In The Event Of A Major Naval War With The U.S. On One Side vs. Russia, China, Or Iran On The Other, Who Would Win?

Dave Majumdar, National Interest: Russia, China or Iran vs. US Navy: Who Wins? (A Sea Control Showdown)

The capability risks that the United States Navy took in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War are coming back to haunt the service as Russia, China and Iran seek to challenge American forces at sea. Increasingly, rival powers are challenging American sea control—something that the U.S. Navy has not encountered since the implosion of the once mighty Soviet Navy in 1991.

“Their operational approach, Russia, China, Iran certainly, is to deny us sea control,” Admiral Philip S. Davidson, commander of U.S. Navy Fleet Forces Command told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., on June 24. “It’s to let us know the last decade—that aberration—that we would not go unchallenged in the maritime domain. That is one of the areas in which we took risk in the last decade.”

Read more ....

WNU Editor: My money is on the U.S. Navy .... but it will be a very costly war.

What Must Be Done To Sink An Aircraft Carrier

How To Sink An Aircraft Carrier -- David Axe, Real Clear Defense/War Is Boring

Sneak up in a submarine, that's how.

A photo depicting an American nuclear-powered submarine poking its periscope above the waves—within shooting distance of a British aircraft carrier during a war game—is a useful reminder of one of the most important truths of naval warfare.

For every sailor who’s not in a submarine, submarines are real scary.

Stealthy and heavily-armed, subs are by far the most powerful naval vessels in the world for full-scale warfare—and arguably the best way to sink those more obvious icons of naval power, aircraft carriers.

The public may not fully appreciate submarines’ lopsided combat advantage, but the world’s leading navies sure do. Today Chinese, Russian and American submarines, among others, are busy sneaking up on, tracking and practicing sinking rival fleets’ flattops.

Read more ....

My Comment: China has repeatedly mentioned that they want to have at least 10 aircraft carriers in the future .... I guess this explains why they are focusing on anti-submarine technologies.

On the flip side .... the Chinese have also surprised U.S. carriers in the past .... The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced (Daily Mail).

How An Aircraft Carrier Can Be Sunk

HMS Illustrious in HMCS Corner Brooks’ sights. Canadian navy photo

How To Sink An Aircraft Carrier -- David Axe, War Is Boring

Sneak up in a submarine, is how.

A photo depicting an American nuclear-powered submarine poking its periscope above the waves—within shooting distance of a British aircraft carrier during a war game—is a useful reminder of one of the most important truths of naval warfare.

For every sailor who’s not in a submarine, submarines are real scary.

Stealthy and heavily-armed, subs are by far the most powerful naval vessels in the world for full-scale warfare—and arguably the best way to sink those more obvious icons of naval power, aircraft carriers.

Read more ....

My Comment: The focus has shifted on the development of "carrier missile killers" such as the Chinese DF-21D. But it is true about submarines .... they have a long and formidable track record in sinking ships.

Diesel Submarines Are A Carrier Commander's Worst Nightmare

USS John C. Stennis in the Arabian Sea.

U.S. 5TH FLEET AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY (Jan. 5, 2012) The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) operates in the Arabian Sea during sunset. John C. Stennis is deployed to the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility conducting maritime security operations, theater security cooperation efforts and support missions for Operation Enduring Freedom. (U.S. Navy photo by Yeoman 3rd Class James Stahl/Released)

Deep New Threats Emerge With Aircraft Carriers In Sight -- The National

Diesel submarines are a carrier commander's worst nightmare. More than 39 nations possess them.

"The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine," says Guy Stitt, the president of AMI International, the US naval market analysts.

That makes them almost impossible to detect, and the Americans are worried.

"Our future adversaries are developing a set of capabilities specifically for the purpose of attacking our aircraft carriers," says Mark Gunzinger, a senior fellow with the US think tank the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Read more ....

My Comment: The U.S. Navy learned that lesson the hard way when this happened in 2007.

Future War Under The Seas

Naval Base San Diego

Undersea Battle Scenarios Worry Defense Planners -- UPI

LONDON, Dec. 9 (UPI) -- The prospect of hostile forces aiming to attack Western targets by stealth through underwater channels is worrying defense planners so much that naval strategists have called a conference that will focus on the problem.

The conference, "Underwater Battlespace 2010," is scheduled to take place in London in January 2010. Conference organizers said specialist discussion panels will bring together naval experts from across the world to highlight security concerns that have been sidelined amid advances in airborne and ground defense systems.

Analysts said the changing threat perceptions meant a new emphasis on underwater military challenges and opportunities for more effective defense.

Read more ....

My Comment: Another threat to focus our attention and monies.

Commentary On Naval Warfare And Peacemaking In The 21rst Century

Image from the BBC

A Question From the Department of Dissent -- Information Dissemination

I believe in the theories I opine through the blog. They do not focus on major power war and high intensity conflict in the maritime domain; rather they focus entirely on littoral warfare and low intensity challenges emerging in the maritime domain. I contend that the line between war and peace at sea is becoming blurred, and the approaches to dealing with both are evolving two very different directions, although with some convergence.

I believe it takes fewer people to kill more people in the 21st century due primarily to the advances in technology; we are simply more lethal than we have ever been in the past. I believe naval forces require more ships for peacemaking than they will for warfighting, and that the costs of warfighting with fewer ships will still be extraordinarily higher than the costs of fielding more ships for peacemaking. I believe that when the Navy takes risk in the development of fleet constitution, the Navy should take risks for peacemaking roles, not warfighting roles, but at no time can the Navy ignore the necessity to field low cost platforms for peacemaking.

Read more ....

My Comment: An informative read. I am 100% in agreement with his observations.