Tango01 | 08 Oct 2020 1:01 p.m. PST |
…Navy's Carrier Fleet " Of all the new weapons in China's modern, ever-growing military arsenal, few have gotten as much attention as its aircraft carriers. China has two carriers in service with a third on the way. The first, the Liaoning, was commissioned in 2012, while the second, the Shandong, was commissioned last December. Chinese state media has repeatedly displayed the ships in flashy videos showing off their capabilities, the most recent of which was released at the end of August…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
jurgenation | 08 Oct 2020 3:35 p.m. PST |
glorified assault ships/..being manned by Navy w/ no experience in Combat.,or History of it. |
Archon64 | 08 Oct 2020 4:34 p.m. PST |
No experience in carrier operations, and under-powered aircraft. |
Skarper | 08 Oct 2020 5:26 p.m. PST |
They look to be about as capable as the USN America class assault ships. They only carry 40-50 aircraft and these do not have the payload of their land based versions. All in all – it's not a significant force yet. With the recent cancellation of the 5th and 6th carriers it looks like the PLAN/CCP view the carrier project as a dead end. This could change but we are not looking at significant blue water power projection capacity any time in the next 20 years. We have to keep an eye on China's PLAN and take measures to counter it, but at the same time let's not panic. |
arealdeadone | 08 Oct 2020 5:34 p.m. PST |
They are at best training carriers with little or no real combat capability. If they are aimed at Indian Ocean with India in mind then that isn't an issue as India's carrier is an even smaller and less capable modified Kiev class ship with the less capable MiG-29K. India's new ship (still fitting out) is of about the same displacement as the Kiev class with the same ski jump operation and same junky MiG-29K. In any such war between those two I suspect it will be submarines and long range anti shipping missiles that will be primary offensive weapons and the carriers will serve as mere CAP without offering any real offensive capability.
|
Ferd45231 | 09 Oct 2020 5:26 a.m. PST |
Don't look at where they are now. Look out for where they are headed. China has a very long game. H |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 09 Oct 2020 7:35 a.m. PST |
As the article clearly stated and we all know, carriers #1 and #2 ('Liaoning' and 'Shandong') are ski-ramp carriers from an old Soviet cold war design and are inferior to traditional US catapult-launching supercarriers. Moreover, the Shenyang J-15 'Flying Shark' (a copy of the Russian SU-33), while a capable 4th-plus generation fighter, is heavy and have to take off with a reduced payload capacity. I'm more interested in carriers #3 and #4, which are supposed to be larger flat-top carriers equipped with electromagnetic catapults and a navalized version of the Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter. |
Thresher01 | 09 Oct 2020 8:23 a.m. PST |
There's really no comparison to our aircraft carriers. Their carriers are quite similar to our amphibious assault ships, especially if/when these get F-35s on them. |
Legion 4 | 09 Oct 2020 9:39 a.m. PST |
No experience in carrier operations, Bottom line IMO …
They are at best training carriers with little or no real combat capability. So far but they may actually be combat ready one day … maybe ? I suspect it will be submarines and long range anti shipping missiles that will be primary offensive weapons and the carriers will serve as mere CAP without offering any real offensive capability. That is probably a safe bet … But IMO US CVNs will still be used effectively offensively. Along with Subs, Cruise Missiles, and even drones. Regardless CAP will still be an important aspect of a Naval engagement/war. |
Legion 4 | 09 Oct 2020 9:39 a.m. PST |
No experience in carrier operations, Bottom line IMO …
They are at best training carriers with little or no real combat capability. So far but they may actually be combat ready one day … maybe ? I suspect it will be submarines and long range anti shipping missiles that will be primary offensive weapons and the carriers will serve as mere CAP without offering any real offensive capability. That is probably a safe bet … But IMO US CVNs will still be used effectively offensively. Along with Subs, Cruise Missiles, and even drones. Regardless CAP will still be an important aspect of a Naval engagement/war. |
Shagnasty | 09 Oct 2020 11:04 a.m. PST |
I agree with Ferd45231. China plays the long game. Remember, we've let them construct unsinkable carriers on their "islands' in the South China Sea. |
Skarper | 09 Oct 2020 5:44 p.m. PST |
The islands are not 'unsinkable' They could be destroyed very easily – easier than a carrier since they cannot move. They are a nuisance, but let's not exaggerate. |
panzerfrans | 10 Oct 2020 10:12 a.m. PST |
The real problem is that the US Navy doesn't have a decent Fleet Defense Fighter in it's inventory anymore, nor is such a type currently in development. This means that should the Russians decide to sell the Chinese the TU-22M3M / Kh-47M2 combo the US Navy will find itself deep into the smelly brown stuff for a decade or two. |
Legion 4 | 10 Oct 2020 11:36 a.m. PST |
FA-18 and F-35 are pretty good aircraft for the USN/USMC. |
panzerfrans | 10 Oct 2020 1:12 p.m. PST |
Yeah, a Ford F150 is a pretty decent truck, but you aren't going to win the Indy 500 in one. I don't think you're grabbing the problem here. Aircraft like the F-18 and F-35 aren't going to prevent a bunch of modern long legged Mach 2 bombers, armed with up to three big 3000 km range Mach 10+ smart AShM's each, from sinking their carrier. |
