and have Bruce Ismay on board

The USS Enterprise, a carrier, was deployed before WW2 started for the Americans and finished the war unsunk, despite having been in most of the heavy fighting, and despite taking and absorbing a lot of hits and battle damage. The USS Enterprise was decommissioned and retired almost 2 years after WW2 ended. In fact, the vast majority of USN ships have never been sunk. No USN battleship was sunk in combat in WW2, unless you count the 2 that were sunk at Pearl Harbor. But they weren't in combat and the US was not in the war or at war at the time. Pearl Harbor was an attack during peace time for the US. The battleships were tied up at dock and largely unmanned. After 60 or 70 years, and several wars, no Supercarriers have ever been sunk.

@@RedRider1600 u r dumb

Hit a iceberg

jhgjhgj hgjhgdj YOU are dumb. You can't even spell your own name. You also have no facts and no argument.

If you don't understand, during a war game exercise in July 2007. A Swedish Submarine (HSwMS) successful avoided all the US anti-submarine ships and had a position to sink USS Ronald Reagan. By taking multiple pictures (this indicates that they could have a shot) of the US aircraft carrier.

Napoléon Bonaparte the US and Sweden have a very strong alience so they woudnt even think abt trying to sink the ship

Napoléon Bonaparte and if they shot the us carrier doesn’t mean they are gunna sink it

@@tylerscarry3153 They took multiple "shots" at the carrier and yet your right it doesn't mean it will sink it. But this shows by even how much protection the aircraft carrier has, it will not always work. (By the way I am American too).

​@@tylerscarry3153 Yes you are right, both Sweden and America have very good diplomatic and military relationships. I was talking about a military exercise carried out by the two countries, called a Wargame. Wargames is an exercise where countries test their latest technology, tactics, or drills even. It also used to intimidate other imposing countries.

I have been practicing shooting Womp Rats in beggars canyon.

Best comment on the whole board.

Classified??

Lets hope, that Mr. Putin did not read that ! 😂

WRONG!!!!!!

Did you have binoculars ? 😂

Didn’t know that. Interesting. So they didn’t travel in packs like this? I guess that would make sense in case of an attack.

It's the subs...every carrier group has subs.

Silent until not time to be quiet.

@@willymueller3278 Standing on the deck the observable horizon is ~19miles due to Earth's curvature. This is within the theoretical range of human visual acuity, but that would be impeded by environment and color masking.

And the bismarck along side Britannic and lusitania

It's all circumstancial incident. If Titanic did not have overloaded and spot the iceberg it would not sunk and don't get me wrong to spot ice or obstacle in the sea is part of the ship. Yamato did not have any aircraft carriers mostly have odds against the large fleet of the Allied. Anf bismarc really don't have support because Nazis navy did not have that good fleet at the beginning, only uboats are the ones who control their navy.

The Yamamoto had a wooden deck.... It's downfall ultimately

You're comparing apples and oranges... Titanic wasn't a military ship, and the Yamato was nearly 80 years ago.... I'll go out on a limb here and speculate that technology may have changed....lol.

@@arbesterrebereb brother the you way say about Bismarck battle, it makes the effort of allied forces sound nothing

Wow really??? Really intelligent comment there P-Chan. You wouldn't be Chinese would you?

No I’m American Asian

Bro, wake up. We are In real world now, there is no transformers, its A movie.

@@svfilms2778 That's exactly what the Decepticons want you to think....

@@Geckogold There is no such thing dumbass. Its a movie. Use your head

Of course this is just a photo op for promotional materials

That's what I was thinking lol. Why consolidate that much firepower in close formation?

@Ruth Dilbeck that’s exactly what it is.

I heard from my buddy who served on an aircraft carrier that if you can clearly see the other boats, the formation is too close. You should only be able to somewhat see that there’s a boat off in the distance

Exactly. The only time we could see other ships while out there was when an unrep, vertrep or both were going on. When we got into diamond formation for the movie The Core that took forever to setup. Also, seeing the 3 carriers together like that give me serious Battle of Midway vibes.

All that money spend on things that are useless and people are dying of drug overdose, homelessness everywhere you look, street after street with boarded dirty houses, people walking like zombies everywhere, You think the sight of evil is impressive? there is definitely something wrong with your view of the world, Humans are fragile as Sting said and Bob said none of them can stop time. it's all a BS waste of money.

Nothing to be proud of.

