US aircraft carriers aren't that easy to kill, here's why - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY TACTICAL

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

Aircraft carriers are symbols of American military might, and, recently, a Chinese military professor caused a stir by calling for China to sink two of them to crush America’s resolve.

That’s certainly easier said than done.

The US military conducted a “Sink Exercise” test in 2005, using the decommissioned USS America for target practice to test the defensive capabilities of US carriers in order to guide the development of future supercarriers. The ship was bombarded repeatedly and hammered in a variety of attacks.


The carrier withstood four weeks of intense bombardment before it was finally sunk, according to The War Zone.

These leviathans of the seas are beacons of American power for a reason. China could knock one of the US’ 11 carriers out of the fight, but sinking one of these 100,000-ton warships is another thing entirely. That’s not to say it can’t be done. It’s just no simple task, experts told Business Insider.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) transits the Pacific Ocean.

(U.S. Navy photo by MC3 Kenneth Abbate)

“It wouldn’t be impossible to hit an aircraft carrier, but unless they hit it with a nuke, an aircraft carrier should be able to take on substantial damage,” said retired Capt. Talbot Manvel, who previously served as an aircraft engineer and was involved in the design of the new Ford-class carriers.

At 1,100 feet long, carriers are floating nuclear power plants, fuel tankers, bomb arsenals, and an airfield stacked atop each other like a layered cake. They are then surrounded by cruisers and destroyers to defend them from missiles, fighters, and torpedoes — even if that means sacrificing themselves.

China can bring a lot of firepower to a fight.

The Chinese military has a lot of different weapons it could throw at a US carrier in a war.

China has its “carrier killer” anti-ship ballistic missiles, such as the DF-21D and the DF-26, which are capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads, as well as a variety of anti-ship cruise missiles and torpedoes.

China would likely use missiles to suppress the carrier, using ballistic missiles to damage the air wing’s planes and wreck the flight deck, where planes launch and land. Weapons like cruise missiles, which can strike with precision, would likely be aimed at the hangar bay, superstructure, and maybe some of the airplanes, Bryan Clark, a former US Navy officer and defense expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), told Business Insider.

These targets are all far above the carrier’s waterline and are meant to knock the carrier out of the fight.

“If they really wanted to sink the carrier, they might have to turn to a torpedo attack,” he added. “Torpedo defense is hard, not really perfected, and so [torpedoes] actually end up being the more worrying threat.”

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) transits the South China Sea.

(US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class Jasen Morenogarcia)

US carriers are behemoths that are built to take a hit.

Displacing more than 100,000 tons, the US Navy’s Nimitz-class aircraft carriers are among the largest warships ever built. Their ability to take a beating “is a function of both their size and the compartmentalization of the carrier,” Clark explained.

“In the case of the USS America, the size alone resulted in it being pretty survivable,” he said before calling attention to some other aspects of the powerful ships.

Each carrier has a number of main spaces, which the crew would try to seal off should the carrier take a hit below the waterline, say from a torpedo. The ship is so incredibly large that it would take a number of these compartments filling up with water for the ship to sink.

The type of steel used on the ships also makes them difficult to penetrate, Manvel said. “It has an underbottom and side protection of several layers of steel.” There are also “voids that allow for warhead gas expansion.”

The extra armoring is also designed to keep damage from detonating the ship’s weapons magazines, where bombs and missiles are stored.

Additionally, the US Navy pays attention to how it moves weapons around the ship, keeping these bombs and missiles as protected as possible. And steps have been taken to reduce the number of hot surfaces that could ignite.

There are also a lot of redundant systems, which means that critical systems can be rerouted, making it hard to take out essentials, such as the propulsion system, which would leave the ship dead in the water if destroyed. As long as the ship can move, it can retreat if necessary.

“Given enough time and weapons, you can sink a carrier. But, if you have defenses, people doing damage control, and propulsion, the carrier can take damage and drive away to eventually come back,” Clark told BI.

US carriers “can take a lick and keep on ticking,” Manvel, who taught at the US Naval Academy, said.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) launches a rolling airframe missile (RAM).

(US Navy)

US carriers and their escort ships are armed to the teeth.

Carriers and their escort ships are armed with sonar and torpedoes to prevent the stealthy boats from getting close enough for a torpedo attack. And the battle group is also armed with electronic countermeasures and kinetic interceptors for missile defense. They also have various close-in weapons systems to strike at incoming threats as a last resort.

Submarines are their gravest threat to sinking. Russian subs, for instance, are often armed with 1,000-pound torpedoes that were designed to destroy carrier groups, and it’s conceivable that enough fired at once and on target could sink a carrier.

For just this reason, the US has put a lot of effort into anti-submarine warfare, so US carrier strike groups have “the ability to put weapons on submarine contacts very quickly,” Clark told BI. Escort ships can launch torpedoes or rocket-fired torpedoes, and SH-60 helicopters can drop torpedoes or sonobuoys to track submarines.

The US has also put a greater emphasis on electronic warfare to prevent US carriers from being actively targeted by enemy missiles. The Chinese could “launch a weapon, but it may not be accurately targeted enough to actually hit” a moving carrier from 1,000 miles away, Clark further explained.

There is also a keen interest in improved missile-defense capabilities. “There are lots of ways to shoot it down with kinetic interceptors, like the SM-6, SM-2, Rolling Airframe Missile,” he added.

Of course, there is also the air wing, which could include up to sixty fighters, as well as a number of jammers, helicopters, and early-warning aircraft. “We have a pretty robust air wing that can go hundreds of miles out to provide a buffer for incoming stuff. It would take a lot to get through that,” Manvel said.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

Ships with the Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group and John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group transit the Philippine Sea during dual carrier operations.

(US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kaila V. Peters)

American carriers are never alone in hostile waters.

“It’s important to put the carrier where it is least at risk … surrounded by the battle group,” Manvel said.

