Posted on 08/08/2013 4:24:05 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
ping
I would agree not to underestimate any enemy, but the word is the Chinese sub fleet is inferior, operationally and materially as well as poorly trained.
But they have a boatload of money to throw at stuff, and I would not underestimate the power of gobs of money.
You mean like, they pee on trees and howl at the Moon?
>> Russian supersonic missiles behave like wolves
So they launch a pack at a time... with a dominant leader missile?
>>>Can we jam then from launch? Can CIWS deal with multiple fast-moving targets?<<<
I think CIWS is not any effective against supersonic missiles.
It may only be useful against aircraft or slow Tomahawk-style targets.
Those numbers are not correct, except for Australia.
Here’s what is currently available to each of the nations you listed:
Russian:
SSBN (Borei): 2
SSBN (Delta IV): 10
SSGN (Oscar): 8
SSN (Yasen):2
SSN (Akula): 8
SSN (Sierra): 4
SSK (Lada): 2
SSK (Kilo): 22
Total Nuclear: 34
Total Diesel/Electric: 24
Total Russian Subs: 58
Chinese:
SSBN (Jin): 2
SSBN (Xia): 1
SSGN: 0
SSN: (Han): 3
SSN (Shang): 4
SSK (Quing): 2
SSK (Yuan): 8
SSK (Song): 13
SSK (Kilo): 12
Total Nuclear: 10
Total Diesel Electric: 35
Total Chinese Submarines: 45
(Note: The Chinese still operate approximately 15 old, Ming class diesel electrics, so with those the total goes to 60)
US Navy Submarines:
SSBN (Ohio): 14
SSGN (Ohio): 4
SSN (Virginia): 10
SSN (Sea Wolf): 3
SSN (Los Angeles): 42
Total US Submarines 73 (All nuclear)
Japanese:
SSK (Soryu): 5
SSK (Oyashio): 11
Total Japanese Submarines: 16 (All diesel electric)
Australia Submarines:
SSK (Collins): 6
Total Australian Submarines: 6 (All diesel electric)
And lets throw in India and South Korea as well since they figure heavily into the western Pacific and have modern forces of their own.
South Korean Submarines:
SSK (Chang Bobo): 9
SSK (Sohn Wonyil): 3
Total Korean submarines: 12 (All diesel electric)
Indian Submarines
SSBN (Arihant): 1
SSN (Chakra): 1
SSK (Sindhughosh): 10
SSK (Shishumar): 4
Total Nuclear: 2
Total Diesel Electric: 14
Total Indian Submarines: 16
The answer is no to both your questions. The navy has had these problems for decades.
Navy jamming effort has most always been concentrated on air to air combat to neutralize incoming hostile fighters with no capability against missile threats.
Surface jamming has to wait until the threat is over the visual horizon, too close for comfort at multiple mach closing velocity.
From what I remember of the EA6 pods, no reason they could not be reconfigured to the surface missile jamming mission. Just getting the thumb out of the USN to do it would be the problem.
Getting them onto the threat axis to do much good would be a problem as well, but they knew how to do that with the old Russian Backfire ASM threat a long time ago.
Could we have ships that launch drones with jammer pods for longer range?
Thanks...I was hoping you would jump in. I figured you had all those at your fingertips, I had to look around...:)
“Shkval rocket torpedo is the fastest on
the planet.”
I wouldn’t get too impressed. Supercavitation torpedoes are unguided weapons last I heard. They are straight runners, like WWII torpedoes
True but they run very very fast, kinda like a bullet, hard to dodge.
The Phalanx CIWS has been continually upgraded since the late 1980s to protect against increasingly faster and more maneuverable supersonic missile threats.
Onyx, now you're a supersonic Miss-ile.
You can see that Ivan has learned from his history.
5.56mm
LOL.
I hope I can help the Cruz Missile!
BUMP
This really comes down to a numbers game. The Russkies know how many SAMs we have aboard our cruisers/destroyers. Say we have 300 SAMs in a carrier battle group.
The Russkies only have to launch around 400-450 missiles to destroy the battle group. This would assume our SAMs have a 100% effectiveness rate. Their requirement would drop, or their chances of success increase, depending on the effectiveness of our missiles.
They learned from the kamikazies in WWII. No matter how good the defences...some will get through.
400-600 of their missiles is a heck of a lot cheaper than our carrier battle group.
All those submarines listed, and the greatest Sub power of the last century is omitted? Have the Germans stopped building them? I know they turned many of them over to the English at the end of the war, and apparently forgot to tell them they were leaking badly.
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.