The Ship Model Forum

The AA system on the Kirovs seem to have been designed to soak up a strike by one 1980s USN carrier airwing. It's not clear how the balance will tip if it really came to a struggle, but at least the balance didn't seem to professionals to be so tilted as to make one side or the other clearly ridiculous.

It is also not perfectly clear whether the underlying technology could have continued to permit the construction of Kirov's style ships throught the 1990s and 2000s to keep pace with chnages in USN CVBG. But whether or no, political changes removed the only player who had the resource and the inclination to try. So no one possess any ship that can stand up to even a partial carrier strike from a USN CV today.

Certainly it is for the want of trying. But whether any attempt could have succeeded is not known.

Mark,

I'd thought of the same thing (attacking ships with HARMs) and I think it was discussed here in a thread that was lost when the board got hacked. I'm not an expert, but some people with more knowledge than me said the HARM scenario isn't very likely against a ships with modern air defenses.

Here's a summary of what I remember (which may or may not be accurate) from that discussion:

First, HARM range isn't as long as antiship missiles, so the aircraft would have to enter the ships SAM range to fire.

Second, HARMs would be detected at the extreme range of the ship's radar. HARM is not a sea-skimmer, so it would be up high and easier to hit with SAMs.

Third, HARMs are designed for stationary targets like SAM sites on land. I don't know if they are programmed to account for the ship's motion between launch and detonation.


Even if these limitations are true, I think your saturation scenario would still cause a problem for a ship's air defense system.

Mac

The world is different than the last time we had carrier borne aircraft engaging ships at sea. Today the aircraft would be engaging from beyond the horizon from all around the compass. Any vessel's layered defense's would most likely be swapped by mulitple missiles. And a lot of the first ones might be HARMS. Another scenario, take Clancey's A-10s bracketting the Kirov from from "The Hunt for Red October". Could a flight of A-10s on the deck get that close? Good question. But if the fecal matter had ever hit the fan the odds are IMO that any HARMs launched in such an operation would be from a vector around up to 120 degrees of the axis of attack.

Yes I was thinking of the movie version.

Storm has the Nimitz getting hit early in the war, Sum does have some carrier action in the Med with the Roosevelt but nothing like Red Storm Rising. You may be confused about a carrier getting hit from the movie version of Sum which is pretty far off from the book.

Timmy,

in sum of all fears Nimitz isn't attacked. In fact there is no military conflict with the US except for the dirty bomb in the stadium.... at least from what i remember. Hmmmm.... crap... now i get this weird memory of a carrier being attacked..... you evil beast... someone please straighten me out.

Red storm rising? I thought it was in Sum of All fears?

Werner, your movie scene reminds me of the chapter from Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising where the Nimitz is attacked by the backfires. Definetly a lot of tension built into that scene and plenty of big booms and bangs.

[quote="Vlad"]Not everyone has AEGIS, in fact the vast majority of warships dont have Aegis or an equivalent system. And besides, you won't be firing at the planes, youll be firing at the missiles the planes launch from outside your engagement range. Sea-skimmers can get really close before you spot them, so youll need some CIWS to take them out. [/quote]
AEgis supports two kinds of primary AA weapons: Area wide (0 - 250km) and Theatre wide (THAAD > 250 <= 500km).

Upshot is that you only need one or two AEgis equipped ships to put a "lid" over your task force, or invasion beach or both (or whatever). The (OpenVMS-based) Cooperative Engagement System allows AEgis sensors and platforms to extend beyond the range of missiles launched from any one ship.

W

oops, my apologies, I did mean South Atlantic, I was reffering to the Falkland conflict of coruse :Oops_1:

Vlad,

I hope you mean South ATLANTIC--otherwise there must have been a war I wasn't aware of...

Mac

[quote="Werner"][quote="JWintjes"] If you have to power up your CIWS, then something has already gone awfully wrong.[/quote]
On board the carrier the sound of the CIWS firing is referred to as the "abandon ship alarm".[/quote]

That's a good one! :thumbs_up_1:

Have to remember that.

Jorit

[quote="Vlad"]

Score 1 for the group of people advocating more close defence guns, i'd like to see the other side argue their way out of this one. :big_grin: :big_grin:[/quote]

Sure it's nice to have, but you don't want to rely on it. What was wrong about San Carlos and Bomb alley was not the lack of AA guns (actually, that was a factor, but only a symptom) - in an ideal world a powerful carrier task force would have put up constant CAPs day and night and prevented the A4s from even coming close to the island. The best defence against an A4 with iron bombs is a Phantom blasting it out of the sky... :wink:

San Carlos is a prime example of the risks you run when you try to stage an amphibious operation without suitable air support.

