Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

t_co said:

This doesn't mean it's easy for the USN to hide: it's tough for them, too. My gaming buddy who played as the US side is going to Northwestern on a NROTC scholarship and graduating into the Office of Naval Intelligence this June, so I assume he knows what he's doing. He had to run AWACS out at distant vectors and shuttle flight stations at the outer limits of combat ranges, to make it look like the carrier was somewhere it wasn't; doing that cut down on his sortie rate (by a lot) and also cut down on the loiter time of his CAP, and it made ASW hell for him because he had to sweep the "right" areas of ocean while sweeping enough of the "wrong" areas to keep me guessing. Add on top of this the 'fighter sweeps' of J-11s and J-16s I could throw at him to wear down his AWACS/ASW helos/CAP, and it was a very grim battle indeed.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's exactly my point. The entire purpose of the AShBM is to make carrier groups vulnerable.

If we take a historical analogy, the British were able to sail up and down the coast and attack Qing settlements with impunity during the opium war. In the 20th century, the USN CVBGs posed the same kind of threat against the PRC. The development of the AShBM, along with a host of other technologies, means the PLA is no longer vulnerable to that kind of threat.

t_co said:

The likeliest outcomes were that multiple USN ships would be sunk (including possibly one, two, or even three carriers), the CAP would be depleted, J-20s would be depleted, most Chinese OTH radar sites would be gone, and both sides would call it a day and go home. If the US side was lucky, they could nail an airbase or two, but that was usually exceptionally difficult. OTH radars were much easier to hit because those sites are stationary, very very 'loud' from an electromagnetic perspective, and fragile.

Overally, the C4ISR strain in a high-intensity naval shootout is enormous. Even in the greatly simplified C4ISR model of SCS Fleet Command, my buddy and I had difficulty controlling all our assets properly. I think the PLAN/PLAAF will need to do some serious training to actually get all their tools to work together in the 'right' way. The current quantity and quality of exercises that they're doing is simply not enough to cut it, IMO.

Click to expand...

I wonder if you took into account the costs of those losses? Logistically, it's far easier for China to replace and deploy J-20s than for the US to rebuild a carrier battle group and send it across the Pacific.

This is where cost-benefit analysis will trump nationalist chest-thumping. If the US has a lot to lose and very little to gain in a fight with China, then it will obviously not want to get into a war with China regardless of whether they can win in the end. And *THAT* is the entire point of the PLA's doctrine.

s002wjh said:

at the current tech and military level of china. The odds favor US, not only US has alot assest in that region+allies to asset US navy, but US survilliance, counter Survilliance, EW, experience, search/destroy, ammount of quality hardware are all rank in top. not that CVBG is impossible to fina/track in real time, it just very diffcult due to above reason.

Click to expand...

While the technological odds certainly do favor the US, China has the home turf advantage in any speculated conflict between the two nations.

solarz said:

Yes, that's exactly my point. The entire purpose of the AShBM is to make carrier groups vulnerable.

If we take a historical analogy, the British were able to sail up and down the coast and attack Qing settlements with impunity during the opium war. In the 20th century, the USN CVBGs posed the same kind of threat against the PRC. The development of the AShBM, along with a host of other technologies, means the PLA is no longer vulnerable to that kind of threat.

Click to expand...

Well... you know, the British were able to do that to the Americans during the War of 1812 too--they even burned the White House and Capitol Building. And that was in the face of a half-decent USN. There's nothing to stop the USN from raiding the Chinese coast with airstrikes if the launch platforms were suicidal or the aircraft were refueled with tankers en route--a coastline is typically very hard to defend against raiders.

I wonder if you took into account the costs of those losses? Logistically, it's far easier for China to replace and deploy J-20s than for the US to rebuild a carrier battle group and send it across the Pacific.

This is where cost-benefit analysis will trump nationalist chest-thumping. If the US has a lot to lose and very little to gain in a fight with China, then it will obviously not want to get into a war with China regardless of whether they can win in the end. And *THAT* is the entire point of the PLA's doctrine.

Click to expand...

Not really. Both sides have very little to gain in a fight, since both sides are each other's largest trading partners. The only country that wins if the US and China kick the shit out of each other is Japan.

While the technological odds certainly do favor the US, China has the home turf advantage in any speculated conflict between the two nations.

Click to expand...

It depends. On one hand, China will have a home turf advantage, but on the other hand, core Chinese C4ISR systems will be within range of US strike assets without a counterbalance from the Chinese side. Basically the US, by bringing the fight to China's doorstep, could conceivably hit Zhongnanhai or the command bunkers in Xishan with conventional weapons. China wouldn't be able to hit NORAD or Mt. Weather or Greenbrier or Raven Rock without using nukes.

