Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

s002wjh

Junior Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

There is no need to keep the electronics cool for the entire flight of the warhead. The warhead lies dormant while being launched and the coolants are only needed while the warhead is activated, just like a satellite. It is entirely possible to cool all the electronics during the terminal phase of flight through chemical reactions like that provided by instant cold packs. Should cooling be needed for the entire flight, a similar cooling method can be employed on the launcher with heat pipes connecting to the warhead(s) that can be severed during delivery.


So is a warhead. Half of the flight of a ballistic missile is controlled by the computer on the launcher itself.


Staying in the same orbit most of the time is not equivalent to never.

Satellites do experience vibration and acceleration. Once again, I point to launching and orbital maneuvers. A lot of vibration is experienced during launching, and a satellite being off during launch time does not magically buffer the propellant tanks and other liquid containers against vibration. These tanks have to be designed with the stresses encountered at launch and orbital maneuver in mind.

Kinetic Kill Vehicles for Anti Ballistic Missile defense carry propellent and oxidizer, and you can see their containers in the pictures of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. KKVs are designed to be able to maneuver rapidly to intercept the incoming target, and the examples shown have no issue carrying liquid on board. In fact, a liquid cooling system is much more simple because
  1. there is no plumbing,
  2. coolant is not consumed so does not slosh around the tanks.


The warhead doesn't experience over a thousand degrees during re-entry. It is the heat shield which encounters such extreme temperature, and it is the job of the heat shield to provide insulation and protection of the actual spacecraft/warhead against such high temperature.


You are repeating yourself, so I will repeat what I have pointed out once again: satellites carry liquid on board. These satellites do not leak while being launched or completing orbital maneuvers. What happens on satellites carry over to warheads.


Nonsense. You pointed out that satellite lies dormant during launch phase and yet you expect a warhead not to? You are contradicting yourself here. There is no need to provide cooling to the warhead for the entire flight. Only a sufficient amount is needed to provide cooling while the warhead is active, assuming that the warhead needs cooling in the first place.


Invalid comparison. Space is a vacuum and the cooling system for PC does not work in a vacuum environment.


Instant cold packs can be pretty cold. You don't need a huge tank of that stuff if that is what you are envisioning.

look cooling system is bigger than a active fan system period. it require pump, a reservior and pipes. and as i said before depend on HOW MUCH electronic are in the MIRV warhead, it needs sufficent space to store the coolant and pumps and pipes.

cooling system such as pump and pipes does not need air to work. so why it isn't a valid comparision.
tell me how you gonna move the liquid to abosrb heat generate by the chips?? you need a pump to pump the liquid, the liquid has to make contact with the chips heatsink in order to absorb the heat. all it need is electricity, pipes, reservior, and a powerful pump. this is true for any liquid cooling system.

the point is a liquid cooling system inside the size of a MIRV warhead with alots electronic, radar, gps etc travel at 8km/s. is not ideal. let me know how you gonna fit a radar anteena, GPS, communication system, digital receiver, sensors, warhead, and other system along with a pump, a gallon of coolant, pipes running through the warhead to cool the chip in a 5x3 cone with outside temp at thousands degree, speed 8km/s, and still able to cool all the necessary components that need to be cooled.
 

s002wjh

Junior Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Just because liquid coolant is used that does not mean plumbing is required. With a one shot deal thing like a munition, chemical reactions like that in an instant cold pack is enough. All it needs is conductor that transfers heat from the electronics to the liquid.

are you saying you gonna mount a cold pack directly on top of microchips heatsink? the surface area of chip or heatsink are too small for a cold pack to be effictive. liquid has to make contact with the chips heatsink, and to move the liquid, you need a pump. there are multiple component need to be cooled. in a typical cooling system, the flow of liquid will abosrb heat where ever it contact. multiple microchips needs alot coolant to aborb the heat. either way you gonna need a pump to move the liquids around. its the flow of liquids that carry the heat away.
 
