The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:42 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 1996
Location: Copenhagen
For sure there are also communications, not only sensors. But for one ship the sensors are crucial if operating alone (which is for sure unlikely to be the case for a carrier). If the sensors are lost by damage, it is likely that also the main channels for communication are at least impaired. The crucial point is that the question is if the fighting capability is maintained - not if the ship is sunken.

@ DavidP: a Aichi D3A could deploy usually only one 250 kg bomb, in some cases two additional 60 kg bombs - it could not deploy two heavier bombs. The Yokosuka D4Y usually would deploy one 500 kg bomb, the Kamikaze version one 800 kg bomb (probably also two 60 kg bombs) (there appears to be some confusion about its bombs on different websites, perhaps is a confusion between kg and pounds?). Wikipedia mentions that there are reports that two 250 kg bombs could be deployed, but I have not yet found a confirmation that two of them fit into the bomb bay.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:45 am 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 1690
maxim wrote:
If the sensors are lost by damage, it is likely that also the main channels for communication are at least impaired.

No, that is not at all likely. The only way that would be likely is if the radar/arrays/sensors were co-located with the comm antennae and they are not. Further, there are multiple comm antennae scattered about the superstructure and masts so that it is almost impossible, short of a nuclear bomb, to take out all comms with a single hit. Barring incredible bad luck it is unlikely that a hit that destroys a single sensor would also significantly impair all comms.

_________________
Bob Carr
My blog : http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 1996
Location: Copenhagen
Many ships have their sensors and communication antenna very close together - for sure close enough to destroy a lot of them with a single anti-ship missile (and I am not talking about the very heavy ones, but the normal Chinese and Russian ones). A good example for closely grouped antenna is the Arleigh Burke class - or carriers with most or all antenna on the island.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:17 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 1690
maxim wrote:
Many ships have their sensors and communication antenna very close together - for sure close enough to destroy a lot of them with a single anti-ship missile

:lol_pound: You need to go back and check the width of a Burke's superstructure and the distance between arrays and then between arrays and comm antennae. The antennae are scattered all over the superstructure and mast. Nothing is going to take all that out in one hit!

You're trying to tell me that a single missile hit is going to take out an entire carrier island and masts? Do you have any idea of the dimensions of a carrier island? Or, how incredibly small a target most individual antennae are? Are you aware that carriers have various antennae scattered around the periphery of the flight deck edge (for example, fold-down HF whip antennae) ?

Come on, you're not even trying to be factual. You're just making wild, unsupported statements. Go research locations, sizes, and distances and then come back.

_________________
Bob Carr
My blog : http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:08 pm
Posts: 60
Location: Yorktown, Indiana, USA
Any hit which interrupts ship's power takes down all the sensors, along with everything else. Really eerie when you lose power at sea. Too quiet.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:12 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 1690
And how easy would you say it is to take down a carrier's entire power grid?

_________________
Bob Carr
My blog : http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:08 pm
Posts: 60
Location: Yorktown, Indiana, USA
I won't pretend to know anything specific about taking down ship's power on a carrier. I have experienced it on two different battleships during normal peacetime operations though, and on a frigate on ship's power alongside a pier. So I suspect it's somewhat more likely on a ship which is receiving damage if can happen when everything is normal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:54 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 1690
For a ship that is otherwise functioning normally, a battle hit, especially on a carrier, is unlikely to take out the entire ship's power. Every ship has multiple turbines, generators, diesels, etc. not to mention nuclear reactors for carriers, to produce power from multiple sources and the power runs are redundant.

Sure, ships lose power from time to time but it's because of internal failures not battle damage and internal failures are not predictive of battle damage power loss from a single hit.

_________________
Bob Carr
My blog : http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:08 pm
Posts: 60
Location: Yorktown, Indiana, USA
If you say so.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 1996
Location: Copenhagen
@ Carr: do you have seen the extend of damage caused by modern anti-ship missile? I guess not. Otherwise you would not think a Arleigh Burke bridge structure or a carrier island are too big.

See e.g. this hit by an NSM, which only has a 125 kg warhead, i.e. a very small one compared to many Russian or Chinese missiles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jspEovlEK-w


In case of carrier it is not necessary to even hit the island - a hit on the aircraft would cause much more damage, because all the secondary explosions of the aircraft fuel and ammunition, which would disable flight operations.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 1466
what was the frigates superstructure made of, steel or aluminum? remember that frigate was not moving nor defending itself so not a fair appraisal. might disable flight operations as depends if aircraft fully fueled & armed plus the number of aircraft hit.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:06 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 1690
maxim wrote:
In case of carrier it is not necessary to even hit the island - a hit on the aircraft would cause much more damage,

:lol_pound: We just covered this!!! Enterprise took 18 major bomb explosions and tons of burning fuel and barely lost flight ops capability (may or may not have) and did not lose comms.

You think a single NSM is going to vaporize a carrier island and destroy every antenna? :lol_pound: :lol_pound: :lol_pound:

I give up. I've tried to help you but you refuse to learn. Enjoy your naval fantasies! :wave_1:

_________________
Bob Carr
My blog : http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:35 pm
Posts: 2559
Location: UK
Back to the original question; I would ask those who think the the aircraft carrier is no longer viable, what will replace it?

_________________
In 1757 Admiral John Byng was shot "pour encourager les autres". Voltaire


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 1996
Location: Copenhagen
Here is nobody thinking that the age of carriers is over...

@ carr: Perhaps should read more carefully.

1.) a carrier can be disabled simply by hitting armed and fuelled planes, because the secondary explosions will disable flight operations (see WW2 and the fires on Forrestal and Enterprise). It is very obvious that several explosions at the stern do not damage the island - for sure not an argument, how resistant the island is against damage. Its sensors and communications are not longer important, if flight operations are disabled.

2.) in the test - which for sure only demonstrate the destructive power of the missile and was for sure not a test of the ability of the frigate to defend itself - the superstructure of the frigate was destroyed at a length, which is equivalent to the length of the bridge of an Arleigh Burke or the island of a Ford class carrier. For sure from that impact is not possible to tell if a taller superstructure would have been destroyed to a similar level, but most antenna on the two mentioned US classes are not distributed over many decks, but are relatively concentrated - and everything above is likely damaged or disabled, if the structure below is destroyed (including energy and data connections). And that was a very light anti-ship missile!

As comparison:
Norwegian NSM: 125 kg warhead, Mach 0,9
Russian 3M54T (Kalibr): 200 kg warhead, Mach 2.9 (there are also versions with a 400 kg warhead, described as armour piercing)
Russian 3M45 (P-700 Granit): 750 kg warhead (also described as armour piercing), Mach 2.5

That means NSM is a light-weight anti-ship missile, typical for many western designs. Its warhead is much weaker and the kinetic energy on impact is much smaller compared to Russian missiles. I.e. the missiles likely fired on carriers are much more destructive than the one, which was tested on that Norwegian frigate.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group