Indian Aircraft Carrier enters sea trials

reply to post by KnawLick


You must note that countries specializing in asymmetrical warfare, like China along with India, has 1000km+ range hypersonic dive down missiles which can sink a carrier by brute kinetic force. Its practically unstoppable. These missiles follows a ballistic path just before target aquisition, once the target is aquired it swoops down and destroys it.

reply to post by Erectus


The F-15E actually replaced the 'Vark. It is close as far as payload capacity goes, but the 'Vark beat it hands down on combat radius. The Eagle beats the 'Vark, because it's much more reliable, and the 8,000lbs difference is made up somewhat by the smart weapons the Eagle carries. The 'Vark was very early generation smart weapons, so they carried a lot of weapons, where the Eagle can drop one or two for the same result.

reply to post by SLAYER69
yea but not as we know carriers as today's even the super carriers will be out dated , combine destroyer with carrier , and a amphibious assault ship, then you will have tomorrows Carriers

reply to post by bekod


I disagree

If you combine all of those into one ship. If that one ship gets sunk then you lose all those varied capabilities. The way it is now, If one is sunk you still have the others afloat and capable to accomplish their individual unique tasks.

In other words, not all your eggs would be in one basket.

It may be that carriers will become outmoded. Space-based weapons, extremely fast missiles, and carrier vulnerability are real factors. But I wouldn't count them out just yet. There's been a lot of talk, including on here, of how the Chinese could take out the American Navy. Most of it is nonsense, but even if something like that were true, the consequences would be, literally, earth-shattering. That's what the policy of MAD is all about. Even though you COULD push that button, you'd be a fool to do so. MAD has worked for 60 years so far. The fact also remains that there are only a few countries in the world that would be capable of taking on and defeating a carrier. Most areas of the world the carriers remain unchallenged.

There remains something to be said to be able to park 100,000 tons of diplomacy and 5 acres of soverign American territory 200 miles off shore. A single carrier has more firepower than 80% of the world's air forces. Put two or three of them together in one spot and the deterrance or destructive power is formidable.

There are 22 aircraft carriers in service today. The United States has 11 with three additional under construction (The Ford, Kennedy, and unnamed, perhaps a new Enterprise)

Countries with one active duty carrier: UK, France, Russia, Brazil, India, Thailand, China
Countries with two active duty carriers: Spain, Italy

Most other countries' carriers are small by CVN standards. For example, Spain's Juan Carlos is 27,000 tons. It's Principe de Asturias is 16,000 tons. Italy's Cavour is 27,000 tons.

And we haven't talked about "Landing Helicopter Docks" which look a whole lot like carriers, displace about 40,000 tons making them larger than a lot of "carrier type carriers" in other countries. This new Indian carrier started out life as the Russian equivalent of an LHD. America has nine of those with two more under construction. So if you're willing to loosen up definitions a little bit, the US has 20 active carrier-type ships, twice as many as the rest of the world combined.

reply to post by asen_y2k


I find this hard to believe. I think you are referring to the "aircraft carrier killer" missile that China has been advertising. But those missiles I highly doubt are hypersonic, as America doesn't even emplore hypersonic missiles.

For something to be considered hypersonic is must go 5x the speed of sound. Our normal cruise missiles only go around mach 1. So unless the chinese are ahead of Boeing and America, I don't think so... Unless you have a link or something?

Boeing has been doing tests with hypersonic missiles though.... the X-51

en.wikipedia.org...

US Navy Carrier Strike Group Deployments current as of 6/10/12

CVN-65 Enterprise is in the 5th fleet AOR: 3/11/12
CVN-68 Nimitz is now in home port in Everett, WA. Arrived 3/9/12
CVN-69 Eisenhower is in home port Norfolk, VA.
CVN-70 Vinson is in home port San Diego, CA
CVN-71 Roosevelt is at Newport News for RCOH & non-deployable, Avail: late 2012.
CVN-72 Lincoln is in the Arabian Sea, 5th Fleet AOR, arrived 1/12.
CVN-73 Washington is underway in the 7th fleet AOR.
CVN-74 Stennis is now in homeport, Bremerton, arrived 3/2/12.
CVN-75 Truman is home at Norfolk for DPIA & non-deployable. Avail summer 2012.
CVN-76 Reagan is in Bremerton for DPIA & non-deployable until 2013.
CVN-77 Bush is in the Atlantic off of Maine.
-------
CVN-78 Ford construction at Newport News. 2015, replaces Enterprise.
CVN-79 Kennedy construction at Newport News. Avail 2018, replaces Nimitz
CVN-80 Unnamed, planned, Avail 2024, replaces Eisenhower.

