>>63854813>wascorrect.
>>63857722>So you're telling me there's an absolute fuckhuge volume of air within a US carrier?chad_yes.png
>Have you ever been inside a supercarrierYes, but i do not see how this is relevant. I can read engineering drawings just fine and they're more useful.
>Do you have any idea how many bulkheads there are?These bulkheads are quite thin.
Did you ever ask yourself why Phalanx CIWS are not loaded with high explosive fragmentation ammo, but rather armor piercing incindiary?
Soviet anti-ship missiles in the 70's grew up to 7 tons in weight, with massive hardened steel warhead casings. To even have a chance to crack those, armor piercing was required.
Do you seriously think a whimy little sheet metal bulkhead is going to stop a 7 ton missile with a hardened penetrator tip going Mach 3?
No, it's going straight thru the fucking ship like in the video I posted. Do you think other ships do not have bulkheads?
Every ship has 9001 bulkheads.
>>63860870There is more volume of ship below water than above.
Think about it, water has a density of 1. If a ship has a density above 1, it floats. The lower the density, the higher it sits in the water.
The density of a battleship is like 0.6.
The density of a carrier is *MUCH* lower because it has zero armor, so much higher air to steel ratio.
You can visually SEE right away that a carrier cannot really have any armor due to how fucking high they sit in the water.