted your brain
>must of
I'm actually more inclined to believe that it's not an ESL from that mistake. The person writing wrote down what "must have" sounds like in day to day speech, indicating that he's familiar with the phrase on a verbal level, but doesn't know how to translate it to the correct written English. While possible, it's unlikely and esl would make that kind of mistake because they won't hear the connected speech of native English speakers very often.
common mistake tbh
I blame the schools
>when others make mistakes it's the vaccine
>when I make mistakes it's the schools fault
kek
And none of those rockets would even put a scratch on the Ford.
bro, the missle barrage they laugh at tel aviv wouldn't even hit a carrier. for one a carrier is a tiny target in comparison that they have absolutely no guidance for, second the carrier is much further away and can move. its like trying to hit a wienerroach from across the street with a shotgun just because you can hit a cow in the same room as you.
This is such a funny post, I would love to see a movie made about Hamas blindly launching 5000 of their rockets at a US carrier sitting 50 miles away. Imagine the bridge on the carrier.
>5000 rocket
You could hit all 5000 and probably not do much
Just the CIWS could stop those bottle rockets
Not to mention there is an entire fleet surrounding the damn ship. Aircraft carriers are protected by smaller ships with their own set of arrays and weapons, made to protect the bigger ship and smash their own targets.
Yeah but carriers are massive targets. And Hamas has already proved that their missiles can defeat Trophy APS
>massive targets
Yeah surrounded by fleets of ships whose sole purpose for existing is to protect the fricking carrier and maybe shit out some tomahawks.
>muh APS
Show me a quadcopter with the range to reach a moving carrier and a payload to do more than scratch it's paint
Not him, but:
*its
>ATGM
>carrier
Are you okay, moron?
Hizbollah have C-802s. From when the Houthis fired the same type of missile at the destroyer outside the coast of Yemen, we know that the standard missiles and Nulka are effective against them. So given that they fired two per incoming missile and the decoys are effective at stopping failed interceptions, you probably need at least ~30-40 AShMs per ship to be certain of hitting it.
How effective would TLAM be in an Anti-ship role?
I know TASM would have pretty poor accuracy if it were to be used in land attack, but would TLAM be stronger in the inverse?
I doubt the TLAM has the right sensors for attacking warships. Do they still use TERCOM or are they GPS/INS only now.
0.0000%
nah
FAFO
I guess a storm could feasibly sink it. Or they get rammed by one of the woman-led escorts.
They tend not to put diversity hires in charge of the carriers though. Naval Aviation is like its whole separate branch to stay quarantined from the Department of the Navy's general pozzed atmosphere. Still, the rest of the Navy is so incompetent now with worthless blacks and women getting promoted rampantly for no reason other than their continued existence that I suppose a friendly fire incident is not out of the question.
>worthless blacks and women getting promoted rampantly for no reason
This is true unfortunately.
>a storm could sink a nuclear supercarrier
A Jupiter storm maybe.
0.0001%
Maybe there's a catastrophic reactor failure because someone cut a few too many corners, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Better chances of winning the lottery than the Ford sinking. A mission kill is theoretically possible, but sinking? Never.
It's 100,000 ton displacement ship. They can maybe hit it, maybe even hit it enough that it has to leave, but the idea it's going to sink is laughable.
Please create more small boat destruction kino.
I heard stories of it happening off of Somalia. There was plenty of sanitized footage or of private security defending a tanker, but we did not get enough footage like this.
>the way the shots arc to directly hit the target
Fricking beautiful
Very high. We need to increase military funding and stop blocking promotions in leadership for political points.
You know the carriers are faster than small boats right?
Big ships are slow. Everyone knows that.
but that's just wrong anon.
?si=IwuKb81tskZ6Nc9K
inb4 evidence, watch the video c**t
Anon, that big ship is powered by a nuclear reactor, not sails.
The speed of small boats is mostly based on the sea state and their draft assuming a normal engine. In open ocean water where waves can be normally 10-20 feet, a small boat with basically no draft can't go at full speed much less stay afloat. A 100,000 ton carrier with a draft of 50 feet would have no problem going at 30+ knots in heavy state waves of 20 feet.
