PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

bd popeye said:

No the USN could not send all 12 to sea at once. But last year the USN deployed 7 at once in operation Summer Pulse 2004. USN CV's are constantly being updated. Check that Northrup-Grumman page. All 12 have the same basic capablity. The US has no "second line" active duty forces.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A single missile could not sink a CV unless it was a nuke. Multipule missiles would severly damage a CV but not sink it. In my opinion.

At what cost would the PRC risk to sink a CV? How many losses would the PRC take to possibly sink or damage a CV? The cost would be high. Very high.
How many PLA forces would be nutrelized just to sink a CV?

War Sucks!

Gotta go help my fiance move... Bye 'till tomorrow.

Click to expand...

Sczepan said:

@ Jeff, could you give us a pic without midification of Kiew-Class?

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

dude, thats like the entire modern PLAN.

Click to expand...

bd popeye said:

No the USN could not send all 12 to sea at once. But last year the USN deployed 7 at once in operation Summer Pulse 2004. USN CV's are constantly being updated. Check that Northrup-Grumman page. All 12 have the same basic capablity. The US has no "second line" active duty forces.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A single missile could not sink a CV unless it was a nuke. Multipule missiles would severly damage a CV but not sink it. In my opinion.

At what cost would the PRC risk to sink a CV? How many losses would the PRC take to possibly sink or damage a CV? The cost would be high. Very high.
How many PLA forces would be nutrelized just to sink a CV?

War Sucks!

Gotta go help my fiance move... Bye 'till tomorrow.

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

chinas ot going to loose much if they just keep sitting there and launching missles at the CV. but thats being cheap. most likely the chinese dont have to sink the cvbg, but to damage it, and let it get low on supplies. that may teampt it to leave.

i dont think the u.s would want to put all 12 cvs at china. too risky and pulls em away from iraq...

Click to expand...

chopsticks said:

yes that is one alternative. fact remains that the carrier is a sitting duck with a big bullseye on its forehead, its like Usa putting all her eggs in one basket. CHina's doctrine is different in the sense she believes in spreading out her forces, so even in EMP attack, she won't lose everything. ie 25 smaller ships wont get wiped out as easily as 1 big ship. (of course China still needs some medium/large sized destroyers for ballistics support)

Click to expand...

IDonT said:

Given enough time, all 12 carriers can be fielded simultaneously. PLAN and PLAAF are also under the same constrained. All their forces cannot be concentrated and fielded in short notice and with out proper coordination.

In naval warfare, its not how fast or how far your missile can go, its whether you can see your target. In a war footing, a carrier group can travel up to 500 miles a day, does not radiate active radar other than AEW, and have a battle space radius of about 500 miles. If you are in this radius, you are tracked, classified, and targeted. Chances are, you probably will not know it until a harpoon missile is detected crossing the horizon.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

you know as well as I do America will not send all 12 carriers over against China. I'd say 2 to 3 carrier groups is most likely.

Click to expand...

Sea Dog said:

They will send over how many they deem necessary. They will make that assessment early and deploy what they need based upon strategic and tactical considerations. Neither you nor I know what that number is.

Click to expand...