Menu
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read
here.
Home
Forums
Research Topics
Alternative History and Future Speculation
Why no USS Denfeld?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="F-14D" data-source="post: 66477" data-attributes="member: 851"><blockquote data-quote="Deadtroopers"><p>This conjurs an ATL where the US is no longer able to keep the world safe for Fascism! Seriously a United States with a drastically reduced ability to interfere with the affairs of others wouldn't be a bad idea. Back to the topic, USS America was very specialised and the atom bombers intended for her. But for North Korea, both the Navy vision and the Air Force visions would have led to grave reductions in conventional warfare abilities and made for a much more dangerous world.</p></blockquote><p></p><p></p><p>Hmm. </p><p></p><p>Well, ignoring the first two sentences, a few points might be in order.</p><p></p><p>1. The name of the cancelled ship was USS United States, not USS America (although two subsequent ships have been named America). </p><p></p><p>2. The United States was not specialized for the nuclear mission, although one of the reasons for her design was to be able to handle the larger jet aircraft expected to be introduced in the future, among them nuclear capable bombers, but also the normal tactical attack and fighter aircraft. In fact, the design of the Forestall owes much to the work done for the United States. </p><p></p><p>3. The Navy got its vision, delayed a few years, in CVA-59 and her successors. Not sure what grave reductions conventional warfare were experienced there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="F-14D, post: 66477, member: 851"] [quote="Deadtroopers"] This conjurs an ATL where the US is no longer able to keep the world safe for Fascism! Seriously a United States with a drastically reduced ability to interfere with the affairs of others wouldn't be a bad idea. Back to the topic, USS America was very specialised and the atom bombers intended for her. But for North Korea, both the Navy vision and the Air Force visions would have led to grave reductions in conventional warfare abilities and made for a much more dangerous world. [/quote] Hmm. Well, ignoring the first two sentences, a few points might be in order. 1. The name of the cancelled ship was USS United States, not USS America (although two subsequent ships have been named America). 2. The United States was not specialized for the nuclear mission, although one of the reasons for her design was to be able to handle the larger jet aircraft expected to be introduced in the future, among them nuclear capable bombers, but also the normal tactical attack and fighter aircraft. In fact, the design of the Forestall owes much to the work done for the United States. 3. The Navy got its vision, delayed a few years, in CVA-59 and her successors. Not sure what grave reductions conventional warfare were experienced there. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Name the company which designed the F-117A Stealth Fighter
Post reply
Home
Forums
Research Topics
Alternative History and Future Speculation
Why no USS Denfeld?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top