That's going to be when $4 billion aircraft carriers are sunk by $250,000 sea-skimmer anti-ship missiles launched by the dozens.
We're #1 with carriers (11). Italy is #2 with (2) active carriers. There are 6 other countries with a single carrier. A big waste of money considering they are so vulnerable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_c...
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-special-report-aircraft-car...
[1]: http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/aircraf...
If China wanted to, they could develop the capability to track aircraft carriers -- especially within striking distance of the mainland.
But there's a much larger implicit assumption threaded throughout the report -- the assumption that our aircraft carriers will be cruising at full speed and on high alert in prepared and competent battle groups at time of attack. The assumptions of a maximally defensive posture and extreme competence are present in virtually every argument advanced by the report.
The most significant US naval defeat -- in which damn near the entire Pacific fleet was wiped out -- suggests that a full threat assessment should relax most or all of those assumptions.
Particularly given the article under discussion.
So what it happens there'll be very clear documentation that they were aware of the vulnerabilities, but ignored them.