Sinking an Aircraft carrier

[corsair7772]

Oh well the topic sayz all. This thread is about naval operations to sink an aircraft carrier ranging fom the Soviets vs Americans to the Pakistanis vs Indians. Discuss the possible elements needed to strike at an aircraft carrier like submarines, martme strike aircraft etc. No Flames, im keeping a eye on this forum myslef.

Frankly speaking on an indo-pak scenario i think that the PN has a chance of damaging the Gorshkov but not sinking it. As the viraat is probably going to be operating along with the Gorshkov its the same kind of protection for it. Airstrikes are difficult and so are Submarines so it possible tht it can be hit only by a small FAC, when the Indian taskforce is operating close enough to pakistani shores to allow a combined arms operation.

 

[XEROX]

It would take 5+ cruise missiles to SINK a large (40,000+) aircraft carrier!!

 

[doggychow14]

a couple of sunburns missiles will do just fine

 

[XEROX]

Id prefer the BrahMos over the Sunburns to sink an aircraft carrier

 

[doggychow14]

either is good enuf. or better yet both at once. or u can throw a couple Yakhont in it 2. the gorshov is not really an aircraft carrier. more of a helocarrier.

 

[corsair7772]

No actually the Gorhkov WAS something of a helo carrier, dats why india made such a lot of modifications on it. In indian insignias itll be a perfect Aircraft carrier. Thats when the Viraat turns into a helo carrier.
I think the PN would have a better chance trying to take out the carrier in port. Airstrikes are out of the question. Subs are a good choice here. The indians have much left to do to bridge the ASW gap.

 

[doggychow14]

i still believe the best bet are sunburn missiles or Yakhon missiles. americans do not have the ability to shoot these missiles down let alone india. how ever in order launch these missiles many other indian navy ships must be sunk or disabled because i'm guessing that they won't just be sitting there as pakastan gets close enuf to launch such an attack

 

[corsair7772]

exactly. so its best to just maka a hit and run raid against the carrier using the subs and just damage it enough to keep it in port for a month, well out of the war period.

 

[insas556]

exactly. so its best to just maka a hit and run raid against the carrier using the subs and just damage it enough to keep it in port for a month, well out of the war period.

The Indian navy knows well from past experience that the Pak Navy's subs are quite a threat. In fact against the Indian navy , they are PNs best bet. The recognition of this threat also has made sure that the Indian navy is very rapidly developing its anti-sub warfare capabilities.
The Delhi, Talwar class ships already have very good capabilitiesThe Kamovs and the re-operational Seaking Helos also have capable anti sub warfare capabilities.Along with the Tu-142s existing IN anti-submarine capability is enough to make sure its not an easy hit and run. In any case a carrier is not something you leave alone at any time.
As for the future with talk of Israeli up grades to Tu-142s,the future project 28 ships designed specifically for subs, acquisitions of maritime recce/strike aircraft maybe, Orions will bolster it much more.
Also with the SU-30s in the Maritime strike role, with the Jags,and future Mig29Ks, the Harriers coupled with improving capabilities provided by KA-31Helos ,the TUs etc. , and further bolstered by the tremendous punch and range of the IAF with the refuellers and the Phalcons , the PN is going to have it hands quite full I think.
And off course there will be indian Subs too which shall be lurking around.

 

[XEROX]

What would be the Primary missile defence systems for the admiral Gorshkov Aircraft carrier in case of cruise missile attacks!!

btw - is there anything official regarding the akula 2 subs, last i heard they were supposed to be delivered early 2004 but nothing else??

 

[tatra]

What would be the Primary missile defence systems for the admiral Gorshkov Aircraft carrier in case of cruise missile attacks!!

On board: a couple of Kashtan CIWS with twin 30mm gatlings and 8km range SA-N-19 missiles or - perhaps - VL Barak SAM.

But mainly it would rely on its jets and escorts (destroyers, frigates) to kill any launch platform before it got into range or to thin out the wave of incoming missiles

 

[Deltared075]

what about anti-ship missile like the moskit with tactical nuclear war head?
it sure can disable the carrier even not sink it.

US also using tactical nuke (US was the pioneer for tactical nuke) , so no total nuke war will happen even some other nation using tactical nuke.

 

[tatra]

what about anti-ship missile like the moskit with tactical nuclear war head?
it sure can disable the carrier even not sink it.

US also using tactical nuke (US was the pioneer for tactical nuke) , so no total nuke war will happen even some other nation using tactical nuke.