US aircraft carriers are surrounded by smaller ships, known as escorts. They sail in carrier strike groups consisting of at least one carrier, one cruiser, and one or two destroyers and are capable of unleashing a lot of firepower when needed.

They are exceptionally well defended. “You have to launch hundreds of weapons at the carrier strike group to even get a few of them through,” Clark explained. That doesn’t mean a strike group can’t be overwhelmed, though.

There’s a good chance China has the ability to do that. At a recent talk at The Heritage Foundation, Clark explained that China could hurl around 600 missiles downrange at a carrier group, which could, on a good day, down roughly 75% of the incoming Chinese weapons.

This, however, creates a dilemma for the Chinese military. The People’s Liberation Army has to make the hard decision on how many weapons it will throw away just to knock a carrier out for a few weeks, assuming it has merely been damaged and not sunk.

“Those weapons are gone. They don’t have them for some other part of the fight,” Clark said. “Maybe that is worth it to them. Maybe it’s not.”

And it’s likely in a war that the US would destroy these missile batteries with bombers and long-range missiles before it sends a carrier into their range.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Antietam (CG 54) pulls alongside the Navy’s forward-deployed aircraft carrier, USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76), during a fueling at sea.

(US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kaila Peters)

To strike a killing blow, China has to get close, really close.

China has decent torpedoes, and their submarines are increasingly capable. But whether or not they are good enough to slip past the defenses of a carrier strike group to deliver the kill shot to a US carrier is debatable.

In 2006, a Chinese Song-class submarine reportedly managed to skirt the defenses of the USS Kitty Hawk strike group, surfacing within firing range of the carrier as it sailed through the East China Sea, according to a report by The Washington Times, some details of which have been called into question. The incident reportedly caused the US Navy to reevaluate its approach to Chinese subs.

The US Navy can put a lot of fire on a submarine very quickly, and because submarines tend to be rather slow with limited defenses, the enemy submarine could retreat only once it was spotted.

“Once a submarine has been detected and you start throwing weapons at it, it pretty much has to leave because it is too slow to evade, it doesn’t have a lot of self-defense, and it doesn’t have the sensors necessary to stand and fight,” Clark told BI.

The big question is: Will the US Navy strike group be able to spot an enemy submarine before it manages to get a shot off?

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

MIGHTY CULTURE

Spread facts, not fear

This is a moment when words matter.

All of us want answers. Within our hands we hold the gateway to all sorts of answers to every question we could think to ask, and even some questions better left unasked.

Can I gently implore you to resist the urge to spend the day on search engines or scrolling madly through social media as the source of information?


Here is the most important point you need to know today:

This is a dynamic situation.

Facts are evolving daily. Leaders are assessing every situation, every nuance and every facet of this public health situation, hourly.

Consequently, the biggest challenge they face is communicating in a timely manner with as much information as possible, without overstating the concerns and without underestimating the challenge.

If you feel an information delay, do not fill the vacuum with conjecture and hyperbole.

Do not add to the swirl.

Do not repeat as fact something offered as opinion.

Do not accept information from non-credible sources.

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://media.rbl.ms/image?u=%2F-%2Fmedia%2FImages%2FMHS%2FPhotos%2Fcoronavirusscreening2020.ashx%3Fh%3D410%26la%3Den%26w%3D725%26hash%3DE99EDEDED30CABE30F87D17E38A265A76E28B2F234DEB40F6F633356828DFC86&ho=https%3A%2F%2Fhealth.mil&s=65&h=d0876c6c57c474bbea07423cfafae50aed344118e91f978e6ad9656b66f2ac7b&size=980x&c=1182438243 crop_info=”%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//media.rbl.ms/image%3Fu%3D%252F-%252Fmedia%252FImages%252FMHS%252FPhotos%252Fcoronavirusscreening2020.ashx%253Fh%253D410%2526la%253Den%2526w%253D725%2526hash%253DE99EDEDED30CABE30F87D17E38A265A76E28B2F234DEB40F6F633356828DFC86%26ho%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fhealth.mil%26s%3D65%26h%3Dd0876c6c57c474bbea07423cfafae50aed344118e91f978e6ad9656b66f2ac7b%26size%3D980x%26c%3D1182438243%22%7D” expand=1]

Stick to the facts you know, from sources you trust.

Community Chat pages are not credible sources.

Private Facebook groups administered by private citizens with no official government or health training are not credible sources.

For our military families: Your first and most credible source of information will be official guidance offered through the chain of command – from the SECDEF to the Chief of Staff for your branch of service to MAJCOM to Installation leadership to unit commanders, etc.

It takes time for clear public affairs guidance to be written, approved and disseminated.

As someone who’s been on that side of things in the White House, Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State, trust me when I say: you want ACCURATE information. Be patient.

Trust leadership at all levels of government and your military chain of command to move as swiftly as possible.

As someone married to a senior leader on an Air Force base, I promise you – your leadership knows you want information. Their spouses are probably telling them all the questions they need to answer. Believe me, they know and they are working it. Trust them.

Earlier this week I got a message from a friend on base. Her kids go to school with my kids. Neighborhood conversation caused her to wonder about how the news headlines would impact her family specifically.

I suspect there are many spouses and families with similar questions today: spring break travel plans, pending PCS, active duty members overseas and family members stationed abroad.

Rather than participate in the conjecture or begin worrying about how to plan for all the contingencies, my friend sent me a quick text, asking if I knew how her family situation might be affected.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

She texted, “I know better than to simply survey my neighbors about what they’ve heard. I’d rather ask someone I trust, who I know can find out what’s true and what’s just rumor.”

You better believe I messaged her right back.

“I don’t know, but I’ll find out.”

My very next message was to find out.

In the interim, I told her, “I asked leadership. I suspect the initial answer will be something along the lines of: it’s a dynamic situation and we won’t know specific answers for specific cases until closer to that time. But I’ll get you an ‘official’ answer as soon as possible.”

This is my message for you today, too.