@@izil1fe You might wanna do a little research about how America protecting the world's shipping lanes has allowed us all to advance. The one battle group I was in could've taken over most of the world, but all we did was float around and made sure people behaved. Not such a bad thing

@@gcxred4kat9 Actually it wasn't america that started patrolling the world's shipping lanes, European colonial powers did that first, mostly Royal Navy that was the preeminent navy of its time just like us navy is now. And you're forgetting that most of the piracy happens in and around the indian ocean and of the coast of africa where u already got a rising power like india and its navy already patrol the area, even if US navy pullout the combined forces of other allies like Indian Navy , Royal Navy and the French can surely patrol the shipping lanes from pirates. As for a threat from other navy, well most of the cause of problem in the region is because of US when it invaded Iraq for no valid reason or how US carries out drone strikes through middle east and different parts of africa that actually help recruit more west hating radicals and terrorists. Its a vicious cycle of violence and instability

We're gonna need them soon.

@Mike 72 First the US military never said they are almost impossible to sink. But they are very hard to sink. Because they are built to withstand attacks . You can blow a 20 foot wide hole in bottom of one. And it can close that compartment off and keep going. But the main reason isn't because they are built so well that they can run into icebergs. Its because they have many defensive weapons and measures on the carrier and surrounding the carrier. Different battleships on all sides, subs underneath, and some of most advanced aircraft above. And although they likely wouldn't need too, those other ships subs and aircraft will shield the carrier as a last resort. But really the biggest reason they are not likely to be sunk is because trying to sink one would be an act of war that would have the full weight of American military power thrown at whoever was responsible. Say if Russia did it. It would be the end of the Putin regime.

A french submarine did the same a few years after the swedish if i remember right 🤷🏼‍♀️

@Nynz The name of the sub?

@@GDRAFPilot_ the swedish Gotland, the fench one Saphir, the Italian Todaro and the dutch Walrus...they all scored hits on US carrier groups in ASW wargames, mostly against Uss Roosevelt

@@ryannichols8315 And a German sub managed to do the same thing. Could have fired 4 heavy torpedoes.

Jeffery Downs us: created global warming

@@punkhomicide It's nuclear powered. it only creates future nuclear landfill.

Jeffery Downs destroyers can take the icebergs down, or the aircraft carrier can just drive pass it.

@@USS_Enterprise6 Destroyers are not ice Class vessels they can not take an iceberg that maybe 20 to 30ft deep in the water or even 5ft deep in the water they will rip a hole in the hull in 3 mins in icy waters without an ice breaker which is why us needs to start developing ice-class Warships not even are carriers are ice classed

@@isaiahwilleford4618 No, not like ramming into it like using weapons system to take it down if there is too much icebergs. The destroyers has guided missiles and they can launch it to destroy the iceberg. But it would be a waste of ammo.

Carrier: Yeesh, its a good thing he's on our side.... Destroyer: For now.... *Swedish boy stares menacingly at flotilla* And that's why we have war games

@@totalnerd5674 Better be more concerned with russia Invading your stupid lil country and raping your women since your NOT a NATO country your not very far from what happened to Ukraine(Who Also initially refused NATO Membership nd now BEGS for it).. then you too will cry "America& NATO Why dont you help us??" Everyone hates america until Autocracy is raping thier children and women... Austria, Cyprus, Finland, Ireland, Malta, and Sweden are all Fair game for Russia Since they are NOT protected by the NATO Alliance... So I Hope those Torpedoes work against your REAL Adversary because Russia IS comming for the Viking lands eventually.. and we will NOT send American Service men to defend you half way across the world... They raped Sweden before and will likely do it again... hold your toungue and upgrade your crappy military... do NOT call US.

Americas would destroy Sweden 😭​@@totalnerd5674

The Aegis defense system mentioned in this video is a component of the US nuclear shield against ICBMs. You know, those things that fly at mach 20. Hypersonic missiles are not a magic bullet. Chiefly, they cannot target due to the very nature of hypersonic flight. Meaning, unless its nuclear equipped, its only useful against a stationary target. There's a reason the US has largely ignored their development. Until very recently, they've had next to no tactical value.

Only the Chinese think hypersonic are world beaters. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂. They really don't understand logic. Think as two short planks. 🤣

@@davidturnbull310 sometimes i leave silly comments under videos because of various reasons, mostly because i was being immature, and when i come across those videos years later, i cant believe how embarrassed i got and how childish my comments look, i usually quietly delete those comments

Airsoftstuff I through only the MC was the only branch that flew the ospreys

@@maxanklowitz9888 they are but the marine corps is technically part of the navy and are stationed on navy ships as ground forces.

usmc21977 good enough for me.

