141
Battleship reformers are unironically more fanatical and non-credible than A-10 reformers
(sh.itjust.works)
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
141 points (98.6% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6792 readers
389 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
With the success of drones in Ukraine, I wonder if the future's just going to be midget drone-mothership subs.
I’m in for outrageous Ace Combat style drone carriers with their own point defense.
https://acecombat.fandom.com/wiki/Arsenal_Bird
And conventional warhead ballistic missile subs with drone launchers:
https://acecombat.fandom.com/wiki/Hrimfaxi
It’s “last second” MIRV too, so more politically correct.
The Japanese had things figured out in 2004, lol.
So is it a the mothership that's a drone, or the midget subs? The latter would make more sense.
It would be a regular sized sub that's a drone mothership, crewed entirely by midgets
Drones must be terrifying for midgets.
Maybe, but they are our last defense against nano bots.
Smart, you can fit an entire extra story inside that way. And they're less likely to mutiny if HAL decides when they surface.
The subs contain lots of drones, but the subs are unmanned, making them drones, and they're launched by a bigger mothership sub that's also a drone. All manned by midgets pretending to be AI, of course.
Carrier Has Arrived
Military planning like that is exceedingly difficult and we're almost always wrong. Like fixed fortifications, in history there's at least 6 major moves away from fixed fortifications because they became "obsolete". A few years later some new design or invention comes about and suddenly fixed fortifications are en vogue again.
In this case I think the definition of a battleship will just change like it did for dread/pre-dread ships. Eventually I think it will be twin high velocity low throw weight railguns in a all or nothing armored extremely low freeboard stealth hull.
Battleships being at the center of naval plans obviously changed. But, I think you're right that something battleshippy will probably still exist.
I mean, look how long it took for the spear to go away. With bayonets you could argue that they've never gone away. But, they're now a secondary thing, rather than the primary thing armies are designed around.
I could imagine a future where a sea-tank exists, something that can take a hit and attack with direct-fire weapons. Having said that, the war in Ukraine is showing that a multi-million dollar tank can be taken out with a few hundred dollars in drone gear. Battleships are/were closer to $1 billion, and they were already mostly obsolete when they were in danger from multi-million dollar planes, dropping thousand dollar bombs, piloted by pilots who had been trained at the cost of millions of dollars.
Get out of here with your down to earth and sensible thinking. This is Lemmy!