Some of the factors that I feel are ignored at times in these discussions are;

1) USN/USMC ECM provided by Growlers and Prowlers and Ticos and Arliegh Burke's. Nothing will work right if your gear is queer.
2) The ability of USN sailors to perform damage control and major repairs in a wartime situation.
3) USN submarines i.e. SSN/SSBN & at least one SSGN roam the Pacific virtually at will. What sort of ASW could the PLAN muster against this force??

While the technological odds certainly do favor the US, China has the home turf advantage in any speculated conflict between the two nations.

Click to expand...

Humm? Lets turn the tables. What if the Chinese decided to attack Hawaii and the US Pacific coast. What sort of forces would they face?

asif iqbal said:

as of right now China does not have the capability to track a Carrier strike group, who told you that

do you know how hard it is to even follow anything in real time? very hard, it would be until post 2015 that China will have some sort of real time capability in South China Sea, it will be very much longer before it can penetrate further out, do you know the Chinese military satallite count covering the South China Sea?

Warship magazine had a pretty extensive article on the sea monitoring capabilitys of China last year, lets keep this in prespective

United States Armed Forces is in overdrive when it comes to military satellite constellations, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 10 years have given them massive knowledge and experience in following enemys in real time, China in comparison is at a very early stage

and also in comparison, American Carrier Strike Groups also carry out satellite evading tatics and have done for decades to evade Soviet/Russian spy satellites, new Ford Class has extremely low electronic emissions and a whole array of stealth at sea tatics, the chances of finding a USN Carrier group is next to zero in the vast Pacific

Click to expand...

I have advise for you unless you have firm handle on the subject you are posting Please refrain from making nonsense and unsubstantiated post. You just embarrassed yourself with your ignorance.Other than spouting bias from drinking too much Koolaid do some reading

Chinese space capabilities has been researched and publish by respectable publication for a long time. Read the latest article from;
As far as Satellite surveillance and intelligence China is not that far off from US capability







Visit Sean website

Read the hundred pages of thread China space program and news
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/strategic-defense/chinas-space-program-news-views-105-1143.html

hinese Long March delivers trio of Spy Satellites to Orbit
November 25, 2012
Picture
Photo: ChinaNews.com
Picture
Photo: ChinaNews.com

A Chinese Long March 4C launch vehicle blasted off from the Jiquan Satellite Launch Center, Gansu Province, at 4:06 UTC on Sunday, November 25, 2012 on a mission to deliver the Yaogan Weixing 16 satellites to orbit.

The Yaogan Weixing Satellite Fleet consists of remote sensing spacecraft that either carry optical or Synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) payloads. According to Chinese Officials, the Yaogan Satellite Constellation is used for scientific experiments, land survey, crop yield assessment, and disaster monitoring. However, it is believed that the satellite system serves military purposes.

This launch orbited three Yaogan Satellites, 16A, 16B and 16C. Details on the spacecraft and their respective payloads have not been given. Three Yaogan Spacecraft were also launched by a CZ-4C back in 2009. This satellite trio included a SAR, an optical satellite and, per western analysts, an ELINT satellite (electronic intelligence). The Yaogan 9 satellites entered a highly choreographed, triangular constellation in a 1,080 by 1,100-Kilometer Orbit at an inclination of 63.4 degrees - resembling the US NOSS triplets that were used for ELINT purposes until being replaced by duos of NOSS (Naval Ocean Surveillance System) starting to be launched in 2001. USSTRATCOM has catalogued the first object related to this launch in a 1,085 by 1,105-Kilometer Orbit with an inclination of 63.39 degrees - confirming that the Yaogan 16 trio is similar to Yaogan 9 and NOSS. Another clue was the payload fairing used on the Long March 4C which was also used in 2009 for Yaogan 9.

The real purpose of the satellites is likely to locate and track warships by acquiring their optical signatures and radio transmissions.

Totoro said:

Satellites are not used for such kind of monitoring. They could be used for it, in theory, but in practice it would be a waste of resources most of the time as keeping an eye over one part of the ocean is not even remotely what they were made to do. After soviet Legenda system no one tried to do such monitoring via satellites, even though the technology went forward since then. And of course, short of hearsay and myths no one will ever know just how efficient or inefficient Legenda would have been. I am not talking just about the satellites themselves but the whole system - number of sats in storage, launch rate potential etc.

