Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

[Blitzo]

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Any navy can take their ships out to sea and "cut doughnuts" in the sea.. and still not know how to properly operate it's ship. I'm positive the PLAN has reached a level of proficiency.

However.. the way the PLAN transfers sailors off of ships every November is a puzzle to me. This breaks the continuity of proficiency in the operation of these ships.



Sailors need to be on a ship at sea doing their jobs in a real World situation in order to gain proficiency in said job. The ships systems need to be operated drill performed, equipment tested and checked again and again. That's what works.

Yes... but is there anything to suggest the PLAN cannot do that with their ships?

Again, the overall readiness of the PLAN or any other navy does not reflect on their militaries anti CVBG capabilities, so unless the insinuation is that only PLAN can be called upon to perform anti CVBG duties or that the proficiency of the navy reflects the entire military I don't see the relevance with my comparison/question.

 

[Red___Sword]

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Vader, several things:

What is "cut doughnuts" actually? I know "cut", I know "doughnuts", but don't know the slang when used on Navy.

...I really feel The PLAN needs to step up it's training...

I agree absolutely, [joke] next time PLAN go out for a stretch at seas and oceans, I nominate Lord Vader to be our speaksman to "demand" the pacific policeman and island-chain watching-dogs to provide necessary room for our stretch. [/joke]

- But seriously, this TRAINING aspect can play as "finding who's better", as well as "finding who's worse".

Besides USN itself, talking about anti-CVBG battle-readiness, those who favours RUSSIANS HAVE A BETTER TRAINING please raise your hands. - and budget-cutting Brits or Gaulish? - or "share-the-same-encryption-channel-with-US" kind of client country like JSDF? (in my personal opinion, Japenese Navy, in the name of SDF, is better than Dutches)

Pick a less rotten apple from a rotten apple tree, PLAN is still your top choice.

So, from Bltizo:

Out of the nations in the world currently I think maybe China has the best shot at defeating CVBGs with their ASBM, FACs, SSK/Ns, anti ship fighters, yeah? Of course that's because they have the doctrine, leading to the construction of these weapons.
Russia would come second?

I agree.

Edit:

To make it easy for reference, I consider the scenario is "USN invading the abovementioned countries, who got a bigger shot?". Because it is hard to analyse in real-life, China and France don't have a chance to success in invading each other by navy, on their own, for one.

 

[bd popeye]

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

What is "cut doughnuts" actually? I know "cut", I know "doughnuts", but don't know the slang when used on Navy.

Just going out to sea to do nothing but burn fuel. No ops planned, no nothing.

Yes... but is there anything to suggest the PLAN cannot do that with their ships?

They don't, in my opinion, spend enough time at sea to be properly trained. Period.

 

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

Regarding using lasers to intercept DF21s. Well I am unconvinced.

Firstly, the DF21 RV would have been shielded to withstand re-entry.

Secondly, with the speed the RV would be traveling, and laser would have an extremely short window to 'light it up'.

Given these two factors, I am finding it hard to believe that even by 2020 we would have lasers powerful enough to heat a target to well beyond re-entry temperatures in a few seconds.

Lasers would be good against standard AShMs, but I highly doubt they will be all that effective against AShBMs. Railguns would be a far more feasible counter to AShBMs imo.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

Regarding using lasers to intercept DF21s. Well I am unconvinced.

Firstly, the DF21 RV would have been shielded to withstand re-entry.

Secondly, with the speed the RV would be traveling, and laser would have an extremely short window to 'light it up'.

Given these two factors, I am finding it hard to believe that even by 2020 we would have lasers powerful enough to heat a target to well beyond re-entry temperatures in a few seconds.

Lasers would be good against standard AShMs, but I highly doubt they will be all that effective against AShBMs. Railguns would be a far more feasible counter to AShBMs imo.

The US is also working on kinetic kill solutions, of which the rail hgun is one solution. The US has also deployed BMD missiles on land as well as at sea and these missiles will engage the target (particularly the "at Sea" variety in this scenario), first...and they are "hit to kill" weapons.

But the laser is instantaneous and the High Energy Laser has the potential of heating the RV to well above re-entry temperatires. If it does this in terminal phase (which is what it is designed for on board ships), it can hit the target while still renetering the atmospher when it is most vulnerable because not too much more heat will cause the heat shield itself to fail, thus destroying the RV...bubt has plenty of time (since it is operating at the speed of light), to continue tracking and hiting the RV as it continues on its termial phase.

Right now, the lasers being tested are not there yet...they are waiting for the much higher electrical power the new reactors and new propulsion systems will make available.

But, these factors have all been taken into consideration. Time will tell, but I believe by 2020 they will have the solution available.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

The US is also working on kinetic kill solutions, of which the rail hgun is one solution. The US has also deployed BMD missiles on land as well as at sea and these missiles will engage the target (particularly the "at Sea" variety in this scenario), first...and they are "hit to kill" weapons.