8 of 11 in port. 3 of 11 non-deployable

RCOH=Refueling and Complex Overhaul, takes about four years
DPIA=Docked Planned Incremental Availability, takes six months to a year

The above are all Carrier Strike Groups that normally travel with about 7-8 support ships including one cruiser, several destroyers (usually a squadron of 4), a fast attack supply ship, some frigates ,and a fast attack submarine or maybe two. The support ships are designed to protect the carrier. A CVN is about 100,000 tons displacement and can carry approximately 85 aircraft. CVNs are nuclear powered and run 25 years between refueling, which takes three years to complete.

Explanation of Areas of Responsibility (AOR)

3rd Fleet AOR – Eastern & Northern Pacific, Alaska, Bering Sea
4th Fleet AOR – Central & South America
5th Fleet AOR - The Middle East, Arabian Gulf, East Africa
6th Fleet AOR – The Mediterranean Sea, Europe
7th Fleet AOR – Asian Pacific. Indian Ocean to International Date Line

Below are the Amphibious Ready Groups/Marine Expeditionary Units. The main ship here is a "baby" carrier that is about half the size or less of a CVN, about 40,000 tons displacement. It is designed to hold helicopters and Harrier VTOL jets. These guys can pull off a minor invasion, if necessary. They usually carry a handful of tanks. Marines, by and large, are light infantry. LHA is a “Landing Helicopter Assault.” LHD is a “Landing Helicopter Dock.”

LHA-5 Pelelieu is underway in the Pacific Ocean.
LHD-1 Wasp is in home port Norfolk, VA.
LHD-2 Essex is in home port San Diego, CA.
LHD-3 Kearsarge is underway in the Atlantic.
LHD-4 Boxer is in home port, San Diego. Non-deployable undergoing upgrades
LHD-5 Bataan is in home port Norfolk, VA.
LHD-6 Bonhomme Richard is in home port Sasebo, Japan.
LHD-7 Iwo Jima is in the 5th Fleet AOR.
LHD-8 Makin Island is in the Pacific.
------
LHA-6 America, under construction, Avail. 2014, Northrop Grumann, Pascagoula.
LHA-7 Tripoli, contracted Avail. 2018, HII Ingalls, Pascagoula. $2.3B

Official Status of the Navy: www.navy.mil... (This is not always accurate.)
Carrier Locations: gonavy.jp... (Usually very accurate.)

Decommissioned carriers still floating (except one):

CV-59 Forrestal, com: 1955, decom 1993, Newport, RI, Fate: scrap or sink
CV-60 Saratoga, com: 1956, decom 1994, Newport, RI, Fate: scrap or sink
CV-61 Ranger, com: 1957, decom 1993. Bremerton, WA, Fate: scrap or museum
CV-62 Independence, com: 1959, decom 1998, Bremerton, WA, Fate: scrap or sink
CV-63 Kitty Hawk, com 1961, decom 2009, Bremerton; WA, Fate: reserve until 2015
CV-64 Constellation, com 1961, decom 2003, Bremerton, Fate: scrap or sink
CV-66 America, com 1965, decom 1996, Fate: scuttled in live fire exercise, 2005
CV-67 John F Kennedy, com 1968, decom 2007, Philadelphia, Fate: donation hold

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by asen_y2k

 

I find this hard to believe. I think you are referring to the "aircraft carrier killer" missile that China has been advertising. But those missiles I highly doubt are hypersonic, as America doesn't even emplore hypersonic missiles.

For something to be considered hypersonic is must go 5x the speed of sound. Our normal cruise missiles only go around mach 1. So unless the chinese are ahead of Boeing and America, I don't think so... Unless you have a link or something?

Boeing has been doing tests with hypersonic missiles though.... the X-51

en.wikipedia.org...

