1.5% gdp defense budget limits too many ship building projects. China still has a low military budget. They are going for small quantity and higher tech instead of bulk numbers.
00X/004 future nuclear CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter AETHER
- Start date
Note that this implies 2 aircraft carriers built every 5 years.
If this continues, and given a 50 year service life, that would imply a steady-state fleet of 20 aircraft carriers.
I would say this is towards the upper limit of how large I expect the Chinese Navy to grow to.
I think the Chinese Navy could settle on a somewhat smaller fleet size, but this does depend on how bad US-China relations get.
I think Carriers are less useful than before. You cannot rely on a carrier to bomb another country that has good anti-ship missile capability. Carriers are useful to use planes as radars in the skies, patrol, Air to Air defense against enemy planes launching anti-ship missiles.
So, Future fleets will need more destroyers per carrier in order to defeat numerous anti-ship missiles and drones coming at you. Moreover, Destroyer based Hypersonic anti-ship missiles will be the primary mode of attacking enemy fleets, spotted and guided by planes or drones. Land attack will also be performed by ship launched hypersonic missiles from a very long range.
If current fleet composition is 10 destroyers per carrier, future fleet composition will need to be 30 destroyers or more.
So, China needs less carrier than US. In fact, US is too carrier heavy for the modern battlefield. Although, they do have allies like Japan to augment their destroyer numbers in actual war.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Generally agree with you, but planes are also very cost effective tools for intercepting drones (assuming UCAV type, not small FPVs) and conventional missiles as well. Unlike destroyers, planes are not limited by LoS against sea skimming threats. Currently planes cannot intercept HGVs, but that may change with future technological developments. While offensive focus may shift away from carrier aviation, aircraft can still prove very useful in other roles, such as ISR and fleet defence.
Last edited:
If a Chinese fleet is operating past the Second Island Chain in the Pacific Ocean, then land-based air support will be very limited.
In such a scenario:
1. Given the distances in the Pacific Ocean and lack of land bases, there aren't that many platforms to launch anti-ship missiles or drones. Even land-based aircraft will be rare.
2. So in order to achieve air superiority, I think it would mainly be aircraft carriers versus aircraft carriers. That means the winner has the ISR advantage whilst the loser doesn't.
3. For anti-ship missions, yes, I think the "best" solution would be an hypersonic ASBM launched from a VLS cell.
---
Current CSG composition is more like 6 escorts for each carrier in the US Navy or Chinese Navy.
My guess is that it's better to build more carrier groups (and therefore gain air-superiority) over an opponent, rather than increase the number of escorts and the number of defensive SAMs. With that air superiority, there won't be incoming missiles or drones.
From the US perspective, I think it likely that the First Island Chain and then the Second Island Chain will be "lost", in the coming decade.
In such a scenario, the next line of resistance will be the aircraft carriers of the US Navy.
---
Remember that the economics of [offensive hypersonic ASBMs] versus [defensive SAMs] is vastly in favour of the attacker.
So if you have air superiority and the ISR advantage, you can launch a lot of hypersonic ASBMs.
But the defender can't hope to have enough [expensive destroyers] launching [expensive SAMs]
---
If hypersonic ASBMs with a 3000km range become the main antiship weapon, I agree that fleets will become somewhat more destroyer heavy.
But remember that a single Type-055 has 112 VLS cells.
So how many additional Type-055 do you need in a CSG?
If each CSG has 6 escorts, my guess is that an additional two Type-055 would be more than sufficient.
I don't think its possible to achieve air superiority over an area guarded by long range AD of destroyers such as SM-6 or HQ-9B. Yes, these missiles need some kind of air based radar/awacs to achieve their full potential. But These systems are of such long range, that within 2-300 KM of a Carrier strike group, No plane can come.
Moreover, these AD are so good that anything less than hypersonic anti-ship will probably be shot down. Plane based slow anti-ship missiles simply won't be able to get through.
So, you can forget about WW2 style scenario of Jet squadrons flying enmass launching bombs or slow missiles to sink ships.
The best way to hit the enemy carrier strike group is to fire ship based hypersonic missiles. Only ships can carry such big missiles.
Thus, carriers are absolutely essential but as a defensive ISR weapon. Planes have limit in terms of weight, so they won't be able to carry ultra long range and hypersonic anti-ship missile which limits their use in offense. They also have less usefulness in defense also, Cause Plane based air-to-air missiles are completely useless against Hypersonic missiles, so they are not of any help in fleet defense.
Any carrier strike group that has less destroyers will not be able to survive a hypersonic saturation strike. Interceptors will be depleated fast. That's why you need carrier strike groups with more destroyers per carrier rather than more strike groups.
Suppose a US nuclear carrier with 100 F/A-18 but 6 destroyers faces a Chinese Liaoning strike group with just 20 planes but 15 destroyers including 6 type 055?
Which one will win?
It will be the Chinese carrier group with mass YJ-21 and YJ-18 saturation ability. US carriers can launch their 100 F-18s but they can't get close due to HQ-9B. Their slow Harpoons are completely useless as well. So, the US carrier group has no way of attacking the Chinese group but the Chinese group can attack and defend well due to its destroyers. That's the key game changer in future wars.
Last edited:
Look at the physics.
An aircraft at an altitude of 10km has a radar horizon of 412km+
So if you have air superiority at a distance of 400km (beyond 300km SAM range), your ISR aircraft can see the opposing ships and there is nothing they can do about it.
Then you can launch 3000km hypersonic ASBMs at your leisure.
---
So what matters is establishing air superiority at a distance of 400km from your target.
---
EDIT. Aircraft can also launch HARM missiles at distance of 300km+. That will take out the SAM radars on the ships.
Last edited:
Ships SAMs are likely limited in range due to ship based radar, so with network connectivity with a carrier base plane, they can probably hit target 1000s of KM away. So, it is possible to reduce any chance of enemy planes coming close to launch their missiles.
HARM are just another missile, no different from anti-ship missile and thus can be shot down by the ship based AD.
Moreover, Planes cannot carry hypersonics due to weight limitations. You need a big missile for that. So even if planes achieve "air superiority" 400 KM from the carrier group, they cannot carry proper hypersonic missile that can hit ships due to weight limitations.
One option might be to have very big carrier based planes like J-36. That way they can carry those big missiles. But then you will need very big carriers, which might be infeasible. So, that might be one way to increase the usefulness of carriers but it will be costly.
You're talking about a SAM with 1000km of range now.
What does such a SAM look like?
How expensive is it?
Is it even possible to track an opposing aircraft from such a distance?
Remember that if you can get within 300km, you can shoot down aircraft flying above the carrier (such as an E-2D AWACs) with a PL-17
Yes, HARM missiles can be shot down. But remember it is specifically designed to evade SAMs and to destroy the SAM system.
And if you have air superiority at 400km, your aircraft can come back again and again.
Then the target faces another wave of incoming missiles, whether they are ASBMs or launched from aircraft.
This repeats until the missiles get through or the target runs out of SAMs.