Comparing Military Capabilities of US/Russia/China

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: Snail2 on November 30, 2015, 12:09:04 PM

Quote from: criptix on November 30, 2015, 11:27:01 AM

Please stop googling your wisdom on wikipedia please.
Explain to me how a icbm works and how it should be able to hit a moving target at water in wartimes.
Why do you think they developed asbm's for this job?
Please explain it to someone like me that has no clue about modern (naval) warfare.
You see, before the us lets one of it carrier downed by a nuclear strike they already would have started a first strike for sure.

You are right, ICBM are against big stationary targets and not against manouvering relative small (compared to a city) ships, so using those things against carriers would be wasting valuable resources, however the Chinese DF-21D and DF-26 anti ship ballistic missiles were designed for tracking and knocking out carriers. The only defense against those missiles would be taking out the supporting satellite systems.

Exactly. Countermeasures would be trying to destroy or jam the guidance systems of the asbm.

The paper i linked on page 1 discussed in one part chinas ability for c4isr which enables the asbm's to hit their target.
That seems to be the weakpoint of the chinese.
( im in no way a expert for asbm's - but this seems to be the main problem )

Snail2

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1000

Quote from: criptix on November 30, 2015, 11:27:01 AM

Please stop googling your wisdom on wikipedia please.
Explain to me how a icbm works and how it should be able to hit a moving target at water in wartimes.
Why do you think they developed asbm's for this job?
Please explain it to someone like me that has no clue about modern (naval) warfare.
You see, before the us lets one of it carrier downed by a nuclear strike they already would have started a first strike for sure.

You are right, ICBM are against big stationary targets and not against manouvering relative small (compared to a city) ships, so using those things against carriers would be wasting valuable resources, however the Chinese DF-21D and DF-26 anti ship ballistic missiles were designed for tracking and knocking out carriers. The only defense against those missiles would be taking out the supporting satellite systems.

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: bryant.coleman on November 30, 2015, 08:45:54 AM

Quote from: criptix on November 29, 2015, 11:43:49 PM

the missile would never hit the carrier.

a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier.

such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km.

You don't even know the basics of modern warfare.

Suppose the Russians launch an ICBM (either the SS-18 Satan or the SS-23 Spider) against an American aircraft carrier. How these missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates, submarines.etc are going to shoot it down? Right now there is no Ameircan anti-ICBM missile capable of shooting down a Russian ballistic missile.

Please stop googling your wisdom on wikipedia please.

Explain to me how a icbm works and how it should be able to hit a moving target at water in wartimes.

Why do you think they developed asbm's for this job?

Please explain it to someone like me that has no clue about modern (naval) warfare.

You see, before the us lets one of it carrier downed by a nuclear strike they already would have started a first strike for sure.

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3808

Merit: 1219

Quote from: criptix on November 29, 2015, 11:43:49 PM

the missile would never hit the carrier.

a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier.

such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km.

You don't even know the basics of modern warfare.

Suppose the Russians launch an ICBM (either the SS-18 Satan or the SS-23 Spider) against an American aircraft carrier. How these missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates, submarines.etc are going to shoot it down? Right now there is no Ameircan anti-ICBM missile capable of shooting down a Russian ballistic missile.

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: Tzupy on November 30, 2015, 05:39:27 AM

Quote from: criptix on November 30, 2015, 01:35:08 AM

...
something like this happens quite often if it is a aip submarine attacking.
there are a lot of nato exercises where such things happened and also the us navy leased a aip submarine from norway to exactly train against it.
so far it seems that the us navy has a lot of trouble against aip submarines.

The US Navy leased a Gotland class submarine from Sweden, for 2 years, then built a full size simulator of it and did the lightweight torpedo Mk54 BUG update.

Thanks for correction.

@carrier battlegroup

I still didnt find any military paper ( us or not) that states something like that.
There is no easy and safe method to down a carrier.
If im wrong please provide information.

Tzupy

legendary

Activity: 2170

Merit: 1094

Quote from: criptix on November 30, 2015, 01:35:08 AM

...
something like this happens quite often if it is a aip submarine attacking.
there are a lot of nato exercises where such things happened and also the us navy leased a aip submarine from norway to exactly train against it.
so far it seems that the us navy has a lot of trouble against aip submarines.

The US Navy leased a Gotland class submarine from Sweden, for 2 years, then built a full size simulator of it and did the lightweight torpedo Mk54 BUG update.

Snail2

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1000

Quote from: criptix on November 29, 2015, 11:43:49 PM

Quote from: bryant.coleman on November 29, 2015, 10:11:28 PM

Quote from: Gronthaing on November 14, 2015, 09:04:44 PM

If I'm not mistaken 1 or 2 more should be finished soon right? Indigenous, not just refitted. Don't know what their role will be though.

I think the PLAN is currently constructing an aircraft carrier, and it might be entering the service by 2018 or 2019. That said, aircraft carriers are obsolete now. A single ballistic missile (costing $10 million or $20 million) can destroy an entire aircraft carrier, which can cost as much as $5 billion to build. That is the reason why the Russians are not building any of them.

the missile would never hit the carrier.

a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier.

such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km.

the only thing i know of which could possibly down a carrier in a battlegroup are the latest state of the art aip submarines like the german U212 or U-216

@russian carrier

they dont only cost billions to build but also hundreds of millions per year to maintain.
it is just too expensive for russia.