But in the med and Persian gulf, small boats can operate with little issues and as long as they can actually find the carrier, can be dangerous.
>Do the muzzies have missiles capable of sinking a modern carrier?
No, unless Iran itself gets involved.
But it's not muzzies they need to worry about, it's a USS Liberty style false flag
If they used Bedouin magic and uss cole the Ford would /k/ give them some props or descended in to malding fits of shitposting rage?
I don't think the Ford will be making port of calls. Would be funny to watch speedboats get blown up by 25mm bushmasters on the open ocean.
Nah. CIWS alone would end any boat swarm. All of the ships have them. It would be a bloodbath.
Part of the Mossad op to stage another false flag
>A plucky group of adventurers take on a brand new piece of technology trying to block their escape
Nobody is going to touch it. Not Hamas, not Israel, not any of the other nations out there.
IMO it's there so that those Iranian homosexuals don't get any funny ideas, i don't actually thing that the US will get directly involved
>it's to keep Iran in check
Why is it in the Med instead of the Arabian sea?
.. because it's a show of force, they have another carrier on the other side
Gee Bob, how come Congress lets you have TWO carrier battle groups?
There's already one there
Queen Liz carrier is in the Arabian sea. Was there as of the 9th anyway.
thirdie can't comprehend that America has enough carriers to harass Russian, China, Iran, and support Israel all at the same time with carriers to spare lmao
Counting the Amphibious Assault ships of the Marines then we can do that without actually changing from the typical 1/3 active, 1/3 in training 1/3 in refit and still have 2-3 to spare for other duties.
it was already in the med because of ukraine, all of the other carrier fleets are currently in port except for one in japan (technically in port) that is scheduled for taiwan.
>IMO it's there so that those Iranian homosexuals don't get any funny ideas
hopefully they try something we just need any excuse to send them to hell
The only way you're sinking a carrier is somehow dropping a cement truck full of C4 from a C-130 on top of the thing even then I wouldn't bet on it
Subs would have the best chance. Luckily Irans are a meme.
I know Iran has some "noor" missiles wich are copy of chinese antiship missiles wich are copies of the Exocet.
We know it works because they accidentally fired one at their own ship in a demonstration, yep.
bump
Iran can do it, 40% chance
This is like that Iowa class vs 10 Apaches thread. No it's not going to happen
yes but it COULD that's all I'm saying
>COULD
And what would firing some unguided bottle rockets at a place the carrier used to be achieve?
Was it ever determined how they thought an Apache would be able to pen the Iowa?
IIRC they could just cripple it by destroying it's radars and command bridge.
Also probably the rudder
I mean sure but a bajillion 20 and 40mms might make it a rather unpleasant endeavor especially since there's no way in hell the ship is going down from that. Annoyed, sure, but not sinking.
Nope. The only thing that has the precision required is laser guided ATGMs and in order to get munitions on those targets you're within 5"/38 range and the launch vehicle is getting plastered, the missile will loose the laser lock and the attack won't go through. They never bothered fitting an apache with HARMs
Maybe a night attack with hellfires?
They could put one into each of the barrels
Radar lights them up and they get plastered at the horizon line with 5" VT spam from radar guided fire control. There simply isn't the precision nor discrimination required to hit those targets.
They have a max range of 11km a 5"/38 can punch out to 16 they wouldn't make it to firing range if they wanted to try and get close and flying high for extra range is going to get them shot down
And the pK of AA guns at that range is fricking miserable if you've looked up the stats. I'm too lazy to go dig through again to find where they broke down hit percentages by range, but the fire rate of a 5inch was ~9rpm and they needed an average of 350 VT shells to hit a target that was flying in a much more predictable manner and would be closing to a much more attainable range. The Iowas had 20 5inch guns, and at 9RPM, if all of them are capable of firing which I'm pretty sure isn't the case unless the Apaches go for a 360 degree surround instead of approaching from the same side, you'd average 1 kill per two minutes they're in range, while they're able to close the distance from max range of the 5 inch guns to a the range of the Hellfires within 1 minute flying at ~200 mph. Going off of the very rough estimations, that's probably 1 to 2 dead Apaches to completely mission kill the battleship, depending on luck.
so the helicopters flying in a straight line at maximum speed are a harder target to hit than an airplane doing the same thing?
they'd get wienersmacked. because the pK goes up as the get closer, maneuver less, and have to slow down to fire. all.the while the 5"/38s are walking in their fire.