Legion 4 | 10 Oct 2020 3:25 p.m. PST |
That is true if the enemy has those capabilities e.g. Mach 10+? Plus there are systems to take out much of the incoming. Plus nothing says you can't shoot down Mach 2 bombers before it drops it's ordinance, yes ? But my $ is still on the USN & USAF … but I am quite biased I'll freely admit. |
panzerfrans | 10 Oct 2020 4:49 p.m. PST |
Neither the F-18 nor the F-35 have the needed speed and range to put up a screen far enough out from the carrier group to prevent an 1800 mile plus range AShM from launching. Adding to the problem is that both the TU-22M3M Backfire and the Kh-47M2 Kinzhal missile have both the range and speed to necessitate a 360 degree defense screen. Adding further to the problem is that the Kinzhal has blistering speed (up to mach 12) and is a smart missile designed to defeat systems like Patriot and Aegis. It can analyse threats, evade defenses, and prioritize targets, and it does this as a group. If a wave of Khinzals comes in low, for instance, only one will pop up regularly and activate to update target information, it will then redirect this information to the other missiles in the wave. And if it gets shot down another missile takes over its task. On the business end you're talking about a 480 kg warhead inside a 1000 kg missile hitting at hypersonic speed, just one or two hits will be sufficient to kill the carrier The US Navy retired their only Fleet Defense Fighter, the F-14, without replacing it, because the bean counters where convinced the Russians where out of the game, and the Backfire threat was gone for good. They were wrong, and if the Chinese manage to get their hands on this weapons system they are going to pay dearly. The only saving grace is the Russians know the TU-22M3M / Kh-47M2 combo will shift the balance of power and, up to now, have declined Chinese orders for them (some years ago China even offered to buy the entire TU-22 production line). If the Deep State / NATO continues to bully Russia that might change however. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 10 Oct 2020 10:05 p.m. PST |
China doesn't need the Kinzhal. Not when they have the DF-ZF HGV. And nobody's "bullying" Russia with sanctions that are largely ineffectual anyway. Not when Russia continues to be a bad actor blatantly engaging in misbehavior such as meddling in democratic elections/processes and poisoning ex-spies/dissidents abroad. |
panzerfrans | 11 Oct 2020 7:58 a.m. PST |
Meddling in democratic elections/processes like what the EU/Deep State did when they organized a revolution in pro-Russia Ukraine to put some pro-EU Nazi (Poroshenko) in power you mean? And accusing the Russians from poisoning ex-spies/dissidents abroad with "Novichock" (Skripals) that in reality never happened? What did happen was that NATO expanded into the East European buffer zone they had agreed upon in exchange of the dissolving of the Warsaw Pact by the Russians. And now they are expanding, or trying to expand, into Ukraine and Belarus. You might not consider that bullying, but I can assure you the Russians do. |
Legion 4 | 11 Oct 2020 9:41 a.m. PST |
Well if the PRC has weapons with those capabilities and in large enough numbers then the USN may very well have some trouble. I'd hope the the USN has been working on this problem. And of course it would be very classified. |
arealdeadone | 11 Oct 2020 4:59 p.m. PST |
Neither the F-18 nor the F-35 have the needed speed and range to put up a screen far enough out from the carrier group to prevent an 1800 mile plus range AShM from launching. This is very true. US Navy carrier aviation range has halved since retirement of F-14, A-6 and even A-7. And both F/A-18 and F-35 are too slow for interceptor role. F-35C is especially bad with terrible transonic acceleration and turnrate as well as currently being speed limited due to issues of damage to aircraft during high speed missions cause be engine exhaust.
|
panzerfrans | 12 Oct 2020 6:32 a.m. PST |
This represents an extreme threat to the carrier itself. During the cold war they came up with the E-2C / F-14 / AIM-54 combo to counter it. Now the threat is back, on steroids, and there's nothing in the inventory to counter it anymore. What's needed is a dedicated Fleet Defense Fighter, a modern day F-14, and it is needed asap. No multi-role whatever is going to cut it. Unfortunately developing such an aircraft and getting it into service is going to take decades. |
Legion 4 | 12 Oct 2020 8:22 a.m. PST |
Again I hope the US Military has taken all this into consideration. And if so I'm sure it's classified … None of us know exactly what the US is working on at Area 51, White Sands, Area 52, Wright-Patterson, etc. Again it is/would be "ultra" classified. I had a Top Secret clearance when I was on active duty. However, I only knew what specifically I was allowed to know. To complete, etc., my mission, etc. High Level clearances are very compartmentalized, as you probably may know. |
panzerfrans | 12 Oct 2020 8:45 a.m. PST |
Projects like this are never realized "under the radar", there's way to much money involved in it for that to be even be possible. |
Legion 4 | 12 Oct 2020 9:18 a.m. PST |
The US does have a very big "Black Budget" … E.g. the story about the USAF paying something like $500 USD for toilet seats. In "reality(?)" the seat cost like $30 USD, the rest went to the Black Budget. Or so I have been told … |