Plan Z was destined for failure.
Battleships represented the core of the fleet. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were the first step of the project. Armed with 9 11” guns, the two light battleships gave German builders valuable experience with large, fast ships, experience that had dissipated since the First World War. Unlike the other major powers, the Germans had no large battleships to reconstruct during the interwar period. Bismarck and Tirpitz represented the next step in the evolution, and were designed in explicit rejection of the limitations of the Washington Naval Treaty. Although they carried only 8 15” guns, the Bismarcks displaced nearly 50,000 tons, well in excess of treaty limits.
Do China’s Missiles Mean Aircraft Carriers are Now Obsolete?
The anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems around the world may indeed curb the effectiveness of the Ford-class, but the U.S. will still find uses for these ships.
Here s What You Need to Remember: The vulnerabilities of the big carriers are real, and the U.S. needs to either remedy those problems, or consider an alternative means of delivering ordnance.
The United States has decided to spend many billions of dollars on the CVN-78 (“Ford”) class of aircraft carriers to replace the venerable Nimitz class. The latter has served the U.S. Navy since 1975, with the last ship (USS George H. W. Bush) entering service in 2009. The Fords could be in service, in one configuration or another, until the end of the 21st century.
Russia Wants Israel to Beef Up Its Military Technology
Moscow and Jerusalem have substantially stepped up their military cooperation in recent years.
Here s What You Need to Remember: The Russian military industry requires consistent infusions of technology in order to complete the transition from the post-Cold War doldrums. Notwithstanding the longstanding strains between the two countries (Iran, the future of the Assad regime) the Moscow-Jerusalem relationship may prove fruitful for both countries in the next decades.
In many ways, Israel and Russia have taken opposite approaches to providing for national security. Israel stands at the technological frontier, while Russia has struggled to keep its national innovation system vital and healthy. Moreover, over the years Russian arms have populated the armies and air forces of Israeli’s enemies.
Destroying things cheaply, risk-free has been a hallmark of U.S. military policy since the 1990s.
Here s What You Need To Remember: The Tomahawk is the backbone of the U.S. missile program. But that doesn t mean it s the only one in America s arsenal.
For the past three decades, America’s signature weapon of war has been the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile, or TLAM. The TLAM has helped bust down the doors of air-defense networks from Iraq to Libya, and has become a favorite tool of political influence for several presidents.
But what if the TLAM had never existed, or at least not in the form that we have grown accustomed to? What if the United States had given up the TLAM in arms control negotiations with the USSR?