Article from Defensereview.com
Personally however, could not agree more with the desperate need to bring back the S-3B Viking or develop something new (CV-22 Osprey-based ASW perhaps?).
Some interesting views - especially a navalised A-10...Can the U.S. Navy Defend Itself Against Chinese and Russian Military Tech?Posted on Monday, November 20 @ 00:56:12 PST by davidc
by David Crane
david at defensereview.com
By now, everyone and their mother knows that last month, in the Pacific, a Chinese submarine stalked a U.S. aircraft carrier battle group and surfaced within torpedo and missile firing range before being detected. DefenseReview can’t really say we’re surprised by this, especially since U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups are no longer utilizing the Lockheed Martin S-3B Viking Aircraft in the ASW/ASuW (Anti-Submarine Warfare/Anti-Surface Warfare) role. Frankly, it makes one wonder how the U.S. Navy plans to protect our carrier battle groups against modern quiet attack submarines armed with standard torpedoes, anti-ship missiles, and the new breed of supercavitating torpedoes like the Russian Shkval-2 (“Shkval” translates to “Squall”).
Given the current lack of U.S. ASW/ASuW capability, we don’t see how the U.S. Navy can possibly adequately defend itself against these threats. In January of this year (2006), Jane's Defence Weekly reported on a new “revolutionary” anti-ship version of the DF-21 medium-range ballistic missile being developed by the Chinese military, but the situation gets even bleaker when one takes into account the aforementioned high-speed, rocket-propelled guided supercavitating torpedoes like the Russian Shkval-2 ("Shkval" tranlates to "Squall") that's reported to weigh approx. 2700kg (5,923 lbs) and travel at 230-300mph. This supercaviating torpedo tech creates a real problem from a ship defense standpoint, since one has so little time to react to a threat coming in so fast underwater, even if you detect it quickly. At present, the U.S. Navy doesn’t appear to have effective anti-torpedo torpedoes, let alone torpedoes that can intercept ultra-high speed supercavitating torpedos.
Oh, and this just in: according to Aviation Week magazine, the Chinese military is developing a new high-speed cruise missile called Anjian (“Dark Sword”). The new missile was reportedly displayed at Air Show China. From the picture we’ve seen of it, Anjian also looks very stealthy, i.e. it looks like it utilizes stealth technology. If China’s already perfected this item, it would be another weapon that our Navy can’t combat.
Bottom line, our aircraft carriers are vulnerable against the latest Russian and Chinese torpedo and missile tech, and with the current U.S. naval defense philosophy, that situation isn’t likely to change anytime soon. Unfortunately, we no longer have an armored Navy (no more battle ships in service), which means we’re relying on our smaller, less armored high-tech ships like Aegis to protect the fleet--along with our aircraft carriers themselves, which, again, are vulnerable.
What happens if China decides to take back Taiwan? How can we protect it. At present, from a pure military/naval standpoint we probably can’t. The Chinese military can most likely sink our aircraft carriers, along with a lot of our other ships, at will. A group of Battleships would most likely be the most effective tool for defending Taiwan, but we no longer have any in service. The USS Wisconson and USS Iowa battleships are currently mothballed, and the USS Missouri and USS Hawaii are in museums in New Jersey and Philadelphia, respectively. That gives us four battleships to work with. The Wisconson and Iowa could most likely be brought back into service the fastest. Two to four battleships would probably be enough to handle the job, provided we could also defend against the Chinese subs.
Bring back the battleships!
For future anti-submarine warfare (ASW), we might want to consider the following:
1) Bring back the S-3B Viking Aircraft for ASW/ASuW. If the Navy doesn’t want to do that, perhaps they could consider converting the Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye or E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft to the ASW role. Or, they could navalize the A-10/OA-10 Thunderbolt II “Warthog” to create a two-seat “Sea Hog” capable of ASW/ASuW. Any/all of these options would be better than having no carrier-based ASW/ASuW aircraft in service, whatsoever.
2) Focus a lot of effort on developing viable supercavitating torpedoes with anti-torpedo/supercavitating torpedo capability.
3) Produce and field more P-3C Orion (P-3C Update III Anti-Surface Warfare Improvement Program [AIP], specifically) aircraft. Right now, if our numbers are correct, the U.S. military has approx. 108 of these aircraft in service. The P-3C aircraft are land-based, not carrier-based.
The U.S. has never had to go up against modern high-tech, quiet nuclear and hybrid-electric enemy subs in battle, and good thing, ‘cause we’re not prepared for it.
If we get into any kind of military conflict with China, it will most-likely stay conventional, and it will very likely be over the Middle East oil supply. The way China and Russia look at it, why should the United States control that supply? Why not them, instead? If it comes to a military conflict, the Chinese will most likely go for the U.S. military’s central nervous system and heart. They could even end up teaming with Russia to fight us, in which case we’d be in big, big trouble. Both the Russians and Chinese combined militaries will be formidable, and they will play chess, not checkers. We have to be prepared for this, and right now, we simply are not ready.
Personally however, could not agree more with the desperate need to bring back the S-3B Viking or develop something new (CV-22 Osprey-based ASW perhaps?).
