Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

IronsightSniper · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

BRLG said:
Unfortunately, you still haven't got it right. The real problem is, you don't seem to realize that whatever you have brought up so far, have known counter measures again and again.

It seems you haven't realized that we have a counter for your counter too :|

　
Regarding # 1. For example, OTH radars operating at even lower bands, i.e. with even longer wavelengths, can actually detect B-2s for early warning. This is similar to detecting JASSMs with lower-band radars, but using HF instead of VHF. A 0.5-degree beamwidth, can generate a 22-km search grid from about 2,500 km away. And for that matter, it can also serve as a preliminary search grid for AShBMs targeting CVNs. Or upon entering the borders, B-2s can also be tracked by distributed networks of bi-static radars (multi-static) as mentioned in my earlier message. Furthermore, data fusion of radar signals from multiple directions, can continuously be refined as radar signatures of B-2s have been recorded. Over time, these radars would only be increasingly well-tuned to their designated targets.

When you light your radars up a HARM will knock them out. To believe that Chinese strategic radars will last long in a high-intensity environment like a U.S.A.F. air campaign is ludicrous at best. Not to mention U.S. cyber and EW will most likely neutralize half of the Chinese IADS's computers before anything even begins.

Regarding # 2. Not so long ago, you acted as if stealth were the magic bullet, but after I showed you that B-2s and JASSMs, let alone Tomahawks, can all be tracked by well-selected radar networks, you are now finally worried about J-7s and J-8s hunting them down. Please let me remind you that (a) you were complacent enough in your earlier message, to send B-2s into China without US fighter escorts, so you are now handicapped to deal with J-7s and J-8s; (b) we have been discussing along the scenario that most of the US airbases in Asia-Pacific, have been destroyed by MRBMs and the superbugs have crashed or mission-killed, after the flight decks of US CVNs off the coast, have been taken out by cluster-demolition from AShBMs. So either way, the B-2s, the subsonic JASSMs, and let alone the non-stealth-and-subsonic Tomahawks, would be pursuit and most of them hunted down by J-7s and J-8s.

Really, I've been teaching you here. As I've said, the Chinese IADS will not last long. If you haven't noticed, strategic radars are what we target first. As I've also said, J-7/8s won't last long in a U.S.A.F. air campaign, they'll either be bombed on land or shot down in the air. To believe that the Chinese land based C4I system can depend on J-7s for PD is also, ludicrous.

Regarding # 3. A multi-static radar can also be assembled with a distributed network of passive receivers, taking advantage of background communication signals from surrounding civilian sources. HARMs would be out of luck against hundreds of cell, radio, and TV transmitters in the neighborhood. And in every occasion that B-2s fire missiles, they are also asking to be found.

You think we don't know that? Again, bombed.

The more to be done, the sooner the superbugs would be depleted of enough fuel, to seek refuge in the civilian airstrips at Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, and have to land on hostile territories or crash into the sea. Time is on the side of J-10s and J-11s. And evidently, you don't even bother to mention your phantom l,000-km worth of fuel anymore. By the way, J-10B and J-11B are also equipped with AESA radars. This opportunity window is steadily closing as more and more B-variants will be deployed. And AWACs too.

Assuming Chinese air-fields don't get hit too (which they will). In fact, (like I've said before), superbugs don't have to loiter around China for long. I don't mention the 2,300 km range because, like I've said, they won't need all of it. J-10/11s have inferior radars and it's likely to assume that no C4ISTAR assets are even close in the air in such an air-combat scenario. So, like I've said (why you don't listen, I don't know), superbugs will see the J-10/11s first, they will fire first, they will kill first, and they will land in Japan/Korea/Taiwan first.

The small fraction of superbugs that survived as such, would remain mission-killed, without support from destroyed US airbases in Asia-Pacific.

Superbugs can always be rebuilt, and because like you've admitted, they will have better kill ratios than the J-10/11s, if the U.S.N. really needed to commit to this they can have 200 superbugs in area before China even knows where to shoot at. At which point, the majority of the J-10/11s will either be in operational or destroyed. Since China won't bother trying to hit the U.S. MIC (or risk a nuclear war to which we will win), we however, can bomb the crap out of any Chinese MIC factory we wish.

But like I've said before, this is off-topic, why you continue to pursue your flawed arguments, I don't know.

Quickie · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:
Assuming Chinese air-fields don't get hit too (which they will). In fact, (like I've said before), superbugs don't have to loiter around China for long. I don't mention the 2,300 km range because, like I've said, they won't need all of it. J-10/11s have inferior radars and it's likely to assume that no C4ISTAR assets are even close in the air in such an air-combat scenario. So, like I've said (why you don't listen, I don't know), superbugs will see the J-10/11s first, they will fire first, they will kill first, and they will land in Japan/Korea/Taiwan first.