If you have specific questions for specific cases, ask credible sources, like those listed below — not social media. When the answer is incomplete, be patient and trust your leadership.

I promise, we’re on your side – it’s our life too.

www.coronavirus.gov is the official government website with up-to-date information from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. The Task Force includes representation from all federal agencies and is coordinating federal, state and local response to this emerging situation.

On that website, hosted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), you’ll find situation updates as well as symptoms to monitor, answers to common questions and steps to prevent illness, including tips for keeping homes, workplaces, schools or public establishments safe.

You can find DOD specific guidance at https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Spotlight/Coronavirus/

For more information on travel restrictions, visit https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices

Look for branch specific and unit specific guidance issued by official public affairs sources. When in doubt, ask your supervisors and let them know you’re willing to wait for official answers. Then trust them to do their job and get you accurate, actionable information.

At a state and local level, official guidance will be offered by official, sanctioned government websites: Governors, Mayors, state and local public health officials. Those individuals and services will likely be pulling their information from this official CDC resource page for state, local, territorial and tribal health departments.
Articles

The US military wants a missile that can carry explosive drones to a target

The US military wants a missile that can carry explosive-packed drones to a target hundreds of miles away, according to a contract solicitation from the Pentagon.


Earlier this month, the DoD announced it was soliciting proposals for this new missile system, which would be fired by the Army’s existing MGM-140 Tactical Missile System or the M-270 Multiple Launch Rocket System. But unlike traditional armaments, the Army wants this missile packed with unmanned quad-copters that will be released, fly to their target, land, and blow themselves up.

Related: Stealth bombers strike ISIS in Libya

“The ultimate goal is to produce a missile deployable, long range [unmanned aerial system] swarm that can deliver small [explosively formed penetrators] to a variety of targets,” the solicitation reads. “This will serve as a smart augmentation to the standard missile warhead.”

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
An ATACMS being launched by an M270. | Wikimedia Commons

The payload seems to be meant for hard targets, which the Army says could potentially mean tanks, large guns, fuel storage barrels, and vehicle roofs. The contract doesn’t mention exactly how many drones should be packed inside a missile.

Still, it could potentially mean hundreds of drones being deployed to a target, if a test of a “drone swarm” made public earlier this month is any guide. During that test, three F/A-18 Super Hornets spit out more than 100 tiny Perdix drones, which then linked up with each other to collectively make decisions and fly in formation.

MIGHTY SPORTS

The NFL’s ‘Power Bottom’ — 5 least entertaining teams to watch

Like it or not, the NFL’s ratings are pretty much the same in 2018 when you look at them year over year. The ratings do dip at times, depending on the teams and the time of day. And really, I can’t blame anyone for not wanting to spend three hours on a Thursday night watching the Jets and Browns pillow fight — especially because there’s no guarantee that Cleveland will lose every game in spectacular fashion this year.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
That job is taken.

But just because a team wins games doesn’t mean they’re fun to watch. This problem is most evident in college football. I’ve been raised as an Ohio State fan, but that doesn’t make the game exciting. I remember spending Saturday afternoons watching the zoomed-in-completely-yet-still-too-far-away telecast as Ohio State puts 900 points on someone like Dartmouth College. It’s just a boring day when you already know the outcome.

Of the 32 teams in the NFL, these are the ones that actually make me wish they were blacked out, just so I could watch a different, interesting game. In the interest of full disclosure, I’m a Bengals fan — and the only reason the Bengals didn’t make this list is because it’s kind of exciting to see how they’re going to blow their lead every week. Will it be a well-timed fumble? Will they just stop scoring points in the second half? Who knows?


US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Or maybe it’s an Andy Dalton pass that does it!

It’s a race to the bottom here, but some other teams deserve a mention, especially the Houston Texans and New York Giants. By the time they played each other, they were both 0-2. Somebody had to stand out, but they sure waited until the fourth quarter to do anything to make anyone care.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

This is the only Bills-related thing I want to see every week.

5. Buffalo Bills

If the Bills were a flavor, they’d be vanilla. Watching the Bills is like opening a Neapolitan Ice Cream box and finding out someone ate the two good flavors and didn’t throw the rest away. Even watching them blow out the Vikings got old after a while. At least the Vikings were fun against the Packers.

It’s hard to believe the Bills gave up two second round picks to get Wyoming’s Josh Allen because they also have nothing for Allen to work with. The team’s sound reasoning is that “he is Buffalo.” Great call. No wonder the Bills’ fans are the best part about the team.

NBC’s Chris Simms was excited for Allen because his Wonderlic intelligence test score was the highest in the league, despite the fact the Wonderlic means nothing. Dan Marino scored a 15 to Allen’s 37, but my guess is the Bills would love to have a Marino. EJ Manuel complained that the Bills didn’t let him grow as a player, and there might be something to that. Many former Bills players saw limited success until they left the organization – Marshawn Lynch, Sammy Watkins, London Fletcher, Ronald Darby, and even all the way back to Antoine Winfield.

The Bills went to the playoffs last year, so obviously they have to change their entire team. You might as well sign Colin Kaepernick, Buffalo. At least it would give people something to talk about — aside from Vontae Davis retiring in the middle of a game.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(NFL Memes)

4. New England Patriots

They may have gotten their asses handed to them in the Super Bowl last year, but this is still the New England Patriots we’re talking about, right? Right? The most interesting thing that’s happened watching the Patriots in 2018 so far is the look on Dolphins fans’ faces as their 3-0 ‘Fins get annihilated by the person they hate the most for four quarters.

The problem with that game is that the rest of us couldn’t stand to watch New England beat a lifeless Dolphin team. It sure wasn’t fun watching the Pats score two field goals they didn’t need to stay on top of the Texans. Every minute the Patriots have played after halftime of week one has pretty much been garbage time.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The headline on Chargers.com on October 2nd reads “Philip Rivers Off to Best Start of His Career,” which tells you what it must be like for Chargers fans, waiting 15 years only to have Rivers’ “best start” be 11 touchdowns and a 2-2 record.