Satellites for such monitoring fly relatively low orbits. At best they will need 90 minutes to do an orbit, or more. And when they do complete an orbit, it will not be over the same place over earth but 200-300 km away. Then some 100+ orbits later, they will repeat the pattern and fly over the same spot. Some seven days later. That is the best one can hope to get with such satellites.

To have a refreshed image of an area every 45 minutes or so, even assuming the satellites have such side looking resolution to cover 500-600 km swaths at a time, one would have to have over a hundred satellites for such role. Perhaps an update every 45 minutes is unnecessary. Perhaps one every six hours is enough. We're still talking about 30 satellites for that role alone.

No country even has remotely such a number of imaging (radar or optical) satellites operational. Most countries that do have them have small constellations of 3-4 such satellites. US has at most one dozen, optical and radar combined. Rocket launches are tracked, and most are known what they are. Those that aren't known, if we assume they are imaging satellites, come to a dozen platforms for US.

And yes, satellites can be redirected a lot but then their lifespan drops from a decade to under a year. Even just months in some cases of the Legenda system.

Click to expand...

I don't know where were you all this time In the last 3 years China averages about 20 launches per year assuming 90% are for domestic use You have 18 satellite and most of them are dual use military and civilian.

China has been launching satellite since 1970 So yes they have more than 100 dual purpose satellite by now

You are wrong about the number of surveillance satellite, Just Weixing yaogan series alone which is dedicated military satellite there are about 18 of them Not counting other military satellites like Shijian and Haiying.

Satellite can have 200-300 km sweep with no problem orbit . The average life modern satellite is 5- 8 years. And there is such a thing as changing orbit and satellite guidance. Yes they can be steered to sweep certain spot

Read this article


Long March 4C launches Yaogan Weixing-16 spy satellite for China
November 25, 2012 by Rui C. Barbosa

Following the postponement of the Zhongxing-12 (ChinaSat) communications satellite launch, the Chinese kept up their impressive launch pace with the lofting of the Yaogan Weixing-16 satellite by a Long March (Chang Zheng) 4C rocket on Sunday. The launch took place at 4:06am UTC from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center.

Chinese Launch:

Chinese media refer to the new satellite as a new remote sensing bird that will be used for scientific experiments, land survey, crop yield assessment, and disaster monitoring. As was the case with previous launches of the Yaogan Weixing series, western analysts believe this class of satellites is being used for military purposes.
See Also

Chinese Forum Section
65 Launch Vehicle Manuals (L2)
Click here to Join L2

In particular this mission is similar to the Yaogan Weixing-9, with three satellites flying in formation in a type of NOSS system. Being similar to the YG-9 mission, the triplet comprises an electro-optical surveillance satellite, an synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellite, and possibly a electronic/signal intelligence satellite.

Designed for location and tracking of foreign warships, the satellites will collect optical and radio electronic signatures of the maritime vessels that will be used in conjunction with other information valuable for the Chinese maritime forces.

This was the 172nd successful Chinese orbital launch, the 172nd launch of a Chang Zheng launch vehicle, the 55th successful orbital launch from Jiuquan and the fourth from Taiyuan this year. It was also the 17th successful orbital Chinese launch in 2012.

Looking back to the Yaogan Weixing launch series:

The first Yaogan Weixing satellite (29092 2006-015A) was launched by a Chang Zheng-4C (Y1) from the Taiyuan Satellite Launch Center on April 27, 2006. Developed by Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology (SAST), the details about this satellite were closely guarded, but later it was said that this was the first Jianbing-5 satellite, equipped with the first space-based synthetic aperture radar (SAR).

The second satellite on the series, the Yaogan Weixing-2 (31490 2007-019A), was launched on 25 May, 2007, by a Chang Zheng-2D (Y8) from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center. Details were also restricted, though it is claimed that this spacecraft is an electro-optical military observation satellite also known as JB-6 Jianbing-6, complementing the results of the Yaogan Weixing-1.

Another SAR mission similar to Yaogan-1 was launched on November 11, 2007 – with the Yaogan Weixing-3 (32289 2007-055A) satellite orbited by a Chang Zheng-4C (Y3) launch vehicle from Taiyuan.

Yaogan Weixing-4 (33446 2008-061A) was then launched on December 1, 2008. This was the second electro-optical satellite on the series and was launched by a Chang Zheng-2D (Y9) from Jiuquan.

