Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, what a target

[PLATO]

What's the top speed of a carrier, how much does it take to accelerate to such speed, how tight can it turn, how far away could the launch be detected, and how much can a ballistic missile be guided on the second half of it's flight?

My Nephew was on The Stennis during sea trials. He said that the carrier turned so hard that it put the edge of the flight deck in the water. My Uncle was on the Enterprise during the Pueblo incident...he said the waves/wake (?) off the bow were higher than the flight deck during her run across the Pacific.

These are some amazing vessels...

[Hauldren Collider]

Two nuclear reactors and four screws can move a lot of water really quickly.

[regexcellent]

The Dong-Feng 21... mach 10. easy to see, little tougher to hit.

Problem is finding the carrier. Missiles can't hit the carrier if they don't know where it is. Otherwise there's just too much ocean and not enough ship.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

true, very true. but something the size of a skyscraper on the flat blue sea cant be that hard to find and see.

[N35t0r]

Provided the missiles are spotted, how feasible would it for the carrier to dodge it?

[My Wife Hates CIV]

3400 meters per second. I don't think you 'dodge' something like that - not with a carrier.

[regexcellent]

true, very true. but something the size of a skyscraper on the flat blue sea cant be that hard to find and see.

It really is...the ocean is a big place, and the carrier moves.

Provided the missiles are spotted, how feasible would it for the carrier to dodge it?

The carrier can't dodge it per se, but it's surrounded by ships with anti-aircraft weapons that, depending on the missile, have a greater or lesser chance of shooting it down.

[grumbler]

Actually, the Dong Feng-21 is the paper tiger here. Its capability to attack carriers is entirely hypothetical, has never even been tested, and the missile itself is not likely to be nearly as fast as the gloom-and-doomers predict.

Someone (probably the Chinese, as they have the most incentive) will create an anti-carrier ballistic missile, but the DF-21 isn't one. Ballistic warheads also aren't very maneuverable, so even when developed the system will have to have pretty good (and very jam-proof) terminal guidance.

The danger to the carrier remains the submarine.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

"The danger to the carrier remains the submarine. "

if this is true I would say the US carrier is safer than not. the US has some pretty advance anti submarine capabilities.

[grumbler]

"The danger to the carrier remains the submarine. "

if this is true I would say the US carrier is safer than not. the US has some pretty advance anti submarine capabilities.

The US has massively downgraded its ASW capabilities in favor of AAW capabilities over the last 20 years. No more S-3s and no replacement; downgrade from the Mk-50 ASW torpedo to the Mk-54 (really just an improved Mk-46); far fewer MPA (120 P-8s compared to 600 P-3s); early retirement of the 30 Spruance class destroyers (the youngest sunk after only 18 years in service) with no replacement; no TACTAS on any remaining surface ships; far fewer ASW heloes in each carrier battle group. US submarines remain excellent ASW platforms, but the USN has moved away from ASW in a big way, and I think that that is a mistake. At least it has equipped all its ASW helos with dipping sonars; dipping sonar helos are the submariner's nightmare.

[Hauldren Collider]

On the plus side, our allies in the pacific are rapidly ramping up their ASW capabilities, particularly Japan and South Korea. Also Australia. Japan's new totally-not-aircraft-carriers "helicopter destroyers" should be excellent platforms for antisubmarine warfare, and they are also building a lot of new submarines.

[Patroklos]

If you knew where the carrier was going and could put a submarine in its path and spring a trap, you'd have a good shot at killing it, I would think. Again, I'm not in the navy, so this could all be total horse****.

This is in fact what happened in all the cases of a submarine sneaking up on a carrier that pop up now and then. In the case BlackCat posted the sub,arise was in the training group so it knew where the carrier would be. Often even if the submarine is OPFOR the scenario directors will ensure the two meet so the submarine can get practice on how to attack a high value unit. You honestly never know.

In the Chinese case from a few years ago the U.S. published the general location of an exercise as a notice to Mariners to avoid creating unsafe traffic situations. The Chinese just hung out there until the carrier showed up, obviously not something they could do in a real situation.

This happens a lot because in peace time we don't have all our sensors and watches stood up. Equipment degrades per hour of use so we don't waste it and man hours are better used elsewhere. The incredibly peaceful world we live in regarding potential navy vs navy conflict means we are generally not looking for surpise submarine attacks. It's like if I walked up to Lebron waiting at a crosswalk and knocked a basketball out of his hands. It doesn't really mean anything.

I mean it depends on what they fired at it... and how many. fire enough missiles that travel fast enough and some are getting through. how many missiles does it take to get to the center of a carrier?

A DDG is generally recognized as needing 20+ warshots at simultaneous time on target to overwhelm it. Obviously the type of ordinace matters. In reality the limitation in defending a HVU is magazine dept to provide for intercepts not sensors or the ability to engage incoming missiles at the same time. That's why we don't worry about the archer but rather the spotter. As HC said the ocean is a big place and even with satillites it's hard to find anything out ther. And you don't just have to find it, you need to hold it and guide ordinance to it with very good accuracy and through interference both electronic and kinetic. As long as the carriers are away from shore and moving they are pretty safe. It's war though, and war is all luck. It might just happen that a CVN does drive right over a Chinese Diesel sub.

ASBMs are highly sensationalized and as far as we know have never been demonstrated to work but as it is pretty much all US CGs/DDGs already have the ABM upgrades already and those that don't will in the next few years

Also a good number of our ships still have TACTAS. While I agree our surface based ASW has been downgraded that's mostly because it was becoming harder and harder to do from that vantage point. We invest out ASW dollars in SSNs now for the most part.

[kentonio]

Actually, the Dong Feng-21 is the paper tiger here. Its capability to attack carriers is entirely hypothetical, has never even been tested, and the missile itself is not likely to be nearly as fast as the gloom-and-doomers predict.

Someone (probably the Chinese, as they have the most incentive) will create an anti-carrier ballistic missile, but the DF-21 isn't one. Ballistic warheads also aren't very maneuverable, so even when developed the system will have to have pretty good (and very jam-proof) terminal guidance.

That's a pretty optimistic assessment though, the real answer is we don't know if its as good as the Chinese are touting.

But it is worth revisiting Admiral Willard’s own statement of December 2010, which is not necessarily so different from General Chen’s: “The anti-ship ballistic missile system in China has undergone extensive testing. An analogy using a Western term would be ‘initial operational capability,’ whereby it has—I think China would perceive that it has—an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it. It will continue to undergo testing, I would imagine, for several more years.”

http://www.andrewerickson.com/2012/0...ver-said-that/

This was from a January 2012 article incidentally. That's former PACOM Commander Admiral Robert Willard saying its undergone extensive testing.

[BlackCat]

It really is...the ocean is a big place, and the carrier moves.

I'm pretty sure that India, China, Russia and a number of other countries know the exact location of every american carrier.

Yeah, the ocean is big, but carriers are big too, not to mention their entourage of support ships and their wake ? probably four times the size of the ships.

[kentonio]

I'm pretty sure that India, China, Russia and a number of other countries know the exact location of every american carrier.

Yeah, the ocean is big, but carriers are big too, not to mention their entourage of support ships and their wake ? probably four times the size of the ships.

The location to within x square miles maybe, but that's quite different to being able to hit one with a ballistic missile.