With modified fire control system, China's Su-30 fighter jets might be aircraft carrier's nightmare

China Military Online ^ | 2019-02-01

[Diogenesis]

another Clinton American-tech-XFER against America?

covered up by Uranium-1-Mueller?

what is the likelihood.

[Da Coyote]

This is almost like “climate change” - in that we’re getting at least one “Chinese end of the world military weapon” report per day.

Perhaps these things work.

Perhaps not.

Our biggest problem is that we still have not eliminated the Dorkbama milquetoast idiots that managed to do a good job of wrecking the Navy, not so-called Chinese (Clinton supplied) technology.

[Vaquero]

Carriers are sitting ducks. They replaced battleships as the Flagship of the fleet (and rightly so for WW 2 and the early Cold War) They in turn need to be replaced as flagships by subs. Both hunter killers and boomers.

For police actions like the gulf war et al they are fine. If We fight China or Russia? Carriers will be the first to go. (That includes China’s fancy new carriers).

[sukhoi-30mki]

This is not a new weapon system; China received the first SU-30MKKs around 2000 or so. They are adapting these systems, that is the news.

[central_va]

We need to sink every aircraft carrier now in a preemptive strategic play to render their missile threat obsolete.

[central_va]

Carriers are sitting ducks

You agree then that we need to sink our carrier fleet now. Why wait?

[Vaquero]

I wrote they are excellent for small police actions. Fighting ISIS etc. when push comes to shove and we are against Russia/China etc. all the carriers are sitting ducks and basically just targets.

[allendale]

The fact is that all surface capital ships are obsolete floating coffins. Brave young crews sent to watery graves by “battleship”, politically correct admirals.

[central_va]

Carriers are sitting ducks

That is why India, Russia and China are desperately trying to build a viable carrier fleets. Carriers will be obsolete when the concept of air superiority over huge swaths of ocean becomes obsolete, i.e. never. So how long were you in the Navy admiral?

[rjsimmon]

all the carriers are sitting ducks and basically just targets.

Then you have never seen a carrier at flank speed.

[central_va]

You agree then we should just get rid of the Navy surface/air entirely right?

[allendale]

By the end of WW I, it became obvious that horse cavalry, despite over three thousand years of action around the world and a love of horses, was obsolete, had no role or survivability on a modern battlefield. Surface warships in an era of satellite and magnetic resonance surveillance, pin point guidance systems, stealth supersonic missiles and equally stealth and quiet submarines cannot survive against a technologically semi sophisticated opponent despite up to date defensive weaponry. It would be illogical and immoral to send brave young crews into battle on these later day “horses”.
You may have not noticed but once the Iranians became armed with the stealthy Chinese shore to ship missiles that they developed ( yes with a Clinton supplied American designed guidance system) to control the Taiwan Strait, the presence of American ships in the Persian Gulf became untenable.
Modern technology and realities are harsh arbiters of behavior.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

They in turn need to be replaced as flagships by subs.

There is a saying amongst submariners in the US Navy;
"There are only two kinds of vessels at sea. Submarines and targets."

[JudgemAll]

With the advant of guided shells and artillery range of 100 miles, the battle ship might make a comeback.

[JudgemAll]

There was a project for a sub carrying jump jets. I think that would he awesome

[Abathar]

Preemptive revenge - One of my favorite tactical maneuvers...

[DCBryan1]

Then you have never seen a carrier at flank speed.

Ha...with Ticos and Burkes with their VLS open ready to rock and roll.

[Alas Babylon!]

Retired US Air Force here, let me jump in with my opinion.

I fear we are reaching the same point, vis-à-vis manned versus unmanned fighters.

The USAF has what we used to call the “Fighter Mafia”, back in the 1990s, led by General McPeak, but basically these boys believed that the fighter pilot's skill and daring-do were all that mattered to first sweep the skies of the enemy before bombing, close air support, etc.

And even so, sweeping the skies of the enemy really is job #1 for the USAF--otherwise our people die in aerial attacks when their people should die in OUR aerial attacks--i.e., CAS.

Now that was 20-30 years ago, but the USAF has been doing counter-insurgency for 20 years now and lost there focus on a larger, more lethal enemy like Russia or China.

There is no Taliban or ISIS Air Force we have to fight. Those skills get lost.

I fear that the focus now goes back to the manned fighter, when we really should be looking at unmanned Aerial weapons. Weapons that are far cheaper than a single fighter (like the F-35, which now runs $130 million each) and because of this, so many more can be deployed in fight.

The first country to figure this out, and can make robust, autonomous fighting drones in large numbers will, imho, win the next big war.

That could also mean autonomous ships and subs. I fear the days of Cyberdine and SkyNet are close at hand!

[allendale]

He who masters the technology wins. As retired USAF, would you want your son flying off a carrier?