U.S. Carrier Group Enters South China Sea Amid Taiwan Tensions

[striver44]

Why China need to landed in Taiwan when all major permanent members of UN including USA recognized one China policy and have zero embassy in Taiwan. Are they scared of China? They have no right to please China according to cowboy like u who keep cheering them against China?

One china policy is just a way to fool china into thinking that they have the governance over Taiwan which is clearly not the case.

 

[Beast]

One china policy is just a way to fool china into thinking that they have the governance over Taiwan which is clearly not the case.

Taiwan are not able to establish foreign policy and interact properly with many foreign countries due to absent from UN. They even need to China to voice their concern for them.

according to cowboy like u, US shall ignore China and stop causing so much distress to Taiwan by recognise Taiwan independent and ask them into UN.

Taiwan DPP condemns latest deportation of Taiwanese to China

TAIPEI - Taiwan's ruling party on Saturday strongly condemned the deportation of 32 Taiwanese to China from Malaysia on suspicion of telecom fraud, and the outgoing cabinet said Malaysia had acted

www.todayonline.com

Malaysia to deport 32 more Taiwanese fraud suspects to Taiwan amid China spat: Envoy

Malaysia will deport to Taiwan another 32 Taiwanese being held for suspected fraud, Taiwan's envoy to Malaysia said, amid a spat between China and Taiwan over the deportation of fraud suspects from overseas. Read more at straitstimes.com.

www.straitstimes.com

 

[striver44]

according to cowboy like u, US shall ignore China and stop causing so much distress to Taiwan by recognise Taiwan independent and ask them into UN.

Malaysia to deport 32 more Taiwanese fraud suspects to Taiwan amid China spat: Envoy

Malaysia will deport to Taiwan another 32 Taiwanese being held for suspected fraud, Taiwan's envoy to Malaysia said, amid a spat between China and Taiwan over the deportation of fraud suspects from overseas. Read more at straitstimes.com.

www.straitstimes.com

Yes.

Redirect Notice

 

[Beast]

Yes.

Redirect Notice

Yes what? recognise one China policy?

The same Biden who ordered cancel envoy trip to Taiwan? What signal is he sending to China?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ancels-un-envoys-trip-to-taiwan-idUSKBN29H2QJ

 

[gambit]

If you think these carriers are a large stick in this modern era you are mistaken and have no idea how easily these ships could sink to the bottom of the ocean

And you do not know what you are talking about.

Let us take the American Mk46 torpedo for example.

Mark 46 torpedo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Note the warhead of explosive weight: 100 lbs or 45 kg. Remember, am using this only an example.

Explosions are like electricity and pressurized gas/water: seek out the path of least resistance.

An explosion from 45 kg warhead will sink a submarine but against a carrier it will not even qualify as a mosquito bite. Forty five kg would damage a destroyer, maybe even make a 'mission kill', or delay a heavy cruiser, but will do nothing against a carrier except scratch the paint and dent the hull a wee bit.

So is the answer a heavier torpedo? Yes. But submarines are designed to be mission specific. How many larger torpedoes? What are their weight/yield class? Different torpedo yield may have different sizes, so does that mean different torpedo tube sizes? And there are many more design questions.

It is not impossible for a sub to sink an aircraft carrier, but this is not WW II era ships. WW II era carriers were CONVERTERS meaning the hulls were cruisers or even oilers converted into aircraft carriers. Today's aircraft carrier hulls are in a different class of design, engineering, and construction. So if a sub with torpedo yields like the Mk46 want to sink a carrier, the carrier will have to sit still and let 100+ torpedoes to do their jobs. Further, subs cannot 'chase' or 'stalk' ships. Submerged, a sub can match a surface vessel in speed but the hull noise would give the sub away. That make all subs 'ambush predators', meaning a sub would have to position itself ahead of the prey's path and hope that the prey would continue unaware of the threat. That is the nature of an 'ambush predator'.

That leave an attack from the air and that have been successfully challenged in many discussions on this forum.