3. Los Angeles Chargers

The Bills may be a vanilla team, but if you’re going for consistent blandness year after year, look no further than the Chargers. They’re the plain yogurt of the NFL. As a matter of fact, since the Chargers went 13-3 in 2009, their record has been around 50-50 on average. Of all the teams in the NFL, they’re Charlie Browniest. They’re even at number three on this list.

Charger fans might ask about their recent two-point win over San Francisco, but that only proves my point. Sure, they won by just two points, not only did the Chargers only score field goals in the whole second half, their game-winning field goal was the only one they scored in the fourth quarter and they did it with more than four minutes left on the game clock. The Garoppolo-less 49ers didn’t even get past midfield in their last possessions.

If you thought the Chargers were forgotten in San Diego, remember that LeBron James plays for the Lakers, the Dodgers are in the National League Division Series, and the Rams are f*cking explosive. I’m really not sure why LA wanted the Chargers.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

Just leave the ball there. It’s not like you were doing anything with it.

2. Indianapolis Colts

At least the Jets are getting fined for crude touchdown dances. The 1-3 Colts are headed to face New England in what will probably be the game I’m forced to watch in the afternoon on television after I get home from watching fun games at the bar. Which is totally fine, I like a good nap in the afternoon — but even the Indianapolis Star is calling the game a “joke.”

Sure, the Colts lost a squeaker to the Texans in overtime on week four, but you had to sit through three quarters of Colts football to catch that end, so of course no one saw it (unless you were watching the Red Zone). What’s interesting about Colts games? Their kicker. 45-year-old Adam Vinatieri just broke the all-time field goal record after 20 years and four Super Bowls and shows no sign of stopping.

That’s about it.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

Larry Fitzgerald, headed to the locker room, probably to call Vontae Davis.

1. Arizona Cardinals

The winless Cardinals are not only the worst team in the league right now, but they’re also the hardest to watch. They didn’t even score a touchdown until week three and even then they didn’t do anything for the rest of the game. They don’t need to win games to be interesting, I mean, watching Cleveland is still fun, even when we’re reasonably sure they aren’t going to win, but at least Cleveland thinks they can.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

That engine is practically in a Browns uniform.

Arizona averages a whopping 9.2 points per game, making the Rams blowout their most interesting game just because we all wanted to see if LA could keep them scoreless while putting up 34 points. A Madden simulation would have been more interesting.

MIGHTY CULTURE

10 best bottles of Scotch whisky to grab before new tariffs hit

Fall and winter are single malt whisky seasons. But, thanks to new Trump administration tariffs, the already pricey Scotch is about to become even more expensive: On Oct. 18, 2019, the cost of a bottle will increase by 25 percent.

Why is your favorite brown spirit taking the brunt of the tariffs? It’s all thanks to a decades-long spat with the European Union over the way member nations had subsidized the airplane manufacturer Airbus. Recently the World Trade Organization deemed European nations ran afoul of international rules, and gave the green light to the US to add $7.5 billion in additional tariffs on a variety of European goods, including Italian cheese, French wine, Spanish ham, and Scotch whisky.

The U.S. is the single largest market for Scotch whisky, importing north of $450 million a year worth of the spirit. That amounts to roughly a third of all the booze the small country produces. Of course, as we know, tariffs are paid by consumers, not by the countries or industries targeted. That means you, my whisky drinking friend. After the 18th, for every four bottles you buy, you could have had five.


This means only one thing: it’s time to head to your local shop stock up on a few bottles before prices jump through the roof — especially if you enjoy drinking and handing out bottles during the holiday season. Here are the 10 bottles of single malt scotch we’d pickup before the tariffs take effect.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

1. Glenmorangie Signet

Glenmorangie Signet is one of our go-to special occasion whiskies. This deep amber whisky is beautifully complex thanks in part to the roasted chocolate barley used in the distilling process. After a lengthy time maturing in virgin American oak, the result is flawless and like all great whisky there is something new to discover in every bottle.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

2. Balvenie 14 Year Caribbean Cask

After aging for 14 years in traditional oak casks, the Balvenie 14 Year Caribbean Cask is finished with a short stint in ex-rum barrels. The result is a delicious Speyside single malt with subtle notes of tropical fruit and nuts — a great whisky for sipping or whipping up some stellar cocktails.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

3. Ardbeg Uigeadail

Easily one of our favorite Islay singe malts, Ardbeg Uigeadail is a smokey treat. Sweet and spicy, notes of honey, cookies and pepper punch through the peaty smoke. A supple dose of chocolate joins the smoke for a finish that can linger into the wee small hours.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

4. Aberlour A’bunadh

It’s a good idea to keep a bottle of Aberlour’s A’bunadh on the bar at all times, not just for your own sake, but for any Scotch drinkers that might show up. If they are ‘in the know’ it lets them know that you know and if they aren’t, you get to drop some knowledge and introduce them to something incredible. Thick and rich, it’s a Scotch with tons of dried fruit, chocolate and sugary notes that make it a delightful yet slightly dangerous single malt (each release clocks in at around 120 proof). In fact, one pour of this cask strength gem is the equivalent of a glass-and-a-half of a typical 80 proof dram.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

5. Lagavulin 16

Not only is it Nick Offerman’s go-to fireside whisky, but Lagavulin 16 is one of ours as well. Islay whisky can be a bit intense for the novice Scotch drinker. But once you develop an appreciation for the hallmark peaty smoke, you’ll savor every drop. Lagavulin 16 is an Islay classic with loads of subtle flavors to discover and a salty sweetness that balances out the intense smoke.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

6. GlenDronach 18

Once you’ve had a dram of GlenDronach 18, you may find yourself totally enamored with this highland whisky. Every glass evokes the warmth of a great, well-worn club chair. It’s soft and rich, with notes full of wood, leather, tobacco, and a finish that keeps you cozy well into the night.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

