Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
It's a point I'm glad you have raised, as I think it is often overlooked by those who embrace new technology as being so revolutionary as to lay waste all that went before. In fact the history of technology and especially weapons technology is that of measure and countermeasure, evolution not revolution as a rule. Look up the 'Red Queen Theory of Evolution' and you'll see what I mean. You have to run as fast as you can just to stand still. UAVs and UCAVs are predicted by so many to make manned aircraft obsolete, but if you can break into the supposedly 'unbreakable' data links then you have made the unmanned vehicles obsolete. Manned aircraft have the advantage that the pilot has no 'hackable' data link between himself and his aircraft, literally just an arms length away (instead of a continent away). I think in summary manned combat aircraft will be around longer than most 'experts' are predicting...
Kurt
Junior Member
Dear Equation and Obi Wan Russell,
it has been rumoured among the 9/11 conspiracy theories that you could actually remote control passenger aircrafts (makes sense to deny hijackers critical abilities to decide and makes sense because none claims the 9/11 eleven hijackers could fly as good after known training as the visible performance on that day). So let's postulate there's such a link, how would you configure it?
Gripen is quite renown for its hard to detect or jam short range laser communication that enhances their multirole capabilities through networking individual information. I think that would be one way to go, short range communication for communicating drones with a manned system as unreplaceable transmission intermediate to block any hacks. In a sense these UAV are then cheap weapon load multipliers for a combat aircraft with good fighter characteristics.
The other idea would be a platform that can autopilot and receives orders via a pre-set individual one-time pad encryption. You can't break into this system, it's been proven impossible to decode if used properly (don't use your favorite book as encryption key for example).
Being able to hack a drone is a sign of sloppy encryption standards and not a vulnerability of unmanned systems per se. They're rather vulnerable to jamming, although you'll have a hard time jamming a frequency hopping communication. The remaining problem is spotting the communication, you can pretty much fly it with a large banner "US drone attacking your home" if you don't use directed low energy communication that best works over short distances (or gets too expensive for the intended cheap UAV).
So I would have very high altitude, but not expensive space, platforms with a wide horizon as intermediary to direct drone operations near ground. Multiple platforms help to constantly shut off communication and change localization. This problem is similar to operating modern artillery, as soon as you send your enemy a visible heavy message, he soon knows where you are. Above the intermediary aircrafts (or blimps?) I would position satellites in order to broadcast the information down without giving away precise locations through directed communication beams. Yes, the enemy will hear every command for every drone, but with good encryption he won't figure out a thing nor will he be able to use traffic statistics to interpret your moves if you run enough misinformation chat (see Operation Fortitude).
Multiple satellites are necessary because all communication sources can again be located and location means destruction, so keep silent from time to time and move unpredictable. Now why the intermediate high altitude layer in the atmosphere, why not direct orders? If you want to give the operator of the drone information of the whereabouts of the drone you need detectable signals to run all the way back. I consider it economic to have the drones use directed short range communication with little energy to a more long range platform that communicates things to the satellites with directed higher energy output (detectable over a large area). Because earth is quite round, the higher up you go, the more space there is, so proportionally detectors have less chances or grow to visible sizes and they have little cover up there. There's no stealth there because you fly with space radiaton on your back, so either you aren't there or you're black spot in a sea of light. However it's vast area to search as long as you don't try to stalk an enemy asset, because the enemy is sure to know the whereabouts of his assets and search the surrounding space (same problem with naval surface warfare, the ocean is a vast place to look despite ships being not small, now imagine more space and smaller objects).
Before I sound too much like flying my drone everyday, I'm just a little tech savvy geek, not the chief engineer of Lockhead, so these guys might easily have better ideas than me.
Well, you know, in the end it's probably more of a technical experiment than an intuitive operational application.
I do not propose to develop a specific asset with this "subcarrier" thing as the primary function. Rather, it would be an additional function an already existing platform could perform, if needed. Hence my proposal of using a SSBN for the role. They are in place and I'm fairly certain that follow on platforms will be designed pretty much thoughout the world to follow the current generation.
I don't know if it became clear or not, but the wings of such a system would be swept / canted inward so that the complete system fits into a normal Trident missile tube. The still rather small cargo capacity will in the most likely still not offset the challanges involved.
I also agree that the single biggest problem operationally is to return something to a sub, wich's primary operating method is indeed stealth.
Maybe it might work as a really big cruise missile then, with a few thousand miles of range and a really big warhead. Another approach to "prompt global strike". Circumventing the problem of how to explain all the nuclear armed players that this ballistic track eminating from the ocean is not a nuclear tiped missile.
If you could somehow get the speed of it right, it might outperform a conventional long range bomber in that role. But still rather stretching it I guess ...
Kurt
Junior Member
I agree, it would be feasible, but you need to evaluate the gained capability through this approach against achieving the same outcome with different approaches. If you go for long range, make the range just a little bit longer, use aerial refuelling and you never need a sub at the fraction of the cost of installing a system there.