But the laser is instantaneous and the High Energy Laser has the potential of heating the RV to well above re-entry temperatires. If it does this in terminal phase (which is what it is designed for on board ships), it can hit the target while still renetering the atmospher when it is most vulnerable because not too much more heat will cause the heat shield itself to fail, thus destroying the RV...bubt has plenty of time (since it is operating at the speed of light), to continue tracking and hiting the RV as it continues on its termial phase.

Right now, the lasers being tested are not there yet...they are waiting for the much higher electrical power the new reactors and new propulsion systems will make available.

But, these factors have all been taken into consideration. Time will tell, but I believe by 2020 they will have the solution available.

imho by 2020 they might have operational lasers as ciws for cruise missiles or rocket artillery, but a ballistic missile in the terminal stage? Maybe a few more years after that.
I'm still waiting for the USN response to the AShBM threat -- whether it be a new variant of the SM-2/3, or development of rail gun intercept solutions (wasn't rail gun development recently axed?). But hey maybe USN believes SM-3 and 2 are enough to deal with DF-21D or they can disrupt the kill chain in other areas.
I do find the idea of laser or gun turrets facing upwards shooting at a RV coming straight down at mach 10 a bit hard to ponder.

Maybe lasers could be used in the soft kill arena, disrupting the RVs electronics and what not.

But this is OT and should be in the end of carrier age thread.

 

[In4ser]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

I'm not very familar with Railgun or Maritime Laser technology but I assume both require a substantial amount of energy, and so repeated shots, should require time recharge and redirect unlike missiles. Even assuming that it works like Jeff Head says, given the relatively cheap platform for D-21 waves of D-21 will make it very difficult to intercept, even more so than Sm-2/3 platforms with traditional AShMs imo.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

I'm not very familar with Railgun or Maritime Laser technology but I assume both require a substantial amount of energy, and so repeated shots, should require time recharge and redirect unlike missiles. Even assuming that it works like Jeff Head says, given the relatively cheap platform for D-21 waves of D-21 will make it very difficult to intercept, even more so than Sm-2/3 platforms with traditional AShMs imo.

The amount of energy available as a result of the new reactors on the Ford class, and the projected new electrical systems on the Zumwalt and Flight II (although not as great as the carriers) will provide very abundant power for these applications. The new technology power source and the new technology lasers will mean essentially that the power is available on the carriers on demand.

The AEGIS SM3 BMD and the anit-cruise missile SM2s will still be available as will the RAM missiles. But we are talking about a significant game changer with the lasers.

Time will tell...but if the non-nulcear electrical systems of the Zumwalt work out as predicted, then even those vessels will have the power and that means...oce other nations catch up or figure it out, that conventiopnal surface ships will be much better defended. It is certainly something the PLAN will look at as well. In fact, we know that the Russians and the Chinese inparticular are already testing laser systems of their own...just not as far along yet.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

The US is also working on kinetic kill solutions, of which the rail hgun is one solution. The US has also deployed BMD missiles on land as well as at sea and these missiles will engage the target (particularly the "at Sea" variety in this scenario), first...and they are "hit to kill" weapons.

But the laser is instantaneous and the High Energy Laser has the potential of heating the RV to well above re-entry temperatires. If it does this in terminal phase (which is what it is designed for on board ships), it can hit the target while still renetering the atmospher when it is most vulnerable because not too much more heat will cause the heat shield itself to fail, thus destroying the RV...bubt has plenty of time (since it is operating at the speed of light), to continue tracking and hiting the RV as it continues on its termial phase.

Right now, the lasers being tested are not there yet...they are waiting for the much higher electrical power the new reactors and new propulsion systems will make available.

But, these factors have all been taken into consideration. Time will tell, but I believe by 2020 they will have the solution available.

Lasers would definitely provide a faster response than ABMs, but I am still at a loss as to how it will be able to intercept a terminally guided warhead. Normal ABMs use pre calculated intercept points, which assumes constant trajectory for the warhead. The DF-21D has a terminally guided warhead, which can alter trajectory.

The laser system would have to have a very fast fire control computer.

There was a PLA concept of an airborne laser system that can also intercept satellites (which is under development), which means their laser is potentially capable of intercepting missiles in mid course stage. How feasible a naval YAL-1 would be is anyone's guess.

PLA also tested their hard kill laser system on a Type 81 MRL rocket. There was a rumor that it will be on Type 052D DDGs.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos

Lasers would definitely provide a faster response than ABMs...The DF-21D has a terminally guided warhead, which can alter trajectory.

The laser system would have to have a very fast fire control computer.

Its ability to alter a ballistic trajectory in terminal mode will be very limited. On top of that, there has been no observed live test over the ocean against a manueverabvle target...so we are not really sure 1) if it can do terminal guidance as claimed, or 2) If the system is at any stage of operation or deployment.

Time will tell.

My guess is that the ability to manuever will be very limited...and the laser, particularluy if it catches it while in reentry mode, will have the time to do its work.

As I say...time will tell. Right now we have a tested and deployed AEGIS BMD (on at least 5 cruisers and 16 destroyers as of late 2010) and a live fire tested laser. The DF-21D has no known operational tests at all.

But, for future carriers and capitol ships, like the PLAN carrier, the ability to successfully defend your vessel with lasers will be a huge step forward.