7. Oban 14

Oban 14 is a bottle we like to have on hand at all times. It’s a richly flavored Highland whisky with a touch of salt from the sea and hint of peaty smoke. It’s hard to thrill every Scotch drinker you might entertain, but Oban is a standard nearly everyone can appreciate.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

8. Glenfarclas 25

At under 0 (for now) a 25-year-old bottle this Glenfarclas is a value proposition. Family-owned since 1865, Glenfarclas ages the whisky in Oloroso sherry casks chosen from a single Spanish bodega. It is a delicious, a classic sherried whisky, with flavors of fruit cake, spice, and a hint touch of cocoa.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

9. Bruichladdich Black Arts

Since price of the bottle of Bruichladdich Black Arts at our local shop is about jump nearly . It might be time to pull the trigger. It’s a 26-year-old Islay single malt, but unlike the traditional varieties, it’s un-peated. Sure, the bottle looks like a prop from Rosemary’s Baby, but the contents are extraordinary. It’s a staggeringly complex dram, with notes of mission figs and chocolate that give way to coconut and tobacco.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

10. Talisker 25

The Isle of Skye is one of those places on the globe that feels not of this earth. Much like the island on which it was made, Talisker 25 has that same other-worldly quality. After 25 years in American and European oak barrels, the heavily peated whisky’s smoke has been tamed by wood. The result is mature, flavorful mouthful of near perfect whisky, with smoke playing off citrus and salt while a whiff of heather magically whisks you off to Skye with every sip.

This article originally appeared on Fatherly. Follow @FatherlyHQ on Twitter.

MIGHTY TRENDING

US Army gets approval from FDA for new malaria drug research

The U.S. Army Medical Materiel Development Activity here has received a Fast Track designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the development of Tafenoquine, a potential anti-malaria drug for adults.


“Achieving FDA licensure of Tafenoquine will provide a significant improvement over the current measures of malaria prevention for U.S. forces,” said Dr. Lawrence Lightner, project manager for the Pharmaceutical Systems Project Management Office at USAMMDA. “Tafenoquine is only required to be administered weekly, while current preventive measures are required daily, and it protects against all forms of malaria.”

Developed through a partnership between the U.S. Army and 60 Degrees Pharmaceuticals LLC, Tafenoquine has shown promise in preventing malaria with a convenient weekly dosing regimen. Fast Track approval will allow for an expedited review of Tafenoquine’s application for approval by the FDA, so that, if approved, it can be used to prevent the disease in adults traveling to malaria-prone areas.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
The female yellow fever mosquito spreads the disease by biting into humans. The left and center illustrations show the female. The one on the right is male. (Illustration: Public Domain by E. A. Goeldi in 1905)

Malaria is transmitted through the bite of an infected mosquito and remains the top infectious disease threat to U.S. Military service members deployed overseas. The malaria parasite has several life cycle stages during infection, including a blood and liver stage, which has made treatment and prevention challenging. Tafenoquine is highly effective in the prevention of malaria, as it acts against multiple stages of the malaria parasite life cycle.

Tafenoquine was first discovered more than three decades ago at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and the drug eventually progressed into advanced development within the U.S. Army Medical Command. USAMMDA, a subordinate command of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, initiated a cooperative research and development agreement with 60 Degrees Pharmaceuticals LLC in 2014. Managed by the PSPMO, the effort has yielded successful results over the past three years in pursuit of an effective anti-malaria drug.

Also Read: This Army doctor made the Panama Canal possible by killing mosquitoes

As the premier developer of world-class military medical capabilities, USAMMDA is responsible for developing and delivering critical products designed to protect and preserve the lives of U.S. troops across the globe. These products include drugs, vaccines, biologics, devices, and medical support equipment intended to maximize survival of casualties on the battlefield.

“Our mission is to develop and deliver quality medical capabilities to protect, treat, and sustain the health of our service members,” said Col. Ryan Bailey, commander of USAMMDA. “The Tafenoquine new drug application is a great example of how we intend to deliver solutions to protect our service members from the malaria threat. This achievement is the result of significant research work and product development — a true team effort.”

Articles

The 13 funniest military memes of the week

Did everyone enjoy their freebies on Veteran’s Day? Congrats! Now enjoy these memes for free!


1. What’s better than getting a bunch of free food on Veteran’s Day?

(via Coast Guard Memes).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Getting free food while collecting a bunch of Facebook love.

2. Seriously. ‘Merica.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
But remember: If it’s burning but doesn’t shoot a rocket, go see the corpsman.

3. Sorry, F-35. No one cares (via Air Force Nation).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
We love you, Warthog.

SEE ALSO: The best A-10 memes on the internet

4. Adapt your equipment for your users’ knowledge level (via U.S Army W.T.F! moments).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
This was probably the work of a bored staff duty runner.

5. It’s not easy to find talented snipers. You gotta take them where you can get them.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Sometimes he shoots birds and sends those humans to fetch them.

6. #InsideThatCounts (via Sh-t My LPO Says)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
#SafetyFirst

7. Poor Coast Guard (via Coast Guard Memes).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

8. This last name must be so much fun at each new unit (via Devil Dog Nation).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
But he will likely be the scariest first sergeant.

9. Those awkward questions your child asks:

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

10. Air Force operators are hardcore (via Air Force Nation).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Still a nonner.

11. If you wanted good food, you should’ve joined the Air Force (via Sh-t My LPO Says).

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
It’s kind of shaped like a heart though, so you got that going for ya.

12. Air Force saving Marines in the one event they’re good at.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
If the enemy could combine gunfire and standardized testing, America would fall.

13. “Really, you waited until right now?”

(via Pop Smoke)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Enjoy your weekend. We’re sure your release formation is right around the corner. Just one more tasking first …

NOW: 7 features that would make military games more realistic

OR: 9 times when troops said what they really felt

MIGHTY TRENDING

The new USS Indiana is one of the most lethal subs ever built

The US Navy commissioned its newest Virginia-class fast attack submarine in late September 2018.