The sub is a weapon platform that lurks around and then cries surprise you're dead. Long range is good for WMD warheads from a second strike platform, but if you want to use a submarine for bombing, the US guided missile submarine approach with many small warheads is just perfect. The sub gets close, not in the former torpedo-close sense, but close and kills out of a sudden.
Using these submarines for precision strikes is rather about testing your guidance and delivery system in order to hone your submarine launched commando capability. I agree, one permanent missile vehicle hovering over the commandos might help them do something with a short OODA loop, but this thing needs good stealth and should be refueled and rearmed anywhere but on the submarine.
The sub is a weapon platform that lurks around and then cries surprise you're dead. Long range is good for WMD warheads from a second strike platform, but if you want to use a submarine for bombing, the US guided missile submarine approach with many small warheads is just perfect. The sub gets close, not in the former torpedo-close sense, but close and kills out of a sudden.
Using these submarines for precision strikes is rather about testing your guidance and delivery system in order to hone your submarine launched commando capability. I agree, one permanent missile vehicle hovering over the commandos might help them do something with a short OODA loop, but this thing needs good stealth and should be refueled and rearmed anywhere but on the submarine.
Well, the USS America, LHA-6 is coming along nicely. Here's the latest construction pics showing her taking form:
...more pics at the site.
She will fly AV-8s to begin with, but ultimately will carry the F-35B. I still hold out hope for a EV-22 AEW aircraft and a ASW variant of the V-22 for anti-sub work. Those two things, in conjunction with the JSF will make these LHAs, CVLs, CHVs, etc. very powerful in the sea control role, and even the strike at sea and close air support role.
Here's how she will look when doing air operations: (Note, the first photo is my own depiction, the second photo is an actual picture of an F-35B taking off from the USS Wasp, LHD-1, which is how they will operate off of the America:
...more pics at the site.
She will fly AV-8s to begin with, but ultimately will carry the F-35B. I still hold out hope for a EV-22 AEW aircraft and a ASW variant of the V-22 for anti-sub work. Those two things, in conjunction with the JSF will make these LHAs, CVLs, CHVs, etc. very powerful in the sea control role, and even the strike at sea and close air support role.
Here's how she will look when doing air operations: (Note, the first photo is my own depiction, the second photo is an actual picture of an F-35B taking off from the USS Wasp, LHD-1, which is how they will operate off of the America:
Last edited:
navyreco
Senior Member
as seen on mp.net
Indian Navy floats out first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier
The Aircraft carrier is first of its Series of Vikrant Class Carriers..
According to a senior naval functionary, the carrier was ‘technically floated out' as the shipyard needed the dry-dock for ‘some other commercial work.' “The carrier has taken on about 14,000 tonnes. She would now undergo interior outfitting, including the laying of pipes before being dry-docked again in the latter half of next year for integration of the propulsion gear-box, generators and the like,” he told
The Hindu
. 40,000-tonne fleet air defence platform of the Navy, which will be named after the legendary INS Vikrant.
More at Link:
That deck doesn't look very "angled" at least compared to western designs...
Indian Navy floats out first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier
The Aircraft carrier is first of its Series of Vikrant Class Carriers..
According to a senior naval functionary, the carrier was ‘technically floated out' as the shipyard needed the dry-dock for ‘some other commercial work.' “The carrier has taken on about 14,000 tonnes. She would now undergo interior outfitting, including the laying of pipes before being dry-docked again in the latter half of next year for integration of the propulsion gear-box, generators and the like,” he told
The Hindu
. 40,000-tonne fleet air defence platform of the Navy, which will be named after the legendary INS Vikrant.
More at Link:
That deck doesn't look very "angled" at least compared to western designs...
Last edited by a moderator:
It's more to do with the 'angle' (pardon the pun) that you are looking at the model. It's an 8 degree deck AFAIK, on a par with most western Angled deck carriers (though US Nimitz class CVNs manage more of a ten degree deck, to increase the parking at fly one).
MwRYum
Major
as seen on mp.net
Indian Navy floats out first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
The Aircraft carrier is first of its Series of Vikrant Class Carriers..
According to a senior naval functionary, the carrier was ‘technically floated out' as the shipyard needed the dry-dock for ‘some other commercial work.' “The carrier has taken on about 14,000 tonnes. She would now undergo interior outfitting, including the laying of pipes before being dry-docked again in the latter half of next year for integration of the propulsion gear-box, generators and the like,” he told
The Hindu
. 40,000-tonne fleet air defence platform of the Navy, which will be named after the legendary INS Vikrant.
More at Link:
2 questions:
1. Does that mean at some time later in 2012 they've to cut her up all over again to fit in the heavy machinery? I know commercial ships do that during major refits but a new build ship?
2. Why the aircraft lifts are walled?
Last edited:
This is strange.. th ship is new. Perhaps they are tweaking some flaw in the design.
As for the "lifts".. that must be an Indian design. I've never seen that before. Maybe it's done to protect the aircraft and personnel against a heavy sea state.(big waves)
- Status