AESA radar may have its advantages but it's not the magical wand. Having a powerful radar and transmitting at full strength is not always a good idea simply because it'll only make it easier for antiradiation missile to find the radar source. And how can AAM missiles be fired over the radar's max range when the AAM itself don't have the range? In reality, AAM missiles are not even fired at its max range because it'll likely not be hitting any target and be wasted.

IronsightSniper · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

A long-range Anti-radiation A2A missile is always a possibility, but like I've said, whatever is firing that missile needs to detect the target first, or else it's firing randomly. The radars on the superbug have a max detection range of 400 km, they work best at 200-300 km. That is true. For maximum end-game effectiveness, those AMRAAMs would probably be fired at half of their max-range.

i.e. · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:
A long-range Anti-radiation A2A missile is always a possibility, but like I've said, whatever is firing that missile needs to detect the target first, or else it's firing randomly. The radars on the superbug have a max detection range of 400 km, they work best at 200-300 km. That is true. For maximum end-game effectiveness, those AMRAAMs would probably be fired at half of their max-range.

This whole discussion on how dandy the 18E/F's radar is and how it is going to single handily defeat PLAAFs reminds me of those Rand scenarios, wherePLA fighters would open up their radars and search desperately while F-15/16/18s would reply on AWACs and only open up their radar in spot mode. to pick the PLA fighters with stand off AAMs.

sounds like in your scenario the exact reverse will happen... where PLAAF would rely on AWACs and a networked approach where as formations of F-18E/F will open up their radars like a drunk redneck deer hunter open up his spotlight in middle of the night desperately searching for that deer.

funny. ain't it.

----

p.s. you do understand that AESAs on AWACSs can act like a giant ESM attenna correct?
and that ESM range is always greater than your active radar range?

----

p.p.s.

long range anti-radiation A2A is not a possibility, it is here now. SD-10/PL-12 from the very beginning has designed in capability to go passive and home on Jam... just as latest version of AMRAAM

i.e. · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:
A long-range Anti-radiation A2A missile is always a possibility, but like I've said, whatever is firing that missile needs to detect the target first, or else it's firing randomly. The radars on the superbug have a max detection range of 400 km, they work best at 200-300 km. That is true. For maximum end-game effectiveness, those AMRAAMs would probably be fired at half of their max-range.

also, in order to get any where near the advertised kinetic performance on those AMRAAMs, I hope you do realize that the launcher, in this case your non-maneuvering, non-G puling, non-afterburning, ultra-long-range ferry-tanked strapped F-18E/F. super fighter, has to get speed and altitude, do you?

right, so it has to lit its after burner and toss those fuel tanks. bye bye fuel, something that it will desperate need in order to get that 2300km combat range that you stated.

looks like they would have to ditch. I hope they atleast get a course in local Fujiannese and Zhejiangnese before they get sent on those mssions, I heard those are a bitch to understand. and they would need it if they get fished up the local fishermans.

BRLG · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:
It seems you haven't realized that we have a counter for your counter too :|

Which means that it would be a back-and-forth exchange ----- the US wouldn't be able to hit-and-run and considerable losses would be inevitable.

IronsightSniper said:
When you light your radars up a HARM will knock them out. To believe that Chinese strategic radars will last long in a high-intensity environment like a U.S.A.F. air campaign is ludicrous at best. Not to mention U.S. cyber and EW will most likely neutralize half of the Chinese IADS's computers before anything even begins.

Please let me remind you that, we have been discussing along the scenario that most of the US airbases in Asia-Pacific, have been destroyed by MRBMs and the superbugs have crashed or mission-killed, after the flight decks of US CVNs off the coast, have been taken out by cluster-demolition from AShBMs. The B-2s are on a lone and supposedly stealth mission and they won't have any help from Prowlers/ Growlers. The so-called "high-intensity environment like a U.S.A.F. air campaign" has already been dismantled along the coast of China.

IronsightSniper said:
As I've said, the Chinese IADS will not last long. If you haven't noticed, strategic radars are what we target first. As I've also said, J-7/8s won't last long in a U.S.A.F. air campaign, they'll either be bombed on land or shot down in the air. To believe that the Chinese land based C4I system can depend on J-7s for PD is also, ludicrous.

And you also forgot that the superbugs have already been effectively shut out. You are so desperate to bring them back again and again.

IronsightSniper said:
You think we don't know that? Again, bombed. (HARMs against hundreds of cell, radio, and TV transmitters)

Good luck for transporting hundreds of HARMs all the way to China and forget about bringing anything else.

