Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?
Furthermore people act as if there are no counters to this sort of technology. There are, and, guess what, they're ALREADY OPERATIONAL. The SM-3 is the best known one. So let's see we have on the one hand a rumored technology in development and on the other hand an operational, real-life tested system that already exists to counter the rumored technology.
Actually the ASBM is a rumored but feasible technology while the US openly admits that the current sea based ABM is only capable of intercepting a very modest attack with primitive Nodong or Shahab-level missiles. The US admits that it is not capable of intercepting missiles that are generations ahead like China's BMs.
In my opinion multiple air launched cruise missiles may do the trick of sinking the carriers. ALCM are more like kamikaze flown planes but with more precision and devistation. Just a thought.
If a saturation attack can be mounted, an AEGIS cruiser can be overwhelmed. AB's weakness is that it must illuminate an incoming missile with one of its three illuminators before it can guide a missile. The actual amount of time it needs to get a lock is not publicized but estimates are around 5 seconds plus 1 or 2 seconds for an illuminator to rotate into place. (The three illuminators face different directions.) Then the missile has to launch and destroy the target, which consumes another 5 seconds or so.
In a saturation attack, the AB will need at least 12 seconds to destroy the first missile. By then the other missiles will be much much closer. Destroying the next one will take another 7 seconds at least, and then the other missiles are closer yet. And so on until the missiles impact.
Just as an estimation, I think an AB can take out 14 missiles or so in a saturation attack with sea skimming subsonic missiles. After that, it's all up to the CIWS and passive defenses. So a volley of 30 missiles, well executed, or so would definitely overwhelm a single AB.
If there are 4 AB's in a group, that's 120 missiles to take out the escorts. This number will be lower if the ASM uses rocket propulsion once it pops up over the horizon, or if it is coated with RAM and has stealthy shape, or if has a high-G endgame maneuver.
I think some of the arguments there raises many (substantive) questions about the reliability of the Aegis / SM3 , and its ability (or inability) to track & shoot down a North Korea BM (let alone a PLA ASBM screaming in at M5+ )
I think because of fundamental limitations for BMD system you need to have lots of sensors far far away from the launch platform, deployed well ahead of time. That's one of the weaknesses that limits the system to shooting down rouge nation BMs.
You're never going to have a single ship detecting an SLBM launch from an unexpected direction and then launching a missile itself and destroying it.
I challenge Wolvie or you to show a way to operate a carriage munition in the Mach 14-20 regime when current carriage munitions all operate at a fraction of this speed.
For instance, the warhead could be covered with ablative material for reentry but inside are baseball-sized tungsten balls. The warhead explodes just above the carrier, raining baseball-sized balls traveling at mach 8 in a circle with roughly 500 meter radius.
You yourself say an AB has three illuminators and then argue it can only engage one missile at a time. So actually your first three missiles will be intercepted in the timeframe that is necessary to ripple launch the interceptors. Maybe one to two seconds.(?) Not 14 or so as you make it appear.