I have heard of a story or movie about a USN carrier sent back to pearl harbor in 1941 dec 7, I want to ask, how well can mordern day equiment fair against ww2 equiment, like one squadron of F-16 aginst 6 to 7 sqadrons of ww2 Zero or anything else, and others like a mordern navy figates vs ww2 battleship? this is a scenrio when logistic is a prombelm, cause all of these mordern days weapons are limited in ammo, can they last long enough to survive the war? P.S sorry if you feel this topic is lame, but i wanted to compared how limited mordern day equiment can fair aginst huge ww2 equiment .
We have come to the conclusion in an older thread that a King Tiger can solo a Platoon of Abrams, Jets can in no way harm WW2 aircraft, and that the STG44 was in every way better than any modern rifle.
Leaving aside Danyel's caustic (and slightly untrue) remarks , a squadron of F-16s would be fairly immune to interception by WW2 aircraft. AAA would still be an issue (once the gunners get used to their speed) as would having their airfield bombed. Most would probably survive up until the fuel & ammo runs out.
This movie is called 'The Final Countdown'.Just as aircraft from the U.S.S. Nimitz are about to intercept the Japanese Dec.7th attack force,the carrier and it's planes are sent back to the present day.It still pisses me off.During the entire movie you're waiting for the inevitable ass-kicking courtesy of the U.S. Navy and at the last moment it doesn't happen.Whoever came up with this idea should have his head ripped off.
Zeros wouldn't be able to hit F-14s (Carrier groups do not carry F-16s btw) since staying in any practical firing position against a modern-day jet fighter is downright impossible due to its speed. And a flimsy world war 2 fighter is unable to sustain more than few hits from a 20mm vulcan firing several thosuand rounds per minute either. But then again are AIM-9s or capable of locking onto small propeller-driven planes with no significant heat signature?
That is an interesting one. Radar-guided missiles would probably be fine, and although they could be evaded by manouver by most WW2 fighters, would the fighter pilots think to manouver that violently the first time they were used? Yes, evade a collision, but you do not expect them to track you! Still, they'd be good against bombers. Imagine the BoB if the Brits had Sparrows! How well would the modern jets fare at shooting down an aircraft whose top speed is not far above their stalling speed? Ultimate 'boom & zoom'!
I think if you pit modern jet fighters against WW2 planes the jets are going to be facing the same situation German aircraft faced when trying to shoot down a Swordfish torpedo bomber. A much slower WW2 plane will turn far tighter and it will probably be damn near impossible for a single jet to get a bead. The most feasible means of attacking will be to gang several jet up on one WW2 plane one the basis that it can't dodge them all then move onto the next target. On the other hand modern ship based AA guns would have a field day against such slow targets... Assuming their software was set up to cope with something coming in at a mere 300mph.
Well, most shipboard systems now have two 'seperate' defense systems. 1) a range of AA missiles to knock down enemy aircraft. 2) a range of defences (missile & gun) set up to destroy the supersonic AS missiles launched by enemy aircraft.
I think most efficient way to shoot WW2 planes down with modern jets is just using missiles. No need to dogfight.
Assuming that a heat seeker can lock on to the much weaker IR signature of a piston engine and assuming the radar guided missiles can turn tightly enough to hit a plane going much slower than it's usual targets
Well, lets try to shoot that radar guided missile far enough, its hard to avoid something going mach 3+, especially if you dont get any warning.
Were forgetting something essential here. The reason why a pilot can evade a missile is that he has an early warning reciever. That means he knows a missile is shot at him way before it reaches him. A WW2 aircraft wont know zit until the missile slams it out of the sky. Just imagine a phoenix going at nearly match 7. How the hell are you gonna know its there? As for defences of carriers. The automatic phalanx will have a day of turkey shooting. It can easily track a target no matter how slow it flies.
What bout a corvette used by most small navies? can they stand up aginast a ww2 cruiser or battleship fleet?
If the corvett is armed with exocet, harpoon, or other such missiles, it will be able to destroy even a battleship way before the battleship is in range.
Will they? Okay WW2 cruisers were generally lightly armoured ( usually a only few inches over the really, really critical stuff) so a modern anti ship missile or two is probably going to do the job. Battleships might be a different ball game. The last generation of battleships had over 12" of armour over their critical areas and a heavily subdivided hull. Sea skimmers I suspect would smack into the main belt armour which is the area of the hull best able to take a hit. If you threw enough missiles at a battleship you would take it out eventually but it would probably soak up a lot of hits. If I had to take on a battleship with something modern then the nuclear attack sub would be the preferred choice. Even under water these aren't much slower than a battleship and obviously the battleship can't in anyway fight a sub. The problem might be the power of modern torpedoes, do they pack enough of a punch to hurt an armoured ship? Baring in mind that battleships aren't armoured at the very bottom and modern torps are generally designed to go off under the target, breaking its back. Finally if a big gun ship did (by some miracle ) get a modern warship into range then the target would be in a world of hurt. Doubt a modern floating computer would stand up to even a near miss from a 15 or 16" gun.
Aren't modern antiship missiles programmed to hit from above, hitting the deck? Having few hundred kg's of explosives going off in deck will hurt even battleship and besides that, missilefuel will feed ensueing (sp?) fire.
Don't know I get a bit hazy on the modern stuff. The last generation of battleship had substantial deck armour, off the top of my head HMS Vanguard had six inches of plate over the deck.