Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics
- Thread starter Kampfwagen
- Start date
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
Oh au contraire, my golfin' Scandinavian friend.
I am not saying CVs are useless. the day CVs will be useless is when airplanes taking off from them become useless. which is not anytime soon.
But one have choices to make based on its resources, its intent and its geographical position.
for example.
for a baltic state wants to defend its space in baltic, to use a aircraft carrier in confines of baltic would be less cost effective than lets say shore based strike aviation and fleets of stealth fast attack boats hiding in fiojds , it your goal was to deny the others of dominating the sea lanes.
but for US have no problem and requirements, its shores facing big open oceans and only confined coastal area (Gulf of Mexico) is boxed in by, literally, banana republics. so you don;'t see fleets of Fast attack craft and diesel subs in US inventory. (except the requirement of LCS, which is essentially offensive in nature and a recognition in itself that carrier aviation is not the optimal form of power projection in every scenario)
China has two fold requirements
1) to keep far away lanes of communication open,
AND
2) coastal defense and sea denial in the packed confines of east china sea.
so it is going to choose a dual mode approach:
for fulfilling requirement 1): build probably the 2nd largest CV fleet in the world behind US, because of the lanes of communication requirements,
AND
for fulfilling requirement 2): cost effective solutions (missile boats, shore based strike aviations, LR AshBM and AshCMs) for sea denial in confined spaces.
Oh au contraire, my golfin' Scandinavian friend.
I am not saying CVs are useless. the day CVs will be useless is when airplanes taking off from them become useless. which is not anytime soon.
But one have choices to make based on its resources, its intent and its geographical position.
for example.
for a baltic state wants to defend its space in baltic, to use a aircraft carrier in confines of baltic would be less cost effective than lets say shore based strike aviation and fleets of stealth fast attack boats hiding in fiojds , it your goal was to deny the others of dominating the sea lanes.
but for US have no problem and requirements, its shores facing big open oceans and only confined coastal area (Gulf of Mexico) is boxed in by, literally, banana republics. so you don;'t see fleets of Fast attack craft and diesel subs in US inventory. (except the requirement of LCS, which is essentially offensive in nature and a recognition in itself that carrier aviation is not the optimal form of power projection in every scenario)
China has two fold requirements
1) to keep far away lanes of communication open,
AND
2) coastal defense and sea denial in the packed confines of east china sea.
so it is going to choose a dual mode approach:
for fulfilling requirement 1): build probably the 2nd largest CV fleet in the world behind US, because of the lanes of communication requirements,
AND
for fulfilling requirement 2): cost effective solutions (missile boats, shore based strike aviations, LR AshBM and AshCMs) for sea denial in confined spaces.
Last edited:
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?
Galleys lack strategic mobility of Full Sailing Ships, but they are still the Littoral combat ship of choice in med.
Galleys lack strategic mobility of Full Sailing Ships, but they are still the Littoral combat ship of choice in med.
Red___Sword
Junior Member
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
I have no doubt carriers will not be replaced by another means, in near future; they just having their usage getting confined more and more, despite which country wielding them. (US can punk Chinese CBGs with easy, at its (US's) own backyard, isn't it? China is just building the same capability in return.)
I have no doubt carriers will not be replaced by another means, in near future; they just having their usage getting confined more and more, despite which country wielding them. (US can punk Chinese CBGs with easy, at its (US's) own backyard, isn't it? China is just building the same capability in return.)
Pointblank
Senior Member
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
However, for any of your super long range weapons to work effectively, they need an asset with high definition sensor suites to guide those weapons in. Only X and upper S-band radars or EO/IR systems have that sort of resolution to accurately guide weapons, and those systems aren't very effective over long ranges. That means that you are placing such sensor suites within range of a carrier group's aircraft, and since most those systems, including the datalinks required to transmit the required targeting information, radiate energy, those systems will be hunted down and destroyed before they can guide your long range weapons in their targets.
However, for any of your super long range weapons to work effectively, they need an asset with high definition sensor suites to guide those weapons in. Only X and upper S-band radars or EO/IR systems have that sort of resolution to accurately guide weapons, and those systems aren't very effective over long ranges. That means that you are placing such sensor suites within range of a carrier group's aircraft, and since most those systems, including the datalinks required to transmit the required targeting information, radiate energy, those systems will be hunted down and destroyed before they can guide your long range weapons in their targets.
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
Completely agree on that. Each country has a different "ideal" composition of its fleet depending on its economy, geography, potencial enemies...etc. But the requirements you mention for the chinese navy are mainly defensive, probably having in mind a potencial conflict with the US over Taiwan or the east china sea. Aircraft carriers are conceived as "projection of power", and any country wanting to achieve it has no other choice but to build them.
Anyway at this point im not really sure about what we are discussing now. Do you agree that the so called "Carrier Age" is over or you just want to say that China has better options to invest its money than building carriers? If its the first option then i dont agree, if its the second (and China is thinking in defence against the USA) then i agree.
PS: Im spanish, the nickname comes from a Tolkiens book, but you are right about its scandinavian origin
Completely agree on that. Each country has a different "ideal" composition of its fleet depending on its economy, geography, potencial enemies...etc. But the requirements you mention for the chinese navy are mainly defensive, probably having in mind a potencial conflict with the US over Taiwan or the east china sea. Aircraft carriers are conceived as "projection of power", and any country wanting to achieve it has no other choice but to build them.
Anyway at this point im not really sure about what we are discussing now. Do you agree that the so called "Carrier Age" is over or you just want to say that China has better options to invest its money than building carriers? If its the first option then i dont agree, if its the second (and China is thinking in defence against the USA) then i agree.
PS: Im spanish, the nickname comes from a Tolkiens book, but you are right about its scandinavian origin
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
Carrier Age is not "Over".
the day CVs will be useless is when airplanes taking off from them become useless. which is not anytime soon.
Anyway at this point im not really sure about what we are discussing now. Do you agree that the so called "Carrier Age" is over or you just want to say that China has better options to invest its money than building carriers? If its the first option then i dont agree, if its the second (and China is thinking in defence against the USA) then i agree.
PS: Im spanish, the nickname comes from a Tolkiens book, but you are right about its scandinavian origin
Carrier Age is not "Over".
the day CVs will be useless is when airplanes taking off from them become useless. which is not anytime soon.
solarz
Brigadier
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
Battleships did not become obsolete because they became useless. Rather, they became too cost ineffective, as their roles were replaced by smaller ships and carriers.
Similarly, if carriers became much more vulnerable due to advances in weaponry (without matching advances in defense), and if UAVs with longer range began to replace manned-aircraft, then yes, carriers would be a lot less useful than they currently are, as a power-projection asset.
Battleships did not become obsolete because they became useless. Rather, they became too cost ineffective, as their roles were replaced by smaller ships and carriers.
Similarly, if carriers became much more vulnerable due to advances in weaponry (without matching advances in defense), and if UAVs with longer range began to replace manned-aircraft, then yes, carriers would be a lot less useful than they currently are, as a power-projection asset.
Re: Latest PLAN Aircraft Carrier Info & Photos
The following page and the graphs and charts on that page make it clear that the great naval thinkers in virtually every nation with any appreciable navy are looking for any way they can to develop, build, launch and commission aircraft carriers precisely because of their flexability and the long term nature of their utility.
I agree 100%. In fact, the Carrier age is blossoming. More and more countries are building them.
The following page and the graphs and charts on that page make it clear that the great naval thinkers in virtually every nation with any appreciable navy are looking for any way they can to develop, build, launch and commission aircraft carriers precisely because of their flexability and the long term nature of their utility.
Last edited: