Jump to content

Navy versus Air Force


Vextan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Its a useless argument. The two forces are designed for interoperability not against each other.

 

If you are talking about versus air force vs opposition navy. The variables are different.

 

agree

 

i suggest u people go read up abt CIWS, phalanx, goalkeeper etc etc.

 

and if u wanna include carrier planes in the argument, then it's like the best air force vs the best airforce AND navy. how? obviously lopsided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

Torpedoes seldom gets to be used nowadays becos the range is very short (at best 50KM only.)

 

However, if a torpedo gets to be fired against u, the chances of survival is very very little.

 

There are currently no highly effective decoys for torpedoes (as such, very few warships carries one) , esp against wake-homing (homing onto the waves generated by a moving ship) ones.

 

 

brother time to read up on latest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming both forces are technologically advanced in all aspects, this should be the outcome if tactical nukes are used.

 

A single tactical nuke warhead dropped from a stealth bomber will finish off any sized carrier group. even if its guidance systems are inaccurate and drops a few km away from the carrier group. Most of the surface ship's defence and offensive systems will be disabled rendering the whole group (other than its subs) ineffective.

 

I'm sure a carrier fleet also carries a few tactical warheads of its own but without the ability to launch stealth bombers from seafaring platforms, it will have a lower chance of infiltrating the country's airspace and inflicting similar catastrophic damage to a land based airforce defended by airfield-launched interceptors and a multilayer anti-aircraft shield.

 

 

thats a good one.

 

but in the first place..... how are u going to reach the battle group if it is stationed in the middle of the pacific ocean?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

modern warfare between 2 countries(not insurgents/guerrilla warfare) will largely depend on who control the airspace aka air superiority..controlling the airspace means that ground troops(who are the one doing most of the land capturing and occupying) can call in air support to strike at enemy ground units/bunkers/artillery/armor..without the aircrafts/helicopters worrying about enemy aircrafts..

 

I agree with your air superiority part, but by controlling the airspace by disabling enemy AA or SAM is more for facilitating projection of forces by Air or Sea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

For NK and SK air superiority might not play a major part due to its terrain

Seem liked a Vietnam war outcome to me and how the PLA push the much advance KMT to the East

Both side will never had a clear winner

I'm more curious what if Roman met the Mongol what if the Greek met the Huns

Edited by Dfx16
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody suggest the use of underwater mines... Just use the planes to drop lots of mines in the area of the Carriers and that'll immobilized the fleet... :p

 

Also, if the Carriers are near cost, just fire arty on them... no defence against arty... [sweatdrop]

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats a good one.

 

but in the first place..... how are u going to reach the battle group if it is stationed in the middle of the pacific ocean?

 

any modern airforce has refuelling tankers which can refuel planes in mid flight like how we are able to get our warplanes over the pacific to USA. However, without support from a land based refuelling tanker, the warplanes of the carrier group are limited in range and would count on the carrier group moving closer to the enemy country in order to carry out a strike of their own. So advantage is still to the land based airforce.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody suggest the use of underwater mines... Just use the planes to drop lots of mines in the area of the Carriers and that'll immobilized the fleet... :p

 

Also, if the Carriers are near cost, just fire arty on them... no defence against arty... [sweatdrop]

 

[flowerface] play too much command and conquer? Planes cant drop underwater mines. And mines are used mainly in shallower waters where the mine is anchored to the sea bed or sea currents will just displace the mines and they may float to africa and maybe bomb a somalian pirate boat lol~

 

Modern artillery have max ranges of 40+ km? gone are the era of artillery in sea shore battles (retirement of the battleships with massive artillery guns) A carrier group will linger out in the deep sea away from any land based artillery systems while retaining the ability to launch guided ship to ground missles and precision strikes to enemy targets by carrier warplanes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm

 

just curious. why no one talks abt the training that the two sides have. how many flight hrs did the air force have. how many battle stations training did the navy have...

 

hmmm...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm

 

just curious. why no one talks abt the training that the two sides have. how many flight hrs did the air force have. how many battle stations training did the navy have...

 

hmmm...

 

 

because cause its irrelevant? no matter how well train, no hardware sure die

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this argument, we should present 2 opposing forces with similar training and similar levels of technology. Else there will be never ending arguments on other factors other than the strategic, defensive and strike capabilities of two different types of operational groups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody suggest the use of underwater mines... Just use the planes to drop lots of mines in the area of the Carriers and that'll immobilized the fleet... :p

 

Also, if the Carriers are near cost, just fire arty on them... no defence against arty... [sweatdrop]

 

there are MCM vessels in the group for mines

 

CVN, in war time, will not go near coast line...the only time they moored pier side is when they're visiting friendly countries and for their liberty breaks...not all ports welcome CVN as they're nuclear powered, or their draft too shallow. normally require deep water port...those diesel ones already decommissioned (USS Kitty Hawk being the last)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this argument, we should present 2 opposing forces with similar training and similar levels of technology. Else there will be never ending arguments on other factors other than the strategic, defensive and strike capabilities of two different types of operational groups.

 

Agree with you Bro, if we were to compare, should at least compare Apple to Apple for a good discussion. [thumbsup]

 

What we are doing is like comparing Green Apple with Red Apple. Both have its own merit. Each have its own Strength & Weakness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutral Newbie

i agree with you on the point that some baseline should be constant, however this discussion is all about comparing green apple (Navy) and Red apple (Airforce).

 

We are discussing which is better, green or red.

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...