The nuclear-powered USS Indiana (SSN 789), the fourth Navy vessel named after the state of Indiana and the Navy’s sixteenth Virginia-class submarine, entered service on Sept. 29, 2018, at a commissioning ceremony in Port Canaveral, Florida.

Indiana is a flexible, multi-mission platform designed to carry out the seven core competencies of the submarine force: anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, delivery of Special Operations Forces (SOF), strike warfare, irregular warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and mine warfare,” the Navy said in a press statement.

Check it out below.


US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(US Navy photo)

The Indiana is the sixteenth commissioned Virginia-class fast attack submarine, and the sixth commissioned Virginia-class Block III submarine.


Virginia-class submarines are developed in blocks, with each block having slightly different specifications than other blocks.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(US Navy photo)

The Indiana is 377 feet long, 34 feet wide, about 7,800 tons when submerged, and has a 140-person crew. It also has a top speed of about 28 mph.

Source: US Navy

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(US Navy photo)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

Here’s a close-up of the navigation computer.


One of the newest features on Virginia-class submarines are advanced periscopes, which are called photonics mast. They can be pulled up on any monitor in the submarine, and on the Indiana, are operated by XBOX controllers.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(US Navy photo)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(Photo by Chief Petty Officer Darryl Wood)

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

(US Navy photo)

youtu.be

Finally, watch the Indiana in motion below.

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

Articles

DARPA’s newest tech will give pilots X-ray vision

The official Mad Scientists of war, otherwise known as Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency employees, have crafted a way for helicopter pilots to see through dust, snow, and smoke to fly safely even when their view is blocked.


US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Dalton A. Precht

Currently, low-visibility conditions lead to crashes and collisions that cost the U.S. hundreds of millions of dollars and can lead to troops’ deaths. Brownouts, when helicopter pilots lose visibility due to dust kicked up by their rotors or sandstorms, have caused a number of crashes in the recent wars in the desert.

The Multifunction RF program is developing a full sensor package that will scan the environment for hazards and report them to the pilot, even when fog, dust, or other obscurants block the pilots’ vision.

The system maps terrain and landing zones in brownouts or whiteouts, prevents collisions with other aircraft and obstacles, and warns of weather hazards.

When the pilot is in combat, the system will aid in identifying and acquiring targets, guiding weapons, and linking the data feeds of different aircraft.

Ideally, the system will work as a “plug and play” add-on to current and future aircraft. Everything from modern helicopters to drones to the coming Joint Multi-Role Aircraft will feature the technology.

MIGHTY MOVIES

Check out this spooky ‘No Time to Die’ trailer teaser

The first full trailer for the next James Bond film, No Time To Die, will be released on Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2019. But for now, the official 007 Twitter account has teased the very first footage from Daniel Craig’s final outing as Bond. And, honestly, the movie looks a little spooky. But, it also confirms a huge reference to the Sean Connery years.

Featuring Bond walking in the shadows, and a mysterious monster-ish face behind glass, No Time To Die is keeping its thriller secrets close to its finely-tailored vest right now. The style and ominous tone of the trailer will also probably remind everyone a little bit that the new Bond film is directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, the same guy who directed the thrilling first season of True Detective. Here’s the brief tease:


Obviously, there’s a lot to love about this trailer. Perhaps the best thing is the fact that Bond’s Aston Martin DB5 is, once again, sporting some guns. And, this appears to be, for the most part, exactly the same spot where Sean Connery’s secret guns were hidden in his Aston Martin; right behind the headlights.

It should be noted, however, that so far, there are at least two separate classic cars confirmed for No Time To Die: the Aston Martin DB-5, but also, the Aston Martin V8, last driven by Timothy Dalton in The Living Daylights

Expect a ton more Bond references in the new trailer in a few days. We’ll update this space with all the new info as our spies report back.

This article originally appeared on Fatherly. Follow @FatherlyHQ on Twitter.

Articles

Japan’s 5th gen. stealth prototype takes to the skies for the first time

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
JASDF


The Mitsubishi X-2, Japan’s first foray into the world of 5th generation fighter aviation, took to the skies for its maiden flight just yesterday, lifting off with the traditional gear-down configuration from Nagoya Airfield, home of the Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation. Originally known as the ATD-X, the aircraft has been in development for over seven years, with no less than 220 domestic Japanese companies involved as program subcontractors. The flight lasted a total of 26 minutes, with the launch occurring at 0847 local time from Nagoya, and ending at 0913 local at Japan Air Self-Defense Force Gifu Airbase, escorted along the way by a Mitsubishi F-2 fighter.

The X-2 isn’t actually a fighter, however. Mitsubishi, and the Japan Air Self Defense Force (JASDF), will instead use it as a technology demonstrator and a testbed to develop and mature concepts and hardware which they’ll eventually use on an indigenous 5th generation stealth fighter, presumably also built by Mitsubishi. The design of the aircraft is fairly similar to the broad architectural layout used on the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, but lacks the dark gray radar-absorbent coating the latter jets utilize to further diminish their radar cross section (RCS).

The X-2 actually only around 46 feet in length, in comparison to the F-35 which is 51 feet long, and the F-22 which is 62 feet long. It’ll fly, for the moment, with one pilot though there seems to be space for a second cockpit behind the primary. It includes thrust-vectored IHI XF5-1 turbofan engines which use three paddles (per engine), probably to afford it a three-dimensional vectoring ability unlike the F-22’s two-dimensional vectoring capabilities. Mitsubishi will also be testing a “Self Repairing Flight Control Capability”, which will allow the aircraft’s onboard computers to detect malfunctions or damage to flight control surfaces, and accordingly adjust the the aircraft to achieve stabilized flight, at least until the aircraft can return to base.

