Would a single modern aircraft carrier, like the USS Nimitz, be able to stop the WW2 Japanese Fleet and save Pearl Harbor?
>>65091747with a full load out of modern jets and munitions? absolutely
>>65091747I don't know, we'll probably have to make a feature length film exploring this scenario.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Final_Countdown_(film)
>>65091747No, since it would create a time paradox in doing so.
>>65091771But they never answered the question.
>>65091775Likely yes according to more longform content:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgLEn9VjWrc
>>65091771That movie seems ridiculous by modern standards in how they presented the shootdown of the japanese aircraft, but you have to remember when that movie came out we were closer to WW2 in years than we are to the first gulf war now.
>>65091747It can't even secure a straight, so I'm thinking no.
>>65091795A) fuck you for making me feel oldB) yeah I think current day technology warps our brains a little bit at how "easy" thinkgs are. The pinnacle of 1980 A2A technology was the pilot holding a steady course while the back-seater used analog controls to keep the fire control radar on target.
>>65091821>>65091802C) I just rewatched the Zero scene, it's fucking great. Complete nostalgia but I love the hammy acting and score, and the practical effects still hold up.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeacDIzR1HU
>>65091773if you ever go back in time you should never ever concern yourself with this. The entire kind of thinking will lead to unsolvable paranoia and fear. By merely existing you have already altered things. Just act according to what is right in the moment.
>>65091838Nostalgia also for the way movies used to just casually have legit quality orchestras doing the BGM in a full size hall with full size hall acoustics, nowadays if you're lucky you get studio musicians recording individually and they combine the tracks later, or it's just straight up fake electronic shit
Do you think APKWS would be enough for '41 era jap carrier fighters?
>>65091907aim120 spam would be more funny.
>>65091747Yes, easily.5 aircraft carriers with no realistic ability to intercept a strike package. A single F/A-18 can carry enough munitions to disable every single carrier.
>>65091982Even a single GBU-12 would detonate a carrier. The battleships are more interesting.
>>65091961How would one FA/18 destroying like 40 carrier fighters in a sortie not be the funniest
>>65091907Probably not, unless the planes weren't maneuvering.
>>65091747A single Nimitz would end WW2.
>>65091747No, because aircraft carriers (even modern ones) cannot time travel and the attack has already occurred.
>>65092062Because akpwks requires you to be within visual range. They're laser designated.
>>65092264> within visual rangeAnd?
>>65091849Based. Even just walking down a street you'll be changing thing even if you don't talk to anyone. Driving a car, you could prevent an accident just by being in front of someone in traffic. They may have died in the original timeline, but instead they have kids who have whole new lives that never existed. You're at a restaurant and eat a piece of apple pie; someone else sees you eating it and orders an apple pie. It reminds them of something from childhood and inspires them to write a novel they never wrote that becomes a national best seller.
>Mr President were from the future and our carrier can prevent a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor!>"Well that's awful nice work boys, awful nice work, now how about you head on out on exercises"
>>65092614>Also please take my trusted military advisor aboard. Bright fellow, bit of an enigma, his family came here from Russia in the 1920s and he was very active in organized labor. He's to have full run of the ship.
>>65091838 I just rewatched the Zero scene, it's fucking great.That and the yacht fly-over are the only scenes worth watching.Put yourself in their place, living in 1941 and getting buzzed by a couple of F-14s.
>>65091795>>65091821>feeling oldUgh. I remember watching this on a Betamax in 1983. A friend at school convinced his Dad to rent it for us one night.
>>65093232They honestly don't even know how outclassed they are. Fuck, are they even going to be able to conceive of what a missile is before it violently disassembles their airframe, much less begin to approach how to counter them?
>>65091838This movie's flight choreography and aerial photography shits all over Top Gun.
>>65091747We need a carrier that can produce all its energy on it own by harvesting oil/gas/wave power (ocean)/nuclear. We need a carrier that can 3D print entire boats, motor. We need a carrier that can produce its own food supply (fish/lab cultured meat/hydrophics/etc)We need a carrier that can 3D print weapons and ammunitions or drones and all the drone parts. (plastic chassis/engine/gas) + onboard IC/sensors/radar/etc + batterySelf sufficient carriers that can do that would be fine thing to have.
>>65092632>Implying 1940s-era Soviets would be able to replicate a single thing on the ship They'd probably just violently shit themselves and beg for more gibs versus Hitler.
>>65092094With infinite ammo sure but that's not an interesting scenario.
>>65091760>with a full load out of modern jets and munitions? absolutelyfpbp. A carrier by itself obviously isn't super useful. Though that said it's kinda interesting to imagine what a fully crewed modern Nimitz could do WITHOUT any aircraft of its own, rather if it showed up and linked up with the USN of the time and was the base for aircraft from back then instead, though it still had any weapons/capabilities of its own. It'd still be incredibly fast, tough, insanely mindblowing sensor suites and with infinite range, fleet water production and so on, for the time it'd still be a big deal. Just not the total gigglestomp it'd be with a fully load of modern aircraft and munitions.I guess the nuclear question is interesting as well, since US ACs have carried nuclear warheads of their own. But it'd be impossible to make use of the permissive action link system in the 1940s, and I don't think it's actually trivial to bypass. So that might legitimately be a lesser factor, at least initially. Obviously though the Manhattan Project would be able to take them apart and get a big jump with reverse engineering, knowing it was possible, and making use of the raw material. Which really leads into the big thing with time travel which is any INFORMATION from the future could easily be the biggest thing of all. Pearl Harbor could be prevented arguably just by information.>>65091773>No, since it would create a time paradox in doing so.Depends on if it's an MWI style of time travel or something like that, which means no time paradoxes ever.
With or without excort?If the germans sent 50 uboats at them and coordinate it well without an escort to get hit in their place,Yeah you could take it down
>>65091747Easily, a WW2 carrier group can't touch modern jets. The only way you lose a single airframe is if you get too cocky and come in low enough for AAA to hit.
>>65091838>>65094179This shot where the tomcat emerges from a cloud behind the ‘zero’ is pure kino
>>65093232Before Iran got missile'd, that would had technically been a scenario that could occur in a practical combat situation to any of the poorer ME countries running up against one in a Super Tucano.
>>65091795>That movie seems ridiculous by modern standards in how they presented the shootdown of the japanese aircraft, but you have to remember when that movie came out we were closer to WW2 in years than we are to the first gulf war now.Yep, though also based on Vietnam and such, particularly given that even in a decade later radars were nothing like now, a shoot down vs a WW2 fighter seems like it might be kinda weird for all involved at first? The A6M zero had a really really low stall speed, like, <70 mph, crazy in a lot of ways. Even with wings swept fully forward iirc F-14 stall speed is more like 175 mph. So it wouldn't actually be able to just sit behind a zero at all if the zero pilot really tried to slow down and maneuver, F-14 would have to constantly circle. Though of course it could completely dictate range, but if it's trying to "intimidate" the nip then that gets all strange. And I wonder how well missiles of the era would do? Since the zero was aluminum not fabric radar should work but if they tried a heat seeker would it be looking for jet exhaust and not finding it? Though no counter measures. Guns of course would be fine and zero put everything into being light, no self sealing fuel tanks or fucking any survivability whatsoever so didn't take much and 675 rounds of 20mm would be no prob but pilot might have to use a more strafing style.
>>65094511Anon they could drop multiple nukes. Germany would end up producing anime.
>>65094568Nukes weren't part of their regular complement though, and looking at the Lincoln it'ss pretty apparent why.
>>65094511>With infinite ammo sure but that's not an interesting scenario.That was my immediate thought as well, but actually it could have a major effect if used right. It wouldn't need infinite ammo merely to sink all the IJN carriers and other major fleet ships for example, advanced precision munitions would make that trivial. IJN had 13 fleet carriers and 17 light or escort carriers total in WW2. Take those out and it's effectively over as a naval presence which would mean the remaining WW2-era American fleet could just steam roll straight to the main islands. The insane sensors and scouting and AWACS and other such modern support stuff can't be underestimated either, the information advantage for the era would be ludicrous. So if imagine they just work on that after Pearl Harbor and go around blapping the fleet then while the US might just have to blockade and then put it on the backburner until nukes were developed it'd still be a big deal if they could focus near 100% on Europe by like, end of 1942.Germany would be less directly effected, much less Navy dependent of course, except that it'd feel more of the full weight of American industry and military vs having it be split on two theaters. And even there scouting, PGMs and advanced radar would be brutal for uboats, uboat pens, key factories, key damns, power plants and so on. Crazy stuff like the dam busting rolling bomb efforts could be just checked off trivially in a few days, enormous amounts of carpet bombing that 99% missed could be replaced by a handful of JDAMs into a factory. So no it wouldn't just "end WW2" single handedly but it'd be one helluva force multiplier.All this putting aside future knowledge and anything that could accelerate US tech advance of course.
>>65094568>Anon they could drop multiple nukesHow (even if we take for granted as >>65094572 said that they had them)? They wouldn't have the codes for the PAL, whole point was to make sure individuals with nuclear weapons could not use them without POTUS authorization. And no way electronics capabilities of WW2 era would crack that.Disassembling the nuclear warheads and making use of the cores in the Manhattan project would speed that up a bunch I think, and might also significantly improve the first warheads by showing more advanced techniques. For example, tritium was first discovered in 1934, it wasn't unknown, and it could be made and separated. So tritium boost might actually be technologically feasible if MP scientists learned about it near the start of the project. But it'd still take a few years I think to get to the point where they could start producing more warheads even if they got a bunch of free plutonium, just a lot of infra.
>>65094572>Nukes weren't part of their regular complementSource? To me it doesn't make sense to not carry B61s as an extra deterance / second strike capability and the ship is already full of high security areas.