Jorit

back on topic, surely this depends on the ship.

Not everyone has AEGIS, in fact the vast majority of warships dont have Aegis or an equivalent system. And besides, you won't be firing at the planes, youll be firing at the missiles the planes launch from outside your engagement range. Sea-skimmers can get really close before you spot them, so youll need some CIWS to take them out.

Oh, and wait a minute. Cast your mind back to a small island in the South Pacific, about 1982. I seem to recall a pair of elderly A-4s managed to get close enough to a UK destroyer to drop iron bombs on it, accurately, and unmolested. You never know when such a situation could occur in the gulf for example. Again, some rapid firing guns could help.

Score 1 for the group of people advocating more close defence guns, i'd like to see the other side argue their way out of this one. :big_grin: :big_grin:

[quote="JWintjes"] If you have to power up your CIWS, then something has already gone awfully wrong.[/quote]
On board the carrier the sound of the CIWS firing is referred to as the "abandon ship alarm".

[quote="kennylibben"]yes tracy, i understand it.... but its gonna make some CRAPPY war movies for the future![/quote]

Not if done correctly. Even though we have these long-range missiles we have what's known as a layered defense. We've also got the RIM-116 RAM missile, which is medium to short range. So... cut to scene.

Scene of planes or enemy ships launching a volley of missiles

CIC: missiles coming in.. radar officer gives info and ETA. manueuvers started... captain or weapons officer orders launch of long-range missiles

Scene outside of ship launching missiles and missiles climing up and away.

Scene of enemy missiles flying in low.

Inside CIC someone updates range and ETA

"good guy" Missiles starting to roll over the top of their climb and head back down to the water.

Back to the CIC, range is read again, obviously much closer now to show these things are approaching FAST and build tension.

water level scene of enemy missiles skimming above the waves... glow of incoming friendly missiles off in the distance and then quickly explosions start to happen... many of the missiles are shot down but some others can be seen zooming away.

Back to the CIC.. radar officer gives new tally... still missiles coming in... and the ETA. Captain orders the RAM to fire when in range, chaff, countermeasures (probably already on but what the hey) etc.

Outside shot of ship as RAM missiles explode outward in rapid succession, chaff launchers popping and the chaff falling around the ship.

Shot of the inbound missiles now with the ship visible in the distance. One-by-one the missiles start falling victim to the RAM but we can see one boring in... will it hit? Will it miss from the chaff?????




Das Boat is one of the best war movies ever made and the types of battles the u-boats fought is similiar to all-missile warfare. It's how you use the equipment and the story.

[quote="kennylibben"]
okay okay okay, but who wants to watch a movie about Thai junks shooting at hang-gliders with bows and arrows?

wait a tick tick, that sounds pretty good! :woo_hoo:[/quote]

I was rather thinking of the last gun cruiser in the world firing broadsides against refurbished ex-RN Counties... :wink: :wink: :wink:

Jorit

[quote="JWintjes"][quote="kennylibben"]yes tracy, i understand it.... but its gonna make some CRAPPY war movies for the future![/quote]

Don't bet on it. Not every navy in the world has Aegis. :wink:

Jorit[/quote]

okay okay okay, but who wants to watch a movie about Thai junks shooting at hang-gliders with bows and arrows?

wait a tick tick, that sounds pretty good! :woo_hoo:

[quote="kennylibben"]yes tracy, i understand it.... but its gonna make some CRAPPY war movies for the future![/quote]

Don't bet on it. Not every navy in the world has Aegis. :wink:

Jorit

Personally, imagining I would have, say, a Type 23 frigate, I wouldn't care too much about the [i]aircraft carrier[/i], at least not a USN one - after all, what damage can you do with a phalanx? Also, you'd have to come pretty close - enough time to empty my whole 4.5in magazine into the carrier...

With [i]aircraft[/i], it's of course different...

:big_grin: :big_grin: :big_grin: :big_grin: :big_grin:

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Just a little more seriously, though, personally I'd be a big fan of taking things out beyond visual range. If you have to power up your CIWS, then something has already gone awfully wrong.

Jorit