Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning
James Holmes, National Interest: China's Nightmare: How the U.S. Navy Could Sink Its Prized Aircraft Carriers
Here it is.
That’s a rough analogy to today. Fortress China is festooned with airfields and mobile antiship weaponry able to strike hundreds of miles out to sea. Yes, the U.S. Navy remains stronger than the PLA Navy in open-sea battle. A fleet-on-fleet engagement isolated from shore-based reinforcements would probably go America’s way. But that hypothetical result may not make much difference since the two navies are more likely to join battle in confined Asian waters than on the open ocean.
Ah, yes, the “carrier-killer.” China is forever touting the array of guided missiles its weaponeers have devised to pummel U.S. Navy nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (CVNs). Most prominent among them are its DF-21D and DF-26 antiship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), which the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has made a mainstay of China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) defenses.
Read more ....
WNU editor: It all comes down to where will the fight occur.
11 comments:
Once the carrier goes down it is likely the planes already in the air go down too. In this age I think in an all out war and a direct attack the life span of a carrier might equal that of a tank during WW II
I'm not so sure about that.. It would be a very interesting scenario..
The UAV tankers that come from the carriers will be key in extending the range of aircraft. Hopefully, the Navy can also field more laser weaponry to counter a barrage of missiles. A nuclear aircraft carrier (huge capacity for electricity) with laser weaponry for defenses sounds like a good combination.
Also WNU, did you see this? Interesting since this type of thing is pretty rare for America when it comes to land borders.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/politics/mexican-troops-american-soldiers-border/index.html
Not sure either Hans but the weaponry of today, especially the super sonic stuff that may be too fast for defensive missiles currently available, together with Satellite overview and GPS accuracy may make the difference when it comes to larger targets on the water. A carrier together with its support footprint makes a fairly large target. The GPS accuracy is vital but of course will be among the first targets in a war between key powers.
A US Carrier Strike Group can monitor and control an area of ocean the size of Texas. Because the ~5 ship battle group is spaced out over hundreds of miles, not hundreds of yards.
A Carrier Strike Group does not operate in tight formation like you see in the pretty pictures.
And a CSG does not wonder blind into hostile close confines.
I have the vaguest breadth of knowledge on this because I served aboard CVN-69, 1987-88. (Flight Deck ABF)
If the Chinese did attack Taiwan in earnest, it would result in an underwater turkey shoot that would render the PLAN inoperable.
/and for all the rants against the aircraft carrier as viable strategic projection, China sure is in a damn hurry to field as many as possible as soon as possible.
STEEP,
LEARNING,
CURVE,
R,
Logistics aside, don't think for a moment that the US would not allow a carrier to be destroyed if those running the show at the time think that is what is needed to fire up the people against an enemy.
Bob Huntley, it would require a bit more thought on your part to realize the stupidity of your above remark.
The idea that US leadership would “allow a carrier to be destroyed” to foment righteous ire among the citizens is ludicrous and idiotic. It’s something a 22 year old snowflake would believe.
(Or maybe an 83 year old snowflake).
Stop being an infantile moron
RussInSoCal
I do admit that they did make sure the carrier was absent during the Pearl Harbor incident.
The greatest intelligence and military functionaries in the history of the world, for some reason failed to protect the country on 911, suggesting, if not participation then acquiescence, perhaps for some ill purpose.
The military and certainly the political leadership today is somewhat less than stellar and if Trump gets a second term, ......
Ah, what!? Ain't going to happen that way. The Navy would not allow this to happen to its sailors and assets aboard the ship. Carriers represent a massive weight to any war scenario.
My bet is on Trump, but not sure what your trying to insinuate? Trumps strategy with China has played out brilliantly, I just hope the administration does not get 'close the deal' happy without some resolutions on the S China Sea issues.
Well, controlling a space the size of Texas is a bit far fetched.
Last year in an exercise a lonewolf swedish sub managed to sink a US carrier, and escape.
And in the event of an all out war (without nukes of course) the hail of missiles directed at the general location of the carrier would be intense. But I imagine that the navy has a plan for that.
All I know is that the navy has very few countermeasures against missiles, one of them is that minigun thing that is cool as f*ck.
So all in all, it would be a very interesting scenario.
Post a Comment