Carrier groups are a WW2 concept and against a technologically advanced enemy it's pretty much obsolete today, especially because of all major powers what can challange the US have developed a series of weapons designed specifically for dealing with carriers, so these big beauties are pretty much in the same situation today as the battleships were in WW2.

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

It´s a huge gravy-train for corporate owners of politicians and of course a convenient unemployment reservoir, both building these things and later manning and maintaining them.

They plan to build 10-12 of those floating coffins until the middle of the century, currently at $13 billion a piece. What a staggering waste.

Balthazar

legendary

Activity: 3108

Merit: 1359

3M-54 Klub is sufficient to get rid of carriers.

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/should-america-fear-chinas-carrier-killer-missile-11321

this was quite an interesting read that gives details about technical and strategic elements of the df21d

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

I´m not sure how you defend against something traveling at Mach-10 and probably even faster in a few years. Not to mention that your defences would probably be jammed anyway.

Anyway; those carrier groups are great against opponents that can´t defend themselves and as a warning against others that can´t defend themselves. So, they´ve been used as tools of coercion and extortion around the world, which is their main purpose. They wouldn´t last long in a full-fledged war with opponents with modern missile and submarine technology which is why they´d be in port out of harm´s way.

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: galdur on November 30, 2015, 12:45:03 AM

Take a break from Pentagon/presstitute lah lah land fantasies and do some reading on Chinese anti-ship missile DF-21 and hypersonic missiles in general. Again, there´s a reason why missiles are missing from that propaganda in the OP.

can you please explain how the system works and what advantages it has and if there are possible counter measures?

Quote from: galdur on November 30, 2015, 01:17:36 AM

As for wonderland defence; in 2006 a Song class Chinese sub surfaced just two miles from a U.S. Aircraft carrier, right amongst the carrier group. And it´s anybody´s guess the number of such instances we don´t hear about. If it was war, that carrier is stone dead.

didnt i just talk about AIP submarines? the song class is not the newest model but still a high quality aip diesel submarine.
(chinese have even better submarines)
seems not that im the shill for some wonderland here.

something like this happens quite often if it is a aip submarine attacking.
there are a lot of nato exercises where such things happened and also the us navy leased a aip submarine from norway to exactly train against it.
so far it seems that the us navy has a lot of trouble against aip submarines.

jaylin

newbie

Activity: 41

Merit: 0

I think Chinese have such little military power compared to the power they seem to project to the rest of the world. Manpower is there tho!

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

As for wonderland defence; in 2006 a Song class Chinese sub surfaced just two miles from a U.S. Aircraft carrier, right amongst the carrier group. And it´s anybody´s guess the number of such instances we don´t hear about. If it was war, that carrier is stone dead.

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Take a break from Pentagon/presstitute lah lah land fantasies and do some reading on Chinese anti-ship missile DF-21 and hypersonic missiles in general. Again, there´s a reason why missiles are missing from that propaganda in the OP.

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: bryant.coleman on November 29, 2015, 10:11:28 PM

Quote from: Gronthaing on November 14, 2015, 09:04:44 PM

If I'm not mistaken 1 or 2 more should be finished soon right? Indigenous, not just refitted. Don't know what their role will be though.

I think the PLAN is currently constructing an aircraft carrier, and it might be entering the service by 2018 or 2019. That said, aircraft carriers are obsolete now. A single ballistic missile (costing $10 million or $20 million) can destroy an entire aircraft carrier, which can cost as much as $5 billion to build. That is the reason why the Russians are not building any of them.

the missile would never hit the carrier.

a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier.

such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km.

the only thing i know of which could possibly down a carrier in a battlegroup are the latest state of the art aip submarines like the german U212 or U-216

@russian carrier

they dont only cost billions to build but also hundreds of millions per year to maintain.
it is just too expensive for russia.

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

There is a very good reason why there are no missiles and systems associated with that in that military gear comparison in the OP. At this point in time it´s possible that a B-2 bomber could be relatively safe over Russia or China as long as its bomb bay doors stay closed but even that may not be enough. Things have been moving very fast in missile technology. As for aircraft carriers, I doubt that they´d leave harbor in an all out war except maybe as part of some last resort measures.

MRKLYE

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Designer - Developer

The americans for sure hold air superiority and in this day and age that is basically a nail in the coffin for any opposing faction.

However, the sheer manpower china possesses is pretty scary, They heavily out weigh the Americans in amount of people they could arm and deploy hands down. As much as i do not like actual war I would be interested is seeing simulations on if USA and China decided to go at one anothers throats via military means.

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3808

Merit: 1219

Quote from: Gronthaing on November 14, 2015, 09:04:44 PM

If I'm not mistaken 1 or 2 more should be finished soon right? Indigenous, not just refitted. Don't know what their role will be though.

I think the PLAN is currently constructing an aircraft carrier, and it might be entering the service by 2018 or 2019. That said, aircraft carriers are obsolete now. A single ballistic missile (costing $10 million or $20 million) can destroy an entire aircraft carrier, which can cost as much as $5 billion to build. That is the reason why the Russians are not building any of them.

galdur

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

If you´re going into prolonged conventional warfare against opponents that can defend themselves and bite
back you´ll need a massive industrial base to replenish the losses in materiel. And the U.S. is seriously lacking there. Aircraft carriers on the bottom of the sea aren´t going to be replaced just like that. As for the manpower to replace human losses, well look around you. 120 million fit for military service? I don´t think so.

Topic: Comparing Military Capabilities of US/Russia/China (Read 1565 times)