Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

delft said:

By the time your laser can be operational China might be far enough with the development of a high-acceleration missile, in several years time. Without going to the extreme of the Sprint missile of many years ago, a ballistic missile might have completed its burn before it can be acquired by the laser system. So what are you to do then? What are you to do, if six of them are launched at the same time?

Click to expand...

The ABL destroyed a target missile like a few months ago, it's operational, it's just that no one wants to buy it.

And if you shoot 6, we'll blow up 6, thing is multi-shot.

If the US consider the destruction of a carrier with a crew of 5000+ unacceptable they should not build such vessels or at least not use them in war.

Let's take an absurd example: The USN attacks Pakistan and the Pakistani authorities consider this to be an existential thread to their country. As nuclear weapons are not outlawed they decide to throw a spread of bombs on the USN ships that attack them and sink a carrier. This is self defense and in international law allowed. If the US were to answer with a nuclear attack on Pakistan killing tens or hundreds of thousands of non-combatants this would clearly be a war crime. So what, in those circumstances, is the use of super-carriers?

Click to expand...

No, it's not the destruction itself, it's the killing of the crew.

Most likely only 1000-3000 crewmen may die if sunk by a missile, and that's if Recovery efforts go fine. If Pakistan decides to nuke our asset we'll nuke Pakistan's assets. If they decide to blow up more assets, we'll blow up more assets. A nuke is answered by a nuke, they should know that, even if it's in self-defense.

An analogy would be shooting a kid with a shotgun because he punched you in the nuts. Overreaction will be treated with a larger one.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Even if in the highly unlikely case that the Boeing 747 stays in the Chinese air space long enough to fire its laser, the launch of a couple of Chinese decoy missiles will take care things.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

supercat said:

Even if in the highly unlikely case that the Boeing 747 stays in the Chinese air space long enough to fire its laser, the launch of a couple of Chinese decoy missiles will take care things.

Click to expand...

Thing is multi-shot, it's not like it's a Death Star and requires a while to reload.

Apparently when Fully Operational it should be able to shoot 20 full-power shots or 40 low-power shots. Even if China launches 39 Decoys and 1 DF-21D, you still got maybe 9 more ABLs flying a circle of doom over you, and even if you manage to decoy them all, we're glad you're wasting your money on decoys :v

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:

Uh, I wouldn't think so.

Currently, the best SAMs China has are reproduced Russian S-300s which they've upgraded and given some designation to which I've forgot.

The best missile available for service with the S-300 at this moment has a range of 200 km. This would mean there would be a large stand off distance between that 747 and that PLA SAM site. Only method around this are Seabased SAMs, which is possible with China's first true Air-defense destroyer, the Type 052C? I think. But even with the Type 052C, China only has 2 of them completed and 4 building. Navy v Navy, I doubt they could hold up to a full on USN attack.

I don't think you understand how the Airborne laser exactly works. The thing is not like a laser range finder, it barely needs a second to detonate a warhead. Spinning won't work unless it's spinning faster than it's flying.

And Reflective paint is actually very expensive.

Click to expand...

So the PLAAF and PLANAF sits this scenario out?

And you need to better separate reality from fantasy if you think any airborne laser can detonate a missile in 'barely a second'. There are clips on Youtube for crying out loud.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Jeff Head said:

Measure-counter measure will continue. But everything added to the BM will add weight and reduce its capabilities. As the power available to the beam, and as different beams are created, they will over come (and indeed already are) the impact of atmospheric conditions) and will add mor epower to allow for a much hotter burn. The beam does not necessarily have to destroy the missile either, just impact it enough to cause it to destroy itself.

Click to expand...

Again, you are ignoring the critical issue of range. Unless you can make such a laser small enough to fit in an F22, or B2 at the most, size plane, than it's chances of getting close enough to missile launch sites to even get a shot is remote in the extreme.

It will be a new technology race...but my point is, particularly for the so called (and IMHO to this date at lease a Sun Tsu deception) Carrier killer, the US has already demonstrated technology and fielded it that can intercept such a missile either kinteically, proximity wise, or laser...and this missile in question has not undergone a single verifiable operational test.

Click to expand...

You mean like how China's ASAT capabilities were so well gauged before their live demonstration?

All of the separate components to the system could be tested quite easily on their own, and a full scale live test could be done against land based targets and it would be all but impossible to determine that it was an AShBM test from just observations.

Wasn't there even a picture from google earth floating around showing a carrier sized 'target' in central China that had a giant impact crater in it?

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Deleted

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

plawolf said:

All of the separate components to the system could be tested quite easily on their own, and a full scale live test could be done against land based targets and it would be all but impossible to determine that it was an AShBM test from just observations.

Wasn't there even a picture from google earth floating around showing a carrier sized 'target' in central China that had a giant impact crater in it?

Click to expand...

You mean this picture . <script src='http://img20.imageshack.us/shareable/?i=asbmtest.jpg&p=tl' type='text/javascript'></script><noscript></noscript>

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Hendrik_2000 said:

You mean this picture . <script src='http://img20.imageshack.us/shareable/?i=asbmtest.jpg&p=tl' type='text/javascript'></script><noscript>

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

</noscript>

Click to expand...

Yep, that's the beastie. Cheers for posting it.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:

What? We can't ignore references?

Click to expand...

Reference for that silly "close-range interceptor with laser-pointer" strawman of yours? That is your strawman argument, not mine, so the burden of proof lies on you to show that a dazzler system can't work in any other way. Nice try.

IronsightSniper said:

Not unless they're made in China.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter where they are made from. Sunglasses don't reflect laser.

IronsightSniper said:

Not even a shred of proof.

Click to expand...

What a fitting description of your posts that you have made so far. You know, like how's there's not even a shred of proof that the ABL won't get shot down.

IronsightSniper said:

Demonstration and Affiliation are different things, young grasshopper.

Click to expand...

Yet another strawman. No one here brings up the idea of them being the same except you. And I believe I have made no ambigiuity when pointing out that you are a loyal devotee to said religion. You clearly didn't get the hint to stop with your red herrings... or perhaps you simply have no intention to participate in any form of constructive discussion on this forum to begin with.

IronsightSniper said:

Well, what's to be the truth and what's to be assumed?

Click to expand...

You are clearly having difficulties, so I'm going to help you:
-- the true or actual state of a matter; conformity with fact or reality; a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like; the state or character of being true; actuality or actual existence; an obvious or accepted fact.
-- something taken for granted; a supposition; the act of taking for granted or supposing; arrogance; presumption.

IronsightSniper said:

And as we know, 1 v.s. N/A, we can assume 1 wins.

Click to expand...

Lol, now even you acknowledge it is an assumption. I rest my case.

IronsightSniper said:

A couple of Flankers, a couple of J-17s, etc etc, are to out-perform a single F-22? Trust me, China will need Space-based Air-defense to counter Stealth. /end metaphor

Click to expand...

You sure are trolling hard.

A single F-22 isn't all that difficult to defeat. That F-22 being invincible is just a myth.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

A single F-22 isn't all that difficult to defeat. That F-22 being invincible is just a myth.

Click to expand...

We already had that discussion in this forum years ago and nothing was proven at all. According to many members in this forum any thing the west has especially the US China has a magic bullet that can defeat it.

"Carrier? We can sink em! Even though we only sunk a stationary traget in the Gobi desert. Never a moving target at sea. F-22? We can shoot them down..no problem. After all an F-117 was shot down over Kosovo with antiquated missiles. So I know we can do it".

Bottom line is that no one knows for sure. And in all honesty. I pray none of us ever find out.