IronsightSniper said:
Assuming Chinese air-fields don't get hit too (which they will)........

You may want to read the other responses.

IronsightSniper said:
Superbugs can always be rebuilt, and because like you've admitted, they will have better kill ratios than the J-10/11s, if the U.S.N. really needed to commit to this they can have 200 superbugs in area before China even knows where to shoot at. At which point, the majority of the J-10/11s will either be in operational or destroyed.

So you finally admit that most of the superbugs would either have crashed or mission-killed and hence, need to be replaced afterall. But China is the manufacturing center of the world and by the time the superbugs would be rebuilt, even more J-10s and J-11s would be deployed. These batches of J-10s and J-11s would be further upgraded too. And there would be more AWACs deployed as well.

IronsightSniper said:
Since China won't bother trying to hit the U.S. MIC (or risk a nuclear war to which we will win), we however, can bomb the crap out of any Chinese MIC factory we wish.

It is pretty stupid to even consider "winning" a nuclear war. Whether it would be MAD scenarios or other variations, a nuclear exchange between China and the US would only mean we all die together. As mentioned earlier, China can simply out-manufacture the US. Please refer to my earlier messages again, as to why the B-2s wouldn't be very effective toward China.

bd popeye · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

You yourself often stress the importance of freedom of passage and navigation on the high seas. On what grounds would the PLA have to come and 'challenge' USN carriers out in international waters?

Just shadow them like the Soviets did and I do realize the Chinese have a different mindset when it comes to naval operations. Perhaps the PLAN is observing the USN with other means.

5 minutes later..I was not finished...By shadowing the USN or playing cat and mose the PLAN could possibly gain knowledge of USN CSG operations.

Blitzo · Apr 13, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

bd popeye said:
Just shadow them like the Soviets did and I do realize the Chinese have a different mindset when it comes to naval operations. Perhaps the PLAN is observing the USN with other means.

Does the Song-Kittyhawk incident count? :O

IronsightSniper · Apr 14, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

BRLG said:
Which means that it would be a back-and-forth exchange ----- the US wouldn't be able to hit-and-run and considerable losses would be inevitable.

Never said they weren't. China is not a tactically inferior target like Iraq. There will be casualties and of course, we will flop in some areas. But I'm simply stating, in the grand scheme of things, China has no chance.

Please let me remind you that, we have been discussing along the scenario that most of the US airbases in Asia-Pacific, have been destroyed by MRBMs and the superbugs have crashed or mission-killed, after the flight decks of US CVNs off the coast, have been taken out by cluster-demolition from AShBMs. The B-2s are on a lone and supposedly stealth mission and they won't have any help from Prowlers/ Growlers. The so-called "high-intensity environment like a U.S.A.F. air campaign" has already been dismantled along the coast of China.

Allow me to remind you that: the superbugs are not going to be launched and then "a few hours later" the B-2s come along. They'll be in flight over China in tandem because like I've said, this is a U.S.A.F. air campaign but it's also supported by the U.S.N. Next, I also told you that Prowlers and Growlers will do the same thing, they won't take off a few hours apart, the EW will take off first, neutralize the IADS, and then the superbugs/B-2s do their thing. You're assuming that the bases and the flight deck gets hit by MRBMs after they launch.

[quite]
And you also forgot that the superbugs have already been effectively shut out. You are so desperate to bring them back again and again.[/quote]

*facepalm*

I told you how and why the superbugs will still be there. Why you don't listen to me, I don't know.

Good luck for transporting hundreds of HARMs all the way to China and forget about bringing anything else.

We do underestimate our Pacific-logistical capabilities?

You may want to read the other responses.

Why? It does seem to me nothing I say that's contrary to you will get through, regardless.

So you finally admit that most of the superbugs would either have crashed or mission-killed and hence, need to be replaced afterall. But China is the manufacturing center of the world and by the time the superbugs would be rebuilt, even more J-10s and J-11s would be deployed. These batches of J-10s and J-11s would be further upgraded too. And there would be more AWACs deployed as well.

Putting words in my mouth now eh? Good one

I'm trying to find a common-ground with you; because you won't listen to me anyways. Assuming that the superbugs shoot down 10 J-10s each, crash somewhere in Japan and the Pilot ejects, like I just stated, we can rebuild superbugs faster than China can rebuild J-10/11s.

It is pretty stupid to even consider "winning" a nuclear war. Whether it would be MAD scenarios or other variations, a nuclear exchange between China and the US would only mean we all die together. As mentioned earlier, China can simply out-manufacture the US. Please refer to my earlier messages again, as to why the B-2s wouldn't be very effective toward China.

