Posted on 08/06/2010 4:12:06 PM PDT by Kaslin
Military Superiority: By the end of the year, China could deploy an anti-ship missile capable of hitting U.S. aircraft carriers at long range. The naval dominance that American foreign policy depended on may be at an end.
When the naval planners of Imperial Japan were laying out the attack on Pearl Harbor, the major question on their mind was — where are the American carriers? In the end, their failure to find them doomed Imperial Japan to defeat.
Since World War II, every president alerted to a crisis has asked the same question — where are the carriers? These floating air bases the size of small towns were visible signs of American power, that we meant business and were able to project that power deep within a potential enemy's territory.
Now our naval supremacy is being challenged with the final testing and imminent deployment of the Dong Feng 21D, a land-based ballistic missile capable of traveling 10 times the speed of sound and hitting fast-moving and heavily-defended American carriers at a distance of 900 miles with deadly hull-penetrating warheads.
China is building its own carrier fleet, but it does not have to match us ship-for-ship with such a long-range carrier-killer. "China can reach out and hit the U.S. well before the U.S. can get close enough to the mainland to hit back," said Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College.
Such carrier-killers "could have an enduring psychological effect on U.S. policymakers," Yoshihara told the Associated Press. "It underscores more broadly that the U.S. Navy no longer rules the waves as it has since the end of World War II."
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Not to worry, Obama has a plan for this.
We will crush the Chinese through niceness and debt.
And give them a few trillion in Afgan mining rights.
Skeptical.
Hype to the extent that not even a mention or consideration of the multiple layers of air defense (i.e.: AEGIS, etc.) that incorporate a US CVs defense.
The military equivalent of the Edsel.
The welfare state so depleted Britain, the nation that long boasted the mightiest Navy on earth, that its war with Argentina in 1982 was a close run thing. Without our help, Argentina may have won.
In like fashion, Hussein intends to bleed our military forces at the expense of the destructive welfare state. The difference is that when Britain retreated, the US picked up the baton of freedom.
Not so this time. When the world says adios to PAX Americana, it says hello to a new Dark Age.
In the next real war, any US aircraft carrier will simply be a big fat target and a floating death trap. They won’t last past the first couple of days of real combat. In fact, I’m sure they will be taken out of the equation at the outset of hostilities.
“Now our naval supremacy is being challenged with the final testing and imminent deployment of the Dong Feng 21D,”
Oh, for Pete’s sake, the Chicomms can’t even manufacture a set of socket wrenches that work. Anyone who thinks the ChiComms are some sort of genuises are idiots. The ChiComms are at best monkeys looking for banana treats.
And no, the Chicomms aren’t worth squat as fighters. The lowly Vietnamese kicked the Chicomms butts in 1978. ( Go look it up.)
And all you monkeys who want to bring up Korea..
First, the UN gave up every Allied tactic to the ChiComms.
Second, Truman nixed bombing Peking, as MacArthur correctly suggested...
So, sue me.....
The fact is after the Cold War the Navy moved from long range fighters such as the F-14 and bombers like the A-6 to Strike Fighters like the F/A-18. The bombs got smarter but the carriers have to move closer.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
American carriers operate as part of a Carrier Battle Group. The carrier is only one part of the Battle Group. It is the center piece to be sure but carriers do not act alone. They are formidable even if they were alone.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Keep living in your little fantasy world, bud. You’re going to say that our enemies have no chance against the US military right up until the time that the USA, and the US military, get annihilated in the next real war by both China and Russia. People like you that think our enemies are incapable “monkeys”, as you stated, are almost as dangerous to our national security as Obama.
The last time I looked, the US military has been shrinking both in size and capability on all fronts, while our potential enemies are modernizing and rapidly expanding their capabilities. We have been disarming as fast as we possibly can. The Chinese and the Russians have been doing just the opposite.
I suggest that you stop living in the 1950’s.
I say we should initiate the only meaningful game changer, we have.
Which we better use, before we lose everything:
Begin turning all those container ships around. Commence the trade war. And don’t back down.
It’s that. Or we’re heading to history’s dustbin. Industrial, financial and technical Davy Jones Locker for the US of A.
Wake up people.
If they actually have this, everyone thank Bill Clinton.
are these missiles invulnerable to AEGIS?
I’d think we have been working on this issue for a very long time....... the article doesn’t even mention AEGIS
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
or does it depend upon trying to overwhelm the system with numbers?
I’d thought that AEGIS is up to handling even hundreds of incoming “targets” nowadays but I have no idea what the Chicoms are up to with this missile...... anyone really KNOW something?
I’d think we have been working on this issue for a very long time....... the article doesn’t even mention AEGIS
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
or does it depend upon trying to overwhelm the system with numbers?
I’d thought that AEGIS is up to handling even hundreds of incoming “targets” nowadays but I have no idea what the Chicoms are up to with this missile...... anyone really KNOW something?
Enchante, you ask some very good and interesting questions. I am not knowledgeable enough on the topic to even tell you a good sea story.
I did ping the list to your post on the hope that someone else may know more, but your questions are not directly Navair related. If there was an ALLNAV list, someone on it might be better qualified to answer them than we are.
I’ve been out of the community for quite a while, but when I was active (90-96) the main vulnerability of the Aegis system was the sea-skimming missile. NATO Sea Sparrow was much more effective against those threats. Aegis was designed to handle 100 Backfire Bombers launching 2 or 3 missiles each at long range. Aegis was very effective against those mass raid threats, but the sea skimmers were a different story. Remember, you had a 12 mile horizon to detect and engage an incoming threat. I don’t know if that helps, but that’s what I remember...
Jeff Head is kind of the Aegis expert, but I don’t know if he’s been freeping much lately...
An AEGIS system can burn through a lot of missiles very fast.
After that it is the distance at which the missile is detected. Do we detect it via our radar or via ESM?
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.