Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

Miramar_14_MV-22_1621a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_1726a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_0074a1.JPG

Miramar_14_FA-18C_0409a.JPG
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





2 styles of naval tactics today

This is a discussion on 2 styles of naval tactics today within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Hello all, OK, I renamed my post to a more appropriate title. I was wondering of your opinions on which ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old August 5th, 2006   #1
Banned Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5
Threads:
2 styles of naval tactics today

Hello all,

OK, I renamed my post to a more appropriate title. I was wondering of your opinions on which navy has the most effective style of fighting. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, I served in the USN for 6 years and therefore know a little something about naval tactics and combat. Based on my own analysis, there are two prime styles of fighting.

The Soviet style of naval fighting is the 'aggressor' style of fighting, with emphasis on missile boats, guided missile cruisers and destroyers, and attack submaries. No carriers are involved in this style of fighting. The fleet is centered around the guided missile surface ships with their SS-N-9 Sunburn ASMs, and the attack subs with their 53 cm torpedoes, which will hopefully evade enemy sonar and cause maximum damage. In this style of fighting, the Aggressor fleet isn't equipped with an effective interceptor/countermeasure system to deal with incoming enemy missiles/aircraft/torpedoes. Also, there is limited to ASW capability in this 'aggressor' style of naval fighting. This 'aggressor' style of naval fighting is practiced by the 'underdog' navies of the world, like China, Russia, and India, which hope to use a greater emphasis on anti-ship/anti-carrier ability to hopefully even the scores fighting a more powerful navy like the United States' navy. The aggressor style of naval warfare also involves the element of surprise to catch the enemy navy by surprise when the massive (and hopefully pre-emptive) vollet of ASMs and torpedoes arrive.

Then, there is the 'Western' style of naval fighting. This is more balanced than the 'aggressor' style. The fleet is more well rounded overall and suited for more tasks rather than just destroying enemy ships. In the 'Western' stype of naval combat, there is less emphasis on guided missile cruisers and missile boats to destroy the enemy fleet. Still the ASM missile capability onboard the Western guided missile cruisers/destroyers are as good if not better than the Soviet ASMs (as the Harpoon and TASM cruise missiles outrange Soviet ASMs by at least three times). In the 'Western' style of naval combat, the fleet is not centered around the surface ships. The fleet is centered around the aircraft carrier and its escorts, which can be used for many tasks (like ASM, ASW, strike, air superiority mission, or shore bombardment). There are fewer attack subs (though these attack subs are admittedly more capable than the Soviet versions) and there is more anti-submarine capability among the surface ships. Overall, the Western style of fighting naval battles is as concerned with protecting their own assets as well as destroying the enemy fleet, (unlike the 'aggressor' style of naval combat I discussed earlier). There is a much greater anti-missile capability with SM-1/SM-2 interceptors onboard the surface ships and Phalanx CIWS. Not to mention superior intelligence (AEGIS) and ECM. This 'Western' style of fighting naval battles is found in the more dominant navies of the world today, like the US Navy, Japanese Navy, British Navy, and other European navies.

So of the 'Aggressor' and 'Western' style of fighting naval battles, which style of naval combat do you find superior and which will come out first in 21st century naval combat? Your guess is as good as mine.
USAalltheway725 is offline   Reply With Quote
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
List of International commando elites The Watcher Military Strategy and Tactics 7 May 17th, 2010 06:49 PM
China Naval Modernization (Implications for US Naval Capabilities) SABRE Navy & Maritime 66 February 1st, 2006 03:37 AM
A really nice account of Pak Navy's psycological hold over Indian Navy. farooqjalalmalik Navy & Maritime 24 January 4th, 2005 01:20 PM
Navy, Marine Corps Team to Revolutionize Naval Warfare The Watcher Navy & Maritime 0 March 19th, 2004 09:45 PM
China And France: Naval Exercises Winter Navy & Maritime 0 March 13th, 2004 05:22 PM

