CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Keyword is "asymetric".

They expecting that the enemy hasn't got assets to attack them.

In exchange it can deliver extreme amount of cheap bombs, not possible by other ways.


Now ,introduction of expensive stand of missiles to the naval airplanes destroy this equation.

If a 100k ships + 5000 pair hands + airplane required to launch a cruise missile with hundreds of km range ,then why not use 4k ship, with dozens of hands and bit bigger , longer range missiles ?

We have a thread where we looked at carrier operations in much more detail.

Future PLAN carrier operations

Basically, for blue water operations, you need a carrier for air superiority and to find opposing ships.

Then it is better for big anti-ship missiles to be launched from surface ships or land-based vehicles.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
post not visible.

Missing post from skyscrapercity;

"Originally Posted by Blackpool88
Desertswo, I'm only quoting to get your attention.

I have a question as a complete layman on Navy matters (BD I would like your view too) - If an Arleigh Burke class destroyer was with a carrier group and an enemy launched a saturation attack of anti ship missiles on the carrier, how confident would you be that the Aegis (or whatever system they use) could handle and eliminate the threat?"

I'm just trying to understand if they could realistically get at a US carrier group in this way. Would also be interesting to see how a Type 45 would handle this situation as their respective systems both state they are capable of tracking 2000 targets simultaneously.

Also has it ever happened in the recent past?
Your's is a good question, but if you'll pardon me, an also uninformed question, because it starts with the premise that the Arleigh Burke/Ticoderoga-class are stand alone weapons systems, and not part of an interconnected whole. Here are some pictures that will sort of make my case. They are in order of where and when they come into play.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


800px-US_Navy_100208-N-9418A-616_The_Ticonderoga-class_guided-missile_cruiser_USS_Shiloh_%28CG_67%29_transits_the_Gulf_of_Thailand.jpg


786632-120201-super-hornets.jpg


arleigh_burke_class.jpg


nrol21_sm3.jpg


It's all predicated on the concept of "defense in depth." We have the advantage of the E-2C/D as the eye in the sky. I wish I could tell you exactly what that gives us, but suffice it to say, she's a game changer. She is controlling the CAP made up of, usually, a pair of F-18E/F Super Hornets. She is also feeding, by direct data link, the rest of the ships in the battlgroup, the first of which will often be a Ticonderoga-class posted well away from the main body, out on the threat axis, in what used to be called Positive Identification Radar Advisory Zone (PIRAZ). I honestly don't know what they call it now, but the concept is the same: separate the wheat from the chaff. Anything passing over or near that ship will be challenged and fired upon if necessary. Then the enemy enters the Fighter Engagement Zone (FEZ), where a whole bunch more F-18s are weighting to pounce. Then the Missile Engagement Zone (MEZ) where the various versions of SM come into play. At around the same time, the SLQ-32 is doing all sorts of wonderful stuff. Again, I wish I could tell you what, but it's all sort of voodoo magic, and it works too. Then the Gunfire Engagement Zone, where the MK-45s commence to chopping, then the SRBOC starts popping, and then the Phalanx goes to work. If it gets past all of that, they deserve a hearty "Well done."

Here's the thing though. This premise also assumes the launch platforms got off shots unmolested. Well, "Homey don't play that." In the USN way of war, we go always for the archer first, and not the arrow. It's a much easier problem to solve.
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
Missing post from skyscrapercity;
It describe the defence tactics of a carrier strike group, not the utility / advantage of it compared to other methods to deliver explosives to non-cooperative addresses.


And there is good level of information about the capability of these defences, at least one Onyx from 8 can go thought the defence of a destroyer, and 3-6 from 24 can hit the carrier in a strike group.


The design of the Soviet / Russian weapons and systems calculated around this.
 

chickenhero3830

New Member
Registered Member
Not a good start to 2020

delays due to virus and no 4th carrier has been spotted which to be honest I was hoping for

no batch 3 of J15 and no further new helicopters

constrained air wing for both CV-16 and CV-17

add to that the the news that there will be no 5th and 6th CVN

after a short sprint looks like Chinese carrier ambitions have been somewhat dented

carrier programmes are expensive and even china can’t splash out on a CVN

USN has 11 x CVN

China at most with have 2 x STOBAR and 2 x CATOBAR which will not bee nuclear powered

overall a rather dull picture and steam seems to have gassed out on the Chinese carrier programme in this new decade

Its not a competition for the one who have the most aircraft carrier. If China have enough military hardware to hold off any forces like usa then why should they compete for who have the most carriers. Don't forget China will utilise land forces.
 

Orthan

Senior Member
Update from Feb. 21st, courtesy of ZY3-02 imaging satellite.

In two months, nothing has changed there. The hangars and cranes are still in the same position. Perhabs they are waiting for the dredging ships to clear the waters before they send the modules away. The chinese lunar new year and the coronavirus cant explain all this delay, IMO.
 
Top