Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Status
Not open for further replies.

thunderchief

Senior Member
Maybe..if they could launch one. when was the last time one was launched? anyone know? That stated a well placed JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) hitting those Granits would reek havoc on that ship. From the videos I've seen their firefighters are not well trained or equipped.

It is almost impossible to use JDAM against that . JDAM needs exact GPS coordinates and this is a relatively small moving target at sea (I'm talking about Granit VLS ) . You could expect that targeting platform would be shoot at , GPS will be jammed , and JDAM itself is a relatively easy target for Kinzhal (Tor) SAMs .

In fact , standard US doctrine against such heavily armed targets was to use massive air strikes with Harpoons , followed with torpedo attacks from subs .
 
It is almost impossible to use JDAM against that ...

I might be completely wrong now, but I'll try :) Maybe if an SS-N-19 Shipwreck missile was hit in its launcher, just a fire (not an explosion) would result, because of "plastic explosives" in the warhead, and maybe the launcher was designed in such a way that it would be able to absorb it (yeah, but there would be the burning rocket fuel, too)?
 
Last edited:

Franklin

Captain
Kuznetsov's problem is the same which is endemic to the Russian navy and their military at large. They simply don't (or rather, didn't) have enough funding to keep their equipment well maintained.

Kuznetsov gets a bad rap for being a piece of rubbish, but I think that is less its inherent design than simply not having the ability to finance its maintenance and operations.
In some ways the liaoning will be the aircraft carrier kuznetsov was meant to be, for it will eventually have a full airwing with a full, professional crew drawn from the PLANs cream of the crop. Even the liaoning's Type 364 radars sit where the kuznetsov's empty mars passant radar panels are. I expect if we compare liaoning's accommodation and facilities with kuznetsov, the latter will be positively spartan.


Liaoning and vikramditya, will both be the inheritors of the kuznetsov's legacy in a way. We will finally get to see what true fully funded STOBAR carriers can do.

I don't think these days the problem with the Admiral Kuznetsov is maintenance. The Russians now have money and the many trips that the Admiral Kuznetsov takes to the Mediterranean shows she is very well maintained. The problem is the old ship design based on old Soviet technology and the fact that the ship is uncomfortable for the crew. They need a major refit but that will take their sole aircraft carrier out of action for many years. And perhabs there are some lingering doubts rather the Russian shipyards will be up to the task for it.

The Vikramaditya has now left the shipyard and now the spot and the workers are now available for the refit of the Admiral Kuznetsov. We will see in the coming months and years rather there will be a huge refit of the Admiral Kuznetsov.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
It is almost impossible to use JDAM against that . JDAM needs exact GPS coordinates and this is a relatively small moving target at sea (I'm talking about Granit VLS ) . You could expect that targeting platform would be shoot at , GPS will be jammed , and JDAM itself is a relatively easy target for Kinzhal (Tor) SAMs .

In fact , standard US doctrine against such heavily armed targets was to use massive air strikes with Harpoons , followed with torpedo attacks from subs .

Apparently you missed this from 2005;

[h=3]
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
[/h]

Resultant Fury 05

The first-ever "Resultant Fury" demonstration will take place in the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean Nov. 22-23, 2004. The two-phased demonstration features B-52 and B-1 bombers meeting, engaging and sinking multiple moving maritime targets. This demonstration is aimed at showing that the US Air Force has the capability to sink multiple moving ships in all weather, day or night, be they used by enemy combatants, terrorists, or those used for piracy. It will mark the first time Air Force aircraft have used the JDAM to sink a moving vessel.

Resultant Fury is a joint countersea demonstration, initiated and directed by the Pacific Air Forces, employing Air Force B-52s against moving maritime targets in an all-weather environment, day or night. This demonstration will take advantage of forward deployed bombers in the Pacific and improve proficiency at both the operational and tactical levels as well as provide increased joint training proficiency. The maritime exercise showcases the services' abilities to work together to accomplish important warfighting missions.

Through real-time, all-weather technology, information is fed [constant Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance platforms to the Pacific Air Operations Center enabling command and control elements near real-time ability to track multiple moving sea targets and feed that information to airborne pilots allowing them to quickly engage and destroy the vessels.

Resultant Fury 05 marks the first time Navy and Air Force aircraft, including B-52s out of Andersen AFB, Guam and B-1s out of Dyess AFB, Texas, will engage multiple moving maritime sea targets using J-Series weapons.

The two-day live-fire against maritime targets will feature on day one two B-52s carrying Affordable Moving Surface Target Engagement (AMSTE) modified GBU-31 (JDAM), and two F/A-18s will carry two AMSTE-modified JSOW. These B-52s and F/A-18s will engage multiple moving seaborne targets. That same day, a B-1 will engage moving targets utilizing its moving target tracking radar and general purpose weapons. During day 2 of the demonstration three B-52s will engage a landing ship tank (LST) with both AMSTE modified JDAM and self-guided GBU-10s.

Two B-52s forward deployed to Andersen AFB, Guam will be the central focus of this demonstration of maritime interdiction. The inherent capabilities of the B-52-heavy payload and long range-make it the perfect platform to demonstrate countersea capabilities in this theater. B-52 Stratofortress bombers have always had the collateral mission of countersea operations. The most common countersea missions are sea surveillance, anti-ship warfare, protection of sea lines of communications through anti-submarine and anti-air warfare, and aerial mining. Anti-ship warfare is commonly referred to as maritime interdiction, or direct attack against maritime targets.

