Thread 63887071

What was the point of this thing?

>was
Don't tease me like this

>>63887071 (OP)
live rent free in the minds of tel aviv

>>63887071 (OP)
Imagine dropping a MOP onto it. Doesn't even need to explode. Just puts a massive hole from deck to keel and a huge geyser of water through the middle.

>>63887071 (OP)
To die to a $500 drone and contaminate the local biosphere for centuries with pollution from it's wreckage on the seabed.

>>63887071 (OP)
Comic relief

>>63887071 (OP)
Pushing the envelope of 2×4 technology

>>63887071 (OP)
42 thousand tons. how hard are Israeli sub captains right now at the thought of sinking this thing ?

>>63887071 (OP)
Retarded dickwaving contest to project their """naval power""" beyond the middle east.

>>63887071 (OP)
To do sick kick flips.

>>63887071 (OP)
To give us a right good giggle

>>63887071 (OP)
An SSN should've snuck in and torpedo'd this sucker.

>>63887071 (OP)
To play at carrier ops and maybe learn a thing or two along the way.
>>63887149
>Retarded dickwaving contest to project their """naval power""" beyond the middle east.
Answers like this should not be taken seriously.
>>63887141
>how hard are Israeli sub captains right now at the thought of sinking this thing ?
They wouldn't even get a chance to try because one F-35 could put it underwater in ten seconds.

>>63887085
That would be an absolutely breathtaking waste of a valuable and highly specialised munition given that this thing is literally just a cargo ship that could be sunk by a stray rpg round or small fire under the right circumstances

>>63887071 (OP)
I don't understand why this isn't considered a carrier. I see a runway capable of launching aircraft and an elevator to store aircraft. Compared to some of the conversions in the early days of carriers it's definitely considered one.

>>63888566
what non-drone aircraft can take off on that thing

Artificial reef

>>63888681
You can see a helicopter in the photo

>>63888566
Same reason why Atlantic Conveyor wasn't considered a carrier

>>63888695
hey retard i was obviously asking about planes

IT SURVIVED THE WAR

CAN YOU SAY THE SAME ABOUT AKAGI? ARK ROYAL? HORNET?

TOTAL IRANIAN CARRIER VICTORY.

>>63888735
THE WAR GOES ON!

SHE'LL BE LAUNCHING DRONE STRIKES ON TEL AVIV AND PUTTING THE SA'AR CORVETTES IN JONES' LOCKER.

NIMITZ AND FORD, IF YOU DARE!

>>63889437

Please sink the Nimitz, going down with the loss of thousands of men is an infinitely better fate than the cutting torch in Brownsville.

>>63888735
>He thinks the war ended because Trump said so
Kek, you are so naive.

>>63887071 (OP)
>look, we are totally a regional power that you must fear

So kikes went out our their way to destroy useless museum pieces like the F14 tomcat but let alone this monstruosity, that its actually the pride of the iranian army
not fair

>>63887071 (OP)
What is actually wrong with carrier ramps? Why doesn't /k/ like them?

>>63889437
THE WAR IS NOW OVER AGAIN. SAILORS ON IRIS SHAHID BAGHERI ARE SMILING AND WAVING TO THE SAILORS OF USS FORD AS THEY PASS ONE ANOTHER IN THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ.

They either know what's coming in the future or someone in Iran has been playing too much of the Russia campaign in Kaiserreich

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd7rScF8tIs

Retarded sandnigger cargo cult posturing. That being said the first carrier a country builds always sucks. You gotta do it a few times to figure shit out.

>>63888543
yeaah, but on the other hand: funy

>>63887139
pic not related, those ships weren't KND.

>>63888543
>>63889910
I was against Blumpf bombing Iran but now that the cats out of the bag we probably should destroy this thing. No carrier has been lost to enemy action since the Card. Sinking a modern carrier even a shitty one would teach us a lot about modern naval warfare.

>>63887071 (OP)
>A FUCKING RAMP

>>63889924
>Blumpf
neck yourself

>>63889924
Plenty of cargo ships have sunk, we know everything we need to about sinking them.

>>63889895
The idea behind a drone carrier is a solid one, so maybe they can figure something out in time.

The wealthy nations with LHDs should probably turn them into dual helo-drone carriers.

>>63889924
The war is over.

Anyway, the US has done it with SinkEX. USS America. They shot and dropped a lot of munitions at her in "realistic" settings.. They eventually had to scuttle her to finish it.

>>63887071 (OP)
Gain experience with carrier operation and design in a cost effective manner.

>>63890113
Now now little Drumpfrie don’t be upset.

>>63888681
There are jet aircraft on the deck in pictures

>>63892526
>There are jet aircraft on the deck in pictures
yeah

>>63890248
Who is that person again?

>>63892561
Supposedly the prince of all Saiyans.

>>63887071 (OP)
it's actually very clever, it has the same radar signature as normal oil tanker so the navy can't ID them without close in prosecution

>>63892557
Not drones I've seen pics of real full sized aircraft

>>63887071 (OP)
vanity project

>>63893182
They have a bigger version. Still a drone.
We haven't seen it in flight.

>>63893208
They're actually all a little bit different from each other.

>>63893208
>>63893213
But is the ship not big enough for them to test naval aircraft? It looks as big as many carriers by other nations. I know it's a conversion but couldn't they use it as a trial for a real carrier and aircraft development? That's what original western carriers were. They were shitty conversions where lots of aircraft crashed like USS Langley in their attempt to learn and develop aircraft and catapults.

>>63889614
They want Iran to keep wasting money on it because it does nothing.

>>63893226
>But is the ship not big enough for them to test naval aircraft?
I'm guessing the deck isn't strong enough to hold up to heavier aircraft.
>couldn't they use it as a trial for a real carrier and aircraft development?
That's probably the idea. I personally think they might try to buy one of China's old carriers in the future.

Thinking about it, they should probably convert another tanker into a ballistic missile ship. This would provide added flexibility with those things they love so much. It could probably get a salvo off if it wasn't taken out as soon as hostilities start.

It'd be useful for extending the range of SRBMs too. I recall they fired some at ISIS back in the day, so it'd probably be most useful for this sort of thing. Stand-off attack against militants.

The drone carrier can launch observation drones for targeting.

>>63893242
>I personally think they might try to buy one of China's old carriers in the future
in like 20 years?

>>63887085
>Mop
it would make a splash on the deck

>>63893208
They have a mockup that looks good for propaganda and a bunch of toys >>63893213 in body kits.

>>63892557
Iran has the opportunity to do the funniest shit imaginable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqFkTekW-_E

>>63887074
Iran has never won a war
Israel has never lost a war

>>63893517
Something like that, probably depends on how quickly China can churn out their domestic built carriers. 3 or 4 modern supercarriers is probably enough for their aspirations in the SCS, at which point they might be open to offloading their old Kuznetsov classes for cheap. I'm sure recent events set Iran's plans back a bit too.

>>63896662
>>63893242
Okay, so why does Iran need a proper carrier in 2045? Or 2075? I'm struggling to see what possible strategy they would have for a carrier or how they would ever be able to afford it or its escorts.

>>63896711
So they can LARP at being a regional naval power? Why does Thailand or Brazil or Spain need a carrier?