Shipbucket
http://shipbucket.com/forums/

Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=38		 Page 2 of 2
Author:  darthpanda [ August 3rd, 2010, 6:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
Come one Colosseum, you must notice that most of CV's are name after Republican.
they should name a submarine after Clinton, like the submariners said: "we go deep and wet!
Author:  Colosseum [ August 4th, 2010, 3:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
darthpanda wrote:
Come one Colosseum, you must notice that most of CV's are name after Republican.
they should name a submarine after Clinton, like the submariners said: "we go deep and wet!
LOL XD
Author:  TridentDwarfman [ December 9th, 2010, 10:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
Gentlemen, Regan wouldn't of had the Trident Submarines if it wasn't for James Earl Carter, as he saw what was and still is the most perfect Weapons Platform ever built, a Ballistic Nuclear Submarine, with 24 Missiles, each with 8 MIRV Systems, or 142 Warheads. If memory serves me right, 24 of these were to be built, but Congress cancelled the last 6, leaving 18 in all to be built. Each of the 24 missiles carried, have 8 independent warheads, allowing for 142 targets to be sighted in on. Show me where a B-1 Bomber can deliver that amount of firepower, and survive like a Trident Submarine can. Carter had it right, that's why he was a Nuclear Engineer, a Naval Nuclear Officer, a State Govenor, and a President of The United States. Give Carter his dues, he deserve them.
Author:  Carthaginian [ December 10th, 2010, 3:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
TridentDwarfman,

Uhm, the Ohio's were under construction prior to Carter's administration- Ohio was ordered under President Ford in 1974 and laid down in April of 1976. If you get technical, I guess they were really a product of Nixon or even LBJ's administration, if you were to count the design feasibility studies and financial concerns. They were not a product of Carter's administration. Sure, they were one of the projects that weren't scrapped under Carter, but that's about all I can say about him and the Ohio's. I guess that he got a bit sentimental about them or something, being a bubblehead and all that. ;)
Author:  gral [ December 10th, 2010, 9:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
TridentDwarfman wrote:
Each of the 24 missiles carried, have 8 independent warheads, allowing for 142 targets to be sighted in on. Show me where a B-1 Bomber can deliver that amount of firepower, and survive like a Trident Submarine can.
Yes, that's why they were used against Saddam Hussein... oh, wait, they weren't.

Horses for courses, TridentDwarfman. The Ohio class submarines can be used only in nuclear war, unless converted to other purposes. Replacing the B-1 with them is fine, if you want to be involved only in nuclear wars - I can't remember a politician that has that position, though.
Author:  Colosseum [ December 10th, 2010, 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
Yes, quite obviously planet-levelling nuclear warfare is a viable strategic option...
Author:  BrockPaine [ December 10th, 2010, 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
I like the SSGN refits, myself.
Author:  MihoshiK [ December 10th, 2010, 5:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
Colosseum wrote:
Yes, quite obviously planet-levelling nuclear warfare is a viable strategic option...
It is, but only as long as the other guy is capable of threatening you on the same level. Which kinda rules out most nations, and makes the Ohio's useless in the vast majority of conflicts.
Author:  TridentDwarfman [ December 20th, 2010, 8:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Question about USS Jimmy Carter drawing
Carthaginian, I had a friend, who's father was a Naval Architec for the US Department of Defense, of the USN, and had a great collection of these Anuals of the USN Fleet for each year, starting back with his collection, from 1942 to 1974. It was some of the greatest reference material I ever came across, as you are right, and I made a mistaken, as it was the 1964 Anual that I remember what I noticed what was described, but not named yet, but would become the Trident Class. Now then, if any of you on here know US Naval history on Nuclear Subs, you may remember they had some test beds for engine plants, as direct drives off the steam turbines, then generators and then electric motors, to what they now use today. So for all we know, Kennedy could of been looking over the proposed concept, only the plant noise was cause and alarm for not developing such a massive giant yet back then. And Gral, MihoshiK, if any navies SSBN were ever used, we wouldn't be here, as it kept allot of contries and their leaders from committing to total nuclear war, which is a war that nobody is ever going to be the winner of, unless they come from another galaxy, as in the Movie "Independance Day", lol.
Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/