Other satellite in the Jianbing-6 series were Yaogan Wexing-7 (36110 2009-069A), launched on December 9, 2009 from Jiuquan by a Chang Zheng-2D (Y10), and Yaogan Weixing-11 (37165 2010-047A) launched on September 22, 2010, by the Chang Zheng-2D (Y11) launch vehicle from Jiuquan.

The first second-generation electro-optical reconnaissance satellite developed by CAST, Yaogan Weixing-5 (33456 2008-064A), was launched on December 15, 2008. The launch took place from Taiyuan by the Chang Zheng-4B (Y20) rocket.

Yaogan Weixing-12 (37875 2011-066B) was other second-generation electro-optical reconnaissance satellite, launched on November 11, 2011, by the Chang Zheng-4B (Y21) launch vehicle from Taiyuan.

Yaogan Weixing-6 (34839 2009-021A), launched by a Chang Zheng-2C-III (Y19) from Taiyuan on April 22, 2009, was a second-generation SAR satellite developed by SAST, having a spatial resolution of 1.5m.

Other second-generation SAR satellites were the Yaogan Weixing-10 (36834 2010-038A) launch on August 9, 2010, by the Chang Zheng-4C (Y6) launch vehicle from Taiyuan; and the Yaogan Weixing-13 (37941 2011-072A) launch on November 29, 2011, by the Chang Zheng-2C (Y20) launch vehicle from Taiyuan.

The Yaogan Weixing-8 (36121 2009-072A), launched on December 15, 2009, by the CZ-4C (Y4) from Taiyuan was a new generation of optical reconnaissance satellite. Similar to the Yaogan-8 was the mission of Yaogan Weixing-14 launched on May 10th, 2012 by the Chang Zheng-4B (Y12) from Taiyuan.

The YaoGan Weixing-9 mission, launched March 5, 2010 from Jiuquan, had an architecture different from the previous missions on the series. Launched by Chang Zheng-4C (Y5) rocket, the mission put not one but a triplet of satellites in Earth orbit. Flying in formation this three satellites form what looks like a type of NOSS system.

The Yaogan Wrinxing-15 was a optical reconnaissance satellite launched on May 29, 2012 by the Chang Zheng-4C (Y10) from Taiyuan. The launch used a Long March 4C (Chang Zheng-4C) launch vehicle, an optimized version of the Long March 4B (Chang Zheng-4B), using an upper stae with restart capability and a new interstage adapter between the first and second stages. This vehicle also used a 3.35m diameter fairing for the Yaogan 15 ride uphill.

Launch Vehicle and Launch Site:

With its main commonality matched to the Long March 4B, the first stage has a 24.65 meter length with a 3.35 meter diameter, consuming 183,340 kg of N2O4/UDMH (gross mass of first stage is 193.330 kg).

The vehicle is equipped with a YF-21B engine capable of a ground thrust of 2,971 kN and a ground specific impulse of 2,550 Ns/kg. The second stage has a 10.40 meter length with a 3.35 meter diameter and 38,326 kg, consuming 35,374 kg of N2O4/UDMH.

It includes a YF-22B main engine capable of a vacuum thrust of 742 kN and four YF-23B vernier engines with a vacuum thrust of 47.1 kN (specific impulses of 2,922 Ns/kg and 2,834 Ns/kg, respectively).

The third stage has a 4.93 meter length with a 2.9 meter diameter, consuming 12,814 kg of N2O4/UDMH. Having a gross mass of 14,560 kg, it is equipped with a YF-40 engine capable of a vacuum thrust of 100.8 kN and a specific impulse in vacuum of 2,971 Ns/kg.

The Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center, in Ejin-Banner – a county in Alashan League of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region – was the first Chinese satellite launch center and is also known as the Shuang Cheng Tze launch center.

The site includes a Technical Centre, two Launch Complexes, Mission Command and Control Centre, Launch Control Centre, propellant fuelling systems, tracking and communication systems, gas supply systems, weather forecast systems, and logistic support systems.

Jiuquan was originally used to launch scientific and recoverable satellites into medium or low earth orbits at high inclinations. It is also the place from where all the Chinese manned missions are launched.

Presently, only the LC-43 launch complex, also known by South Launch Site (SLS) is in use. This launch complex is equipped with two launch pads: 921 and 603. Launch pad 921 is used for the manned program for the launch of the Chang Zheng-2F launch vehicle (Shenzhou and Tiangong). The 603 launch pad is used for unmanned orbital launches by the Chang Zheng-2C, Chang Zheng-2D and Chang Zheng-2C launch vehicles.

The first orbital launch took place on April 24, 1970 when the CZ-1 Chang Zheng-1 (CZ1-1) rocket launched the first Chinese satellite, the Dongfanghong-1 (04382 1970-034A).

