JFC FullerOn another note, CBG’s aren’t always entirely impossible to find, aside from dumb luck, they still have to be within reaosnable range of all necessary targets in a country, and the surrounding ocean could play a part. Just as an example, CBG’s operating against Iraq during the 2003 or 1991 wars wouldn’t exactly be hard to find based on where they usually parked up.
Do you have any idea the kind of square miles one would be talking about here? Especially with the ever increasing ranges of ship launched missiles and aicraft the area to be covered is vast and made larger by the mobility of ships which would allow them to transit to and from firing points should they choos. Again, strategic mobility.
Nor were they that hard to find when they turned up in the Taiwan straits when wasn’t absurd possibility there some time ago. But again, another irrelevant point. Any conventional strike by the US would hit threats to the CBG’s in the region first, either when the CBG first arrived or before using long range bombing/Tomahawk strikes.
They were meant to be found, it was a diplomatic exercise designed to demonstrate intent not a conflict scenario.
JFC FullerSure there is, they are sitting ducks against a large bomber or fighter force.
What else is there? Hmm, well in terms of Naval warfare? Nothing. You got that.
This is the point that you have been unable to prove throughout all these pages.
For Russia and China, CGBs are replaced by tanks and an air force. Land forces have all the mobility, firepower, and staying power a naval force has, perhaps more in some cases if you stick in the air arm of the military of the nation in question.
Which will be of absolutely no use once the USN has closed down the worlds oceans to their shipping and prepares to undertake infrastructure degrading conventional strikes at will from CBGs that they can not locate.
You really are in fantasy land. If the US had to choose backing down or dying, they would back down. Last time I say this. Can’t help the deluded.
They would not because they know that Russia would never actually launch first. You might be suicidal but the Russian leadership is not, they know the consequences of launching on the US and that is MAD.
It’s hardly a sitting duck, being a stealthy missile.
At 50,000ft against high performance land and airborne radars it certainly is. Stealth merely reduces signature it does not remove it. A Kh-101 will be tracked at that altitude by any competent land, air or sea based AD system with the reach in its radars and that includes Samson and Aegis.
Something as massive as the 900lb warhead doesn’t need 5m accuracy.
To damage anything of value it does.
Russia has all the world for its taking, don’t delude yourself buddy. Look at the world map, and you’ll figure this out. Its unmatched natural resources are something even the US dreams of!
Take a look at the state of it population, economy, armed forces etc etc. Russia is on the brink of insignificance, the US is worried about China and india not Russia.
And let’s not forget, the US priority might have been “destroying Russia” – but the USSR / Russia has been prioritizing that this does not happen!
Up to about 1989, after which followed a collapse in Military capabilities compounded by massive underinvestment for what little was left.
What radar horizon? Behind the huge mountain infront of every enemy air base? You can’t hide from short range air defenses that can cover a military base.
every AD network has weaknesses and holes, its that simple, and they will be exploited. if you think defending a fixed site is as simple as drawing circles on a map and putting your launchers in the middle of them you are seriously ill-informed.
JFC FullerFYI, MAD hasn’t been US policy since the Carter failu….erm…”administration”.
True, but the use of nuclear weapon will rapidly initiate a chain of escalation that makes MAD (whether policy or not) highly probable. Thomas Schelling got one thing right with his ‘threat that leaves something to chance’ concept.
JFC FullerFor one, the A-135 system was never going to be sold to anyone! But ABM testing is still conducted regularly at Sary Shagan in Kazakhstan. The difference is that a lot of the testing isn’t made as public as it is in the USA, where the justification for expense is far more politically visible. As for the S-500, they can’t seriously begin testing until 2015 I assume, as they aren’t required to have any hardware until then.
SOC, RIA Novosti has reported on Russian ABM testing on a number of occasions.
JFC FullerThere is everything lumbering about a fleet hauling its way across the entire Pacific Ocean LOL! 😀
Or the Atlantic Ocean, for that matter . . .
Perhaps you could suggest another armed force that provides such an incredible combination of mobility, conventional firepower and staying power? Simply put there is nothing lumbering about a 30 knot battle group.