@@maxanklowitz9888 i gotchu bro, not alot of people know about that.

usmc21977 nah I knew I was just being very exact.

Oh come on US never face a major power in any war without helping friends.

If anybody sinks an American aircraft carrier, there is probably going to be a regime change in their near future. A disheveled Saddam looking like an alcoholic homeless person living off of canned tuna, and smelling like he was marinated in old piss, being pulled out of a hole in the ground comes to mind.

Oh come on ...no one will sink US aircraft carrier if there are no real reason. Thus in a real war against Russia or China it will be equal disaster on every side.

@@alberthenriette8976 The US was the largest military power in WW2 producing half the world's weaponry, and at the same time propping up Russia, The UK and their commonwealths, and China. In every war after WW2, our allies did little or nothing to help. Their contributions were very small or nothing at all. In a real war with Russia or China, they both would get crushed. Neither of them have the numbers or the technology to put up a good fight against the US. The US does not need to send troops or invade either country. They both can be destroyed by sea and by air.

@@RedRider1600 you are dreaming dear...The same power elite who funded the German war machines..the Uk and American war machines also funded Russian war machines after WWII. Russia is the country with the strongest form of scalar weapons today. And thats why the US is backing out from strategic places around the world and letting the Russian in.

Technology and our ships have IMPROVED a lot since those days.

@@Orly90 and so have the offensive capabilities

Lmao

Lol this comment is underrated

So 12 pebbles in a olympic size swimming pool would noticeably raise the water level ?

@@daryljonesfoster4102 r/woosh

@@spiritualbeetle3904 pretty ironic you say that because my joke seriously wooshed right over your head

Your comment should have 10,000 likes! So many "experts" on here that are actually 100% clueless.....

..Hero wrote: "The amount of weapons expert in the comments section is staggering." ...... The reason so many of these guys are so knowledgeable is because they have seen so many submarine movies, such as "The Enemy Below," "Das Boot," "The Hunt for Red October," &c. It is the same reason that we know that Christ was white, blue-eyed, & had long blond hair parted down the middle.

ZeroHero exactly right. And most of them start by saying “ the amount of weapons experts in the comments section is staggering” apart from being American and ignorant. What qualifications and knowledge do you have on the subject? Apart from shit talking others and adding zero substance to the conversation and zero validity to your comments.

@@bh8671 snittily wrote: "... American and ignorant. What qualifications and knowledge do you have on the subject? Apart from shit talking others and adding zero substance to the conversation and zero validity to your comments .... " ...... I have read many histories about WWII subs and tactics, English, German, and American. Most information about modern nuclear and diesel electric boats is classified, but the boomers carry nukes along with other armaments. I have read and talked with submariners who have served on both types, & read Tom Clancy's non-fiction book, 'Submarine.' Most experts agree that the modern diesel-electric boats are much quieter and cheaper to build and maintain, yet carry the same sophisticated weaponry as the nukes, but none of them are boomers. The maximum depths both types of sub can achieve is classified, but nukes are noisier because they have to have active pumps running all of the time to keep the reactor cool. I have read books from the time of steam-engine-driven boats to gasoline thru diesel and hydrogen peroxide driven ones, and I have a "Jane's"-equivalent book on all the types and classes of submarines produced by all the sub-constructing countries of the world, including who they sell their products to. Which is to say, I am not entirely ignorant on the subject of subs.

@@bh8671 The person assuming I'm American and Ignorant is asking me for my qualifications? What are your qualifications that you think you know what a persons nationality and personality is by reading a youtube comment, besides being non-American and ignorant.

Who has the numbers, technology, firepower and organisation to challenge a full carrier group on alert? Honest question.. i can only think of other Nato countries or perhaps China.

@@tacticalgaming4765 Russia hands down

With what they cost they are going nowhere. The industrial military will never let it happen. When people bitch about their taxes military spending is never addressed. The average US citizen has not a clue on how much we not only spend on defense but how much is wasted. Everyone my friends and family who have worked for defense contractors like to talk about how well they are paid and how little they often do. This has been going on for decades. If you say anything you don’t love your country or are soft on defense. If people even had a clue how much we piss away every day.

