second most powerful country

[Nazis in Space]

That's actually some very decent power projection - beats the British until at least the end of the decade, and presently beats the French and their constantly-limping Charles de Gaulle, too (Granted, when the Charles de Gaulle isn't limping... Though Italy's supposed to replace its Harriers with F-35 B- Okay, I'll stop joking now).

Their only weak point is that they're crewed by Italians. Otherwise Italy would be the dominant military power of Europe.

[Minnysota]

What about Russia? IIRC, Russia already has supercarriers, right?

Nothing near the size (and flight compartment) of the US supercarriers. That's because their surface naval doctrine focuses more on defence of their shores - rather than on power projection.

Their modernization programs, while probably not going to do much, are aimed at bringing back Russia's "blue-water" capabilities.

[Minnysota]

That's actually some very decent power projection - beats the British until at least the end of the decade, and presently beats the French and their constantly-limping Charles de Gaulle, too (Granted, when the Charles de Gaulle isn't limping... Though Italy's supposed to replace its Harriers with F-35 B- Okay, I'll stop joking now).

Their only weak point is that they're crewed by Italians. Otherwise Italy would be the dominant military power of Europe.

So Italy's Harriers can match the Rafale? lol

[Nazis in Space]

That's actually some very decent power projection - beats the British until at least the end of the decade, and presently beats the French and their constantly-limping Charles de Gaulle, too (Granted, when the Charles de Gaulle isn't limping... Though Italy's supposed to replace its Harriers with F-35 B- Okay, I'll stop joking now).

Their only weak point is that they're crewed by Italians. Otherwise Italy would be the dominant military power of Europe.

So Italy's Harriers can match the Rafale? lol

Read again. Context is everything.

[Minnysota]

The French still have the Rafale, which is pretty much the best navalized 4.5 generation aircraft out there (I suppose the FA-18E/F could go up against it). When the French get their new carriers, they pretty much secure a spot in the top 3 navies.

[Naurobia]

Sounds about right although I would say that Britain was tied with France, Germany, and Russia.

[Calenhardon]

The power of the Russian and Chinese navies relative to those of Britain and France are largely irrelevant. Russia and China are both located more or less in the middle of Eurasia-they can project power just fine using land forces. China doesn't need a navy to threaten most of its neighbors, and neither does Russia. The United States and United Kingdom, both of which are separated by large bodies of water, need large navies to project power. France is in a somewhat similar situation-while it is on mainland Eurasia, it is part of NATO and surrounded by relatively friendly (and least not hostile) states. So for the US, UK and France, the primary tool of power projection is naval. China and Russia project power using land forces, and thus comparing naval forces among them is silly. While the British army may also be superior in training and equipment to the PLA, the UK could not get any significant portion of that army onto the Chinese mainland. While nationalist dick-waving over who has the biggest gun can be fun, it doesn't really matter that much.

[Angleter]

That's actually some very decent power projection - beats the British until at least the end of the decade, and presently beats the French and their constantly-limping Charles de Gaulle, too (Granted, when the Charles de Gaulle isn't limping... Though Italy's supposed to replace its Harriers with F-35 B- Okay, I'll stop joking now).

Their only weak point is that they're crewed by Italians. Otherwise Italy would be the dominant military power of Europe.

Screw-a dee baiyonets!

[Sremski okrug]

Nothing near the size (and flight compartment) of the US supercarriers. That's because their surface naval doctrine focuses more on defence of their shores - rather than on power projection.

Their modernization programs, while probably not going to do much, are aimed at bringing back Russia's "blue-water" capabilities.

They are modernizing all Kirov Class battle-crusiers under their possession. If they fit them with the latest brahmos anti-ship missiles they should be able to provide some limited projection.

[Minnysota]

Their modernization programs, while probably not going to do much, are aimed at bringing back Russia's "blue-water" capabilities.

They are modernizing all Kirov Class battle-crusiers under their possession. If they fit them with the latest brahmos anti-ship missiles they should be able to provide some limited projection.

The Kirovs are sitting ducks with no air support, though. The Russians have only one carrier in the fleet, and that sure as hell can't defend the Kirovs from attack. Not to mention, the BrahMos' range is limited due to some treaty that Russia is in.

e: Link to treaty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTCR

[New Rogernomics]

Either China or Russia.

[Nazis in Space]

They are modernizing all Kirov Class battle-crusiers under their possession. If they fit them with the latest brahmos anti-ship missiles they should be able to provide some limited projection.

The Kirovs are sitting ducks with no air support, though. The Russians have only one carrier in the fleet, and that sure as hell can't defend the Kirovs from attack. Not to mention, the BrahMos' range is limited due to some treaty that Russia is in.

To be entirely fair, it's debatable inhowfar dedicated air support is needed for defensive duties. Modern planes are helluva expensive, and modern SAMs are helluva effective. And the Kirov's a spiked with SAMs - nevermind that the Russians are usually leading, or at the very least competitive in missile technologies.

Britain appears quite confident that its new frigates will do the air defence job quite well. As are the Dutch, the Germans, the Swedes, the Fins...

Aircraft carriers do nowadays appear to be a strictly offensive tool.

A very valid point for criticism, re: the Kirovs is that their hulls are fucking ancient, and that they're distinctly oversized for their role. But I wouldn't really describe them as sitting ducks.

[Minnysota]

I meant defense in like the ASW role. A submarine force could destroy a group of ships if it closed up on them.

