Carrier killers (an article from JED online)

**rickusn** · 29 Jan 06, 22:28

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

According to Rick USN and some other sailors i'm friendly with US soft kill(ie ECM) systems are very effective.

I dunno if I ever said that if I did I dont now have any documentation to back it up.

OTOH I have related that effectively targeting ant-ship missles is problematic especially as you increase the range.

The USN is not even putting harpoon on the new Burkes.

It appears that the wepon of choice for surface combatants is the Standard SAM missle.

Not really a ship killer. But apparently an effective mission killer.

Longer ranged attacks would be carried out by aircraft.

Submarines too are in the mix of attacking enemy surface combatants far from the battlegroup.

USN Surface Combatants simply are not seen by the USN to be used for long-range attacks vs enemy surface combatants. Or at least so it appears.

Strike/AAW/ASW are their primary missions with the exception of the OHP's and weve already discussed them in another thread.

ASW took a back seat for awhile after the end of the cold-war. Renewed interest of late is revitalizing the USN's capabilities.

**lurker** · 29 Jan 06, 22:41

Originally Posted by rickusn

While Im sure theoretically Sunburn could be used against a carrier

Yes, theoretically it could.

... But assured required expedenture (or how it is in engl.) to sink it is around 70 missiles

**rickusn** · 29 Jan 06, 23:17

"But assured required expedenture (or how it is in engl.) to sink it is around 70 missiles "
__________________

Thats reassuring!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL

**Bill** · 30 Jan 06, 01:58

Originally Posted by rickusn

I dunno if I ever said that if I did I dont now have any documentation to back it up.

You did, here on WAB.

If you REALLY want me too i can hunt it down, would take a while...but it's out there.

**Bill** · 30 Jan 06, 01:59

Originally Posted by lurker

Yes, theoretically it could.

... But assured required expedenture (or how it is in engl.) to sink it is around 70 missiles

Expenditure.

**rickusn** · 30 Jan 06, 02:36

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

You did, here on WAB.

If you REALLY want me too i can hunt it down, would take a while...but it's out there.

Dont go to too much effort. Its not a real big deal. But if you come across it I would like to re-read it to refresh memory. I d like to know what I used for sources and documentation. Or in what context I included the assumption.

You know I dont like to make statements unless I have some material to back them up.

Im sure Ive stated that the USN has countermeasures available but "very effective" I can only hope I think.

Although it is possible I do have info around here to make that claim. I just for the life of me cant remember where I have it and/or found it.

Like I said if its not too much trouble refresh my memory. Im going to try on this end although not particularly hard. Unless of course it keeps me from sleeping.

**Bill** · 30 Jan 06, 05:38

Here ya go, it was in response to some of the wabsters babbling on about some of the new supersonic sea skimmers and how vulnerable the USN is:

Missiles and ranking

My post:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

ESSM and RAM both exist specifically because of missiles like Brahmos.

The threat hasn't even finished fielding Brahmos, and the USN has already identified the weakness, designed and tested the neccesary defensive systems, and integegrated and fielded them in the fleet.

The RIM-162 ESSM and RIM-116 RAM are the USNs answer to Brahmos, Sunburn, and all the other worldbeater missiles around the world.

A single Arliegh Burke DDG Aegis guided missile destroyer can embark as many as 360 Mach 4+ 60g ESSM missiles in it's VLS cells, and perform as many as 16 simultaneous intercepts with the state of the art medium range ESSM and Mk7 Aegis system. ESSM was designed from the ground up as a missile killer, as was RAM.

Brahmos and Sunburn are still a threat, but the USN has made sure it's a threat they're fully prepared to deal with.

PS: Both ESSM and Block1 RAM have an anti-ship/anti-surface capability as well.

Your response:

Originally Posted by rickusn

Sniper is correct. But thats just the "hard kill" part. The USN has a plethora of "soft kill" systems.

Plus the fact that the USNs doctrine is to "kill the shooter" before he fires. And they have the capability to do that. And/or screw up their targeting, which isnt to do easy in the first place(M21: I assumed you meant OTH targetting wrt that sentence).

