Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

Re: China tergets carriers

I have never regarded Super Carriers as much more than costly White Elephant, Missile Magnets and this news, (if true and not just part of a further funding campaign for SW2) rather bears it out.

Re: China tergets carriers

I'll believe it when there is an exercise that shows an actual ballistic missile hitting a ship/moving or otherwise.

There are many problems to solve for this weapon to work. I'm not saying it won't happen, but the engineers have a lot of work ahead of them.

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

Threads combined. No need for two CV sinking threads. Please keep the discussion civil.

bd popeye super moderator

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

One thing the Americans haves talked about is the Kinetic Lance concept, i.e. using armor piercing bolts fired from orbit at hypersonic speeds to hit targets at sea; an interesting idea, but materials technology for it is no where near feasible at present.

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

Please note the latest article is at the Washington Times, and written by Bill Gertz. The guy is a warmonger.

Re: China tergets carriers

AssassinsMace said:

If this weapon exists, China has every right to have it.

Click to expand...

My opinion

China has every rigth to use it.

China will not use it as it is not in their best interest to broaden the war to include further US reinforcements and further involvement from the US navy.

I highly doubt the Chinese leadership will actively utilize this weapon against the US naval strike groups unless it is for a critical phase of the Taiwanese invasion in which heavy US naval strike groups must be sunk.

Otherwise, I highly believe China would use it with reserve. Remember, the Chinese invasion of Taiwan should be executed with flawless precision and is heavily dependent on execution within a small time frame.

Its aim is to not sink aircraft carriers and excite the American public into war, but instead, avoid US Naval engagement the best they can and by POSSESSing this weapon, its enough to give proper distance away from the US naval involvement in that general vincintiy area.

Its all political. This weapon is equivalent in destruction to nearly an atom bomb. It could quite literally stun a navy into submission. Just by purely boasting about this weapon and displaying it, it is mroe than enough to scare US naval commanders and respect the Chinese navy more effectively. Surely it will not be used lightly. How do YOU know it would not broaden the war into greater China and force the US Navy to send further reinforcements to the area???

Any average person including high military commanders would do the same thing. You surely do not think the American naval commanders would take such a massive lost standing down?

The worst thing China needs is addition US naval reinforcements in the form of more US Naval carriers. That would prolong the war after the Taiwan invasion is complete. Direct confrontation against the US Navy over an extended period of Time is against the Chinese wishes. By blowing US ships out of the water without repercussion, they are just asking for just that.

This is why I don't think this weapon will be used lightly in this war. It will be used with reserve, only when time is right, when carriers must be sunk in critical make or break phases of the war.

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

The military is doing its job well if there is no war at all. This saying can be applied to this so called "carrier killer" weapon of tomorrow. So i agree with the concept of ASBM would be something that would scare USN out of engagement with PLAN, rather than the silver bullet that could defeat US military.

And yes, Bill Gertz is a warmonger...and Washington Times is one of the most unreliable sources to get news, esp news about the military.

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

What about using ballistic missles to drop heavy homing torpedos in the carrier's vicinity?

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

One'd have to devise a way to slow down the container carrying the torpedo before it hits the water. And we're talking about slowing down from several mach speed to a parachute glide speed. You'd need a lot of altitude for such a slowdown, which means longer wait time, easier target and so on. Plus the torpedo would have to drop into the water fairly close by, as by then the fleet my very well be alerted and could be steaming at 30 knots away from it.

Re: How Do You Sink A Carrier?

The US wont go all out if China sinks one of their carriers, its not like Pearl Harbour. Japan knew their consequences and knew they couldn't stop a retaliation if American started one. America dropping nukes on Japan, was a surefire win for America cause they knew Japan didnt have any themselves and couldnt do much about it.

Though if America lobbies nukes to China, China wont sit pretty and see them falling onto their cities they'll retaliate hard.

The outrage of Pearl Harbour is that it was un-provoked, their where having peace. But if America sails their carriers into war with China then they have everyright to take it down without much international uprage. If the Americans didnt want their carrier to be sunk then dont sail it in their.

Also don't see much benefits from America in going to war over China for an island that isnt of much use to America in the first place. They'll fear if Tawain falls to communism than the threat of the "domino effect" will happen. china has lots to gain in taking tawain, they'll be able to obtain deep water faster for their subs.