Old August 5th, 2006   #2
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14
Threads:
I seriously doubt that western ASM outrange russian ones. In fact russian ASM-missiles like the Sunburn seem to be much supierior in all aspects, as they - as u said correctly - emphasise on the use of these missiles. They have missiles especially build to hit carrier groups, that surpass western missiles in range, speed and warhead size considerably and that can be read on a lot of websites easily. Can u show any evidence for your statement?
Marc Aurel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #3
Banned Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5
Threads:
Well, I read from somewhere in Sinodefence forum that USN outranges its opponents by a minimum range of three times. Perhaps Harpoon is inferior to Sunburn ASM, but is the US Navy also has the TASM, which is the modified tomahawk meant for naval anti-ship use. This, while it may be slower and somewhat less sophisticated than SS-N-9, nonetheless outranges it by hundreds of miles.

I also think that loading F-18E/F, S-3, and EA-6 (and maybe even the Harrier) with Harpoons, TASMs, and Mk50s for an anti-ship strike, and then launching from a carrier also gives a US Navy (and other Western navies) a huge advantage in range and firepower. The anti-ship strike could be launched from hundreds of miles away and then could deliver hundreds of ASMs to their targets at maximum range. THis is what I believe puts the US Navy, British Navy, and other Western Navies in better standing than navies which use the 'Aggressor' tactics with ASMs launched from ships.

Nonetheless Russian systems like SS-N-9 Sunburn and other impressive arrays of ship delivered ASMs are not to be underestimated and the USN should develop more advanced ECM and interceptors (perhaps SM-3 or SM-4) to deal with them.
USAalltheway725 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #4
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,678
Threads:
I thought TASMs have been retired from active service and rebuild into land attack TLAMs.
I also thought that Prowlers are able to use HARMs and no Harpoons.
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2006   #5
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 257
Threads:
USAalltheway725, you are 15, how can you be serving in the navy for 6 years? That would make you.... 9 years old when you start serving...LOL...
You seem to be a habitual lier...from the wording and grammar of your posts, it's easy to deduce you are not even out of high school.

Last edited by dioditto; August 8th, 2006 at 07:57 AM.
dioditto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2006   #6
Defense Professional / Analyst
Captain
bd popeye's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 686
Threads:
2 styles of navy tactics used today

Quote:
USAalltheway725, you are 15, how can you be serving in the navy for 6 years? That would make you.... 9 years old when you start serving...LOL...
You seem to be a habitual lier...from the wording and grammar of your posts, it's easy to deduce you are not even out of high school.
I agree..we just don't know how old you are USAalltheway If in fact you served in USN for 6 years where were you stationed? And what were your basic duties? What was your CO's name? Who was the CMC?..What color was your ID card? What is PSD? What is the BOQ? What is the BEQ? what is PWC?? What is PRT?.Those are far questions for anyone that served in the USN.Thank you.

Now back to the subject at hand.

Quote:
I thought TASMs have been retired from active service and rebuild into land attack TLAMs.
I also thought that Prowlers are able to use HARMs and no Harpoons.
True on both accounts. If USAalltheway served in the position he says he did he should have know that answer. Instead of posting this:

Quote:
I also think that loading F-18E/F, S-3, and EA-6 (and maybe even the Harrier) with Harpoons, TASMs, and Mk50s for an anti-ship strike,
Oh by the way USAalltheway, the USN has retired most of it's S-3's in favor of more SH-60's.....
bd popeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2006   #7
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7
Threads:
I don't see the difference between your 2 ways of fighting style. The former (Aggressor) simply have less or lack defensive capabilities. The ''Western'' country has more money to develop better defense... that's all. Most military with limited ressource or technology focuses on offense first.
LtDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24th, 2006   #8
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 67
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waylander
I thought TASMs have been retired from active service and rebuild into land attack TLAMs.
I also thought that Prowlers are able to use HARMs and no Harpoons.
Correct on all counts. The TASM was retired in 1992, as were the nuclear-tipped land attack versions of Tomahawk. Examples of both were converted into the normal land-attack variants (HE unitary and HE submunition) during the late 1990s.

The EA-6B can fire HARM, but not Harpoon. Harpoon requires a special firing panel inside the aircraft. There are enough types (F/A-18, S-3) in a carrier's air wing capable of firing Harpoons anyways.
Jtimes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:33 PM.