You must log in or register to comment.

Rexia t1_itu14jn wrote

What's preparing for war with Russia like? 30 minutes of activity and then the rest of the day off?


Deevilknievel t1_itu1wnl wrote

"It is a real change," said Lieutenant Cordan Mackenzie, 27, one of the F18 pilots on board. Her call sign is 'Big Poppa'.

"Most of the time what we are doing, it feels like training, it feels like a game but you come out here and have intel [intelligence] briefings and you fly missions with NATO allies and it really solidifies how real the things that we do in the world are and how important our mission set is: having a presence here in the Adriatic and having the US work with our NATO allies to make sure the world knows we are still a power to be reckoned with."

She, and her fellow aviators, face the possibility of one day being ordered to fight in air-to-air combat against the Russians should tensions escalate significantly.


taggospreme t1_itu4vun wrote

I wonder if she loves it when people call her 'Big Poppa'


Bareen t1_itw2jo6 wrote

I bet she has entered a room more than once and someone starts playing Biggie Smalls.


[deleted] t1_itx0tkf wrote



haimez t1_itxuyj0 wrote

That’s not really relevant when talking about military aircraft deployments. Quantity and quality, both for the aircraft themselves and in terms of air defense- Russia hasn’t been able to even go toe to toe with Ukraine.


autotldr t1_itu2uz4 wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot)

> The crew of a giant US aircraft carrier in European waters says they are ready to fight Russia if the call comes but their mission is to deter threats and prevent escalation.

> The vicinity of Russia's military and the knowledge that Russian forces are locked in a brutal war with Ukraine - which is not part of NATO but shares borders with members of the alliance - means operating in Europe is no longer just another peacetime training exercise for the more than 5,000-strong crew of US sailors on the carrier.

> He said this was also only the third time since the end of the Cold War that a US aircraft carrier group has come under NATO command, with all three of those occasions happening as part of Neptune drills in the past year.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: NATO^#1 Russia^#2 carrier^#3 allied^#4 more^#5


nick5erd t1_itu67rz wrote

There is no scenario where you could fight someone with their own military complex with a aircraft carrier. For example every training mission with Europe counterparts ends with a sunken aircraft carrier. Sweden could fight them with their German export sub marines. Germans own ones with a much better technology never have to take part. China and Russia got anti ship missles, the sunken flagship of Russia shows you how this scenario will be. Aircraft carrier are good to bomb countries without infrastructure, but nothing more.


Cuddlebeasts t1_itu913i wrote

Lol you think an aircraft carrier floats on the sea by itself? Do you realize how many support and defense ships a carrier battle group has?


nick5erd t1_itu9zfa wrote

Just look at the exercises with Europe and look at the armada of the Russian flagship.


Cuddlebeasts t1_itub5yw wrote

The US Navy continue to produce these massive floating fortresses with another nuclear-powered carrier slated to set sail in 2024. I’m no expert in military but you’re talking about the US Navy… they’re not going to continue funding these carriers or send them around the world if they’re to go down easy. Nor will they admit or let others know what countermeasures were developed to address the weaknesses pointed out.

You also have the protection of the US Air Force, US intelligence, etc. They’re not going to sit idly if they know a threat is coming whether from land, air, or sea.


nick5erd t1_itubjjf wrote

It is just the mechanism of a military complex. There cannot be a reason to spent ten times more money on military services than every one else.


VakoKocurik t1_ituhm1k wrote

What Armada? The one under the sea?

The one that had to be towed?

Or the one failing to supply anything beyond 50km?


Opposite_Ad_3715 t1_itubig9 wrote

The war games and simulated missions we use in Europe are hella unfair, based on reports they will literally summon enemies from nowhere, teleport them, and give them unrealistic advantages to force the trainees to think in their feet, it’s why most war games end in an unfavorable scenario


nick5erd t1_itucf7q wrote

Maybe, but if you want to use your aircraft carrier you have go near the cost, and there is no chance to find a small, quietly submarine there. Or in the scenario of the Russian flagship, Ukraine just use more than one missle and a drone. There is no upper limit to use just more missiles or drones. Aircraft carrier not useful in modern wars outside bombing some stone age culture.


Cuddlebeasts t1_itufox2 wrote

… aircraft carriers will never get close to a coast. Carriers during the Iraq war from what I recall were “parked” in Turkey, nowhere close to Iraq. And you’re comparing the sunken Russian Moskva to a US aircraft carrier…? Far from apples to apples. Again, included in a carrier battle group are anti-air ships (and the aircraft from the carrier itself). A drone will have a hard time getting close.


StewGoFast t1_itug0rt wrote

Certified arm chair general here. Grammar and spelling on point to go along with it. Hope the US Navy hires you as a consultant. Don’t take anything less than $1 billion an hour for your immense expertise.


nick5erd t1_itunhuz wrote

You don't get it. My theory is, that this kind of weapon is build to conquer resources and land from people not able to defend them self. It is not for defend themselves from anybody able to attack. We have to discuss it, because it is built for future crimes of the US.


noneyabuiznezz t1_itvz2ug wrote

Your theory is beyond dumb. Carrier battlegroups are huge, their defenders are also massive as the can be ground based defence systems (depending if they have support from the coast) it’s own aircraft it launches also acts as a deterrent and defensive mechanism, then you got multiple ships that are built around the idea of protecting themselves and others through C-RAMS, missile systems and jamming abilities.

There’s a reason why aircraft carriers are still around and the fact that your pathetic mind can’t grasp the reason why is just mind bogglingly stupid.


nick5erd t1_itwcx85 wrote



QuantumWaveFormCat t1_itwze3t wrote

I thought Russian trolls were supposed to be better than this? Putler must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel.


R0cky9 t1_itwsquf wrote

Its an entire battle group not just one aircraft carrier.