Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chinese sub plays Marco Polo with US Navy battle fleet... and wins.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • But what the SLQ-32 is used for is to control counter-measures, such as chaff or jamming. The SLQ-32 may very well figure out what type of missile is going to hit the ship in the next two seconds. But that is useless it can do something about it.
    No, having used it, that is not what the SLQ-32 is for. It is used to collect intel from electronic sources (from ships, aircraft, shore sites, and missles) which can be used in a variety of ways. One of those is to fire chaff (or NULKA), or to pass that data to Aegis for a SM2 intercept.

    I can't tell you the exact SPY slide run for this, but lets assume that for a C-802 you get 15 seconds from detect to hit (take my word for it). That is enough for two SM2 (unless there is more than one escort, then more) engagements, several ESSM (or RAM depending one the specific hulls present) engagements, and one CIWS engagement. This is assuming the missile aquires its target (if it is self homing), the source survives (if it is guided by a third party) and doesn't get confused by chaff or electoronic jamming (another thing the SLQ-32 is good for).

    No, it isn't. A phased array radar creates a radar beam from an array of discrete antenae. It is not "active 360 continuously". The computer still has to sweep the beam across the search area. The beam is either pointing at the target or it isn't, just like a traditional targeting antenna.
    Care to guess what the time frame of a phase array sweep like that is? It is inconsequential. SPY-1D has defacto real time 360 monitoring capability.

    First of all, no it can't. Second of all, do you know how many softball sized targets there are within 256 nm of a cruiser at sea-skimming heights? Maybe 1 trillion. All those wave tops. Would you like to view the targets sequentially?
    First of all, yes it can. Second of all, we have ways with dealing with waves (they look different, and are easy to differentiate. We can, afterall see ships to!).

    Of course, the missile has to be above the waves, what do you think a missle traveling Mach 2 looks like after getting smacked with white cap?

    The difficulty with sea skimming missiles is not that they blend in with the water, it is that they can hide themselves under the horizon as long as possible. Once they are over the horizon however they will be seen by any decent air search radar. Or can you think of anything else that moves at Mach 2? Oh yeah, waves, I forgot

    Ever, uh, been to the ocean? They have these things called "waves".
    No. Oh wait, there are those to sea service ribbons I sport to work everyday. Obviously of no relevance to the topic at hand.

    But sea-skimming (or Nap of Earth) are difficult to detect even on a smooth surface, because you can't simply rotate a wide beam and expect a return from anything in range.
    I guess that would be a common misconception if you didn't know how many modules and beams a SPY array actually has. As it is, looking at 13nm diameter circle (knowing exactly what point in that circle to aquire at (the edge) no less) maks it even less difficult.

    The earth itself blocks the radar unless it is pointed not only in the right direction, but also at the perfect azimuth.
    It is looking at the entire volume, all the time Vanguard. The horizon is the only refuge a missile has, and if ducting is in effect not even that.

    The ship was operating in a war zone, knew that missile attacks were being made and that there was an Iraqi aircraft nearby. They were equipped with US anti-aircraft defenses designed to protect the ship from missiles. Despite this, they and an AWACS plane, failed to detect the launch of either missile or their target.
    If you repeat yourself over and over again do you think that makes you right.

    FACT: The ship was not at its highest level of readiness, if it had it would have shot the mirage down.

    FACT: The ship is not an AAW platform.

    FACT: Obviously they did not consider Iraqi planes a threat because they saw it and determined it was not a probable threat

    Bunch of cheap frigates I guess.
    Exactly nobody did. Imagine that, if you put a carrier in the worst scenario possibe for it, and the best one for its attackers, the carrier loses. Are you a war college graduate, a tactial dynamo you are.

    Solution. Don't put the carrier in the worst position possibe (ie within shore missile battery range of China).

    First, why don't you explain why you think we are going to defeat China's air force in 5 days? Afaik the USAF doesn't think that.
    1.) You would have to give me the start scenario.

    2.) You will have to explain why the force ratio between the USN itself and the PLAAF doesn't answer this question for you. Then we can add in the USAF for fun. And then our likely allies to belabor the point.
    Last edited by Patroklos; November 19, 2007, 16:13.
    "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Patroklos


      "At," not "of."
      Think that Kuci read it as nano instead of nautical.

      Anyway, that range is for high altitude targets - not at sea level - for such it's much shorter.
      With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

      Steven Weinberg

      Comment


      • Anyway, that range is for high altitude targets - not at sea level - for such it's much shorter.
        Yes, it would be. That was to counter his nonsence about a missile's small cross section. If it can see a beer can at 200nm it won't struggle to see a missle the size of a small car for instance (Sunburn) at 20nm.
        "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BlackCat
          Think that Kuci read it as nano instead of nautical.
          I knew what he meant, I'm just screwing around.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Vanguard


            If you don't detect the missiles then you are not going to launch any chaff.
            I wasn't an EW, but they were in my Division on my ship. The SLQ-32 is a ECM suite that can identify and spoof incoming missiles, the SuperRBOC is the chaff.
            Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.

            Comment


            • I was hoping you would weigh in Lonestar, I wasn't sure what type of Crypto you were and since they merged EW I though maybe you got a chance to play with the SLQ-32(v3).
              "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Patroklos


                Yes, but there isn't much we can do about that. Unless we go around on a war footing all the time, something that our equipment couldn't keep up with and most of our personel wouldn't survive we are going to be vulnerable to the odd completely unexpected suprise attack.

                But in the case of a war with China, losing a single carrier to an unannounced and unprovoked attack might actually save us casualties in the end (the world response would be different than say if we attacked them, or if they attacked us while tensions were hightened for whatever reason),
                If we're prepared to fight to win that is the case. otherwise no. Also I wouldn't bank too much on any world response.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DinoDoc
                  Star Wars doesn't even have shields and is typified with poorly designed ships.
                  Star Wars does have shields. The movies make mention of them. But I guess at the time they were made, Lucas wasn't able to work the shield graphics into the SFX. At numerous points even in the first movie (A New Hope) you hear the X Wing pilots saying set all power to front deflector shields (to protect against the oncoming turbolaser fire in the Death Star trench run).

                  Some ships in SW are pretty crap though. The Trade Federation designers apparently were eating a donut when they had their inspiration.

                  Also, Amidala's ship looks like it's flying ass backwards.
                  "lol internet" ~ AAHZ

                  Comment


                  • In TESB the Star Destroyers' shields are faintly visible. That might just be in the 1997 version though.

                    Comment


                    • Heh, I'm so old school. My parents taped the original three from TV on VHS and I was raised on those.

                      I still feel weird when I watch the 1997 ones. And as for the remastered DVD ones, they're just plain wrong.
                      "lol internet" ~ AAHZ

                      Comment


                      • If we're prepared to fight to win that is the case. otherwise no. Also I wouldn't bank too much on any world response.
                        If China suprised attacked an American carrier and sunk it you don't think

                        1.) Americans would not think that a worthy cause to grind China into dust or

                        2.) We would not have allies? I can tell you right now Japan, Australia and Thiland would throw in on us given almost any scenario, the above one would include all of Europe and probably India.
                        "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Vanguard
                          First, why don't you explain why you think we are going to defeat China's air force in 5 days? Afaik the USAF doesn't think that.
                          Umm...yeah, they pretty much do think that. Military channel interview of the USAF General for that theatre says the battleplan for establishing air superiority is 5-7 days. Air superiority is essentially defeating the Chinese Air Force.

                          You have to remember, it is not just plane on plane like some WWII dogfight. Chinese airfields, fuel dumps, radar installations, command and control complexes will be devastated by sea launched cruise missles, and strategic bombing runs. US doctrine calls for establishing air superiority at nearly any cost.

                          US airframes and command and control systems are incredibly ahead of the Chinese. Further, the Chinese currently have little capacity to defeat or interdict US command functions. In air battle, the command and control functions are essential to victory...and no one even approaches the US ability in this arena.

                          Months or years is a ridiculous statement. It is highly unlikely that any war between these two countries would last years. Months would be a stretch. The war, if it comes, will be a short affair of incredibly hard punches thrown by both sides.
                          "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Patroklos


                            If China suprised attacked an American carrier and sunk it you don't think

                            1.) Americans would not think that a worthy cause to grind China into dust or
                            I don't know.

                            2.) We would not have allies? I can tell you right now Japan, Australia and Thiland would throw in on us given almost any scenario, the above one would include all of Europe and probably India.
                            During the first Gulf war, Japan, I think, refused to allow its merchant fleet to be used to carry wartime supplies to our forces and those of our allies. As to the others, they either have too much interest in not pissing off china, or no real way to help in what the conflict would become. So it is likely that they'd stand off and criticize us because it is safe to do so, even if they hope we'd ultimately prevail.

                            Comment


                            • Just did a little research on the respective Air Forces:

                              China(Current):

                              J11 (Chinese Su-27)...180
                              J10 ...6
                              J9...6
                              J8...200
                              J7 (Chinese Mig 21)...500
                              J6 (Chinese Mig 19)...350



                              USAF:

                              F15...522
                              F15 Strike Eagle...217
                              F16...1280
                              F22...91


                              That's just the fighters! The US advantage in strategic bombers is MUCH greater. Additionally, this does not count any aircraft from the Navy or the Marine Corp, or the Air Force Reserve. Even further, the Taiwan Air Force has 422 fighters of which 331 would be considered top of the line (wheras China's force would consist of 392 top of the line airframes).

                              In retrospect, I would be suprised if it took the US 5 days to defeat the PRC airforce.

                              China's projected top of the line fighters for 2015 is only upto 500. In top of the line units, the USAF will have better than a 4 to 1 advantage even then with the worst US unit outperforming the best Chinese Unit.
                              "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                              Comment


                              • Taiwan is not worth a war between the USA and China.. let the Chinese have it imo
                                I need a foot massage

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X