Could an F-35 squadron take down a carrier?

>tfw your enemies save that sound clip and play it back when you complain them breaking the ship treaty by building banned ship types

You do know that the Brits invented the modern aircraft carrier, with catapults, angled flight deck and arrester gear?
We also invented VTOL/STOVL and decided it was a strength to be able to operate from smaller carriers.
Alright, in modern age, we are utterly fucked and I have no fucking clue why QE isn't nuclear or has mag catapults. That's just fucking retarded.
But we did invent the things, so give us some credit, no matter how fucking retarded our latest White elephant is

LMAO

>3 millions per missile

What do engineers put in this shit to make it cost 3 millions

Part inflation and part custom parts and testing for military standards.

>What do engineers put in this shit to make it cost 3 millions
I bet you'd get a lot cheaper per unit quotas if you bought a 100k instead of 100

Based

>Alright, in modern age, we are utterly fucked and I have no fucking clue why QE isn't nuclear or has mag catapults. That's just fucking retarded.
No, you are.
>seething because QE class can launch f35Bs with a grater payload than the USMC

>Far Left meets Far Right online

Attached: 1560691529188.jpg (437x431, 15K)

>small batch = divide the maching cost among small units
>non 3rd world labor
>dash of government spending protocol (aka "not my money")
>electronics more sensitive and rugged than your phone, because your phone isnt tracking something several nautical miles away
>development cost for software
>compensate for R&D cost
>materials, because machined aluminum and electrical igniters are going to be more rugged than Chinesium """stainless""" steel and a raspberry pi circuitboard

There are a lot of reasons why these things get expensive compared to something like a Honda Civic that gets spat out by the literal tens of millions. Its a robot that has to fly to a target, keeping track of its own relative velocity and targets velocity, has to be machined for aerodynamics, and the payload has to be precisely designed because explosion geometry is a real thing that matters. All of that requires engineers who get paid good money, and good machinists who also get paid good money

Theres alot of depends in the answer, the main question is what kind of Intel the f35 is using to track down the carrier.
Anything but a spy on board gives the carrier almost assured survival.
The next big question is how far away the F35 is from land or their own carrier. If the defending carrier has even 5 mins to inact air to air counter measures, then its perfectly safe. There will be 100 miles of radar, electric, and physical bullshit any missile would have to defeat before reaching payload.
Lastly there is weather and crew to consider. Does the carrier have cloud cover? Is the crew highly trained? Something as silly as cloud cover could make destroying the carrier an impossible task

no because the range is shit.
2 of pic related can tho

Attached: a3m61lf0enw11.jpg (960x612, 62K)

>seething that his country's carrier isn't CATOBAR

Sink it? Sure, with a B-61.

Mission-kill a supercarrier, or sink a helo carrier or RAMP? Sure, with a wider variety of weapons.