106
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
106 points (94.2% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6564 readers
530 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Not my area, but... I'm pretty sure there are rules and regulations on quantities of ships of certain classes in various waters - ie, one country couldn't suddenly float 500 battleships in the Mediterranean. Frigates are the second smallest ship, so if you can shove tons of strength and firepower into the class of ship with the loosest regulation, then you can essentially get more firepower into the same spaces.
Countries have been fucking with the class designations (which, from my very casual understanding, are totally silly) to circumvent restrictions for many years.
I think I saw a video on this from Battleship New Jersey.
The main time that displacements and ship sizes were actually standardised and restricted was due to the various naval treaties from about 1900 to WW2.
Before and after that (and to some degree during), sizes of each class of ship gradually crept up and up as technology advanced and everyone wanted a frigate/destroyer/cruiser/battleship that was slightly better and thus slightly bigger than what their potential opponents had. Scope creep.
Prior to WW2, this simply meant that the biggest ships kept getting bigger and bigger, and then other classes were 1/2/3 sizes smaller.
Post-WW2, while each class kept getting bigger and more expensive, the advent of air as a serious threat meant that the largest ship class just disappeared - the US hung on to battleships for a while for specific applications, but never built new ones. Too expensive, too many eggs in one basket, and not enough actual need. No-one expects to have another big naval slugfest; radar, aircraft, and missiles have obsoleted large naval guns and armour.
Each successive 'large gunboat' class has disappeared somewhat later, as it reaches the point where politicians and admirals decide we can't risk losing this many people and this much cash in one hit.
Aircraft carriers have stuck around because they're very useful and they're not intended to go within range of enemy heavy weapons, but a battleship with 16" guns and armour to suit is very overkill and expensive for anything but fighting another battleship. Shore bombardment is about the only role they could have left, and much smaller ships do that just fine.
Aircraft carriers are staying because they're force projection plate-forme. Like they're not meant to fight, rather they are forward bases that you can move on the water. And the navy is meant to protect them.