>>65094543How many German U-boats operated in the Pacific?
>>65094566>heat seeker would it be looking for jet exhaust and not finding it?A piston engine is still hot enough, you might have slightly less range though
all major WW2 naval battles were essentially cat and mouse games where the fleet that found the other fleet first generally won the engagement, having E2 AWACs with their 200+ mile RADAR ranges flying around the battlefield would absolutely game break them far more than even the modern jets would, then you add modern missile ranges and the Jap fleets are sinking without ever seeing a manned enemy craft>>65094543modern ASW would fuck WW2 sub warfare up, a helicopter using a SONAR buoy is a capability no Uboat commander came up with in their wildest nightmares
>>65092580It's more funny to blow them up without them ever seeing who did it.
>>65094543>2026>dumb frog posters are still absolute fucking retardsyeah>50 uboats at themHow. A Nimitz can go 30 knots and doesn't run out of fuel on WW2 timescales, a U-Boat could go 17 kn /surfaced/. Their periscopes were super visible even on WW2 era radar, and of course they had to be surfaced much of the time, they were diesel electric. And it's not as if anyone on the allied side was fucking unaware of uboats.>coordinate it wellWith what their starlink phones talking to nazi orbital surveillance assets? how exactly are you imagining them coordinating 50 fucking ww2 subs to find something that goes double their speed with unlimited range and an air patrol a hundred miles around in the middle of the fucking atlantic ocean.
>>65091747how much of the modern tech would work reliably? Initially I wanted to say a single F35C could kill 6 ships using quicksinks, but then again GPS hasn't been built yet. Also the biggest limitation would be jet fuel imho. And I solely base this off of civilian turboprops, so no idea if E2-Ds have magic sauce in their engines that makes this stupid, but I could see them being able to be fuelled using more common diesel or avgas fuel mixes from back then. That alone would make a hell of a difference in early warning.
>>65091771The Axis of Time trilogy of books is even better, it lets the F-22Ns smash a LOT of axis hardware instead of just getting into a single dogfigh.
>>65091747Yes but not much more. Modern jets are designed to fling a few multi million dollar missiles to shoot down other supersonic jets which there are not that many of. So you get one battle for free but once the missile are expended that's it for air battles since f18s are not made to dogfight at 200mph. You could also do ground attack but GPS won't work
>>65094590I agree with what you said mostly but it's hard to comprehend just how much Germany was bombed even when factoring in lesser accuracy and yet they managed to keep military production growing until 1945. I would say a limited ammo Nimitz would fare much better doing operational destruction instead of strategic. Or better yet, participate in Operation Unthinkable, vgh...
>>65091771they could have liberated concentration camps in Europe and they didn't
>>65095206I mean, I agree with a what you say a lot too, but it's also hard to comprehend how fucking inaccurate bombing was, particularly night bombing which was near worthless, and what an unbelievably insane advantage we've gotten in relatively modern history with PGMs. The information advantage as well is just really hard to overstate, if you read about either theater but particularly the Pacific and naval engagements tons and tons of critical events were the result of fog of war, fleets effectively stumbling around in the dark hoping to bump into each other and not knowing exactly what they had when they did hit something either, lucky intel, and so on. A few E-2Ds would be like playing with god mode oversight cheats.However, keeping things running would be a real wild card. Not just munitions usage, but parts and fuel. JP-5 wasn't developed until the early 1950s. I think it should have been technologically doable a decade earlier if someone on the boat (or a computer system) had a copy of MIL-DTL-5624, but it wouldn't just be ready to go. I suspect under the circumstances the WW2 US government would scramble to get fuel together, keeping a bunch of jets operational would be so important it'd be worth devoting real resources too and the whole country was onboard. But until fuel production came online consumption would have to be tracked really carefully. The carrier can run forever but if there's no more fuel for the aircraft the effectiveness plummets.And parts would ultimately I think be the final ender, acceptably compatible gun ammo I'm sure could be done, probably some unguided rockets even and of course bombs if anyone wanted, with some leaps forward. But modern jet engine stuff is insane, at the end of a very long path of technological and infrastructure progression, even with full plans and where to go it wouldn't be accelerated by that much. Granted, you can keep some going for awhile harvesting from donor craft and so on.
>>65095236True true. Older wars seem so frustratingly complicated and slow mess when contrasted with modern recon and guidance. When I think about it the bomb payloads aren't that much different iirc there were several artillery pieces capable of delivering over 1000 lbs projectiles during ww1 already but of course their effectiveness is nowhere near of a modern 1000 lbs bomb with proper guidance and recon.
>>65094556I really like this shot from earlier on where they look like great eagles stalking their prey from above.
>>65094797>all major WW2 naval battles were essentially cat and mouse games where the fleet that found the other fleet first generally won the engagementwdym like half of them were 2 fleets accidentally stumbling into each other in the dark and then slugging it out