Don't kid yourself, use of ANY nuclear weapon (regardless tactical or strategic) will trigger a nuclear response. It is irrelevant whether this is a TOTAL nuke war.

 

[gf0012-aust]

i still believe the best bet are sunburn missiles or Yakhon missiles. americans do not have the ability to shoot these missiles down let alone india. how ever in order launch these missiles many other indian navy ships must be sunk or disabled because i'm guessing that they won't just be sitting there as pakastan gets close enuf to launch such an attack

absolute bollocks. the USN has trained against supersonic threats for the last 8 years (public declaration - but has been longer) In fact they have used russian missiles as the test beds (KH-31's).

The KH-31's were modified by Boeing and found to be inadequate to simulate sunburns and have been replaced.

At the last series of supersonic tests, 49 out of 50 supersonic launches were intercepted successfully.

The US was running supersonic ship strikes in 1958 - so the issue of how to counter them has been undertaken since then.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The RAAF's F-111's have "notionally" sunk US carriers in maritime strikes in Exercises many times. The RAAF uses a combination of Harpoon missile strikes (to damage the ship) and LGB's (to finish it off) dropped from high altitude at the maximum standoff range. Their techniques have proven quite effective (and frustrating) to the Americans. Cheers.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

An U.S carrier is not easy to sink. It's always protected by several Ticonderoga cruiser or Alreit Burke DDG. Normally an battle group can track up to 600 targets along with E-2 support. No single navy in the world can challenge the might of a U.S battle group at the point in time, with the possible exception of Russian subs launching a massive missile strike, numbering about several hundred supersonic "Shipwreck" missile.

I doubt F-111 can even get in range to strike the battle group. Since the sky is closely monitored by E-2 and Aegis system on the ships. Not to mention interceptors sent by the carrier itself.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Well pathfinder, I'm afraid you're wrong. The US Carrier WAS "sunk" in Exercise Tandem Thrust 01, by RAAF F-111's, despite the presence of Ticonderoga's, Arleigh Burke destroyers and the Carrier's Air Wing, including the E-2C's, Hornets and Super Hornets.

I agree that sinking a US carrier is a very tough exercise, but the F-111 is not rated as the best maritime strike aircraft in the world for nothing and the RAAF is VERY good at it...

 

[corsair7772]

Amazing stuff. was it one of the Nimitz class ones or what? Could give us a link on this?

The only aircraft available for marime attack are either the new JF-17, JH-7 or J-10 with some older mirages as well. An indian task force would appear as a US one on a sub continent scale. The Indians would have their own super hornets (Mig-29s) and something of an E-2C (Ka-31). due to this and the Sams the best option would remain a well co ordinated sub attack in conjuction with aircraft.

 

[gf0012-aust]

To get inside a CVN Strike force is going to be exceptionally difficult. The Soviets were the best placed to be able to do it (and they were a real blue water navy with enough supersonic regiments to swarm and create a real presence)

The electronic air screen for a USN CSF is atypically 700-1000k's in radius from the carrier. That ignores the fact that there will also be 2-3 Aegis AB's in escort and a minimum of 1 x Tico.

For a supersonic that is air launched to get past the screen and identify the carrier at terminal stages means that the data link has to be visual and it also needs to be able to avoid systems such as the "lamb" and Nulka.

The Soviets estimated that if they were lucky then less than 10% of a full regiment launch would get through the screen - they had no guarantee or ever had any confidence of killing the carrier. This was even with a nuke tipped SSM or ASM.

While the regiment has launched their weaps, the CVN is travelling at flank, running evasion and also (in current scenarios) NETFORCEd with every other ship in the fleet and any other platform within a 1000 k's, that means that in current scenarios, there will be another CSF adding its electronic capability to the response.

It's estimated that it would take 4 torps of the capability of the Mk48 ADCAP to sink a carrier.

A non USN CSF would be easier to strike, but it also depends on their force constitution and the distance they are from shore support. However, the further out to sea a CSF is, the better its ability to survive and destroy the incoming air OPFOR

 

[corsair7772]

Yes but the nearer you are to Hostile mainland or port or whatever, the more vulnerable you become. the british were lucky that they had to fight falklands from a safe distance, out of the range of most of the argentenian arsenal. However fighting close to the argentenain mainland would have been a totally different story ( a horror story). Similarly, the gorshkov has a good chance of gettin blown up if it operates close to pakistani shores where it would have 2 face everything pakistan throws at it.