Attacking Russia is suicidal for the US too in the long term. You still don’t see this since you live in fantasy land. The supreme 10 trillion plus economy could be destroyed in hours. Oh what a shame and stupid move that would be for the US LOL! 😀
Only if Russia goes nuclear, which it would not, again MAD.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=16088
Thread from this forum. Also, google all news about Yasen SSN. You will see for yourself.
Wow that is inaccurate! And it can only make its maximum range by acting as a sitting duck for every AD network and Fighter between Russia and its target! And that is even before we get to the difficulties Russia would have just launching them given the limited number of launch platforms and the fact that they would have surrendered the world oceans.
The people in Iraq and Afghanistan are too much for the US too handle, Russian reserve units won’t be any worse.
However Iraq (now won) and Afghanistan are a completely different type of warfare for which the US was simple not prepared. Destroying Russia (now China as russia becomes increasingly irrelevant) has been a US priority since the late 1940s. Thats why the USN is so well equipped to undertake the task.
Hahahaha, yeah okay. Sorry that Russia makes you feel small. It’s a common occurrence.
One day you are going to have to realise how unimportant Russia actually is and how it is becoming even less important every day.
Lines of Tomahawk missiles can’t exploit AD weaknesses.
Yes they can, they can fly low beneath radar horizons, programmed to exploit gaps etc.
So that’s what you call instances that screw over your dream of the invincible USN?
No this is what I call trash articles.
JFC FullerThe USN has a policy of naming Frigates & Destroyers after decorated heroes from the naval forces (Coast Guard, Navy, & Marines).
The stories behind the names of many of the USN’s surface warships is inspiring reading.
Other ships (such as carriers) are less inspiring (presidents, congresscritters, etc).
But it should be inspiring for presidents to keep paying for them: ‘But Mr Obama, if you dont let us have another carrier how will we possibly be able to name one after you? And if it is a smaller carrier it will mean you are less important than the other presidents.’;)
JFC FullerThe TLAMs won’t be anywhere near their targets when they are found, and the attacker will have no real surprise as the defender would be ready for an escalation. Targets that are in prime danger, and of prime importance to the defenders war machine would be well defended by point-defense systems well in advance of this lumbering assault you have devised.
There is nothing lumbering about an assault that can be directed from more or less any point on the world oceans. Strategic mobility will make it virtually impossible for any opponent to successfully defend against an all arms US offensive.
Your analysis is simply horrid, have you not even considered the other side of this? Would the US now, risk getting obliterated over some useless political quarrel with minimal economic gain it is pursuing with the likes of an idiot administration like that of Bush? Please. Do not make me laugh. The moment the Russians threaten to use nukes, it is LOSE-LOSE. Sitting and letting the economy get worse and worse over US blockade would be LOSE-WIN, and LOSE on the Russian side. Guess what the Russians choose? It sure isn’t being the only loser.Take your fantasies to the bar tonight, please.
This is very simple: Russia would never launch a first strike against the US because the end result would be no Russia rather than a Russia that is just even more humiliated than it is today. if you want to believe that Russia is suicidal then feel free but you are wrong.
No, the Kh-101 is 5000KM range. Unless you have otherwise evidence. The Yasen and other boats have 3100mile range weapons (4960KM) as per all sources, meaning that the Kh-101 is coming around in many forms.
Again, how many launch platform are there and having surrendered the worlds oceans they will be easy to defend against. Post sources providing the range.
Stashes are one thing, while a handy supply is another. Even if they aren’t on completely ready form, their components exist, and while the US plans this grandiose disaster of yours (mobilizing their reserve crap, remember?) the Russians are going to get their birds up, and commission their reserve units too, if they even feel it is necessary.
Haha, Russian reserve units! Have you seen the state of the active fleet! its falling apart at the seems! If Russia has all these stashed satellites and launch vehicles you say they have prove it.
Yes, I was waiting for this. The Russia is weak garbage. Take this garbage to the bar with your buddies if you have nothing better to talk about there, which I imagine you don’t. :rolleyes: Hey, wait, was it Russia that just cancelled the actually capable 5th gen figther? No, didn’t think so. Want to talk about unsustainable defense spending, look no further than the US of A.