These missiles are hypersonic because they are ballistic missiles. All ballistic missiles at re entry are hypersonic. Actually the chinese missile is high hypersonic as mentioned on the wiki page:

Wiki page

reply to post by KnawLick


India has the BrahMos in service, and is in talks to export it to several countries. It was a joint development between India and Russia. They are in talks with Russia to develop a follow on missile as well.

reply to post by Zaphod58


And the Brahmos is supersonic and a hypersonic version is being developed. And this is not even a ballistic missile, its a cruise missile with a full hypersonic flight.

reply to post by KnawLick


The X-51 isn't a missile. It's a technology demonstrator aircraft.

reply to post by asen_y2k


The BrahMos-2 land launched missile has been tested, and the sea variant is expected to be tested this year or next year. It's a Mach-7 cruise missile, with a range of 290km.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Didn't realize the Chinese missile was ballistic, yikes. Hope we lied about "not" developing space weapons. Shoot it out in the atmosphere before reentery

As of now the x-51 is... But as soon as the technology is perfected it will be made into a hypersonic cruise missile. NASA and Boeing don't make anything they don't intend to turn into a weapon.

Or at least has military applications.

The deadly chinese missile has yet to hit a moving target. How do you guide something so fast against a target that has moved a dozen miles in any direction since the weapon launched......and without satellites, because there is just no way that the US will allow chinese satellites to threaten the fleet. As mentioned above DARPA hasn't even figured out how to maneuver a hypersonic craft reliably. I wasn't aware the warhead was actually hypersonic on the chinese missiles.

The US has tested the ability of the RAM system (deployed in carrier groups) to defeat the Chinese missile (simulated of course). It succeeds 95% of the time.

Factor all that together and the chinese missile is just another nominal threat on the battlefield, assuming it works as well as they claim.

And.......there is a certain risk involved in launching ballistic missiles into space during a war. It might make someone think you're going nuclear. Infact, if I were the US I'd declare that any extra-atmospheric missile launches would be presumed to be nuclear and will be met with an overwhelming counterstrike.

reply to post by KnawLick


The X-51 was intended to demonstrate hypersonic technology for the next generation Air Force medium bomber. They were looking to develop a hypersonic strike capability that could quickly be anywhere in the world, carrying a decent payload.

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by asen_y2k

 

I find this hard to believe. I think you are referring to the "aircraft carrier killer" missile that China has been advertising. But those missiles I highly doubt are hypersonic, as America doesn't even emplore hypersonic missiles.

Measure - Counter measure...


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cfad26733c7b.jpg[/atsimg]

RIM-162 ESSM
The RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) used to protect ships from attacking missiles, aircraft and surface threats. ESSM is designed to counter supersonic maneuvering anti-ship missiles

reply to post by Zaphod58


I understand what your saying and not disagreeing with you. But would you agree with me that, just because the military INTENDED it to prove hypersonic flight, doesn't mean they won't just slap the engine on the back of a JDAM and call it a day? After all NASA was created under a Defense Department mandate...

As for the pictures and videos of those anti-missile launchers they are irrelevant. We were talking about a hypersonic ballistic missile. Those launchers would be useless against such an attack.

The carriers do however have an innnnnnsane about of technology built in to stop the very thing china plans to do, swarm attacks. Not only missile launchers but the phalanx cannon is super cool too... Oh yeah and they have the Aegean missile ship in every strike group, whose sole purpose is to keep the flagship carrier alive... "we are quite protected from your pitiful band of rebels, skywalker" lol

Originally posted by asen_y2k
And the Brahmos is supersonic and a hypersonic version is being developed. And this is not even a ballistic missile, its a cruise missile with a full hypersonic flight.

So how do you target this "super weapon"? I mean it has to know where the carrier is at in the first place.

reply to post by KnawLick


There is actually a completely seperate program that is developing a hypersonic missile for the US military. The Air Force wants a hypersonic missile that can be carried by the F-22/35. But yes, I see what you are saying, although it would be harder than just taking the data from one project and plugging it into another.

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by asen_y2k
And the Brahmos is supersonic and a hypersonic version is being developed. And this is not even a ballistic missile, its a cruise missile with a full hypersonic flight.

So how do you target this "super weapon"? I mean it has to know where the carrier is at in the first place.

Just like a harpoon, and as the flight time is short, the target ship has moved a lot less by the time the missile arrives at the target.

The Chinese ballistic missile uses satellites.