This progression takes us back to the battlestar: It has the heavy armor and big guns of a battleship, along with the fighters and point defense weapons of a carrier. Thus, authors are likely to explain that missile combat didn't take for various reasons, such as abundance of electronic countermeasures to disrupt missile guidance, accurate point defenses, or electronic warfare potentially compromising the effectiveness of remotely piloted (or automated) craft. However, warfare largely dominated by purely automated systems can reduce the importance of human characters in a war story. As missile technology and remote piloting advance, the aircraft launched by the carrier may become unmanned smart munitions, blurring the line between missiles and attack craft. Currently, major warships that aren't carriers or amphibious assault ships are missile ships, each capable of launching a relative Macross Missile Massacre, so the other side better hope it isn't Point Defenseless. Modern warfare may eventually subvert this trend. It had none of the battleship's armament and durability, but it could project force hundreds of kilometers away, without ever endangering the ship itself - which made most WWII aerial/naval battles decidedly one-sided. The flagship of the future that encompasses both artillery and piloting tropes: a hybrid carrier/battleship.ĭuring World War II, the honored tradition of building more and more powerful gun-toting battleships came to an abrupt halt when naval artillery became largely supplanted by the aircraft carrier.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |