It would be funny if the US just started endorsing the military claims that some of these 3rd world nations make, and used that as justification for war.Like, >Yep, Iran did just kill 500,000 of our troops and allied troops and that's why they need to be stopped
>>529954973NUKE EM FOR LINCOLN
>>529954973Cope
>>529954973Would be even funier if you didnt start that war. No articel 5. No support. Trump and his band of bastards get impeached and executed. So is netanahuj. Ukraine falls. Israel will be disolved and ruled by palestina.
>>529955302is that real?
>>529955553What is palestina, isn’t that the name the Romans gave for the land of Judea and Sumeria?
>>529955302Yeah, war thunder is pretty cool.
>>529955302
>>529955302Do American aircraft carriers even have CIWS?As a nerd who played a lot of engineering games where you design CIWS and missiles and test them against each other, I can say that the American CIWS is pretty bad. It doesn’t turn fast enough (turret rotation and acceleration speed) and the volume of fire is way to low for something that inaccurate. Either you can have a 10cm wide grouping 5km away on full auto either you need way more bulletsThe Russian one is better, it goes for that dakka dakka approach https://youtube.com/shorts/TogUgnoVHksLastly the bullets themselves are too slow but it’s very difficult to get faster bullets than this so whatever. The range of CIWS (3km) comes mostly from the slow bullet speed Here this shows what I mean by the bullets being too slow. This is a game but it works exactly the same way in real life. That (horrible) performance is accuratehttps://youtube.com/watch?v=MMIJV8XwASwCIWS would be far more effictive if the bullets had 3 to 5 times more muzzle velocity Currently I would say CIWS (Vulcan goalkeeper etc) is not very good at all. I would not trust it to protect a ship even against a small number of cheap missiles or drones. The gun is too inaccurate the bullets are too slow the gun turns too slowly and it is too inaccurate to be effective
barking dogs must eventually be hushed
>>529954973
>>529954973there are 100 ways of sinking that damned carrier. It's very anticlimactic of iran to not even try. Sad.
>>529954973you dont even need that, we are 100% morally correct, even excluding any Israeli wishes.we had an agreement they'd stop enriching uranium, they continued to enrich PAST 10X WHAT IS NEEDED FOR ENERGY PRODUCTION, denied further inspections, all while chanting death to america. All things considered, we are going waaaay too light on them
>>529957060carriers are more of a liability than anything now thanks to drones and missiles. going the way of the Battleships soon.
>>529960548What is the main use of carriers? F35 is VTOL so it can land on a helicopter pad.So which planes in the American arsenal are still non vtol and need runways, yet are absolutely needed? Is it the flying radar/headquarter planes?I’m trying to figure out what planes still require aircraft carriers because it’s not the f35s and ospreys