LOL, US defense spending is magnitudes above Russia’s, its economy stronger, its population bigger and not imploding, its servicemen do more training and are better equipped in every way. Russia is nothing more than the broken shadow of what the Soviet Union used to be, a barely viable entity fast becoming little more than a giant North Korea in both importance and power whilst it is even further eclipsed by the US and as India, China and the European Bloc sail past it leaving it standing.
Yeah! It’s EASY to sail around the world on something the size of a small town. On the other hand, it’s SO hard to move some point-defense systems and long range SAMS to cover your air bases on roads. You are .. truly something my friend. :rolleyes:
I never said it was hard to move AD systems around, what I said it was hard to do was to actually create an all embracing weakness free AD network. Reality is that any AD network will always have holes n it and they can and will be exploited.
Did a good job of poking some nice holes in the “USN is invincible” garbage.
But your “fair” method of choosing evidence doesn’t help here. 😀
Not at all, the article that was posted is simply utter rubbish, cling to it if you will but it does you no favours as it is so weak.
JFC FullerIt’s a good way to give away your position and will not make anyone the size of Russia or China back down. That’s a lose-lose right there.
This has been covered multiple times, strategic movement gives the attacker a choice of time and place thus enabling him to take advantage of weaknesses in the defenders position. At the moment of attack the position will be revealed but if the cBG is not where the defender thinks it is and its missiles and plnes are flying through holes in the AD network then it has more than paid for itself. To argue that strategic mobility is useless is ludicrous.
No, that’s your little fantasy world. Sorry, but the USSR is gone.
Russia now says it will use nuclear weapons to defend itself FIRST.
So the US are deranged Islamists, since they will allow themselves to get plastered into oblivion by pissing off the Russians. Good one! 😀 :rolleyes:
What Tsar Putin says and what he will actually do are two very different things: think rationally about this, your economy is going down the pan but you and your people are still alive and your cities standing, why would then decide to destroy your country by initiating MAD?
Do you have any clue as to the range of the Kh-555 and Kh-101?
Russia can hit GUAM from Kamchatka. . .
About 3000km (the 5000 you are currently wetting yourself over only applied to the prop powered version), whilst useful it will not enable the Russian to inflict the sort of damage that the USN is capable of doing simply due to the very limited number of launch platforms that Russia has by comparison.
What do you know about Russia’s space assets? :rolleyes:
No really, what do you? Do you have inventory?
Yes, every satellite that gets put up gets tracked by NORAD and given an id; check out Pavel Podvigs site.
Something tells me if they felt something big coming, it wouldn’t take much to launch a few Cosmos satellites from Plesetsks with plenty of ELINT birds.
You know, from the country that basically monopolizes space launches? :rolleyes:
Evidence echo, show us that there are stashes of such satellites and the required launch platforms to get anywhere near the number needed. There is none as storing launchers is simply not commercially viable. Your feelings are useless without evidence.
Tell that to the Germans in WW2! :rolleyes:
We have already covered this, the Soviet Union is a completely different beast to the bankrupt, under-invested, economically weak Russia with a collapsing population that we see today.
EW works both ways.
Defending key targets isn’t that hard if you plan in advance.
No its actually very hard and very silly to suggest otherwise.
Oh good, so they would give months of planning to Russia or China to set up defenses, launch additional recon assets, and mine the crap out of important waters. Perfect! 😀
And you think the USN would be doing nothing?
What SS-26 posted makes Jonesy’s “analysis” and “evidence” look like a drop in the pond.
No it does not, what SS-26 posted is little short of garbage.
JFC FullerI dont understand this ,nobody mentioned Over The Horizon radar russia and china use in pacific with 700-3000km ranges , and also good underwater sonar network that tracks rumbling of carrier group very far away.
-that keeps cariers of your coast and thats most important,but if you want to track them over the planet another approches are needed.
That issue was covered many pages ago.
JFC FullerStrategic movement that would make them relatively useless for a conflict that pertains to this planet Jonesy. Roaming around firing Tomahawks doesn’t win wars. Not against anyone of significance at least.
Strategic movement useless? What? Startegic movement is one of the most useful assets one can have! This has already been covered anyway, and how can firing Tomahawks not contribute to a war effort?
