• Tar_Alcaran
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 小时前

    USA: this is an aircraft carrier. It carries aircraft to destroy enemy ships.

    Japan: this is a helicopter destroyer. It carries helicopters (and some aircraft) to protect our fleet.

    Indonesia: this is a humanitarian vessel. It uhhhh. Shhhhh

  • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 小时前

    I mean, barring the immense cost, a hospital ship capable of launching an entourage of aircraft for medevac or search and rescue would be invaluable to global humanitarian efforts I would think. Particularly after earthquakes, tsunamis, etc.

    Says something about us where we can justify that expense for war but not helping people.

    • EmoDuck
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 小时前

      You’ll need something to deal with potential rubble during search and rescue, so make sure to carry some radar guided missiles on your rescue planes

    • nukeM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 小时前

      All I’m saying is give war a chance

  • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    10 小时前
    • Be a huge country of 300 million spread around thousands of islands
    • Have centuries long naval tradition
    • Your Navy is shit

    Indonesia 🌈

    • Teh
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 小时前

      I’m pretty sure that most of these hyper-yachts have helicopter pads. For transporting one person and their mistresses, it takes up a lot less topside real estate. The plebes can spend time on a boat between harbor and yacht if they need to get on or off.

      • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 小时前

        aren’t planes faster than helicopters though? I guess that doesn’t matter as much though as the yachts stupidly spend time near coasts normaly, but I still find it weird that there are AFAIK no privately owned aircraft carriers.

        • MonkeyTown@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 小时前

          Probably because a skeleton crew for one of those is an absolute shitload of people (Nimitz-class carriers have a standard compliment of 3,200, not including the air division, so pilots and mechanics and such)… and like sure you could probably get rid of some stuff and cut that in half, but it would still require a lot more staff than a super yacht (20-50 crew), including nuclear technicians/engineers and stuff which would probably be expensive.

          Plus you’d be spending a ton to demilitarize and make the below-decks spaces comfortable, as that’s the vast majority of the ship. But in so doing, you may actually alter the ballast of the ship causing it to float higher and become unstable…

          Why bother when you can get a status symbol custom made for you, you know?

  • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 小时前

    This is good, a peace-focused aircraft carrier can do a lot for disaster relief. Just make it nuclear with onboard large-scale desalination plants, oh my

  • Taokan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 小时前

    Piracy is still alive and well, especially in the Pacific and around nations with less powerful naval defenses. It’s probably to push back against piracy, especially with much the rest of the world turning towards “me first” attitudes and an island nation’s heavy reliance on trade for prosperity. It may also be that the agreement to purchase an aircraft carrier might extend the willingness of other nations to continue helping to protect the trade routes: like it’s a show of good faith that they’re helping too and not putting all the burden on other countries.