(Images via Chinanews.cn, Twitter and Unknown Public Domain Source

bd popeye said:

Humm? Lets turn the tables. What if the Chinese decided to attack Hawaii and the US Pacific coast. What sort of forces would they face?

Click to expand...

That's something very few people have thought about, I think. But any attacking force would first have to get past the "Second Island Chain" as I believe the Chinese call it, and of course Guam. And, seeing as China doesn't actually have a blue-water navy quite yet (maybe in two decades?) such a scenario seems far-fetched at best.

But if they did, they'd first have to contend with our subs and carriers. While China's coastal defense batteries are nothing to sneeze at, the US doesn't really have such a thing on our shores. What we do have are dozens of carriers. The eleven supercarriers and around twenty smaller USMC carriers for F-35s and Harriers, plus the ten or so super and "small" carriers in various stages of mothballing around the US (which, I would assume, would be quickly pushed into service in such a dire situation). The airpower flying off of these carriers, plus B-1Bs/B-2As/B-52Hs carrying cruise missiles in bulk, would be a formidable barrier to everything from Near Earth Orbit all the way down to several hundred feet beneath the sea. Add to this our submarine fleet, and you have an extremely tough defense.

Still, the Chinese having the capability to challenge the US on our own shores in the near future is a wishful thinking senario. Although it's far more realistic than that Red Dawn remake.

Hendrik_2000 said:

I don't know where were you all this time In the last 3 years China averages about 20 launches per year assuming 90% are for domestic use You have 18 satellite and most of them are dual use military and civilian.

China has been launching satellite since 1970 So yes they have more than 100 dual purpose satellite by now

Click to expand...

The US has been at war for the past decade... actually longer. We've used military satellites to hunt down terrorists and the like for all of that time. I've actually read up on China's space rising space launch capabilities, and they are indeed coming close to the US and Europe in some areas. But the fact that China has plenty of surveillance sats isn't really the point. the point is that we, the US, have been targeting some very hard to find bad guys with drones and satellites for a long time- in actual war. We've made plenty of mistakes, killed civilians, missed targets, and even commited fratricide in that time with those assets- but we learned from said mistakes, and now use the drones and space systems better than anyone else in the world because of simple hard-fought bled-for experience. Something which China doesn't have.

FirstImpulse said:

The US has been at war for the past decade... actually longer. We've used military satellites to hunt down terrorists and the like for all of that time. I've actually read up on China's space rising space launch capabilities, and they are indeed coming close to the US and Europe in some areas. But the fact that China has plenty of surveillance sats isn't really the point. the point is that we, the US, have been targeting some very hard to find bad guys with drones and satellites for a long time- in actual war. We've made plenty of mistakes, killed civilians, missed targets, and even commited fratricide in that time with those assets- but we learned from said mistakes, and now use the drones and space systems better than anyone else in the world because of simple hard-fought bled-for experience. Something which China doesn't have.

Click to expand...

So you're saying the US has better people than China because they have had ample experience in looking at satellite pictures whereas China does not. Ummm... is finding a bunch of RPG's on the back of donkey in the middle of an Afghan mountain the sort of scenario China would encounter when looking for an entire fleet of warships? I'm pretty sure that China can also train its analysts to look at pictures of RPG's on donkeys too if they want, in fact, they probably do. Your hypothesis of US superiority because US analysts looked at more satellite pictures than Chinese analysts is quite preposterous to be honest. If your point was that China has inferior satellite capabilities due to technological constraints, then that might be more plausible. However, you have no way of knowing how many satellite pictures an average Chinese analyst looks at and how that compares to US analysts.

bd popeye said:

Humm? Lets turn the tables. What if the Chinese decided to attack Hawaii and the US Pacific coast. What sort of forces would they face?

Click to expand...

It would be a completely different scenario. The USN has the ability to cut off the supply line of any attacking Chinese force. The Chinese do not have the ability to do that. Therefore, different strategies apply.

solarz said:

While the technological odds certainly do favor the US, China has the home turf advantage in any speculated conflict between the two nations.

Click to expand...

well, the whole point was for china to search & cripple CVBG, that means china has to send out its UAV/sub to look for CVBG, in that case there is not much home turf advantage. the advantage occur only if CVBG/US craft are within certain distance of china. you could argue UAV/AWAC doesn't need to be on carriers in order to lunch, china can send more. but US has advantage of assets in the region as well, its not like US only rely on CVBG for its intel, tracking etc.