Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Engineer said:

China hasn't demonstrated the capability to launch its ICBMs and hits US either, but that doesn't mean the capability doesn't exist. Likewise, a lack of a full range test is not a lack of capability.

Click to expand...

For the ICBM's they do not need, of course, to do a test hitting the US...that would mean all out war. But they did do live fire tests hitting target many thousands of km away and proved they could do so within whatever CIP they found acceptable.

Utlimately, they will do the same with with the anti-shipping ballistic missile , hitting a moving target far out to sea that is manuevering and mimicking the role the missile is designed for as much as possible...just like they and the US and Russia and everyone else has done with their ICBMs...to prove to themselves that all the investment works and is a credible program for deterrence and defense.

Finally, there was a very good Q&A session with the US Navy, where the Deputy Chief of operations responded to questions from Bloomberg about Admiral Willard's statement.

Bloomberg said:

1. Does the US Navy agree with ADM Willard’s view that the Chinese have reached Initial Operational Capability (IOC) with the DF 21D?

Answer: The U.S. Navy agrees with Admiral Willard’s characterization of the DF-21D as IOC. China has developed a workable design for an antiship ballistic missile. However, several definitions of IOC used by U.S. agencies include the requirement that an operational unit be capable of effectively employing the system in question. The U.S. Navy does not believe this is the case for China and the DF-21D.

2. Do the Chinese have the C2, satellite links, and other systems in place and operational to potentially employ the missile?

Answer: China likely has the space based intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), command and control structure, and ground processing capabilities necessary to support DF-21D employment. China operates a wide spectrum of satellites which can provide data useful for targeting within its maritime region. China employs an array of non-space based sensors and surveillance assets capable of providing the targeting information necessary to employ the DF-21D.

3. How effective can it be if it has not been flight tested?

Answer: It is unknown to us, and probably the Chinese, as to how effective the missile will be without a full-scale test.

4. Has the satellite and command and control system needed to cue the weapon been IOC’d? If not, any sense of how many more years?

Answer: Yes, the satellite C2 systems are likely in place.

5. Does N2 assess that the missile itself, without the satellite cuing system, is a threat to Navy carriers and other vessels?

Answer: Yes, China’s non-space based ISR could provide the necessary information to support DF-21D employment. This includes aircraft, UAVs, fishing boats, and over-the-horizon radar for ocean surveillance and targeting.

Click to expand...

I agree with the Navy's response and myself feel that an initial IOC for China without any full scale flight test is premature and probably not going to approach FOC until that telling phase of development is complete.

The fact is, until they do such testing, their level of confidence will not be as high as it otherwise could and should be. I believe such testing will occur and look forward to the day whne we can analyze such testing and get a real feel for the effectiveness of the current technology.

Clearly, again, even when done, this system charges hard into the teeth of the strongest defense the carrier has, it's AEGIS anti-missile system, which has been specifically tested, numerous times against ballistic missiles of various types, and according to the US Navy, with varying levels of manueverability.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

NikeX said:

NikeX I guess you have preconception that somehow China is only good at copying Russian design You need to brush up on your knowledge about Chinese electronic One way of knowing the state of industry is socalled trade show Where electronic manufacturer show their hardware and China is no exception CIDEX is the biggest trade show of Chinese electronic

The Chinese air defense systems today are all based upon Russian designs. This is a fact. Someday in the future China will be able to produce her own indigenous designs based upon her own requirements. In the meantime, the Chinese military forces are playing catch-up in systems and tactics

Click to expand...

There are plenty of counter examples showing that Chinese air defense systems today are not all based on Russian designs. This is especially true with regard to sensors.

NikeX said:

Actually the X-47 does not have to penetrate that far into the Chinese air defense network. Since the ASBM is coming to kill the carrier, all the UAV and other platforms have to do is position themselves along the likely route of travel and intercept the missile when it is most vulnerable - the boost stage. Since the X-47 knows the location of the carrier, all other missiles can be ignored.

A refined AIM-54 Phoenix missile or Russian Novator K-100 could both do the job of intercepting a boosting missile.

At the very least the X-47 platform could give early warning of a launch and cue other defenses on where to pick up the incoming missile. At least that's how I would play it. Does that sound logical?

Click to expand...

Putting aside the question of range, and how an X-47 would be able to penetrate an integrated air defense system that already has some anti-stealth capabilities, it is extremely questionable that an AAM would have enough speed to catch up to and intercept a ballistic missile, unless the X-47 is on top of the launch site already.