Anywho, yes the aircraft attacking a Kirov would be in danger, I'm not denying that. I still don't think that battlecruisers are of any use except for morale when they are not guided by aircraft carriers.

[Nazis in Space]

I meant defense in like the ASW role. A submarine force could destroy a group of ships if it closed up on them.

Yes, but modern submarines murder the shit out of pretty much everything, whether it's carriers, oversized frigates, or actual frigates.

[Minnysota]

I meant defense in like the ASW role. A submarine force could destroy a group of ships if it closed up on them.

Yes, but modern submarines murder the shit out of pretty much everything, whether it's carriers, oversized frigates, or actual frigates.

The ASW support on a carrier could still help out a bit. Whilst ASW technologies and capabilities aren't great, still having something there to help out a bit is still something better than just being a sitting duck.

[Sremski okrug]

I meant defense in like the ASW role. A submarine force could destroy a group of ships if it closed up on them.

Anywho, yes the aircraft attacking a Kirov would be in danger, I'm not denying that. I still don't think that battlecruisers are of any use except for morale when they are not guided by aircraft carriers.

Any sane Commander would have smaller dedicated ASW Frigates escorting his battle-cruisers alongside some escorting submarines for sensible

[Keronians]

1: China's Navy is in very poor condition relative to other global navies, if the British, French or Germans were able to Destroy it and essentially blockade China from the US, then China would definitely be keen to go to the negotiation table.

2: While Russia has more nukes than god, its military being advanced? Rofl. Get real, if I remember correctly Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other military the US has smeared across the globe since the 1945 has all used Russian equipment. It has consistently been proved to be pretty poor quality stuff. Some of it is sturdy and reliable, but on the whole, definitely not advanced.

3: India has the potential. Certainly its army is large, and decently equipped. I could even see it taking on China, but its navy is also like Chinas, in a pretty poor state.

4: Brazil? No. Brazil is a regional power in South America. It has like no influence around the world. When has there ever been a story that said, "Fighting stopped when Brazil intervened."?

Many people say that, but the fact is that India simply can not compare to China. They have enough trouble with Pakistan as it is.

Well, we have a carrier, and China doesn't...

[Keronians]

On a related note, while googling, I learnt that the Italian navy has 2 aircraft carriers.

They're two small sized Aircraft Carriers.

Giuseppe Garibaldi (551) is about the same size of old HMS Invincible - and was built mostly for ASW role in the Mediterranean. Carries max 18 Harriers, plus some helicopters.
Cavour (550) is a multirole carrier/assault ship, about the size of the French Clémenceau. Carries max 30 Harriers, or up to 24 MBTs.[/quote]

Italy could be the dominant military power of Europe... Oh, yeah, Italians.

[Neo Esper]

Okay.

Now looking very carefully at the list I feel we have all overlooked one nation that could easily sit at number two and dare I say? Even number one. One nation that has been overlooked to the point that it just surprises me to no end that it hasn't already been brought up. Unless I've missed it somewhere. It is a sleeping giant that has the devastating potential to take control of the world as we know it. Be it through military, diplomatic or economic means. Ladies and gentleman... I have just one nation name to say to you all.

"Luxemburg".

[Keronians]

Okay.

Now looking very carefully at the list I feel we have all overlooked one nation that could easily sit at number two and dare I say? Even number one. One nation that has been overlooked to the point that it just surprises me to no end that it hasn't already been brought up. Unless I've missed it somewhere. It is a sleeping giant that has the devastating potential to take control of the world as we know it. Be it through military, diplomatic or economic means. Ladies and gentleman... I have just one nation name to say to you all.

"Luxemburg".

That's a weird way of spelling "Switzerland"...

[Minnysota]

I meant defense in like the ASW role. A submarine force could destroy a group of ships if it closed up on them.

Anywho, yes the aircraft attacking a Kirov would be in danger, I'm not denying that. I still don't think that battlecruisers are of any use except for morale when they are not guided by aircraft carriers.

Any sane Commander would have smaller dedicated ASW Frigates escorting his battle-cruisers alongside some escorting submarines for sensible

Still does not provide the support of a carrier, since the carrier could put up swaths of ASW helicopters at a time. Let us not forget that Russia's navy is nothing to get excited about; it never has been. Russia would have a hard time going up against the British, French, and American navies (in fact, it would be utterly destroyed by the USN).

[Tiami]

Any sane Commander would have smaller dedicated ASW Frigates escorting his battle-cruisers alongside some escorting submarines for sensible

Still does not provide the support of a carrier, since the carrier could put up swaths of ASW helicopters at a time. Let us not forget that Russia's navy is nothing to get excited about; it never has been. Russia would have a hard time going up against the British, French, and American navies (in fact, it would be utterly destroyed by the USN).

Well, what navy wouldn't get destroyed by the USN?

[Keronians]

Still does not provide the support of a carrier, since the carrier could put up swaths of ASW helicopters at a time. Let us not forget that Russia's navy is nothing to get excited about; it never has been. Russia would have a hard time going up against the British, French, and American navies (in fact, it would be utterly destroyed by the USN).

Well, what navy wouldn't get destroyed by the USN?

Some future European navy?

[Tiami]

Well, what navy wouldn't get destroyed by the USN?

Some future European navy?

Not in this modern age.

[Keronians]

Some future European navy?

Not in this modern age.

Well, European Armed Forces aren't as implausible as some would think. Numerous leaders from the peripheral economies have come out in support of a united military, which would probably be able to rival the US.