11km is twice the firing range of an aerial torpedo which was the most standoff of WWII plane attack methods, and the absolute garbage estimation of pK that chart provides has no range dependency, so unless you think that all planes killed by 5 inch guns were in that extreme range and not once they closed to actually fire, which the actual data shows, a single battleship doesn't have enough throw rate to kill more then 1 Apache before they're in launch range for the Hellfires.
it also includes all shots fired at crossing and maneuvering, and high altitude targets which the apache are effectively incapable of being. it's likely that with modern radar directed laying the pK would be substantially better against apaches, them being slower, less maneuverable by far, lower altitude and having to slow to fire their weapons.
There's also the question of ether those shots were with VT ammo or standard fuzes
Anon, the chart specifically denotes VT vs conventional ammo, with conventional having ~ twice the RPK.
If the Iowa has been modernized with modern radar, they also have a suite of AA missiles that would actually be effective at dealing with some choppers instead of relying on a flak screen, so the thought experiment has always been centered around a WWII era ship. I also have no idea why you think a Apache has to slow to fire a Longbow at range since it's working purely off a radar lock, and unlike a WWII plane, the guided munitions means that the chopper can approach at a slant and not have to nose point at the ship which means you're making deflection shots instead of them flying into the shells.
Longbow Hellfires are F&F. You might not be able to snipe the fire control radar with just one, but a full volley of them is from 10 Apaches is gonna mission kill the battleship, and at that point it's just a matter of shooting enough HE at the deck to keep fires burning and crew dying even setting aside the ability to rearm for a second round to try and punch through the deck to something vital.
The fire conrol radars aren't needed for the metric frickton of orlikons and bofors.
Good luck hitting a target moving laterally at 2km without radar FC if the Apaches have to use their chainguns and can't go pick up another load of Hellfires to keep blasting every last AA emplacement with impunity. Even proxy fuses aren't going to make that a doable task, especially since the Apaches have night and thermal optics to come in when the AA would be trying to guide by the Mk1 eyeball.
Cool you hit one director each gun has optical backup and lot of charts for shooting as propeller driven aircraft moving at roughly 250mph
That's nice sweety, but helicopters don't have to move in a straight line at the target and can operate at night time because they have thermal optics and the battleship doesn't. I'm sure hitting targets that are sitting at 2 to 3km out while moving laterally and you can only see by flare rounds is a trivial task. After all, the IJN showed just how effective non-radar guided AA was :^)
Oh they can pen it with like mavericks and hellfires and shit. The issue is they're not reaching anything of any importance when the do. Congratulations you pocked a 1/4" hole in a void space that holds 500,000 gallons of ballast water.
I don't think a hellfire can pen a 12" angled armor citadem bro... Certainly not an any range that would allow an Apache not to get turned into swiss cheese by 20 and 40mm.
The deck, sure, but that ain't going to cause it to take on water.
hellfire pens something like 800mm RHA, and isn't range dependent, with like 8km range. It's still not gonna sink shit but don't underestimate ATGMs
Iowa armor is internal; Hellfires etc. won’t be exploding at the armor.
>muh rockets
Say it with me lads,
A R M O R E D
F L I G H T
D E C K
Our Star Destroyers aren't glorified garbage scows like the Moskva, OP. That ship is in zero danger, and I'm 0% worried about jinxing it. Prove me wrong, muzzies.
>Dangerous to your guided missile cruiser, Captain of the 2nd Rank. Not to this Carrier Strike Group.
So iran or Russia tries and succeeds
Now there are two nuclear reactors in the Persian gulf spilling fuel and irradiating all the aquatic life and fricking everything metal up that goes by that section.
?????
Profit
Satan's Legions exist to end the world. This shouldn't be a surprise to you.
Okay but what's the point of effectively cutting off all oil and killing all food in the Persian gulf area. This isn't an oil tanker.
>How does Russia benefit from hurting oil flow in the persian gulf?
The Ford is in the Med. No way it enters the Gulf.
Imagine if it got stuck in the Suez canal.