The ultimate goal of the X-2 program is to develop a fighter that can best anything China has to throw at it, including the country’s new J-31 and J-20 fighter aircraft, which are supposedly on the same playing field as other fifth generation fighters in development today. The X-2 actually has the F-22 Raptor to thank for its origin, as the program began when Japan’s attempts to buy the Raptor for the JASDF were shot down by the US government, with a formal prohibition on foreign sales of the F-22. Japan plans on procuring the F-35 Lightning II for the JASDF as well.

 

MIGHTY TACTICAL

X-20 Dyna-Soar: America’s hypersonic space bomber

Decades before America’s Space Shuttle would roar into the sky, the United States already had plans to field a reusable spaceplane. Born out of Germany’s World War II efforts to create a bomber that could attack New York and continue on to the Pacific, Boeing’s X-20 Dyna-Soar was to be a single-seat craft boosted into the sky atop American rockets.

It would soar in the sky in the blurred line between earth’s atmosphere and the vacuum of space, bouncing along the heavens before releasing its payload over Soviet targets miles below. The X-20 was a 1950s science fiction fever dream born of the nuclear age and the earliest days of the Cold War… And according to some experts, it very likely would have worked.

Operation Paperclip and the burgeoning Cold War

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Kurt H. Debus, a former V-2 rocket scientist who became a NASA director, sitting between U.S. President John F. Kennedy and U.S. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson. WikiMedia Commons)

As World War II came to a close, the United States and Soviet Union’s relationship with one another was already beginning to sour. Nazi Germany’s war machine had torn through the continent, often on the backs of Germany’s state-of-the-art military technology, but geopolitics is a game of theater and pragmatism in equal measure. While the world ached for justice, defense officials in both America and the Soviet Union already saw the Cold War looming large on the horizon. Justice mattered in the minds of these leaders, but not quite as much as surviving the next great conflict to come.

Nazi technology had given Germany an advantage on multiple military fronts, and both America and the Soviet Union knew the scientists responsible for these technological leaps would soon be looking for a means to escape prosecution for their roles in the conflict. Both nations, recognizing the strategic advantage their knowledge could offer, quickly set about capturing as many Nazi scientists and researchers as they could. In the United States, this effort to leverage Germany’s scientists came to be known as Operation Paperclip.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
V-2 rocket launching, Peenemünde, on the north-east Baltic German coast. (1943)

In all, Operation Paperclip, which was organized by the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA) and largely executed by the U.S. Army’s Counter Intelligence Corps, brought some 1,600 German scientists, engineers, and technicians to the United States following the war, where they were given roles in America’s ongoing military and technological efforts. NASA’s famed Wernher von Braun, the man who developed the Saturn V rocket that brought America to the moon, was perhaps the most high profile German scientist to come through Paperclip, but among the others were Walter Dornberger and Krafft Ehricke.

In their newfound roles at Bell Aircraft, an American aircraft manufacturing firm, Dornberger and Ehricke first proposed the concept of a sort of vertical-launched bomber and missile in one. In Germany, they had called this theoretical platform the Silbervogel, or Silver Fish. Today, the plan seems quite logical: The vehicle would be sent aloft atop a rocket booster and propelled all the way into a sub-orbital but exoatmospheric altitude where it would briefly enter space, before gliding down toward the atmosphere and being “bounced” back up thanks to the vehicle’s wings.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Diagram of the planned X-20 Dyna-Soar (WikiMedia Commons)

Today, the idea of launching a reusable spaceplane into a suborbital altitude practically sounds run of the mill, thanks to similar concepts being leveraged by everything from nuclear ICBMs to the most advanced, cutting-edge hypersonic weapons, but Dornberger and Ehricke’s proposal was submitted in 1952 — five years before the Soviet Union would launch the world’s first man-made satellite into orbit. Operation Paperclip was devised specifically to leverage Germany’s scientists to help kick-start America’s own exotic military programs, and in hindsight, it’s hard to argue that the effort wasn’t a success, regardless of the ethical implications.

Working in the shadow of Sputnik

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Replica of Sputnik 1 (NASA)

On October 1, 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1, the world’s first man-made satellite. It was a small, metal sphere, measuring only about 23 inches in diameter, with four external radio antennas trailing behind it broadcasting signal pulses back to Soviet scientists, as well as the rest of the world. What followed has come to be known as the “Sputnik Crisis” in the Western world.

America had been the de facto world leader in terms of both military and economic might following the end of the Second World War, but the success of Sputnik placed America’s supremacy into question. The Soviets had matched America’s nuclear weapons with a test of their own in 1949, and again with the hydrogen bomb in 1953. Now, instead of matching America’s success, the Soviets were starting to take an intimidating lead.

The United States had taken to developing Dornberger and Ehricke’s concept in three separate programs: a rocket bomber (RoBo), a long-range reconnaissance vehicle (Brass Bell), and hypersonic weapons research. Just days after Sputnik 1 launched, the U.S. re-organized their efforts, combing all three programs into the new single Weapons System 464L program, also known as Dyna-Soar.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Artist’s rendering of the X-20 Dyna-Soar (NASA)

The new Dyna-Soar effort was to mature in three stages. Dyna-Soar 1 would be a research vehicle. Dyan-Soar 2 would add reconnaissance, and Dyna-Soar 3 would incorporate bombing capabilities. America intended to work fast, planning to test the first iteration by 1963 in glide trials, with powered trials to follow the next year. By then, the Dyna-Soar 2 was expected to exceed Mach 18 in powered flight. A missile based on the Dyna-Soar program was expected to enter service by 1968, with the spaceplane itself operational by 1974.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
(U.S. Air Force image)

In order to meet these deadlines, proposals were fielded by both Bell Aircraft and Boeing. Despite Bell’s head start, Boeing ultimately secured the contract and set about work on developing what was to be the X-20 Dyna-Soar.

Building a Dyna-Soar

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
(Boeing photo)

By 1960, the spaceplanes overall design was largely settled, leveraging a delta-shape and small winglets for control in place of a traditional tail. In order to manage the incredible heat of reentry, the X-20 would use super alloys like the heat-resistant René 41 in its frame, and molybdenum, graphite, and zirconia rods all used for heat shielding on the underside of the craft.

