![]() |
|
|||||||
|
Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board! The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today? |
| View Poll Results: What does the US NAVY need most? | |||
| Iowa Class Battleships |
|
39 | 24.68% |
| Virginia Class Nuclear Attack Submarines |
|
34 | 21.52% |
| Amphibious Assault Ships |
|
16 | 10.13% |
| Aerligh Burk Class Destroyers |
|
10 | 6.33% |
| Nimitz Class Carriers |
|
30 | 18.99% |
| Littoral Combat Ships |
|
29 | 18.35% |
| Voters: 158. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#152 (permalink) |
|
Banished
|
Well, there was this "controversy" a while ago whether USMC Force Recon should join SOCOM or not. I wanted to know what Force Recon did that SEALs didn't do, because bringing in another unit that did the same thing would be completely pointless.
So, I searched on google: "What is the difference between Force Recon and SEALs?" And found this: http://www.specialoperations.com/Foc...ences/Navy.htm |
|
|
|
|
#153 (permalink) | |
|
Administrator
|
Quote:
Most of the time though Googling is the very first thing I think of.... It's still annoying on those rare occasions. I do still want to know why a real military man (as opposed to us civvies) would choose FR over SEALs though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#154 (permalink) | ||
|
Banished
|
Quote:
Quote:
SEALs on the other hand are Sailors who probably didn't see a lot of combat because they were on ships and were doing different jobs before they applied for BUDs. That might be one reason why I'd pick Force Recon platoon over a SEAL platoon. I'm still curious to know why OoE would pick FR over SEALs. |
||
|
|
|
|
#155 (permalink) | |
|
Military Professional
Moderator Scotch taster |
Quote:
__________________
Chimo |
|
|
|
|
|
#156 (permalink) | |
|
Administrator
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#157 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Contributor
|
Quote:
An Iowa class hunting subs? LMAO Yes thought you may catch that one...lol Rest asure never would i waste such an awesome suface combatant on something so elusive as sub chasing just tweakin the tail Besides can you imagine something the Iowa's size chasing a sub Like a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. And a sitting duck to a torp strike as well. But I certainly will not give up the battleships either ![]() What can I say its in the blood ![]() Last edited by Dreadnought : 11-11-2005 at 17:48 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#161 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Contributor
|
Quote:
Quote:Thou shalt use Smiley Winks when tweaking tails. Aye : ) |
|
|
|
|
|
#163 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Contributor
|
Quote:
Hows about a sub hunting Iowa..lol that this person claimed to be on. Or an Iowa that would split into three watertight sections if hit. It was imusing to read the first time. Angering to continue to hear how much this person thought he knew about them. I have the tech blueprints on the class (behind glass ofcoarse as well as the Pennsylvania class) and I had to ask at what frame (section) these watertight comparments split at to form these three compartments. When he answered I laughed he obviously bull chitted a few but anybody that knows the animal knows the truth. Warships became an advertisement board compared to what it used to be : ( Last edited by Dreadnought : 11-14-2005 at 08:43 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#164 (permalink) |
|
New Member
|
what the us navy needs is the ddx class battleship with a power plant strong enough to power several rail gun turrents would greatly reduce the need for aircraft carriers. someone mentioned that the iowa class battle ships have only fixed guns and no aircraft. that is untrue the iowa class lost its broadside turrets for tomahawk missle turrets the iowa class battleship also lost its manned prop plane they used to cat apult from the rear main turret . the mannned plane was replaced with a smaller remote controlled plane. both of these planes served the same pupose on the battleship target aquistion and veryify that target was destroyed.the ddx will use sattelites for targetting
|
|
|
|
|
#165 (permalink) | |
|
New Member
|
Quote:
Actuallly the iowa class has phalnex anti air guns and crusie missles in addition to the main turrets the battleship is far cheaper to operate and sends a more powerfull message and response but like i said eailer the navy is looking @ replacing the last 2 Iowa class battleships and the aircraft carrriers with the new ddx class battleship |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| World Navies in Review | rickusn | Naval Forces | 7 | 06-14-2007 23:51 PM |
| UK Drawdown? | rickusn | Naval Forces | 19 | 05-03-2007 11:22 AM |
| BMD Article | rickusn | Naval Forces | 6 | 02-05-2007 23:04 PM |
| Royal Navy ASW, MW,careers, etc | rickusn | Naval Forces | 8 | 12-04-2006 15:12 PM |
| PLAN Analysis | rickusn | Naval Forces | 9 | 06-12-2006 15:05 PM |