Trying to imagine a frickup of that scale literally boggles the mind
Its like my brain shuts down as a sort of defensive mechanism when I try to picture that scenario in my head
>Imagine it gets attacked while transiting the canal.
>Imagine an uncontrollable fire breaks out aboard.
>Imagine it (partially) sinks.
>Imagine its reactors are somehow breached.
>Imagine trying to refloat or cut apart a burnt-out 100,000-ton radioactive hulk.
>Imagine trying to do it quickly as the global economy collapses more and more around you.
>Imagine brainlet Jihadis trying to launch follow up attacks the whole time.
Fun times.
But they aren't capable of it. Well russia is capable of killing it with nukes, but not conventionally. And Iran simply can't. So your scenario is a fantasy.
thats not how radiation works
bump
Imagine if a hundred of them in paragliders tried to land on the carrier deck.
Imagine if they did and then were immediately doused in jet fuel and set alight. Wouldn't that be horrible? After Allah did say that anyone who died by fire was under his curse.
>snap a few arresting wires on purpose
>free terrorist legs for days
lol
>Imagine if a hundred of them in paragliders tried to land on the carrier deck
Imagine GWOT vet Marines with erections hard enough to etch glass with a fully stocked ship armory knowing they will be sung about by boots at Parris Island for the next 200 years after what they do to the victims.
We could eliminate the national debt overnight selling pay per views of it happening live if we used AI to dub Bob Eucher's voice for play-by-play.
> Bob Eucher's
Nah, Jerry Lawler’s
Also it’s Uecker.
>BY GAWD, HE’S BROKEN HIM IN HALF!
it stinks of false flag to usher in WWIII
If a Lexington class carrier can survive a side hit of a NUCLEAR weapon for 7 hours, I'm pretty modern carriers have nothing to worry about besides Nuclear War.
I'm still mad. Should have been a museum ship.
Weren't ships a lot more armored back then?
I would love to see one of our sweetheart carriers sunk. Perhaps that would inject some T into our homosexual military. I care more about the metal on the sea floor than the gay sailors aboard.
I don't think ANYONE has a missile capable of doing that.
I'd be more concerned about it being sunk by a meteorite
It's not impossible of course but Hamas has vitually no chance. I would guess if we would sample from randonly selected 1000 timelines, they would only manage to sink an US aircraft carrier in on or two of them, so I would say max 0.5% chance.
You should of course never say never because the unexpected DOES happen and the universe loves its dark ironies 😉
Please explain how iran sinks a carrier in the med?
Magic carpet bomb
you see the general had these things called "speed boats". Little boats wiht 1-2 people with rpgs. And in this game those little frickers could literally teleport and were under an invisibility cloak. They could get within a few hundred meters of the Carrier and shoot their rpgs.
Don't forget the speedboats carrying anti-ship cruise missiles bigger than the boats themselves and the lightspeed motorbike messengers
The shit we dream up to secure funding. Next year they're going to convince congress that they're at war with Alpha Centauri and the Warp
None. China can blow it up in video games that they fudge but that's it. The fleet defenses+it's air wing+it's defenses+plus it's structural design+U.S.N. damage control training make actually sinking it almost impossible even for a real navy. I'm not saying it couldn't be damaged just it's not going to the bottom.
The US took out half the Iranian navy in 8 hours in 1988, and they were only going after a few of the ships. Had they been allowed to go for the full Iranian navy there wouldn't have been one left by the end of the day.
I say chance nonzero... Just to encourage mudslimes to send huge swarm Shahedshits, then whole fleets's CIWSs lighting up the night sky in turkeyshoot, that would be kino.
I think I am loosing it slowly. Fricking hell, meme universe causality attached occupied currently speaking LSD cosmos unified god divine fabric threads
Either lay off the drugs, take more drugs, or take different drugs.
Then reword your post into something understandable.
It's only theorized as a threat from Iran because the narrower parts of the Persian Gulf are 100mi wide or less. USN warships are not forced to operate remotely within speedboat range of the Levantene coast.
>Gold Anchors
Not with that retention rate, lmao.
extort someone on the nuclear reactor team to override the safeguards and pull the control rods or whatever it takes to cause a meltdown. not inconceivable.