@@DFFno They cant even maintain control over a small island against Ukraine. They have one shitty diesel powered aircraft carrier. They cant even combine their infantry, armor and airforce in Ukraine. They are not even in the top 20 of countries to challenge a US carrier group..

@@DFFno do you think Russia can plan out a plan of attack and execute with the logistic problems they have 😂

5 minutes later Japanese pilots:Yo wheres Hiroshima?

😂😂😂😂I love both your comments

Bcoz they have advanced defense systems and protected and escorted by a fleet of advanced warships. Those escorts can provide other defenses as well. Plus the carriers can deploy fight jets to the target where the threat was deployed. A Nimitz carrier can carry up to 90 fighter jets, but they usually don't fill all the spots with fighter jets. They also carry Airborne early warning planes, small transport planes, helicopters like Seahawks, Vipers, Super Stallion, Ospreys, etc.

That wasnt even modern carriers.

Slav Giorno What about a swarm of Kamikazes piloting not only f16 falcons, but also boats going 344mph? The Spirit of Australia is the fastest boat in the world & is powered by an outdated fighter jet engine. It’s made in an Aussie’s shed & is made out of wood which makes it stealthy... kinda.

Thomas andrew - Titanic.

And it will it's a mathematical certaintie

Iron ? Is a Major Liability. By today's standards, Iron is simply "dead" weight.

Facts Andrew. You poke enough holes or one big enough. In "anything' floating on water...... the bitch is going DOWWWWN!. Now it may be damn near impossible to catch one off guard though. With all the sensors and back up ships in the carrier strike group. Kudos to the engineering prowess of these leviathans.

Leo Martin I know right. They hit the USS America with a few small warheads and they tested weapons on her for four weeks before they scuttled her.

In January 2024, a simulated attack on US warships by Chinese hypersonic anti-ship missiles from space was demonstrated at a Chinese research lab in Chengdu. The simulation involved an American aircraft carrier strike group, warplanes with a combat range of 620 miles, and the Chinese PLA launching a salvo of missiles from 745 miles away. The missiles climbed more than 124 miles, then headed for the US warships, whose radars didn't detect them until 10 minutes after launch. By then, the missiles were only 30 miles away. The simulation showed how the People's Liberation Army might use space weapons to strike an American aircraft carrier group.

What problem does that solve who’s coming after us in space lmaoo

Because costs

Yh ok but in real life combat one US strike groups would win a war against Sweden 😂

@@nobapptv3733 l

Go ahead, refresh my memory. What about it.

Yep ps. Nice profile pic

Swedish submarine? Is that a euphemism for something sexual?

Even the US Marines have a more powerful airforce than China.

The Nazi regime is collapsing and on its death bed.

Good sir, you appear to be about 80 years late.

The US Navy has more aircraft than the US Air Force. But then, that includes US Marine aircraft, since the US Marines serve under the Department of the Navy.

Radiation Studios Whiney the Pooh: Hold my coronavirus.

stop using wargames as relevant information. One team has both their hands tied behind their back so that they can learn from the experience. In real life a swedish sub would get obliterated.

So very,very true,! We must mind ourselves ,we are all tenants of the earth, not the land lord!!!!

Thermo nukes can sink a fleet as well

@@Feelthefx Can't be used unless they want to get nuked themselves.

@@Feelthefx nuclear war

@@RedRider1600 Very, VERY True. USA is a SICK nation LOCKING for the destruction of Earth. real SICK nation of Warmongering Psychopaths

Anne Pak oh yea love your opinion a powerful one and true good job.awesome.!!👍

@@marshalmontez6795 Thank you! :-)

Reason #7 If you somehow manage to take out all U.S carriers (or just half) you just gave the most powerful country in the world a reason to start armageddon.

GOLD.

@@mikescarborough4285 Thank you sir. :-)

*nearly*

Can you even read?

Keyword: NEARLY

Yeah it’s impossible to come back alive after death.

Murphy's Law: "Any thing that can go wrong will go wrong"

Yeah, but to have that many missiles you would also have a fleet of your own so the only way to sink a carrier is more carriers or dropping a big stick (made of tungsten) from orbit (it would probably cost the same and the amount of fuel to put it in orbit would be similar to the amount of fuel in those hundreds of missiles)

That would be an act of war. That means B-2's are in the air, Boomers start unleashing Trident D-5's, B52's take off with JASSM's' , 1000s of Tomahawks are released, and Minuteman missiles fire from their silos... now China is a sea of glass....even the Chinese recognize this would happen....

