1. It really depends on what kind of preemptive strike policy china will settle on. This can not be known, it'd be pure espionage and politics. In theory, it is possible that china would be sure that US would intervene in a massive way. IF you're sure that's gonna happen, then nothing is stopping you from striking first - at okinawa (and other bases in japan), gathering ground forces around afghanistan and north korea, ready to move in if needed, striking guam if possible. Also, it'd mean that any US ship just approaching china would be attacked when chinese deem its possible. That would make it sure US would not risk trickling in their CVBGs as soon as they can get them to theater but that US would wait to group 4-6 CVBGs for a simultaneous strike.
Of course, all this written above is a highly risky political move which could turn china into the agressor against US, not the other way around. Longterm costs could easely outweigh the short term benefits of such early strikes - all depending on the info of what real US plans would be. In my opinion, china would not strike US first, unless it is very obvious a US attack is imminent - numerous additional USAF squadrons being sent to japan would be such a signal.
2. I don't have any inside info like you, sea dog, might have so i'm just writing what USN said in its official papers. And that is that, under the new battle plan, 6 CVBGs will be sent to the pacific area, with 4 of them being able to engage in a war within a week. I would assume one or two more CVBGs from the gulf area / mediterranean could be redirected in the same time frame. So this is my assesment: one CVBG within 24 hours, 3 groups within 72 hours, 5-6 groups within a week, 7-8 groups within a month.
It really does depend on the time of china's choosing. They may plan the whole ordeal to begin at the moment which maximizes the time USN needs to get a good deal of their boats to the theater. Out of 12 carriers that could be called into service, at least three are undergoing maintenance at any given time. 1-2 more are in their post-deployment cycle. 1-2 more training for their next deployment cycle. Maximal theoretical number of carriers USN could deploy is, in my opion, 8. With 6 being more realistic number, since time is and will always be of the essence, and USN will probably choose not to wait for a month to gather more than 6 CVBGs.
3. It is silly to talk about the future. In my opinion it is in US interest for the conflict to happen earlier rather than later, if there is gonna be a conflict. Looking at long term, the capability gap has been diminishing and will continue to diminish. Navy JSF won't form the first active squadron before 2012-2013. Who knows what sort of stuff US or China will have active then. So lets please lay off the future talk and concentrate on 2006.
Of course, all this written above is a highly risky political move which could turn china into the agressor against US, not the other way around. Longterm costs could easely outweigh the short term benefits of such early strikes - all depending on the info of what real US plans would be. In my opinion, china would not strike US first, unless it is very obvious a US attack is imminent - numerous additional USAF squadrons being sent to japan would be such a signal.
2. I don't have any inside info like you, sea dog, might have so i'm just writing what USN said in its official papers. And that is that, under the new battle plan, 6 CVBGs will be sent to the pacific area, with 4 of them being able to engage in a war within a week. I would assume one or two more CVBGs from the gulf area / mediterranean could be redirected in the same time frame. So this is my assesment: one CVBG within 24 hours, 3 groups within 72 hours, 5-6 groups within a week, 7-8 groups within a month.
It really does depend on the time of china's choosing. They may plan the whole ordeal to begin at the moment which maximizes the time USN needs to get a good deal of their boats to the theater. Out of 12 carriers that could be called into service, at least three are undergoing maintenance at any given time. 1-2 more are in their post-deployment cycle. 1-2 more training for their next deployment cycle. Maximal theoretical number of carriers USN could deploy is, in my opion, 8. With 6 being more realistic number, since time is and will always be of the essence, and USN will probably choose not to wait for a month to gather more than 6 CVBGs.
3. It is silly to talk about the future. In my opinion it is in US interest for the conflict to happen earlier rather than later, if there is gonna be a conflict. Looking at long term, the capability gap has been diminishing and will continue to diminish. Navy JSF won't form the first active squadron before 2012-2013. Who knows what sort of stuff US or China will have active then. So lets please lay off the future talk and concentrate on 2006.
I'm also going by open source info. I'm also just going by what I know from experience, and from looking at sites like navy.mil and such. Just like everyone else here. But I do know USN CSG's and SSN's are at a very high state of readiness right now. And they all have a very high ops tempo as well. The deployment of 7 CSG's last year was specifically intended to show that USN CSG's can amass on scene incredibly fast if needed nowadays.