Any attempt to choke off the Russian economy long term over some small military spark, or the Chinese one for that matter, will end in nuclear fire. So that’s out of the question.
No it would not, no country, with the exception of the most deranged Islamist ones would invite complete nuclear annihilation upon themselves in response to economic degradation……..fact.
The Russians might even return the favor and litter everything US economy-related with their rather capable new Kh-555 and Kh-101 cruise missiles.
How? If Russia has surrendered the worlds oceans it will have serious problems just getting the handful of launch platforms it actually has in a position to launch such missiles.
They were supposed to launch within the last week! It seems that the one of the satellites has been sent back to the factory as they discovered a defect somewhere in the onboard computer if I recall correctly!
I would bet they could even use their Kobalt-M satellies to take digital snaps of areas in question. Nothing like a nice fat Nimitz! 🙂
This has been covered before, Russia has no where near the required space tracking assets to undertake any sort of realistic search and track operation against an at sea CVBG. On this issue you have repeatedly refused to answer the facts put to you by multiple posters in this thread.
Of course, but let’s face something else. It’s also much easier to REINFORCE the prime TLAM targets once you feel that sh1t can hit the fan right? Defenders always have the advantage. Always. You should know this. Whether it’s pure ground combat or naval bastion defense.
Simply not true, neither side has the advantage, especially when one side has the strategic mobility offered by multiple CBG’s with SSN’s and SSGN’s.
Mobile short-range SAM systems like the TOR can be very very very effective at this sort of thing.
Sure, but they will never plug all the holes, once you start laying down air defences t becomes very clear very quickly that it is significantly more challenging than just filling theoretical circles on a map. In addition to topography, geography, even geology such a network is likely to have to deal with intensive EW warfare too.
Sufficient firepower would be what, only Tomahawks? Against China and Russia, while they are on high alert, 1 or 2 carrier groups may not even have enough to saturate reinforced defenses. Against the Russians any 1 pronged assault is a great way to commit suicide, as strategic bombers can be rushed from other parts of the country on rather short notice!
Assuming such a scenario ever happened the US would initiate a massive mobilisation including the reserve fleet, forget 1-2, you would see 10+ along with dozens of SSN’s and the navy would only be part of an integrated response drawing in USAF assets as well. With the coming of the F-35B on the amphibs this situation gets even worse for you as the USN will have the ability to supplement its CVN’s with smaller strike carriers by simply loading the amphibs up as such.
Oh wow, stories about stories? Come on now, some blog of a USN commander is hardly meaningful about Soviet naval capability! Don’t waste my time please.
Jonesey has provided considerably more evidence and insight on this issue than you have. In fact I admire his patience, every time you repeat one of you points he calmly rebuts it with overwhelming evidence, facts and analysis.
JFC FullerAhahaha.. Here comes the Jonesyrussophobia at its best again. Typical for a Brit, don’t worry.Yes, coastal surveillance is exactly how Russia or China are going to find those carriers, due to limited areas of conflict.
Limited? Not as limited as the range of coastal surveillance systems. Plus the fact that either of those countries would therefore have ceded the rest of the world oceans to the US would mean that their economies would be in bad shape very quickly.
Russia could also use satellites – Liana/Lotos-S ELINT birds.
Russia’s space recon capability has collapsed since the end of the Cold War, how many of those birds are currently in orbit?
I start talking of SAMs stopping MOST, not all TLAMs. Don’t pretend like you don’t fantasize of the US fleet stopping every missile that gets shot at it either. :rolleyes:
And the minute those TLAM’s (+ F-18’s and soon JSF’s) start getting through the opponents recon and attack capability starts to be rapidly degraded. However you are mixing the two issues, the point of being mobile and difficult to find is that the USN can choose the time and place of its attack. Take Gulf War 1 for instance, US carriers launched aircraft from the Med to exploit weaknesses in Iraq’s air defence network in the north of the country. No AD network is all embracing and all have weaknesses. As the ice caps recede this issue will get harder for the Russians as their long northern coastline is exposed.