The detection of ground-based TEL is more difficult than that of detecting an aircraft carrier in the ocean. A satellite has the advantage of altitude, coupled with large active phase array radar, can provide a large footprint. An aircraft doesn't fly as high, has volume and power constraints that severs limit the capability of the on-board radar, which in turn limits the coverage. Should the aircraft flies low to evade radar, the coverage would be even smaller. Finally, unlike an open ocean, there will be a lot of ground clutters that will obscure some ground targets.

You try to argue that detecting an aircraft carrier on the ocean is impossible, yet when the table is turned and the problem becomes much much more difficult, you think it would be easy. I think this illustrates the mentality you have -- that US weapons are magical while Chinese weapons are utter crap, which fits with the stereotypical characteristics of a naysayer.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

AssassinsMace said:

And the Iranians downed a sophisticated stealth UAV. Yeah and one can say it was a malfuction and had nothing to do with anything Iran was doing. And another person can say stealth isn't what it's cracked up to be whether it's a UAV or a fighter. And I'm saying is no one really knows including you. Because if the Iranians did electronically down the UAV, that says a lot how stealthy it wasn't and how easily a UAV can be affected by electronic warfare. It's all called hype.

Click to expand...

You are basing your conclusions on facts not in evidence. At this point we do not know under what circumstances this UAV was downed. Lets wait and see how things develop and watch as more facts are revealed.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Bltizo said:

The point is to destroy the TELs if you already know where they are, before they can actually fire their missiles but okay then.



The problem is that you have no idea where the launchers are in the first place, they could be just off the coast or they're a few hundred kms well inside the IADS.
satellites and early warning radars could probably pick up the launch, and the uav's own sensors may be able to as well that will makeit easier for any aegis ships between the TEL and the CVBG to try and shoot it down mid course. But the uav shootin off missiles to try and get it in boost phase? yeah, nah.

Click to expand...

At the very least they can detect the launch of the DF-21 and that added warning time is golden for a carrier under attack

A novel... and unnecessary way. I think I've already mentioned some challenges of such an approach already but i'll do so again anyway
-The fact TELs can be virtually stationed anywhere in the chinese mainland
-Your UAVs, even stealthy, will need to venture a good distance through said mainland's IADS...
-...If your UAVs know where to go in the first place because the TELs could be anywhere.
-Then there's the challenge of whether your A2A missile will be able to cross the distance between the boosting missile and the relatively slow flying UAV... assuming they can penetrate the IADS in the first place.

Click to expand...

They can. This is what X-47 is being designed for

-Need to develop an entiely new, larger UAV to fly from carriers in the first place (larger because of h[eavier avionics for A2A, missiles, and more importantly fuel because the current X-47B's range is hardly enough for the mission we're talking about).

Click to expand...

The stated range of the UAV seems to be enough plus the X-47 is being designed to be re-fueled in flight

I think we've deviated from the original point. You said X-47B could be a counter to AShBM. The fact there are no plans for X-47B to be equipped for A2A role makes the point moot. If it's possible, the point is mooter because X-47B's combat radius at the moment is barely enough to cross AShBM range for strike, never mind A2A.

Click to expand...

The thinking is 'could'. However there are at least two missiles with the range to close with an aircraft operating in defended airspace and these are the retired Phoenix and the Russian Novator K-100.... it is a Russian air-to-air missile designed as an "AWACS killer"[4] at ranges up to 200km

The same UAVs whose missiles you want to take out a ballistic missile in the boost phase? Completely different kettle of fish, shooting a target from boost and a target already in flight, exoatmospheric. (possibly partially exo, we've heard things about weird mid course maneovers to fool defences or something). You'll need a pretty high flying uav to shoot that down, and you're basically getting to space war by then.

Click to expand...

As you said about A2A missiles shooting down boosting missiles, the same could be said about mid course manuevers of these proposed ASBMs. Until tested know one knows what is happening.

Not sure what your obsession is with stealthy uavs; it's just complicating the defence. All the jobs you're proposing can be done by existing US military assets. This one in particular can be done by leaving aegis ships between the coast and the cvbg.

Click to expand...

X-47 is the next wave. Just posting the news on where carrier aviation is heading. Besides as the saying goes...Drones are fearless

But before I close this out can you tell me why the US Navy is working on X-47 type UAVs that are designed to fly off of carriers. What is your idea why they are putting all this time and money to develop these carrier borne UAVs?