“It was a hot-temperature structure using a nickel super alloy,” said Dr. Richard Hallion, former Air Force chief historian.

“The leading edges of the wing would be made of an even more exotic alloy. There was provision for active cooling.”

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
(Air Force artist rendering of the X-20 Dyna-Soar)

That same year, astronauts were chosen to fly America’s new space bomber. Among them was a thirty-year-old Navy test pilot and aeronautical engineer named Neil Armstrong, who would go on to leave the program in 1962.

By the end of that same year, the program was given the designation X-20 and it was unveiled to the public in a ceremony held in Las Vegas. America’s mighty B-52 Stratofortress was chosen to air-drop the X-20 for in-atmosphere flight tests, and the first firing of the rocket booster intended for higher altitude drop-tests was also a success. The project was incredibly ahead of its time, while somehow also being entirely feasible with the technology of the day. In the early 1960s, it seemed all but assured that America would soon be flying space bombers.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
(U.S. Air Force photo)

Once built, the X-20 Dyna-Soar’s first mock-up measured 35 and a half feet long with a 20.4-foot wingspan. It used three retractable struts for landing. Although it would have its own A-4 or A-9 rocket engine to help it reach an exoatmospheric trajectory, it would effectively glide throughout most of its mission, dipping down into the atmosphere just far enough to create lift, which it would use to bounce back up, skipping across the air enveloping the earth like a stone over a pond. It would continue to skip until it had lost enough velocity to prevent another bounce back up, at which point the pilot would glide the craft back down to earth just like the Space Shuttle.

The X-20 Dyna-Soar goes extinct

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
(U.S. Air Force)

Although the X-20 concept was quite literally out of this world, it was still technically feasible, and early tests suggested that the Dyna-Soar may indeed work as advertised. However, the program was also incredibly expensive, and with the new National Aeronautics and Space Administration moving forward with its Gemini program, America’s civilian leaders were becoming more interested in fielding an actual spacecraft they could use to compete with the Soviets, rather than a weapon that offered little in the way of international prestige.

“If we had pursued it as a black-world program like the U-2, it might have gone ahead,” explained Hallion. “I never saw any technical issue that would have been a show stopper.”

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why
Artist’s rendering of an X-20 during a glide (WikiMedia Commons)

On December 10, 1963, the X-20 program was canceled. The United States had invested $410 million in its development, or more than $3.5 billion in 2021 dollars, but the Dyna-Soar was still a long way off from being the space bomber it was intended to become. Even per Hallion’s positive recollection of the effort, the X-20 was still at least two-and-a-half years away from working and would have required at least another $370 million to complete. A space bomber would indeed offer global range, but in 1957, the U.S. Air Force had demonstrated that the B-52, the same bomber tasked with helping test the X-20, could circle the globe all on its own, without any need for pricey rockets.

Upon canceling the X-20 program, the U.S. government diverted its remaining funding to the Manned Orbiting Laboratory effort that used Gemini spacecraft to demonstrate the value of a crewed military presence in Earth’s orbit.

But the X-20 was not completely swallowed up by history. Elements of the program could be found in NASA’s Space Shuttle, and of course, the Space Force’s secretive X-37B bears more than a passing resemblance to the X-20. The X-37B is not touted as a space bomber and almost certainly isn’t, but the reusable spaceplane may, in fact, be one of America’s most capable reconnaissance assets.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

America’s first jet fighter was made by a company known for helicopters today

Today, Bell is a company known for its UH-1 Iroquois and AH-1 Cobra helicopters, but Bell was once much more than a helicopter company. The corporation built front-line fighters during World War II and was also responsible for making America’s first jet fighter.

The P-59 Airacomet was never much more than a flying testbed. It had an armament that consisted of three M2 .50-caliber machine guns and a single 37mm cannon — the latter being a common feature in Bell’s primary propeller-driven fighters, the P-39 Airacobra and the P-63 Kingcobra. The P-59 was also able to haul a fair load for air-to-ground ass-kicking, in the form of either two 1,000-pound bombs or eight 60-pound rockets.

The P-59, however, would make its greatest impact without ever firing a shot at the enemy.


By the early 1940s, both the Germans and the British were pursuing jet technology, having flown experimental jets before. According to aviation historian Joe Baugher, General Henry Arnold saw England’s E-28/39 jet in 1941 and asked if the Americans could use the then-groundbreaking technology. The British gladly handed it over, and General Electric was given the task of building the engine.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

While Bell is known for its helicopters today, during World War II, they built fighters.

(USAF)

Bell, which was located next to GE’s jet engine plant, then got the contract to build the jet fighter around the new engine. The process was kept very secret — a “black project.” The project was dubbed XP-59, a designation recycled from an older Bell design for a propeller-driven fighter that had a “pusher” arrangement. That design was modified to carry two J31 turbojet engines.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

In addition to the three .50-caliber machine guns and the 37mm cannon, the Airacomet carried eight 60-pound rockets or two 1,000-pound bombs.

(USAF)

The Airacomet never made it to the front lines. Despite being technologically advanced, it just didn’t have the performance needed to join the fight. The two jets were heavy and while it had a top speed of 413 miles per hour, its range was very short. On internal fuel alone, the P-59 only could go 240 miles. External tanks more than doubled its range (carrying it up to 520 miles), but a P-51 Mustang could go as far as 2,300 miles.

US aircraft carriers aren’t that easy to kill, here’s why

The pilots who flew the P-59 didn’t see combat, but did learn lessons that paid off for pilots of more advanced jets down the road.

(USAF)

The P-59, despite never seeing combat, was very valuable for the United States. It taught pilots how to fly jets — and this experience that would pay off big time when more practical aircraft emerged for the United States Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.

Learn more about this jet-powered pioneer the video below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrXNGAIYE3I

www.youtube.com

Do Not Sell My Personal Information