@@dalemiller2160 Yeah but at least the carrier is sunk

Missile spam? Not a bad strat...

Well, you can fire hundred missiles towards the aircraft carrier, but there are space based US laser defense system system that will intercept them.

He said that asshole...

And if it's a "peer" enemy (Russia or China) so will they.

Shh thats a silent service...just ask the spirit of Chester Nimitz.

Don’t forget about the French and Swedish subs that sunk the US carriers in war games.

@@georgetaylor8085 There are no true peers. We simply don't rub that fact in.

They know the carriers are at risk. Especially against any major naval power. They only support carrier warfare out of patriotism and US naval tradition. But it's an age of cruise missiles and hunter killer submarines now. Where entire squadrons of deadly "sunburn" and "shipwreck" missiles attack simultaneously.

I mean it did not sink it, but it was in clear firing position. The carrier would have been heavily damaged for sure, but sinking is a questions, that was not answered. A swedish sub in 2005.

He didnt say "Unsinkable" flat out.. He said "nearly unsinkable". Anything is possible with enough effort. But it would take ALOT of effort.

You realize that American military exercises are impossible for the good guys to "win" by design, don't you?

@@eq1373 Oh Wah,... You know, for the greatest military superpower in human history, with military spending greater than the next dozen countries (mostly allies) combined, with an almost unbroken history of foreign wars, never having suffered a war on your own soil, you guys really are a tragic bunch of mewling crybabies.

quiet subs does the job alright. imagine drone subs with 1/10th the size... Problem is remote controlling something underwater, has to be an A.I. controlled underwater drone...

I'm not aware of any aircraft carriers ever sunk by an iceberg. In fact, except for that one ship, an ancient post sail British ship, the Titanic, I'm not aware of any other medium or large, or even a small ship that has ever been sunk by an iceberg.

RedRider1600 the joke clearly flew over your head

iVince905 Yeah, it was a joke. . . A joke making fun of this video that claims American supercarriers are nearly unsinkable. Your "joke" was disputing the main point of the video, by Implying that iceburgs can easily sink American supercarriers.

@@RedRider1600 No, his joke is a call back to the last time someone claimed a ship was unsinkable...never assume something can't be done and the video doesn't, just that it's very unlikely.

@@tremedar nah, he can't get scared now, he said what he said. Also you're wrong, hind sight tells us why the Titanic sunk. It's not a lesson on making claims, they were wrong, but we aren't now. It is nearly impossible. We have ice breakers, but the point is they know what would sink it. He was a disrespectful little bitch for his comment. Like I said don't get scared now, own your comment!

frigates and corvettes are for shoreline defense . Not Really Suitable for the Deep and large Pacific. The US Coast Guard has corvettes . the The US Coast Guard is looking to upgrade to Frigs. Europe uses frigs because they are more practical for that Region.

What you smoking 😭

That's not Prime, it's definitely Ironhide.

Jason LD Nah thats Jetfire... why would you have a truck on an AIRCRAFT Carrier?

@@punkwrestle well Ironhide is the one with cool weapons. And that transformer in the video have a badass weapon.

Jason LD Maybe, but I think that if they had any Transformer on board it would be the one that could turn into a plane, which has a very cool slick look. I was just surprised the US Navy has gundams now...

@@punkwrestle yea that is the only logical assumption.

Yep

Actually, he did .... but he was referring to *their* carriers .... not ours. We were kind of on the same side. :)

The LA class was built for carrier escort.

Finna be? Spelling shit how you mumble it out in real life is fucking dumb.

@@honkykong7389 it's the internet... So.. Stfu?

@@honkykong7389 hush. Or you will never see your father again

@@arrowup8711 can't threaten me with a deal like that.

GreatRaiden u

@Rory Spoons sweden also has a strong airforce and navy

@Rory Spoons yeah you said that but Sweden also has a very strong airforce and navy

@@sixtengiljeandersson9541 it has 207 aircraft and that included helicopters. While thats a loy more than a bunch of poorer nations, that wouldnt be that strong consideting theres hardly any fighter jets.

@@sixtengiljeandersson9541 I guess they are considered "strong" by European standards but compared to the U.S. they are weak

John Farlio Im from Norway and our millitary is so god damn weak, thank god for you defending us. America we love you

Gotland already sunk one on a blue on blue

Being difficult to sink is one thing, being put out of commission are two different things. The USN's large deck carriers have an armored flight and hangar decks, multiple rows of compartments between the outer hull and the hangar deck. The theory is that battle damage could be contained and, flight operations would continue. The greatest danger to a carrier is the Russian "keel hunter" torpedo with a one-ton warhead from a submarine. That can stop a carrier's ability to make war.

