Comparing Military Capabilities of US/Russia/China

[galdur]

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.

[Snail2]

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.

[Tzupy]

...
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.

[criptix]

...
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.

[bryant.coleman]

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]

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.

[Snail2]

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]

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 )