Navy versus Air Force

[Rickster]

shudn't carrier planes have a certain standard requirement? 16s and 15s can meh? I know 18s and 14s

 

Dun think our F-16 and 15s are suitable for carrier borne ops. Wat i meant is the numbers of fighters that we have is more than the numbers of wat 2x US aircraft carriers carries.

 

Tyically, an aircraft carrier only has 60-70 fighters on board. The rest are helis & support aircraft to make up a total of abt 90.

[Rickster]

All those people saying the navy will win are forgetting stealth bombers.

 

And the very same pple also forgot that there are stealth warships [smash]

[Vextan]

since the majority's sentiment is that a carrier group is almost invincible, does it mean that no country can fight off a carrier group if it is under a seige ?

 

i would assume that when such a scenario happen, it is logical that the country under the seige of the carrier group will send their fighter aircrafts to sink the carrier group, hence this million dollar question that every foe country of usa will die to know.

 

Supposing the defending country's fighter planes launch a dozen of anti-ship topedoes, how can the bulky Nimtiz carrier evade them ? Surely one or two will hit it right ?

Edited July 20, 2009 by Vextan

[Rncw]

then...there are the ARGs (Amphibious Ready Group)

 

consists of:

 

LHD/LHA - Amphibious Assualt Ships

LPD - Amphibious Transport Dock

LSD - Dock Landing Ship

 

Harrier II

Sea Stallion Helo

Sea Knight Helo

Super Cobra Helo

 

 

 

[Rncw]

since the majority's sentiment is that a carrier group is almost invincible, does it mean that no country can fight off a carrier group if it is under a seige ?

 

i would assume that when such a scenario happen, it is logical that the country under the seige of the carrier group will send their fighter aircrafts to sink the carrier group, hence this million dollar question that every foe country of usa will die to know.

 

Supposing the defending country's fighter planes launch a dozen of anti-ship topedoes, how can the bulky Nimtiz carrier evade them ? Surely one or two will hit it right ?

 

the problem is can the defending country's fighters have chance to take off or not?

 

air fields/bases are one of the primary targets

 

all CSGs are only in supportive roles...the main invasion forces will still be the land troops

[Rickster]

since the majority's sentiment is that a carrier group is almost invincible, does it mean that no country can fight off a carrier group if it is under a seige ?

 

i would assume that when such a scenario happen, it is logical that the country under the seige of the carrier group will send their fighter aircrafts to sink the carrier group, hence this million dollar question that every foe country of usa will die to know.

 

Supposing the defending country's fighter planes launch a dozen of anti-ship topedoes, how can the bulky Nimtiz carrier evade them ? Surely one or two will hit it right ?

 

The best way to counter a carrier group is submarines.

 

That is the current doctrine of Russia (large fleet of missle submarines that can launch supersonic anti-ship missiles against surface ships from >200km away.

[Rickster]

Supposing the defending country's fighter planes launch a dozen of anti-ship topedoes, how can the bulky Nimtiz carrier evade them ? Surely one or two will hit it right ?

 

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.

 

 

[Freemen]

In my own opinion, Yes i believe that a carrier group is almost invincible. It itself has plane to counter enemy aircrafts, weaponary to dedect & deter subs & other attacks.

 

However, the battle itself is never decide on strength alone. While strength is an advantage, its the people that makes the diff. History alone has many lessons that however strong the enemy is, there is always some weaknesses. Take Pearl Harbour, Battle of Midway etc.. The KEY is the people. Who has more determination

 

If its a must for head on for the planes vs the ships, than its a 'who can outlast each other'. The navy group while have superior defence at one point will finish its ammo without any re-supply. If for some reason the air force can outlast that long than thats a key.

 

Also to have a plane crash on the a ship as the ultimate sarcifice is a will of the pilot. I personally dont think all pilot can be like the Japs in WW2 who is all willing to go down dying.

 

My take on this is a co orindated attack using planes as a decoy while attack the main group with small fast speed boats to bring divers close enough to disable the ships.

[Rncw]

My take on this is a co orindated attack using planes as a decoy while attack the main group with small fast speed boats to bring divers close enough to disable the ships.

 

just like USS Cole in Yemen

[Robin]

the side who has the longest radar and missle range will probably win

 

cos they can start shooting first

[Shull]

Every warship has a CIWS (close in weapon systems) usually, they are super rapid firing chain guns of at least 20mm. Will shred any incoming matter to dusts.

 

CIWS is a last min measure..if they carrier needs to use the CIWS, that means the enemy missile has penetrated all other defense liao..

[Tireburner]

How effective is CIWS against a nuke warhead?

[Kusje]

How effective is CIWS against a nuke warhead?

 

Zero.

[Weihui]

since the majority's sentiment is that a carrier group is almost invincible, does it mean that no country can fight off a carrier group if it is under a seige ?

 

i would assume that when such a scenario happen, it is logical that the country under the seige of the carrier group will send their fighter aircrafts to sink the carrier group, hence this million dollar question that every foe country of usa will die to know.

 

Supposing the defending country's fighter planes launch a dozen of anti-ship topedoes, how can the bulky Nimtiz carrier evade them ? Surely one or two will hit it right ?

Actually what you have been asking have been discussed to death on various forum on this planet earth, majority between 2 you-know-who nations supporters.

 

When it comes to whatever questions or scenarios that you mentioned, the side that is holding the most up to date intel will win. In short, whoever has accurate intel wins.

 

Let's see a very simple example:

 

Let the 2 parties mentioned in your scenario are Red-Air force and Blue-Navy respectively. If Blue holds all the intel, they will know what battle range the Red-Air force is capable of. Does Red has the ability to refuel in the air? What is the maximum flight range of their most advanced anti-ship missiles? And how many were there? How can these missiles be fired, from land, sea or even air? And many more...

 

Based on all these intel, Blue will form tactical formations and strategies to accommodate various scenarios. Of course they have plans for surprises, but you can't possibly plan for ALL surprises.

 

The same goes to Red side too. In today's context, almost no one will be launching a war or attack blindly without proper intel and plans.

[Shull]

How effective is CIWS against a nuke warhead?

 

for nuke warhead to have maximum efficiency, they usually detonate a fee hundred metres above the surface..and that is way into the final stage of the flight liao..

[Kenny8088]

imo... a couple of aegis cruisers can smoke the planes and own the sky liao... navy has the advantage here

[Zyrofillica]

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.

[Sci10213]

the one with better stronger men will win...

 

best attack or best defense no use if the person operating the machines are "bobo" shooters or CMI soldiers...