U.S. Carriers Becoming Too Vulnerable To Be Relevant? New Report Says Yes

Officer of Engineers said:
All you've got is this cloud of noise. Until you can burn through this noise, you got nothing. You've got the general area but you can't aim at the noise and say that's a target.
Click to expand...

No but you can reduce the search area based on the intensity of the jamming signals. The signals go by dB and the closer you get the more intense it gets.
 
Not to mention the jamming could be coming from a Hummer or Growler....doesn't have to be surface based and could be offset.
 
yes but then you can put a circle around that growler and reduce the search area accordingly and moreover, a plane's jammer doesn't come close to intensity of the ship's jammer. Power is a big factor in the jamming capabilities.
 
Jamming

Jamming

Blademaster said:
Then the CVBG just gave away its position. Anytime you start jamming, you reveal your position.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that assume the ECM is coming from the CV, and not an escort, or an aircraft? CV's do have a SLQ-32 system installed, actually I think effectively a dual system, but I doubt it operates unless missiles are inbound or absolutely no other ECM source is available.
 
Blademaster said:
yes but then you can put a circle around that growler and reduce the search area accordingly and moreover, a plane's jammer doesn't come close to intensity of the ship's jammer. Power is a big factor in the jamming capabilities.
Click to expand...

If you're operating a search aircraft in the vicinity of a CV you've already narrowed the location down a bit. Unless a CVBG is under complete EMCOM, ESM satellites will likely pick it up, and the PRC has recently started to orbit its own 'White Cloud' type constellation. I'm guessing in most scenarios an E-2 would have already given up the rough position of a CVBG, though you can definitely have some fun putting one of those well far and away from your CV formation, perhaps over a suitably large neutral target that would look like a CV to anything short of an ISAR radar mode.
 
Chances are if your operating a search aircraft in the area of a CVN, Or any USN ship chances are they have already found you first.

The next few moments are going to determine your immediate future once its CAP or escort hails you.

Most turn away at that point. If not you can expect a "lock" moments later and then ONE warning.

For the CVN, no doubt its CAP has already found you long before you lay eyes on the CVN considering its radars found you a few hundered miles back. Yes, they can see quite a few hundred nautical miles around them with even their older radars.

Fly overs happen, Yes. And have since Korea and Vietnam But those actions are closely watched for "posture" and approach if your deemed a threat then you are no less a legal shoot then you would be a hostile.

If they dont want you in their airspace or envelope, there are other means available to them to remove you rather fast. The rest will get settled by diplomats.
 
Last edited:
Blademaster said:
yes but then you can put a circle around that growler and reduce the search area accordingly and moreover, a plane's jammer doesn't come close to intensity of the ship's jammer. Power is a big factor in the jamming capabilities.
Click to expand...
You're assuming a single source. Put three to five jamming signals and I guarantee you don't know which is the stronger one and which is coming from where. You still have to punch your way through the screens just to get a burn through to start looking for a carrier ... and you're not going to do that with a drone.
 
Officer of Engineers said:
You're assuming a single source. Put three to five jamming signals and I guarantee you don't know which is the stronger one and which is coming from where. You still have to punch your way through the screens just to get a burn through to start looking for a carrier ... and you're not going to do that with a drone.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but what about the intensity of the signal? Is it possible to extrapolate based on the intensity of the signal and the distance?
 
Which intensity? Remember your highschool physics on wave theory. If no interference, you have one big wave, not a bunch of small waves.
 
Ah... trying to remember my high school physics... smaller waves can combine into one big wave if they share the same frequency or amplitude right?
 
Blademaster said:
No but you can reduce the search area based on the intensity of the jamming signals. The signals go by dB and the closer you get the more intense it gets.
Click to expand...

that assumes that the your identified source of emission is also a real one..... - let alone fleet or fleet asset based
 
Blademaster said:
Ah... trying to remember my high school physics... smaller waves can combine into one big wave if they share the same frequency or amplitude right?
Click to expand...

We-ll, maybe.

This isn't electronic warfare, but on the subject of a "big wave", take a look at what might cause Rogue Waves. See: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave[/url]

In any event, I think the best thing to say is that if one wants to learn about EW, go to the library and read up on it. I don't think I've done, actively, EW for close to a quarter of a century, so anything I know that they would cut my tongue out for saying has probably long since passed. But I still hear and read things here and there, probably not secret, but with my background, I could probably fill in the gaps that makes it the kind of stuff others wished the world did not know.

So when people get talking about this stuff on an open Net, I'd like to get into the talk, I find this stuff fascinating about what might be done with it. But then I remember that maybe it is not such a great idea to get into the talk and I just shake my head at what is being said. Not because it is being said, mind you, but because I can't add to it.

But let's put it this way. Remember the movie Wargames? In the small scene after the General sends up fighters over Alaska to investigate Soviet air contacts? His Aide comes in with something like, "Intelligence reports that the Soviets can generate false radar images 200 miles from the source."

And the General says, "Christ! Now they have us chasing ghosts."

Like producing holograms with intersecting laser beams, I can see how doing things like that in this day and age might be possible.
 
Last edited:
gf0012-aust said:
that assumes that the your identified source of emission is also a real one..... - let alone fleet or fleet asset based
Click to expand...
You beat me to it. With today's technology you can be sent on a wild goose chase, only to find your whole house burnt down by the time you come back.
 
Ward_Carroll said:
Sunday, 26 January 2025
This Congressman Wants to Kill the Ford Class Aircraft Carrier
(23 min, 17 sec)
Representative Ken Calvert (R) (CA-41) recently told an audience at the American Enterprise Institute that a Ford Class aircraft carrier couldn't survive an attack from a Chinese hypersonic missile and that the Pentagon should consider canceling future construction as a result.

At the same time, the Congressional Research Service has just released a comprehensive review of the Ford Class program that's somewhat damning when considering the time and money it takes to build these ships.

So are aircraft carriers doomed to go the way of the battleship?
Click to expand...
...
 
Might be time to look at arsenal ships again and possibly more modified Ohios fitted out with the VLS mod. My main concern would be the possibility of overwhelming a carriers group's defenses enough to just damage the carrier, sinking it is not required. This isn't WW2, the US cannot afford to have even two or three of it's 11 carriers dry docked for repairs for a few months in the middle of a shooting war because there sure as hell wont be multiple new hulls sliding down the slipways every few months to replace them. Currently it takes what? 5 years or more to build one new carrier. The war would be over before even one new boat got a champagne bottle smashed on its bows.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top