Last edited:

Engineer

Major
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

look cooling system is bigger than a active fan system period. it require pump, a reservior and pipes. and as i said before depend on HOW MUCH electronic are in the MIRV warhead, it needs sufficent space to store the coolant and pumps and pipes.
Cooling system which based on chemical reactions such like an instant cold pack does is a one-time deal thing and does not require plumbing.

cooling system such as pump and pipes does not need air to work. so why it isn't a valid comparision.
At the end of the day, the PC transfers the heat into the air. A passive heat sink does this, a heat sink with a fan does this, and a cooling system using liquid does this. In a vacuum environment, there is no where for the heat to be dump in, which is why a cooling system for a PC does not work in a vacuum environment. This is why your comparison is invalid.

tell me how you gonna move the liquid to abosrb heat generate by the chips?? you need a pump to pump the liquid, the liquid has to make contact with the chips heatsink in order to absorb the heat. all it need is electricity, pipes, reservior, and a powerful pump. this is true for any liquid cooling system.
Obviously, what you have described is not true for any liquid system. You don't need to move the liquid to absorb the heat. You don't need to pump the liquid. Heat transfer can be achieved via heat pipes, essentially solid copper pipes connecting the electronics to the liquid.

the point is a liquid cooling system inside the size of a MIRV warhead with alots electronic, radar, gps etc travel at 8km/s. is not ideal. let me know how you gonna fit a radar anteena, GPS, communication system, digital receiver, sensors, warhead, and other system along with a pump, a gallon of coolant, pipes running through the warhead to cool the chip in a 5x3 cone with outside temp at thousands degree, speed 8km/s, and still able to cool all the necessary components that need to be cooled.
It is called
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. No pump is necessary.
 

Engineer

Major
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

are you saying you gonna mount a cold pack directly on top of microchips heatsink? the surface area of chip or heatsink are too small for a cold pack to be effictive. liquid has to make contact with the chips heatsink...
Nope. A conductor such as a copper pipe contacting both electronics and liquid is sufficed to transfer the heat efficiently. The reason why your computer's CPU needs a heat sink is because the chip's surface area is too small for the heat to be transferred to air effectively. The mechanism for cooling your PC is different than how satellites/warheads cool their electronics. Stop making invalid comparison.

...and to move the liquid, you need a pump.
No need to move the liquid. Once activated, instant cold pack is naturally cold. The temperature difference between the liquid and the electronics would cause heat to move away from electronics and into the liquid. This occurs because of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. This is Thermal Dynamics 101.

there are multiple component need to be cooled. in a typical cooling system, the flow of liquid will abosrb heat where ever it contact. multiple microchips needs alot coolant to aborb the heat. either way you gonna need a pump to move the liquids around. its the flow of liquids that carry the heat away.
The liquid doesn't need to be moved around, hence no pump or plumbing is required.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

In an attempt to get more directly back on topic regarding the specific purpose of the thread, I put together the following:

IS THE END OF THE CARRIER AGE COMING SOON?

To answer this question, one need only look at what the major nations of the world are currently planning. Are they curtailing Carrier production because of threats, costs, or a perceived lack of usefulness?

The following tables make it abudanltly clear that the major nations, with their professional planners and strategic thinkers do not think so in the least. These major nations, everyone of them that is capable of doing so, are moving full speed ahead with new carrier development, engineering, building and deployment.

(See the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for more information on each class)

New Super Carier/Sea Control Construction and Planning World Wide
(These vessels are projected to have 35-50 year life spans)​

USA :
Ford Class - 0 launched, 2 building, 10 planned
America Class - 0 launched, 1 building, 3 planned
UK :
Queen Elizabeth Class - 0 launched, 2 building, 2 planned
France :
CVF Class - 0 launched, 0 building, 1 planned
Mistral Class - 0 building, 1 more planned
China :
exVaryag Class - 1 launched, 0 building, 1 planned
Indegenous Class - 0 launched, 1 building, 2 planned
Russia :
Mistral Class - 0 launched, 1 building, 4 planned
India :
Vikramaditya - 0 launched, 1 building, 1 planned
Vikrant - 0 launched, 1 building, 2 planned
Japan :
22DDH Class - 0 launched, 1 building, 2 planned
Austalia :
Canberra - 0 launched, 1 building, 2 planned
Korea :
Dokdo Class - 1 launched, 0 building, 3 planned
Spain :
Juan Carlos - 1 launched, 0 building, 2 planned
Totals - 3 launched, 11 building, 36 planned

These planned new generation of vessels are in addition to the ones already commissioned and at sea. Generally, the new vessels will replace the old, but not in all cases:

Current Super Carier/Sea Control Vessels World Wide
(These vessels range in life span from 1-2 years remaining to 30+ year remaining)​

USA :
Nimitz Class - 10 vessels
Enterprise - 1 vessel
Wasp Class - 8 Vessels
Tarawa Class - 1 vessel
UK :
Invincible Class - 1 vessel
Ocean Class - 1 vessel
France :
Charels De'Gaulle - 1 vessel
Mistral Class - 3 vessels
Russia :
Kuznetsov - 1 vessel
India :
Viraat - 1 vessel
Brazil :
Sao Paulo - 1 vessel
Japan :
Hyuga Class - 2 vessels
Osumi Class - 3 vessels
Spain :
Asturia - 1 vessel
Italy :
Cavour Class - 1 vessel
Garibaldi Class - 1 vessel
Thailand :
Nareubet - 1 vessel
Totals - 38 vessels

38 Large or Sea Control Carriers at Sea from 10 countries. 36 more planned (most will replace existing vessels, but not all) from a total of 13 countries in the future.