That proves, that videos are always right !😂

And then they get drunk and ram their aircraft carrier into the side of a destroyer mistaking it for an aircraft carrier

I think u ment vodka

@@jacobeyre9035 he said bear not beer

sweden*

About AEGIS, please find the adventure of Donald Cook with some older Russian Su 24 (I am not sure) in the Black Sea. Or something about Tchibini.

Russians- the people that can destroy their own aircraft carrier

That's almost Davey Jones' Locker

@@krillansavillan A little bit to small, but if you think...😀

why in the world the sailors onboard will make them unsinkable. We train for that.

@@lieunguyetnga Hooyah!

I’m sick of r military giving away information on ARE MILITARY PERSONAL “”Maybe YOU people’s house should be RAIDED YEH wonder U people?

Why?

Ooh ooh ooh, pick me!

Didn't the virtual military exercises against China and Russia prove this video to be a joke?. After 5 days they virtually sunk a US aircraft carrier.

this isnt made by the US military

There are known knowns, unknown knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns. Or, something to that effect...

@@homersimpson9352 Source

@@animus444k China uncensored

That's why Russian fear sending their navy thru the Baltic

Don't worry, there are 79 newer and better ones. ;)

I never would want to be a pilot on a aircraft carrier shit is too stressful.

@Olyvia planes dont have a reverse. They are placed on the edges of the flight deck by a special vehicle similar to what airports use to move planes away from the jetways prior to takeoff.

Jeff Burnham I know that! Lol 🤦‍♀️ My papaw owns an air plane and I’ve had to back his plane up into the hanger several times. I just wouldn’t want to be the one responsible for backing those up to the edge.

@@jeffburnham6611 Partially true. Fighters tend to have pure-jet engines (they lack a fan by-pass), plus the weight and complexity penalties of adding reverse-thust would be undesirable, and off little operational benefit. Passenger aircraft with high by-pass jet engines usually (but not always) have reverse-thust and is only used at high speeds upon runway touch-down where the probability of FOD due to debis ingestion is unlikely. For this reason, among others (imagine what would happen to airport ground equipment!), reverse-thust is not used on the taxiway or apron, but it could be. Turbo-prop aircraft such as the C130 Hurculies do have reverse-thrust and use it regularly, however the engines are high up which makes FOD unlikely, and the mechanism for reversing the propeller's pitch is relatively simple (with respect to adding reverse-thust functionality to a solution that requires a variable-pitch prop).

jjjoooojjj Poseidon isn’t real

Usually two submarines actually.

@@rufiorufioo But not always.

Andrew Lehman Shhhh . . . Secret weapon

William Mcfierson nature

Johnarooski Vlogs exactly

No human nor god sank the titanic, he was right. Difference is the Titanic was pretty much a scam that made a retarded mistake that no Navy admiral would make

He wasnt wrong i guess

Both case are different. Because America trust in God Jesus.

lmlyon In theory, yes, they could be sunk. In actuality, no. Supercarriers have never been sunk.

But then they have never been in a war situation . Surely you can work that out Todays missile technology will make a mincemeat of them and for a fraction of the cost of building them . Get real will you

yes they be sunk but it getting harder to sink it with missiles. technology get point if lunch missile far enough away that missile going get destroyed. which mean you need a ship with cannon big enough too sink it at close range or missile boat that fire missiles at close range.

daffadd1 Supercarriers have been in every war since they were created. You are an ignorant moron. Today's missile technology has never sunk a Supercarrier. It's not as easy as you think. In fact, no US Navy warship has ever been sunk since WW2.

The aircraft carrier allows the US to strike anywhere in the world very quickly so it is the most important thing to be protected.

bet your ass they will

Yeah true

Of course

Well, they were in Vietnam...and we are talking the 1960s - 1970s...they didn't fair very well over there. Iran would eat the US alive.

@@timookello3822 1960,and 1970, our missiles,our planes and our weapons were far less superior/capable and were in their ealriest years. The U.S has the best in the skies and the water and is the primary strength of the nation. This is why it doesnt get fucked with. I won't be the one to say it's invincible, or deny credible nations of merit,but your nation is asking for a lot of hell. The end game would not be worth it.

jawaskie wolf Swedish subs have never actually sunk any ship, ever. And no US SuperCarrier has ever been sunk, or even attacked. In real life, a sub that fires torpedos at a US aircraft carrier doesn't get to just swim away.

