I like the B-36, I just do.

It’s true that I wouldn’t have liked to have gone to war in one, but there is something to the size that provided a modicum of strategic comfort during the early days of the Cold War.

 

Housing Men in a Women’s Prison

I know, it’s woke and it’s progressive and men are to be considered ‘women’ if they say they are. It’s the new normal. It’s just like there are no more mothers,  just ‘birthing people’. There are 36 genders, right?

Combining men and women in prison? What could possibly go wrong? (Daily Wire)

Women incarcerated in California’s largest women’s prison are describing the conditions as “a nightmare’s worst nightmare” after the introduction of new pregnancy resources in the Central California Women’s Facility (CCWF) medical clinics. The new resources are a tacit admission by officials that women should expect to be raped when housed in prison with men, where all sex is considered non-consensual by default within the system. 

 

The Beard

The Castro brothers – trading on human misery for generations.

 

So you know where you stand…

 

 

In 1945, the Royal Navy heavy cruiser HMS Sussex was struck by a kamikaze near the Dutch East Indies. The Mitsubishi Ki-51 “Sonia” failed to penetrate the ship’s 4.5″ belt armor, leaving only a distinct imprint on the hull.

Ki-51 (Sonia)

 

In the Navy

(Article) The article referenced (h/t Claudio) lays out the Navy’s Plan. They’d like to mothball the remaining seven Ticonderoga Class cruisers, and in exchange, they’ll take one new Arleigh Burke Class destroyer.

To frame the argument, as the article does,  the significant missile-launching capacity of those seven ships “rivals the entire British Royal Navy’s surface strike fleet.” (emphasis added) 

I realize that the British Navy is a ghost of its former self, but, the point is well made.

Ticonderoga Class CV – 122 missiles

Arleigh Burke Class DD – 96 missiles

British Type 45 DD – 48 missiles

The US Navy wants to remove 854 missiles from the fleet in exchange for adding 96.  That’s the point and one can only wonder.  I realize that there is a significant cost to keeping those seven CV’s in service. But the Navy isn’t scrapping all of the WORTHLESS littoral combat ships.

All this is fine if we never have to fight another Navy war. But what if we do?

17 COMMENTS

  1. I am a fan of the B-36 as well; an airplane design that took piston engine technology just about to its limit as far as warcraft are concerned. I have heard from a former coworker that used to work on them that they were an absolute maintainers nightmare though.

    • Any radial engine is a maintenance nightmare, but they proved to be very effective in combat. Rugged and reliable so long as they were. maintained.

  2. The powers that be seem to not want us to win another war, though.
    Well, not against a true enemy.
    Can they sail a Ticonderoga Class up the Mississippi?

  3. The B-36 was an interesting stop-gap aircraft until more modern jet aircraft could be brought on-line. I’ve never seen one, but they’re YUUUUGE!

    A YUUUUGE sitting duck, hence the “Parasite Fighter” programs.

    DUMP the LCS, and keep the Ticos. They’re proven, well-understood platforms, and could be upgraded.

  4. The B-36. Six turnin’, four burnin’. To me the high point of the old Jimmy Stewart film, Strategic Air Command, was when they fired up and flew that 36.

  5. One of the great things about this blog is cool bomber photos. And exactly, the UK’s gambling on never having to fight another major war, by sea, land or air again. Perhaps we are too, but what am I saying. We have a clear and present enemy, right wing extremism and its flip side ally, The Weather. Oh, and a deadly virus.

    Kyrie Eleison.

  6. 36s were a nightmare for maintenance… sigh… Re the Ticonderoga class, it comes down to deferred maintenance and lack of upgrades. I agree it’s a mistake. Junk the Little Crappy Ships and put THAT money where it would do the most good (hint, hint, upgrades).

  7. I believe the conclusion from simulations 20 years ago is that expensive big ships lose to swarms of missiles. Imagine hundreds of self-targeting cheap drones attacking antennas and windows. Besides, I thought it was historically conventional that the Navy needed to lose before the empire was lost.

    • Everything loses to swarms of missiles, if there are enough missiles.

      The choice is between making expensive, capable designs and trying to keep them out of the way of large enough missile strikes, or trying to build more cheap ships than the enemy has missiles. Which one sounds more possible to you?

      -Kle.

  8. I just can’t fathom what Big Navy is doing to… Big Navy.

    Between cutting ships right and left, reducing capabilities, and forcing the mud Marines to be a light reactive force rather than a rapid deployable heavy force, gee, are we bending ourselves over and lubing our hawser hole for the ChiComs to come play?

    Gah. Get rid of the little crappy ships, build new Ticonderogas with newer equipment, maybe upgun it to a 6″ mount, or not, as the 5″/54 is a damn good gun. Though the 6″…. Add some lasers for defense and they’d still probably cost less than the LCSessessss.

  9. big navy, air force f35 etc, army crt training, marines ditching armor. all designed for no other reason but to guarantee our loss to the chinese. many lives will be lost needlessly, but we will still defeat them. and hopefully hang those responsible.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here