Any other suggestions?

Leave nuclear weapons out of this debate, because EVERYTHING is vulnerable if you detonate an instant sun warhead on top of it…

Shall we concentrate on the threats the USN is likely to face – aircraft with supersonic/long range ASMs, diesel electric subs etc?

Can’t land on a carrier though…..

The invasion of the Falklands had very little to do with the Falklands and everything to do with the Argentine Junta making one last desperate grasp to stay in power.

A continuation of politics by other means? Incidentally the UK wasn’t the Argentine Navy’s only supplier by a long shot.

The Viking’s submarine hunting role has largely been taken over by additional helicopters in the air wings. They are more suited in modern threats in relatively shallow waters than the Viking.

dionis

What the Russians could easily do is shoot a group of nuclear armed missiles in first, have them air burst detonate at a safe yet effective EMP range perhaps – crippling the CVBG’s ability to detect anything, then pummel away with the rest of the payload.

Don’t you think that NATO have been aware of nuclear EMP effects for decades, and equipment has been designed to survive it?

At least the US Navy still has a carrierborne fighter, unlike the Royal Navy post Sea Harrier (see this very long PPRuNe thread).

I believe that AIM54 is considered out of date in today’s world, being intended for long range, open ocean engagements. Super Hornet with AMRAAM is an excellent capability and more suited to today’s threats. The avionics is more advanced, so is the modernised version of the E2 Hawkeye that would provide AEW and command/control.

In today’s political and economic climate, justifying single role aircraft is difficult in peacetime, especially when the US and West have been lulled into a false sense of security by the lack of air or naval threats in the Iraqi or Afghan theatres.

Perhaps the main problem caused by retiring the Viking is that loss of tanking ability – I don’t know why nobody has ever thought of using the C2/E2 airframe for an organic AAR role.

How did this thread degenerate into these sort of slurs and accusations?

I thought that USN Intruders used Harpoon during several confrontations with Iran and Libya in the 80s?