@@RedRider1600 it did

@@newdrug1880 It did what? Do you understand English? Read what I said again.

@@RedRider1600 Did you want it sunk for real? It was as good as can be for a training mission. And no they couldn't get to it afterwards.

@@RedRider1600 Instead of feeding your ignorant brain, go and watch some recent past history about the Swedish Sub gaining virtual hits on US Nimitz class carrier. And the exercise was soon terminated after that incident when none of the ships of that CBG could even detect that Submarine.

You think I'm funny? Like, haha funny?

Yes they are.

@Rory Spoons you can't kill what you can't see. And they've proven that they can not deploy countermeasures. And if you don't pull out that nuclear bomb trump card i don't see any way how a us fleet even comes close to sweden.... and even then. If sweden wanted they'd build their own nuclear bombs within days. Put it on said impossible to find submarine. Sail right into boston, new york, washington dc and make things go boom. You don't want to play the nuclear game vs a western country....

Majin Dude thank you for your service not just in the military, but for calling this guy out aswell

Foxi! U think the us doesn't have stealth subs too? If Sweden got 1, US has10 .and nukes are not built in days, not in weeks, not months, not in a couple years, but in many years...

If Mother Nature exist then what is Father Nature and are they offspring or perhaps third generation and do they plan on having any children of their own?

Agent Smidt Mike Tyson, the boxer? . . . LoL I didn't know he was an expert on aircraft carriers, or mother nature.

If it’s without the fleet it is, that’s why we have destroyers and cruisers with air defense

Why don't you add it was a controlled environment where the Swedes knew where the US was while the US had to find the Swedes and the US couldn't use subs or aircraft. When you give one side the entire advantage, the outcome is pretty much a given.

@@ThatCarGuy I agree but correct me if I'm wrong but the Swedish Götland submarine is currently undetectable by current sonar technology. All you need is 1 torpedo to sink that thing.

@@barstos ​@Ivan Barz Any sub is visible to radar/sonar including the best sub class in the world, the Seawolf class. When in green water diesel electric subs will always have an advantage. 1 Torpedo will not sink a carrier. The US tried to sink it's own carrier and gave up after 4 weeks and scuttled it. Ill also post a sinkex exercise(where they test older ships armor by destroying them to see how much they can take) ""The ship was pummeled by explosions both above and below the waterline," The War Zone reporter Tyler Rogoway explained in 2018. "After nearly four weeks of these activities, the carrier was scuttled. On May 14, 2005, the vessel's stern disappeared below the waterline and the ship began its voyage to the seafloor." "America stood up to four weeks of abuse and only succumbed to the sea after demolition teams scuttled the ship on purpose once and for all, it's clear that America was built to sustain heavy damage in combat and still stay afloat."" Sinkex video : /watch?v=sOC4yNkIttQ&ab_channel=GungHoVids

@@barstos it cant be any ordinary torpedo. And I dont think only one would really do it. The sub would have a very limited window and would have to land multiple shots in the right places

@@ThatCarGuy Thanks for the info!

YOU LEARNED A LOADS OF BULSHIT BECAUSE THEY WANT YOU TO RISK YOUR LIFE... IT IS UP TO YOU BUT HERE IN EUROPE WE KNOW THERE IS PLENTY THAT CAN SINK THIS OLD BEHAMOUTH SHOW UP BULLSHIT IN THE MODERSN TECH'S WAR

Yep. I served on “targets”. Just ask any submariner. They’ll tell you about that!

America is not an empire (that would require it having an emperor) but yeah America is currently so divided that civil war is not an impossibility

pizza steve emperor Donald! He can do no wrong 😂

Unfortunately you're both likely more right than you know.

I like how he put a heart on your comment XD

Go make your video with your sweet voice

It's NOT a kid! Just some male person, light in the loafers. Very off-putting and lacking the testosterone needed to convince anyone, that we have the masculine sounding men to create the ass kicking military we have, in the first place. This guy should narrate something with flowers and bunnies and butterflies.

Someone’s insecure... no one forced you to watch the video macho man.

Ok boomer

Drones big enough to carry the kind of weaponry to take out a giant ship are not any less conspicuous than a plane.