Aircraft Carriers vs. Submarines: The Real Arms Race That Won't Go Away

[rangerrebew]

November 4, 2020

Aircraft Carriers vs. Submarines: The Real Arms Race That Won't Go Away

The balance of threat between carriers and submarines remains unsettled today. The most advanced vessels of both sort have become absurdly expensive.
by Robert Farley Follow drfarls on Twitter L

Here's What You Need To Remember: Aircraft carriers and submarines have always occupied distinct opposing roles in naval warfare. It is unlikely that the role for either will disappear in the near future.

The great naval powers emerged from World War I relatively confident that the battleship would continue to decide question of naval warfare. German submarines had nearly starved Great Britain in the last two years of the war, but the Royal Navy had turned back the offensive with minimal damage to its heavy units. The Royal Navy had also begun to experiment with aircraft carriers, a development the American and Japanese watched with close attention. Still, the major interwar naval agreements concentrated on battleships, rather than on “support” vessels such as the carrier and the submarine.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/aircraft-carriers-vs-submarines-real-arms-race-wont-go-away-171925

[PeteS in CA]

Arms races like this started when someone discovered that long-handled clubs were badder weapons than hand held rocks. So shell size and velocity vs. armor type and thickness ... torpedo boats vs. battleships ... CAP and AA vs. bombers and torpedo bombers ... anti-ship missiles vs. missile defenses ...