Iranian missiles v western navy

[Oldman1]

somewhere I read the USA had 14 air craft carriers, or the correct number is 11?
Sinking a carrier won't deter retaliation for sure, but it would be a great loss for the USA.

Somebody either miscounted or mistaken for an amphibious ship for an aircraft carrier. It may be a great loss but we have been used to losing carriers before. In any case the U.S. Navy was preparing for a possible conflict against the Soviet Union during the Cold War and the aegis system was built against possible attack in a scenario where they are saturated by aircraft and missiles. This is nothing new to them. Same method different enemy. Hence the reason for carrier battle group to handle submarines, aircraft, missiles, etc.

 

[gambit]

as I said AEGIS Anti Balistic missile defence was not designed to defend the navy itself...

So what? Ships can launch missiles, no? Or are you talking about 'Iranian physics' here?

...but they designed it as a portable Anti ICBM & IRBM defense system not to defend against short range missile like Iskandar OR Fateh 110 or Persian Gulf these missiles have very low altitude (compared to other IRBM or ICBM) and have a very short flying time another capability of such missiles is that they are not completely follow a trajectory path and when they come down or at the flight time can do some maneuver and change their flight pattern so it would be very hard to determine where it come down to fire the defensive missile .

Now you are talking out of your league. The technical challenges against the moving target, even as slow moving as a ship, is enormous for the attacker.

- The attacker must know the INITIAL location of the target. This is applicable in all intercepts and a missile against ship is very much an intercept.

- The attacker must keep sensor track of the moving target. Or make credible guesstimates of the target's future location. This is applicable in all intercepts.

- If the attacker is maneuverable, what is the range of maneuverability that will allow the attacker to maintain sensor track? If the maneuvers have range enough to lose sensor track of the target, the attacker must return to a previous course to reacquire the target and the more maneuvers, the greater the fuel expenditure, reducing capable distance.

- What kind of sensors?

A missile against missile intercept is very similar to a missile against manned aircraft intercept in concepts and engineering. Today we have missiles sophisticated enough to 99% guarantee a hit against a maneuvering aircraft. So what make you think a missile defense is impossible? Because of 'Iranian physics'?

 

[Mosamania]

So what make you think a missile defense is impossible? Because of 'Iranian physics'?

These were made be Iranians idiot they have special super duper secret most state of the art sophisticated unrivaled technology. The missile can flip in the air twice and has internal AI that allows it to find target of I treat on it's own some say it has an actual human brain done by genetic engineering and stem cell research that it can think on it's own. Man you are an idiot you don't know anything about Iran do you??

 

[Vassnti]

Any plan needs to go beyond the first day, even if and thats a big if Iran can saturate a US battle group and sink a carrier, close the strait and blow up a few oil tankers, what then. Your missiles are shot, you have now pissed off every country that gets oil through Homuz.

Day 2 85 B-52's 31500kg pay load 2,677,500 Kg of bombs land on Iran, allow 9 hour turn around plus flight times
Day 3 2,677,550kg of bombs land on Iran
Day 4 starting to get the picture?