Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

s002wjh said:

sure you can detect all ships in 1000 sq mile, then doing it over and over to cover a million mile area. take alot time and resource. then you have to know which ship is the carrier. prioritize require more information than detection.

Click to expand...

That's where you are wrong. Prioritize means working with the information you have so that in the next scan, ones that are likely to be carrier are done first. Ship sizes can be use for prioritizing, their speed and direction can be used for prioritizing.

s002wjh said:

i said it before it doesn't matter how many satelite or process step you use. to cover that much area, id 1 target out of many, in a short time. i doubt any nation has that capabilities right now.

Click to expand...

That's not a proof that SAR satellites cannot detect, track and identify carrier.

s002wjh said:

That's just as my analogy put 2000 different size needle bury in a 50sq mile beach, grab 100 people with metal detector or other detector find 1 needle out of those 2000. sure you can find it EVENTUALLY. now if that needle keep moving, its gonna be tougher to find it.

Click to expand...

Your analogy is flawed. In this, you are considering hand-held metal detectors that have extremely small coverage. This analogy would work with an optical sensor where the field-of-view is narrow. However, the coverage from a Synetheic Aperture Radar on wide beam scan is huge, and is akin to using a metal detector that is 100m by 100m in size. On top of this, you have multiple of these detectors working, and at any instance where a metal object is detected, the detector can zoom in for a high quality look and identification purpose.

s002wjh said:

wait the last part I give you an ideal situation. but are you saying detection is much more difficult? seem like you contradict your self.

does this image better less ship, less calm sea

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

china, SK, japan, south china sea has one the largest volume of ships traveling through that area. how many ships do you think from coast of china to australia to japan.

Click to expand...

There is no contradiction. On the ocean, there are a lot of ships and they are spreaded very far apart, this means what the satellite sees would look nothing like the pictures you have referenced of ports and costal regions.

Total number of ocean fairing merchant ships in 2010 is . Total area of ocean on Earth is km2. Assuming half of the ships are in port and the other half moving around in the ocean, there would still only be one ship per 14,384 km^2.

Hence, when you use those pictures to portray the amount of ships on an open ocean, you are being disingenuous.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

s002wjh said:

i never say CANNOT, i said if china know the general location of CVBG. itll be easier, but if they have to blindly search ocean from china to australia to japan then its much more difficult.

sar image processing

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Once again, general area is a . It shows you don't have a good idea of what you are talking about.

Detection of ships in sea, tracking of detected targets in sea, switch to narrow beam to zoom into targets of interest -- none of these is impossible, contrary to your use of "difficult" that intends to mean "impossible".

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

s002wjh said:

there are alot ways to detect, id and track the target. but issues become area of coverage, multiple detection, and false alarm. back to my parking lot example, if you do the same on a much smaller area, then it take less time and easier to find the object. but if you have alot area to cover and alot detetion occurs which require go through each one, then it require much longer time. also moving object can mess up the current detected database. for example if you detect an oil tanker in grid1, and when the same tanker move to grid X, and your satelite is currently scan in grid X, you have another detection, which need to processed to check is the correct targets, its redundant, waste of resource and time.

Click to expand...

The wave pattern produced by an aircraft carrier at operating speed is highly specific. The fast container carriers of the sixties have been replaced by larger and slower ships so no other large ship comes near the speed of the aircraft carrier.
As for your oil tanker ( a very slow type ) moving from grid 1 to grid X, people have been solving such problems for scores of years.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

NikeX said:

Regarding using aircraft leaving and returning to the carrier, the USN has already prepared tactics that handle that situation. In one case aircraft previously launched from the carrier would return to some large surface ship and go into a landing pattern around this vessel, lets say a large tanker, and then appear to land.

What would really happen is that the aircraft would approach the large vessel and then drop below the radar horizon to skim the waves to fly several hundred miles away to land on the real carrier. There they would land in radio silence or under the control of the E2 to recover aboard the carrier. In fact there is a series of signals that can be relayed to the aircraft attempting recovery via the landing light system (the meatball) and controlled by the LSO to where radio silence is never broken. That and other tactics allow the carrier to perform flight operations right under the nose of an enemy conducting a search for the carrier. I got this from an S-3 pilot.

Click to expand...

Your oil tanker will be much too slow to recover an aircraft so will definitely be recognized as not being the aircraft carrier
sought.

Re: »Ø¸´: The End of the Carrier Age?

s002wjh said:

you can't track ships 24/7 for what 2 yr, 10 yrs.

Click to expand...

Why not?

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

NikeX said:

Just to add a little more to the SAR debate there is the problem of slant range. A distortion can occur. In other words The slant-range distortion occurs because the radar is measuring the distance to target in slant-range rather than the true horizontal distance along the ground. This results in a varying image scale, moving from near to far range. A ship detected near the edge of the SAR of a passing radar satellite might suffer this distortion and misinterpret what it had seen. You can be sure that this weakness would be exploited by the carrier to avoid detection.

Click to expand...

That one means that the picture will have to be corrected to account for the height of the satellite and the curvature of the Earth. Most PC's have video cards well able to handle such calculations.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Elint is also part of equation,

an CV group would give off an distinctive radio traffic, then lets say an refueler tanker.
TACAN and landing aides particular/

the idea is to use multiple means, Elint, SAR, optical on multiple platforms to track a group.

not new and done before with US and Soviet union.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

How will this correction be done? In the world of radar detection this is considered a major problem. The slant range is the length of the skywave path between target and radar, not the distance as measured along the Earth's surface (the so called Down Range). Please explain how you believe the slant range problem will be corrected with a mere PC card. And do not forget both target and in the case of the satellite transmitter are moving

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Since the aircraft carrier can launch and recover aircraft from zero speeds and up, tell us how ship speed will be a factor in detection of the carrier.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

"...an CV group would give off an distinctive radio traffic, then lets say an refueler tanker.
TACAN and landing aides particular..."

You are correct that a carrier battle group does give off a distinctive electronic signature. This opens the door for deceptive measures to where a frigate or other smaller vessel can broadcast that distinctive electronic signature and be sailing on a heading AWAY from the true location of the battle group while the real battle group operates in tight EMCON.