The vessels themselves already at sea represent an investment of over $100 billion for the ships themselves, and probably close to that same amount (if not more) for all of the aircraft they embark, not to mention the yearly maintenance costs. In addition, all of the escort vessels and logisitic vessels to support them altogether probably amount to another $100 billion (or more) investment. The new carriers being planned will cost even more.

So, is the Carrier Age coming to an end? Clearly, the major nations of the world do not think so. They are building more of them as fast as they can. We know that for at least the next 50 years, the plans are for the "Carrier Age" to continue, despite whatever threats exist from submarines, anti-shipping cruise missiles, potential anti-shipping ballistic missiles and whatever other projected threats that these professional strategic, long term planners can think of.

As these threats develop, the nations of the world operating aircraft carriers are developing counters to them and continuing with the development, building, and deployments.
 
Last edited:

navyreco

Senior Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

^ FYI as far as I know France has a 4th Mistral planned.

And India has plans for 4 LHD/LHA.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

^ FYI as far as I know France has a 4th Mistral planned.

And India has plans for 4 LHD/LHA.
Has India approved the money for the LHA/LHDs? When they do, I will add them to the list. I updated for the fourth French Mistral...will that come after they build the Russians?
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

In an attempt to get more directly back on topic regarding the specific purpose of the thread, I put together the following:

IS THE END OF THE CARRIER AGE COMING SOON?

To answer this question, one need only look at what the major nations of the world are currently planning. Are they curtailing Carrier production because of threats, costs, or a perceived lack of usefulness?

The following tables make it abudanltly clear that the major nations, with their professional planners and strategic thinkers do not think so in the least. These major nations, everyone of them that is capable of doing so, are moving full speed ahead with new carrier development, engineering, building and deployment.

The same reasoning why they keep building dreadnought at the onset of WW II
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

The same reasoning why they keep building dreadnought at the onset of WW II
Actually, not at all. The ability to gather intelligence, and to research and predict emerging technologies and threatswas severely constrained in the 1930s as compared to today...in fact by many orders of magnitude.

We are now aware of what the potential threats are and what levels of technology can and must be developed to make them happen...and we are also capable of countering them much more quickly. China obviously feals the same because it is developing billions itself in the development of aircraft carriers and there groups.

Now, if a nation set up shop in space with all of the technology necessary, the recon assets, the target acquisition and prosecution capabilities, etc. and was unopposed, they could make it happen...but other nations will not sit idly by and let that happen.

Another real threat are supercavitating weapons, but they too can be defended against and the technology to defend against them is already available such that if that threat did emerge, the defenses would be put in place quickly.

At any rate, comparisons to the dreadnaughts are not applicable to the situation of today. Its comparing apples and oranges.

I admit that there are technologies that can make carriers obsolete...but they are not going to be developed and put in place to the degree necessary to do so for a long time. The strategic planners today, in virtually every major developed nation, are very intelligent people, they are all moving forward with this technology which tells us it is nowhere near the end of its useful like...to the contrary, it is expanding.

My point is simple, the systems have been in place for decades and the lsystems of the last few decades are now being replaced by a new generation of vessels We can easily look forward to another fifty years of modern aircraft carriers being a significant tool for power projector on the high seas. I will be gone before the end of those fifty years...but I expect they will last even longer short of full scale dominance of space by one or an allied group of powers with the technologies and weapons platforms necessary to aquire, target and destroy the carriers, and without other powers contesting or opposing it.

Right now, that could not happen because too many countries have the abilityu to thwart and prevent one dominant power from doing so.
 
Last edited:

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Aircraft carriers become obsolete the day aircraft become obsolete, and that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

That's the short version. Jeff's already done the long version for me!

Or to put it another way, as the 'Dreadnought' argument has resurfaced, Dreadnoughts were the optimum means of deploying big guns against the enemy at sea. Big guns were replaced as the primary naval strike weapons by aircraft operating from carriers. Those aircraft have now been replaced by?
 
Last edited:
Top