The moment a carrier takes any MEANINGFUL action against Russia or China, it WILL be exposed. Very very quickly. An airbase lost for a whole fleet potentially lost is not a great proposition for the US Navy! 😎
Or wait, are F-18s invisible? And do they disappear off the screens of radar once they are done with their mission?
Hell, an E-2 on patrol can give away the position of the carrier.
Which is why when that ‘meaningful action’ takes place it will be against a lot more that just a single air base. And again, If the opponent country has just abandoned the world oceans to the USN things will not be looking to sharp for them economically.
You know nothing of what the Soviets did or did NOT know. Don’t pretend to be some all knowing messiah of naval warfare here. It’s a very interesting fantasy of yours, when you really think you know what the USSR was tracking, or not tracking, over the period of the Cold War. 😀
Whatever you think you know about the US “deceptive” maneuvers, the Russian Navy, along with China, know 10x more. Don’t you worry about that.
A tacit admission that you know equally less and that you are struggling to support this argument, if you have some inside information on the Russian and Chinese tracking capabilities then please enlighten us.
JFC FullerJust to add to what Jonesey said, one of the great advantages of Trident is the missiles range, it puts the carrying submarine further away from its targets therefore making it harder to find- it was a major issue for the Soviets in the late eighties.
JFC FullerThe Sukhoi Su-9 (the first time the designation was used) was a twin-Jumo fighter that looked superficially like an Me-262.
It had a slender fuselage, low set, unswept wings under which were mounted the jet engines.
It was as similar to a Meteor as it was to a 262 and was NOT based on the latter.
It was developed into the Su-11 and Su-13 – with two indigenous Lyulka TR-1 turbojets.
The Su-11/13 looked even more like a Meteor – because the engines were more mid-set on the wings.
Like you say, Sukhoi suffered from the influence that Yakovlev had on the Council of Ministers – it was he who spread the suggestion about the Su-9 being an Me-262 ‘copy’.
Ken
Sorry Ken I should have clarified, I was not suggesting that Sukhoi copied the 262, simply that the insinuation undermined the type therefore revealing a very strong distaste for anything overtly German that would explain why the 262 was produced in the communist bloc.
JFC FullerThere were some minor issues with building 262’s after the Nazi collapse. German industry was being demolished and the distributed production tooling for the 262 made re-starting production difficult. Interestingly I have seen references to Sukhoi developed fighters being abandoned in late 50s after it was suggested to Stalin that they were just warmed over 262’s. Eastern Europe took what it was given by the new overlords and western Europe had no industry and took donations from Uncle Sam and Little Britain. Furthermore, 2-3 years passed after 45 before the Cold War really got cold during which time much of the German technology had been absorbed anyway- see F-86/Mig-15.
It is worthy of note the Tu-95 is essentially a combination of a highly evolved B-29 airframe with some Nazi designed turboprops in it.
JFC FullerWhatever you may think about hiding carriers in the open sea, you greatly overestimate this capability especially against opponents with sufficient recon and intelligence assets.
Which opponents would these be?
Wherever a carrier may be deployed, will still have a limited effective range, TLAMs or not. Any nation provoked by the US will be on high alert, and the US has nothing of the sort that is very hard to shoot down in terms of missiles for 1980s or later defensive SAM systems. Any deployment of aircraft or missiles, be it E-2s or F-18s or Tomahawks will do a nice job of giving away the CBG’s position to at least some extent. There is no other way to spin this.
The point at which such an engagement begins the opponents strike and recon assets come under fire and their effectiveness is degraded rapidly. If you wish to delude yourself about the ability of US navy assets to penetrate defended air space then go ahead. Furthermore the CBG does not have to be undertaking a strike mission, if its presence shuts down shipping to a country simply by its presence it may already have won depending on who the opponent is.
Stop living in your fantasy world of the US pulling of some clandestine attack on another powerful nation. No such garbage will happen, and any such event will be preceded by very evident political or economic tensions between the nations in question.
Of course such a conflict will be proceeded by evident actions, see both Iraq wars as an example, but the timing, location and nature of the attack can remain clandestine until the moment it takes place. Knowing that a CBG is around but not knowing where has far greater diplomatic, and if required military, effect than knowing where it is.
Sign In