Haha, China will nuke like 10 U.S. cities while all of China will be nuked by the U.S. I know people have a maxim that nuclear wars can't be won but like Mao, I beg to differ. Finally, you still aren't reading what I said. B-2s are essentially immune to the Chinese IADS (or what's left of it). Without the strategic radars that China needs to do anything in regards to air defense, any and all manufacturing centers will be bombed, and China, will be suffocated like the South.

If you're going to remain thick-headed and not listen to what I'm saying or just simply dismiss my retorts simply on the basis that they don't agree with you than we can move back to talking about Carriers and AShMs now because like I've repeated how many times over and over, this is off topic, you don't listen to me.

BRLG · Apr 14, 2011

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

IronsightSniper said:
Never said they weren't. China is not a tactically inferior target like Iraq. There will be casualties and of course, we will flop in some areas. But I'm simply stating, in the grand scheme of things, China has no chance.

Actually, the mounting US losses would generate so much political pressure at home, that the US wouldn't be able to carry out such a confrontation far enough, to see the end of the tunnel. And this is the realistic grand scheme of things ----- military operations cannot be executed in a vacuum without politics. But this is off-topic, which is the reason that I haven't brought it up so far.

IronsightSniper said:
Allow me to remind you that: the superbugs are not going to be launched and then "a few hours later" the B-2s come along. They'll be in flight over China in tandem because like I've said, this is a U.S.A.F. air campaign but it's also supported by the U.S.N. Next, I also told you that Prowlers and Growlers will do the same thing, they won't take off a few hours apart, the EW will take off first, neutralize the IADS, and then the superbugs/B-2s do their thing. You're assuming that the bases and the flight deck gets hit by MRBMs after they launch.

And you are assuming that only one initial wave of attack would have destroyed most of the counter-strike capabilities in China, for which it wouldn't happen, not even close. At the very least, China is too geographically diverse with the high-valued assets all spread out. And China would already have noticed even when such an air campaign is in the process of being assembled, let alone getting ready to strike. Once MRBMs and AShBMs have been launched to destroy the US airbases and the CVN flight decks, the superbugs would be out of picture, and the US wouldn't be able to continue with more waves of attack for a long time.

IronsightSniper said:
I told you how and why the superbugs will still be there. Why you don't listen to me, I don't know.

Because this isn't the military and we don't need loyal followers here?

IronsightSniper said:
We do underestimate our Pacific-logistical capabilities? (HARMs against hundreds of cell, radio, and TV transmitters)

You underestimated the weapons capacity needed for the superbugs to take up such a task.

IronsightSniper said:
Putting words in my mouth now eh? Good one. I'm trying to find a common-ground with you; because you won't listen to me anyways. Assuming that the superbugs shoot down 10 J-10s each, crash somewhere in Japan and the Pilot ejects, like I just stated, we can rebuild superbugs faster than China can rebuild J-10/11s.

The superbugs have to be destroyed before they need to be replaced. One is connected to the other. My interpretation wasn't off-based. But you are pulling numbers out of thin air again and again. The superbugs can only carry 8 AA missiles each time. And those are all they can use after MRBMs and AShBMs, have been launched to destroy the US airbases and the CVN flight decks.

IronsightSniper said:
Haha, China will nuke like 10 U.S. cities while all of China will be nuked by the U.S. I know people have a maxim that nuclear wars can't be won but like Mao, I beg to differ.

Maybe you enjoy how the other "yes-men", have been entertaining you and wouldn't try to investigate more probable outcomes. First, several years ago China has already announced to switch from minimal deterrence to limited deterrence, and you can expect at least the western half of the US be thoroughly nuked in a counter-strike. Second, MAD scenarios would drag Russia into the nuclear exchange, for which I don't have to elaborate further. Third, your best hope is to be immediately vaporized, instead of having to sustain a slow death from wide-spread radiation contamination. It wouldn't matter if you were to survive from a bunker, when the atmosphere, soil, and underground water, are all contaminated with for example, Cs-137 with a half-life of 30 years or even worse, the deadly Pu-239 with a half-life of 24,200 years. Now, do you still fantasize of "winning" a nuclear war?

IronsightSniper said:
Finally, you still aren't reading what I said........

Let's just say that you probably haven't been reading what I wrote either, since you are so concerned of whether people are listening to you........

Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

IronsightSniper

Junior Member

Quickie

Colonel

IronsightSniper

Junior Member

i.e.

Senior Member

i.e.

Senior Member

BRLG

New Member

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

Blitzo

General

IronsightSniper

Junior Member

BRLG

New Member