How vulnerable is an air craft carrier? ***OFFICIAL*** & ***CONFIRMED***

[charrison]

hammer,

I would have to disagree on CBG being enough to neutralize the chinese force. Under best cases 1 would be enough.
However a single bomb can sink a carrier(this almost happened to the USS Enterprise by Accident). A single bomb destroyed the USS Arizona as well. If china was able to put a large number of their planes in the air to attack a carrier, it would surely overwhelm the CBG on just numbers alone. There would be no doubt that incoming planes would take significant hits.

Not to mention china has purchased a carrier(partially complete) from russia recently.

 

[Hammer]

yes, there are many many variables but I think we do stand an excellent chance. I don't think the Kuzsetnov class carrier they bought is anywhere near ready, and they are still left with less than 45 5th generation fighters. As for being overwhelmed thats where the questions comes up again about how many incoming can a CBG engage. Classifed I'm sure.



<< hammer,

I would have to disagree on CBG being enough to neutralize the chinese force. Under best cases 1 would be enough.
However a single bomb can sink a carrier(this almost happened to the USS Enterprise by Accident). A single bomb destroyed the USS Arizona as well. If china was able to put a large number of their planes in the air to attack a carrier, it would surely overwhelm the CBG on just numbers alone. There would be no doubt that incoming planes would take significant hits.

Not to mention china has purchased a carrier(partially complete) from russia recently. >>

 

[AndrewR]

Didnt we sell Tiawan 2 older AEGIS class destroyers that were pulled from mothballs..

Just wanted to point out that "older" and "AEGIS destroyers" are not two things that go together. The Arleigh Burke class is one of the newest in the Navy. AEGIS hasn't been around all that long (relatively speaking).

 

[Lithium381]

<< You'd probably be able to take one down if you nuked it. Or if you could get Jet Li on board he could probably take it over for you. >>



hah, that's funny, though it's a few days old, i'll finish reading the rest too

 

[MrDudeMan]

hahaha nuke it! you would kill lots more than a carrier with a nuke...all the surrounding coasts and marine life


lol that was amusing

 

[DIRTsquirt]

Yo Andrew. Aegis's roots go back to the 1960's it was called ASMS and renamed to AEGIS in December 1969.
the first Destroyer to be fitted with AEGIS were Spruance class destroyers.
At the time of refit the class was redesignated as Guided Missle Cruiser. The USS Ticonderoga commisioned in 1983 it ws the first non experimental or test
production ship with AEGIS
So you see no where did I mention the Arliegh Burke class destroyer.

 

[Shantanu]

Perhaps this will answer your question: BrahMos

Another link here.



<< The BrahMos missile is a two-stage vehicle that has a solid propellant booster and a liquid (propellant) ram jet system. While solid and liquid propellants can give a specific impulse of 300 units (energy level of 300 units, namely kg-second/kg), the cryogenic engines (liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen) can generate 450 units. But a solid ram jet system can give 600 units and a liquid ram jet 1,200 units. "So you have very high energy packed in a small mass," a missile scientist said. The system is called ram jet owing to the fact that it collects the air it needs from the atmosphere during the flight, rams it inside and the propellants burn in the combustion chamber.

The BrahMos missile, travelling at 2.8 to three times the speed of sound (Mach 2.8 to 3), is three times faster than a subsonic cruise missile such as the Tomahawk of the U.S. It has nine times the kill power because the kill power is proportional to the square of the velocity. >>



No known aircraft carrier can withstand an attack from a BrahMos missile.

Don't worry, both the Russians and the Indians are on friendly terms with the U.S.

 

[Hammer]

Regarding the BrahMos, I'll believe it when I see it. The specs sound impressive, but I'd need more data on it. I do think the is where the ESSM comes in. I don't think we've deployed it yet though.

 

[Shantanu]

Has ESSM even been tested yet?

BrahMos is a tried and proven technology. There was a successful test last year, and there will be several more between now and the end of 2003 when it enters production.

Short of blowing up an actual ship, what more could you want?

 

[Hammer]

I'm not sure how far along the ESSM program is along. As for the BrahMos, tried and proven in the US military usually means its been in the field for while. Sounds to me like its still in the experimental phase.

 

[Nefrodite]

once we get a nice carrier full of ucavs we'll rule(for a little while atleast) 15 g turns... any manned plane is just plain dead meat.

