Thu, 25 Apr 2002 21:09:48 -0700
Well, Dunnigan did think the Russians could take out a US Navy carrier
But supersonic Backfire bombers with those massive 250nm cruise missiles
are also expensive. The Soviets probably would have had to launch 1/4
of their entire strength at a single Navy carrier to take it out. At
the time we had 14, and that was a losing proposition.
As for lots and lots of submarines, putting submarines in blue water
isn't as cheap or easy as you might think.
And especially with submarines, geography is important. The Soviets
were always behind the 8 ball. As long as China doesn't have Taiwan, so
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen Byrne [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> I think many military theorists would suggest that the Aircraft
> also the Achilles heel of the US Navy, because of their incredible
> any other nation was willing to spend a fraction of what the US does
> defense, they would likely build lots and lots of submarines with
> missiles and lots and lots of long -range supersonic bombers with
> missiles - sort of like the USSR circa 1990.