But what do I know Im just a fork-lift driver. LOL

Yup. And Christ was only a carpenter. LOL

Bring it on I say. The world apparently needs yet another lesson.

And we may be soft but we arent yet melting. LOL

Notice the small scratches the USN has received via AshM, mines or small boat attacks have been acknowledged and rectified accordlingly. Notice again that the USN pays attention and changes to situations and threats.

Steeped in tradition yes but ever-changing with no fear as an institution irregardless of any individual or individuals who from time to time hold power.

Its amazing to me how critical of the USN I have been in my life(even after serving for four years) and somehow you people force me to defend the institution.

Boggles my mind. LOL

GOD bless Snow.

**leolover** · 30 Jan 06, 07:37

how would aegis-equipped escorts with sm-2, ram and essm compete with threats like mach 5 misslies?

could missiles like HARM (i knwo its an arm, not an asm) or AS-16 break through the aegis-defense of a CVBG?

**gunnut** · 30 Jan 06, 08:09

Originally Posted by leolover

how would aegis-equipped escorts with sm-2, ram and essm compete with threats like mach 5 misslies?

could missiles like HARM (i knwo its an arm, not an asm) or AS-16 break through the aegis-defense of a CVBG?

If I understand correctly, Aegis escorts are only a layer of the multi-layered defenses deployed by the USN to protect the CBG.

All missiles have limited ranges. The launch vehicle must get within the range of the outer CAP to get targeting data and fire their missiles. Should they succeed in that, they have to get by the 2nd layer of CAP. Of course there will be more fighters within that along with Aegis escorts laying down SAM traps.

USN's strategy to deal with these missiles is to destroy the source before the threat materializes.

"The enemy cannot push the button, if you disable his hand." - Sgt. Zim, Starship Troopers.

**gunnut** · 30 Jan 06, 08:13

Here's my next question. I read somewhere that China has developed anti-ship ballistic missile. How credible a threat is that?

**sparten** · 30 Jan 06, 09:00

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

I don't disagree with any of that...but it would still not sink unless it was finished off with torpedos or scuttled. In order to sink a ship you need to hole the hull. AShMs are not the right weapon for that endeavor. That's why god invented Torpedos.

LOL.

Thats what the Perrys are for, a couple of torpedos from them would finish the job. But you do agree with me that 6 Shipwrecks would doom a carrier?

**Bill** · 30 Jan 06, 11:00

Originally Posted by sparten

Thats what the Perrys are for, a couple of torpedos from them would finish the job. But you do agree with me that 6 Shipwrecks would doom a carrier?

Gut it, sure. Whether or not it could be towed/recovered or had to be scuttled would be a matter of damage control responsiveness and effectiveness.

No realistic amount of Shipwrecks would actually *sink* the Carrier though.

**rickusn** · 30 Jan 06, 12:31

Ah yes Ill stand by that. Thanks.

**leolover** · 30 Jan 06, 13:14

Originally Posted by gunnut

If I understand correctly, Aegis escorts are only a layer of the multi-layered defenses deployed by the USN to protect the CBG.

All missiles have limited ranges. The launch vehicle must get within the range of the outer CAP to get targeting data and fire their missiles. Should they succeed in that, they have to get by the 2nd layer of CAP. Of course there will be more fighters within that along with Aegis escorts laying down SAM traps.

USN's strategy to deal with these missiles is to destroy the source before the threat materializes.

"The enemy cannot push the button, if you disable his hand." - Sgt. Zim, Starship Troopers.

of course, i know that, but what will happen if the attacker overrun or fool the fighters (something like described in "red storm rising") and launches his missiles???

is aegis combined with SM-2, RAM and ESSM capable of defeating AS-16 and HARM-style missiles???

**Bill** · 30 Jan 06, 17:38

"
is aegis combined with SM-2, RAM and ESSM capable of defeating AS-16 and HARM-style missiles???"

Yeah. The $1,000,000 question is, how many in what time frame?

Short of war, no way of really knowing.

Thread: Carrier killers (an article from JED online)

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Favorite Naval Book(s)

World Naval Rankings

Carrier Battle Group Essay

An Interseting article....

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions