First Chinese Aircraft Carrier - When?

[Az]

Also, I can have an anti-ship missle with a 1000 mile range, doesn't matter because a shore or ship mounted surface search radar is only going to see max 30nm due to the curviture of the earth (though air search can see 250nm+). An airborne surface search radar can scan thousands of square miles at once, quickly (think soviet naval recon Bears in CW period). So no, aircraft are still the trump card in non littoral naval combat, and are very useful there as well.

I always wondered about that. if you are sending in naval planes to take out the other battlegroup or so, you already know where it is, approximately, right?

so a missile that would go in a a similar fashion, and that would be smart enough to recognize an aircraft carrier ( somehow I doubt that's too hard to accomplish ) could achieve the same effect, i.e.: go to approximate area, reach projected location of carrier, identify it, and destroy it? hell even if it isn't possible for software to identify it, I am sure that operators flying the missile remotely will be able to do it. note, I am not speaking of kamikaze UCAVs, but of missiles, that would be still very cost effective, and remove the enormous logistics envelope of current naval aviation.

[Jon Miller]

If you keep their planes and the like away from your ships, would they know where you were?

JM

[Patroklos]

I always wondered about that. if you are sending in naval planes to take out the other battlegroup or so, you already know where it is, approximately, right?

so a missile that would go in a a similar fashion, and that would be smart enough to recognize an aircraft carrier ( somehow I doubt that's too hard to accomplish ) could achieve the same effect, i.e.: go to approximate area, reach projected location of carrier, identify it, and destroy it? hell even if it isn't possible for software to identify it, I am sure that operators flying the missile remotely will be able to do it. note, I am not speaking of kamikaze UCAVs, but of missiles, that would be still very cost effective, and remove the enormous logistics envelope of current naval aviation.

No, you have to think of the area involved when talking about naval combat. Even for the Russians to find a Western carrier group in the relatively confined GIUK gap, you are talking about searching though 10,000nm if not 100,000nm of empty referenceless sea space.

Imagine China trying to find a carrier group outside the inner island chain. Or Iran in the Gulf of Oman. the distances are not small enough to just saturate with missiles.

And your targets are not just sitting there waiting to be sunk either. These missiles have to come in fast (no loiter time to look for as of yet unlocated targets) and low (like tens of feet, no ability to search) or they will be shot down by the defending units. Even the Suburns are no longer fast enough to get away from ESSMs.

And as for targeting, it is really not as easy for missiles to see things. Most still just go for the largest radar return within their given target area. Now you can set seeker search priorities, but I bet you would be disappointed by what those amount to.

And as for remote control, well that has its own host of problems (jamable signals, transmitting said signals, etc). That is basically what lazing a target is, and again that is done primarily through aircraft.

[Patroklos]

Also the US Navy has this pesky "positively identify before you shoot" policy. Though aggressive behavior is enough to fire on.

But a group of ships sitting at the edge of the radar picure, is that a fishing fleet or enemy battle group? Probably shouldn't shoot missiles blindly, let alone at "possible" targets 500nm away.

[Jon Miller]

btw, Pat, I know that nm is probably being used correctly, but I can't help seeing nanometers whenever I read that

JM

[Az]

No, you have to think of the area involved when talking about naval combat. Even for the Russians to find a Western carrier group in the relatively confined GIUK gap, you are talking about searching though 10,000nm if not 100,000nm of empty referenceless sea space.

Imagine China trying to find a carrier group outside the inner island chain. Or Iran in the Gulf of Oman. the distances are not small enough to just saturate with missiles.

well, imagine the US trying to find a carrier group. It's not just going to send it's fighters around. It's all the same trouble.

[Patroklos]

Heh, different worlds JM, different worlds...

But if it were in nano meters, Az's idea would work. I would blot out entire fleets with my pinky finger, crush worlds between my thumb and fore finger

[Patroklos]

If you keep their planes and the like away from your ships, would they know where you were?

They could probably come up with a threat axis when all their planes sent in a particular direction fail to return.

well, imagine the US trying to find a carrier group. It's not just going to send it's fighters around. It's all the same trouble.

Not really, our carriers have alot more planes, and more capable planes (Hawkeyes) to search with. Not to mention no possible rival has more than one carrier, not too hard to keep constant track of it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Az
[q]
well, imagine the US trying to find a carrier group. It's not just going to send it's fighters around. It's all the same trouble.

Coral Sea?

[Az]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
btw, Pat, I know that nm is probably being used correctly, but I can't help seeing nanometers whenever I read that

JM

heh. Got over it in about 5 posts.

[Jon Miller]

I got it, but I still see nm as nanometers.

JM

[Patroklos]

Just for some more comparison...



The smallest carrier is the HMS Ocean, which is an amphib.

(found this on fanatics)

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Patroklos

No, you have to think of the area involved when talking about naval combat. Even for the Russians to find a Western carrier group in the relatively confined GIUK gap, you are talking about searching though 10,000nm if not 100,000nm of empty referenceless sea space.

Imagine China trying to find a carrier group outside the inner island chain. Or Iran in the Gulf of Oman. the distances are not small enough to just saturate with missiles.

I'm just wondering, I thought with satellites the locations of surface naval groups on mission are pretty much known to anyone using the sats, so at least the bigger guys like Russia etc would have it easier?

Unless the sats are taken out of course.....

[Az]

oooh. purty

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Patroklos
No, you have to think of the area involved when talking about naval combat. Even for the Russians to find a Western carrier group in the relatively confined GIUK gap, you are talking about searching though 10,000nm if not 100,000nm of empty referenceless sea space.

I'm going to have to assume you mean nm^2.