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

NikeX said:

You are basing your conclusions on facts not in evidence. At this point we do not know under what circumstances this UAV was downed. Lets wait and see how things develop and watch as more facts are revealed.

Click to expand...

And you're basing what you believe on assumptions. None of it has been tested in real world combat situations. So how would you know? Because of the "facts" you read on paper?

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Engineer said:

There are plenty of counter examples showing that Chinese air defense systems today are not all based on Russian designs. This is especially true with regard to sensors.



Putting aside the question of range, and how an X-47 would be able to penetrate an integrated air defense system that already has some anti-stealth capabilities, it is extremely questionable that an AAM would have enough speed to catch up to and intercept a ballistic missile, unless the X-47 is on top of the launch site already.

Click to expand...

Even these missiles are credited with a long range anti-AWACS mission including the Chinese YJ-91. Range is not a limitations for killing a platform at long range. Intercepting ballistic missiles are easiest during the boost phase.

"...Three strategies are possible for interception of ballistic missiles. Boost phase intercept sees the slow moving and highly visible by exhaust plume missile attacked, midcourse phase intercept sees the warhead and if attached, final stage attacked at the apex of its trajectory, and terminal phase intercept involves engagement of the warhead section as it dives on the target. ..." This is according to Dr Carlo Kopp, SMAIAA, MIEEE, PEng
July 2008

You try to argue that detecting an aircraft carrier on the ocean is impossible, yet when the table is turned and the problem becomes much much more difficult, you think it would be easy. I think this illustrates the mentality you have -- that US weapons are magical while Chinese weapons are utter crap, which fits with the stereotypical characteristics of a naysayer.

Click to expand...

You must have me confused with someone else as I believe detection is relatively easy. The hard part is maintaining a track on the carrier. That is the real meat of the problem. And since I seem to have stepped on your toes I wish to apologize and refrain from offending your sensitive feelings. Lets drop this subject and move to something else

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

AssassinsMace said:

And you're basing what you believe on assumptions. None of it has been tested in real world combat situations. So how would you know? Because of the "facts" you read on paper?

Click to expand...

Regarding the downing of this drone over Iran there is nothing anyone knows for sure. Until the Iranians make more details available its all speculation

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

I found this interesting bit of video on the detection of an missile launch by an F-35. Take it for what it is worth



The U-Tube video is remarkable

F-35 JSF infrared sensor tracks rocket launch - YouTube

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

NikeX said:

Even these missiles are credited with a long range anti-AWACS mission including the Chinese YJ-91. Range is not a limitations for killing a platform at long range. Intercepting ballistic missiles are easiest during the boost phase.

"...Three strategies are possible for interception of ballistic missiles. Boost phase intercept sees the slow moving and highly visible by exhaust plume missile attacked, midcourse phase intercept sees the warhead and if attached, final stage attacked at the apex of its trajectory, and terminal phase intercept involves engagement of the warhead section as it dives on the target. ..." This is according to Dr Carlo Kopp, SMAIAA, MIEEE, PEng
July 2008

Click to expand...

First, anti-AWAC missiles has nothing to do with ABM. An AWAC is a slow flying target, whereas a ballistic missile (even in boost phase) is not. Secondly, whether a ballistic missile is easier to kill in boost phase than others does not address the question of feasibility on using an AAM to intercept a ballistic missile. Again, it is questionable that the speed of the AAM is fast enough to catch up to and intercept a ballistic missile, even in boost phase, unless the launch platform is on top of the launching zone.

NikeX said:

You must have me confused with someone else as I believe detection is relatively easy. The hard part is maintaining a track on the carrier. That is the real meat of the problem. And since I seem to have stepped on your toes I wish to apologize and refrain from offending your sensitive feelings. Lets drop this subject and move to something else

Click to expand...

The real meat is that hard does not equate to impossible. The difficulties you and another member have listed can be overcomed by increasing the number of sensing platforms, which China is currently doing.

And again, if you didn't assume US weapons as magical while Chinese weapons to only have appearance and filled with cement, you wouldn't expect a more difficult problem to be cakewalk just because the US does it. Ditto for expecting proof of Chinese capabilities to the n-th degree while not having the same expectation for US's weaponaries. Ditto for expecting Chinese integrated air defense to be easily penetrable eventhough China pretty much has the land equivalents of Aegis combat system. I am simply making an observation here.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Regarding Ocean Surveillance satellites this bit of history might prove educational