One Air Force B-1, two Air Force E-8s, one Air Force E-3, one Navy P-3, the Pacific Air Operations Center, two F-18E/F fighters, three remote controlled ship targets, three improved surface ship targets and 1 target will also be involved in the Resultant Fury 05 demonstration.

More than 300 people will participate in the $10 million Resultant Fury 05 demonstration.

Resultant Fury 05-01 concluded in the Central Pacific Nov. 23 with the targeting and destruction of a decommissioned Navy tank landing ship, ex-USS Schenectady. Personnel from both Navy and Air Force services worked together to destroy multiple mobile seaborne targets and attack ex-USS Schenectady, in a unique training opportunity to sharpen at-sea warfighting skills while using the latest in modern weaponry.

Nine JDAMs were dropped during the two-day demonstration with all hitting their intended target. Also, four GBU-10 laser-guided bombs hit the ex-USS Schenectady ship, resulting in extensive damage helping sink the vessel.
 
Apparently you missed this from 2005;

... Resultant Fury - GlobalSecurity.org

Yes and there was somebody on youtube.com with a nick
Schenectady1185
who put up six videos of this attack there; they are all short, though, and I didn't understand all of the military talk (like I wouldn't know what "I have two-two" was supposed to mean) so maybe somebody here will tell me what exactly happen please :) I guess several bombs were released, guided for about thirty seconds?
 

thunderchief

Senior Member
Apparently you missed this from 2005;

No , I understand very well that JDAM could be used against moving targets . After all , they were used against Taliban trucks in Afghanistan . But they cannot be used against ships with good SAM coverage , because you cannot get constant coordinate update , and frankly , do you expect that B-52 or B-1 could just fly over Russian fleet ? :D

Event the article itself admits intended role - fighting pirates , terrorists and other lesser foes they could track in real-time :

This demonstration is aimed at showing that the US Air Force has the capability to sink multiple moving ships in all weather, day or night, be they used by enemy combatants, terrorists, or those used for piracy.


Through real-time, all-weather technology, information is fed [constant Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance platforms to the Pacific Air Operations Center enabling command and control elements near real-time ability to track multiple moving sea targets and feed that information to airborne pilots allowing them to quickly engage and destroy the vessels.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Thunderchief, I can read and you'd be surprised what the full extent of the ability of the USN and US military. Some issues are better kept shrouded.

Since I'm not one to argue, I'm out.

Thunderchief, your post are excellent. Keep it up.

Have a blessed day.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
It is almost impossible to use JDAM against that . JDAM needs exact GPS coordinates and this is a relatively small moving target at sea (I'm talking about Granit VLS ) . You could expect that targeting platform would be shoot at , GPS will be jammed , and JDAM itself is a relatively easy target for Kinzhal (Tor) SAMs.
Sorry, Thunder, you are completely mistaken on this...it is not nearly impossible in the least. For the last 6-8 years the JDAM has been capable of hitting moving, manuevering naval vessels..

In 2004 Boeing began testing a Laser Designator JDAM (LJDAM) and then in 2006 the JDAM was upgraded with the resulting sophisticated Laser Designator, and data link capabilities. This allows it to attack moving targets on land or sea, and it allows it's targeting data to be updated by various communications means.

You're data regarding the JDAM needing exact GPS coordinates is over 8 years out of date. And the Extended Range capabilities added around the same time frame have made the JDAM a decent 80km standoff weapon as well. On top of that, for US Navy use, Boeing also developed and implemented an Integrated Anti-Jam System into the weapon.

So, to be sure, the JDAM can attack and hit targets either with Inertial Navigation, GPS, or Laser designation (which it does itself) and have that targeting data updated in flight.

As to Harpoons, it is true that the US does use them...but they are far from being the only stand-off weapon. In addition to the LJDAM-ER, the US Navy employs the SLAM-ER, an anti-shipping version of the tactical tomahawk, the Joint Strike Missile, and is developing and has tested the new Long Range Anti-shipping missile (LRASM) which will soon go into service as well. All of these would be preceded in use against any heavily defended target by liberal use of HARM missiles to take out the various radars and sensors on the target vessels precisely so their AAW capabilities are severely degraded.

BTW, as to this quote,"be they used by enemy combatants, terrorists, or those used for piracy" being used to say that their intended use is mainly for Pirates, that is not at all what that sentence says.

It says they are intended for use against ALL of those targets. "Enemy combatants (which would be surface ships of enemy nations), terrorists (like in Afghanistan and elsewhere), and pirates (like off the Somalia coast if necessary). But trust me, the LJDAM-ER has been developed specifically to give the US NAvy and its aircraft much more flexibility against other nation's navies and their vessels.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODERATOR COMMENT <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<​


As it is, the detailed discussion about the JDAM and its specific capabilities is off topic here. Both sides have presented their views and understandings. Let's let that rest and get back to aircraft carrier discussions.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>> END MODERATOR COMMENT <<<<<<<<<<<<<<​
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Popeye, Kwaig, and any others who have served any appreciable time on US Navy aircraft carriers.

What do you guys think about the new stern configuaration of the USS Gerald R. Ford as compared to earlier carriers?

This is one change that has not gotten much attention, but they have significantly widened the spaces to the stern.

One side includes a widening of the hanger back there. The other side included new machinary and testing shops.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top