 

[Calin]

<<

<< "To everyone's surprise," the New York Times reported, "China defeated the US in both." >>


Sure if we're talking about a land war. Of course how many of the Chinese soliders would actually fight? Those guys are conscripts and would probably surrender faster than a Frenchman. Well maybe not faster, but at least as fast. >>



The vietnamese were also conscripts, and do they surrender fast? I think you're missing the point - if one of the 100 conscripts is a fanatic, US army will be overwhelmed

Calin

 

[Wolfsraider]

<< AEGIS hasn't been around all that long >>







<< Yo Andrew. Aegis's roots go back to the 1960's it was called ASMS and renamed to AEGIS in December 1969.the first Destroyer to be fitted with AEGIS were Spruance class destroyers.
At the time of refit the class was redesignated as Guided Missle Cruiser. The USS Ticonderoga commisioned in 1983 it ws the first non experimental or test
production ship with AEGIS >>



yep i remember in "a" school in 1984 we were trained on aegis systems Phalynx and fire control radar to name a few and they were giving us tours on the USS Ticonderoga and others (training of course lol)
can you say hook track enable lol and you think tracking a missle is hard lol try going thru the malacin straits (spelling?) and bonka boats keeping track of them is harder than tracking a missle lol

 

[DIRTsquirt]

heard that Wolfsraider! I was a snipe so I never had the pleasure, however my attitude would have been It takes me 2 miles to come to a stop. So
get the hell out of my way!!
Not to mention that age old rule he with the biggest ship has the rightaway! hehe
My favorite port was Thailand (Phucket)(Perth) Austrailia. I cant choose!. Scariest port (pusan) North Korea. Drunkenest port (Alongapo) Phillipines
Biggest disappointment port (Japan) Weirdest port (Diego Garcia) Ugliest port. (GUAM)
Thanks for you service to our country.

 

[BMdoobieW]

Don't you worry about about Mr. Aircraft Carrier. He can fend for himself. And what has been "***OFFICIAL*** & ***CONFIRMED***" about this thread? The fact that aircraft carriers exist?

 

[UltraQuiet]

<< Don't you worry about about Mr. Aircraft Carrier. He can fend for himself >>


US ship's are referred to as "she" or "her".

 

[Hammer]

It's an ATOT tradition. If a thread reaches 100 posts, it becomes ***OFFICIAL***. If it reaches 200, its ***CONFRIMED***. Of course, sometimes exceptions are made.



<< And what has been "***OFFICIAL*** & ***CONFIRMED***" about this thread? The fact that aircraft carriers exist? >>

 

[StageLeft]

<< It's an ATOT tradition. If a thread reaches 100 posts, it becomes ***OFFICIAL***. If it reaches 200, its ***CONFRIMED***. Of course, sometimes exceptions are made.



<< And what has been "***OFFICIAL*** & ***CONFIRMED***" about this thread? The fact that aircraft carriers exist? >>

>>

Oh that's how it works is it? I was just being an ass, but I guess it worked out

 

[UltraQuiet]

I think hammer just made that up.

 

[Hammer]

Skoorb, didn't you get that memo? The ATOT executive order from a few months ago?



<< I think hammer just made that up. >>

 

[Shagger]

But toss in some stealth bombing runs before hand to cripple the ability of planes to take off and the picture would radically change.

I heard that the Chinese were working on a way to detect the B2 without radar, something about when it passes in front of FM and UHF waves they can detect it?

True or HS?

 

[Hammer]

From what I understand, the British did a study and discovered that old style radar could detect stealth aircraft. Something different about the way it operates. This very same study was mention during a press briefing when that f177 was shot down in yugoslavia, but they wouldn't comment.

 

[Shagger]

The sub-life simulation was High-larious - I almost got fired for laughing so loud..


Da' Bears...

 

[charrison]

Shagger,

I have not doubt that countries are trying to figure out how to see our stealth aircraft. But at the same time, i am sure we have people working on ways to keep our stealth technology stealth.

 

[mechBgon]

/me waves to charrison, LTNS my friend...

A Navy friend of mine mentioned seeing a Phalanx AMS on a destroyer (ok, being a Mechwarrior fan, I call it an "AMS," bear with me ). He said it was disarmed but evidently tracking, because there was an idling helo (I believe this was on a destroyer) and the Phalanx was a blur of activity as it continuously retargeted on whichever of the rotor blades was the closest, as the rotor turned. Apparently they are very quick on the draw. I'm also told they fire depleted uranium slugs since uranium is extremely heavy.

Sounds like a potent defense weapon if it can get a shot at the missle. As I recall, the damage to the USS Stark and her crew (is that the right ship?) might have been avoided, but the Phalanxes were unable to get a bead on the incoming missle due to a maneuvering or positioning error of the ship.