If we're operating on the belief that Israel's all big brained masterminds who plan on sinking the Ford to get the USA into what? A ground war in Israel to slaughter people in the west bank? Lebanon? Jordan? Iran? Making the instigating incident the destruction of the literal most valuable and potent piece on the global blue ocean board is about the most moronic play you could make. That'd be punching a hells angel in the face at a bar, then blowing your own leg off with a shotgun when he and his pals square up.
they dont drive around alone. good luck.
The Chicago Bears have a higher chance of winning the Super Bowl.
>thread involving US carriers
>midwits and thirdies bring up the millennium challenge
like clockwork
It's literally impossible and you're fricking brain damaged if you think otherwise.
the general abused the parameters of the system to do things that are physically impossible I.E. teleporting bike couriers. this isn't a bad thing, though, because it meant they could fix the sim.
>Do the muzzies have missiles capable of sinking a modern carrier?
no
What if they use swarm tactics with hundreds of kamikaze speedboats?
they will get merked long before they get anywhere near the ford. they are not getting past a screen of destroyers and cruisers let alone the air screen defense the ford provides
>Realistically speaking, what are the chances the USS Gerald Ford is sunk?
Exceedingly low, but not impossible
>Do the muzzies have missiles capable of sinking a modern carrier?
Iran? Yes.
Hamas? No.
Syria? Maybe (Russia or Iran may have provided them with some toys to frick up warships with).
Houthis? Presumably no, but those frickers are above you average Arab in terms of ingenuity so I wouldn't put it past them.
>What if they use swarm tactics
Combat Air Patrol would sink the majority of them before they even came within eyesight of the Carrier Strike Group. Accompanying destroyers and frigates would probably mop up the rest
>hundreds of kamikaze speedboats?
Hamas doesn't have anywhere near enough to break through a Carrier Strike Group's security screens.
how many terrorist would it take to kill the entire crew of a carrier, supposing the terrorist spawn on board
If I were a Russian I would go and buy for Hamas the best anti ship drones and missiles that I could possibly be able to do while still having some degree of plausible deniability.
Than help Hamas as much as I possibly could in arranging the surprise attack and enjoy the results of any.
But this would be very smart so I strongly doubt Russia would even consider it.
Lol
I know this isn't directly related to the thread, but figured someone might know.
Why does the Ford not have F-35Cs? It's going into the Middle East with F/A-18Es, which are fine, but surely aren't going to compare with Israel's F-35As.
I know the Navy has a squadron of F-35Cs operational, but they're assigned to the USS Carl Vinson.
Is the Ford lacking some technical capability or does the navy just not think it's important? (or some other factor?).
The F-35Cs are just there to replace the USN's remaining legacy Hornets that weren't already replaced by Super Hornets. The real Super Hornet replacement is the FA/XX that's currently in development.
Yeah but operational deployment for that is looking to be ~12-15 years out.
Surely we could have 200+ F-35Cs operational by then.
USN could dig out Corsairs from WWII for all it really matters in doing a presence patrol in the area, while I'm going to guess the F-35s are assigned to "keeping China honest" duty since they're much more of a worthy threat.
Somewhere between "lol" and "lmao"
Not zero.
I think it would be rather feasible to make a battery powered drone sub that's really hard to detect.
There have been military exercises when subs managed to sneak up on US carriers.
Hezbollah supposedly has relatively modern Russian ASMs, but probably only a handful of them. I would say that IF Hezb decides to use those missiles, then maybe 15%
it's probably a lot more sinkable then the zogbots in this board think. It's hull is thick. But bombs can really go boom.
You've been watching too many tank kill clips.
> He's literally losing his fricking mind
Imagine growing up alongside a pair of massive khazar killers like Abby's while being a beady eyed manlet like Ben. It's honestly a surprise he didn't lose it years ago
Maybe the local moron platoon(s) should think about obtaining and holding accurate target solutions before anything else comes into play. Good luck.
b***h please, they wouldn't be able sink it even if Americans left it there and allowed them in. USS Independence survived 2 nuclear explosions and had to be towed away and manually cut up in pieces.
>Do the muzzies have missiles capable of sinking a modern carrier?
No. But Israel does.