Again..You do not know what you are talking about.

 

[Titanium100]

And you do not know what you are talking about.

Let us take the American Mk46 torpedo for example.

Mark 46 torpedo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Note the warhead of explosive weight: 100 lbs or 45 kg. Remember, am using this only an example.

Explosions are like electricity and pressurized gas/water: seek out the path of least resistance.

An explosion from 45 kg warhead will sink a submarine but against a carrier it will not even qualify as a mosquito bite. Forty five kg would damage a destroyer, maybe even make a 'mission kill', or delay a heavy cruiser, but will do nothing against a carrier except scratch the paint and dent the hull a wee bit.

So is the answer a heavier torpedo? Yes. But submarines are designed to be mission specific. How many larger torpedoes? What are their weight/yield class? Different torpedo yield may have different sizes, so does that mean different torpedo tube sizes? And there are many more design questions.

It is not impossible for a sub to sink an aircraft carrier, but this is not WW II era ships. WW II era carriers were CONVERTERS meaning the hulls were cruisers or even oilers converted into aircraft carriers. Today's aircraft carrier hulls are in a different class of design, engineering, and construction. So if a sub with torpedo yields like the Mk46 want to sink a carrier, the carrier will have to sit still and let 100+ torpedoes to do their jobs. Further, subs cannot 'chase' or 'stalk' ships. Submerged, a sub can match a surface vessel in speed but the hull noise would give the sub away. That make all subs 'ambush predators', meaning a sub would have to position itself ahead of the prey's path and hope that the prey would continue unaware of the threat. That is the nature of an 'ambush predator'.

That leave an attack from the air and that have been successfully challenged in many discussions on this forum.

Again..You do not know what you are talking about.

Submerged swarm suicide drones (under-water drones) could bring this big boy down and sink it to the bottom of the ocean and mind you they can be loaded with enough to bring down several Carriers. I know the Carrier is considered impregnable and national US pride and I would even say US power projection is based on Aircraft carrier it is not as impregnable as it was in the past tho but still one hell've fine asset for it's own era

 

[KurtisBrian]

The US sent two or three carrier groups to threaten China in the past. Doubt a single US carrier group is considered much of a threat by China anymore. More of an annoyance like hornets flying around you. they can sting but cannot really hurt you.

nobody is goint to attack anyone, this is just posturing, with threats from India, China will have to invest more in the PLAGF, thereby dividing resources with the PLAN, the US doesn't have this issue in the continental America, as most of it's neighbor had been pacified.

Not what you are referring to but Iran might get attacked. They are trying hard to make everyone their enemy.

 

[gambit]

Submerged swarm suicide drones (under-water drones) could bring this big boy down and sink it to the bottom of the ocean and mind you they can be loaded with enough to bring down several Carriers. I know the Carrier is considered impregnable and national US pride and I would even say US power projection is based on Aircraft carrier it is not as impregnable as it was in the past tho but still one hell've fine asset for it's own era

This is typical of those who made ignorant comments devoid of technical understanding and support in subjects they know nothing about, so they follow up with increasingly technically empty fantasy weapons.

 

[KurtisBrian]

Vietnam is the majority owner in SCS

Vietnamese occupy the most islands in the South China Sea. That is all. Occupying is NOT ownership. If it was then squattors would own all sorts of stuff in cities.

 

[Titanium100]

This is typical of those who made ignorant comments devoid of technical understanding and support in subjects they know nothing about, so they follow up with increasingly technically empty fantasy weapons.

Indonesia has recently spotted underwater rockets and drone like controlled? look into this. It's unfortunately not a fantasy it travelled some distance to end up on Indonesian shores.

China’s underwater drones seized in Indonesia expose tech, routes and potential submarine plans

Seized underwater drones expose China’s tech, submarine plans

Glider picked up in key maritime strait off Indonesia may have been mapping the sea floor to chart a submarine course, says defence analyst

www.scmp.com

 

[striver44]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1353668092249821186