Have aircraft carriers had their day?

Have aircraft carriers had their day?

Author
Discussion

Wacky Racer

Original Poster:

38,972 posts

254 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Reading the Ukraine thread, there has been mention of the power of the US fleet and the amount of immense firepower a single carrier group has,

However it is not 1960 anymore, and no matter how many state of the art aircraft a carrier has on board, if a country fired (for example) ten hypersonic guided missiles at one carrier, would it be helpless?

These precision weapons can literally land to within a few metres of a target.

Southerner

1,733 posts

59 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
They’ve all got anti missile systems, surely? Wasn’t there one called Goalkeeper back in the day on Illustrious & Invincible?

Defcon5

6,300 posts

198 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
A few of these might do the trick


LordHaveMurci

12,097 posts

176 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
The clue surely, is in ‘carrier group’, the ‘group’ providing protection for the carrier?

Wacky Racer

Original Poster:

38,972 posts

254 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
I am especially interested as my Dad served for three years on HMS Formidable in WW2 in the Pacific, surviving several Kamikaze attacks, several which hit his carrier.

https://www.armouredcarriers.com/hms-formidable-ma...

Here in the cockpit in 1944 aged 20.


dvs_dave

9,030 posts

232 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
There’s many layers of defense to get past before the carrier is at risk, and the carriers also have close in defensive systems like CWIS, and no doubt other kit. Also, nobody has hypersonic missile tech capable enough of hitting a moving target like a carrier. Which whilst large, can also move quite quickly, in the 30-40kn range.

A carrier group basically allows you to put an Air Force base (and lots more) with tremendous firepower far enough from harms way, but close enough to inflict serious damage off an enemies coastline without much the enemy can do about it.

SlimJim16v

6,096 posts

150 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
The problem now is drones, but almost certainly many countries are now working seriously on counter measures.

98elise

28,180 posts

168 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Wacky Racer said:
Reading the Ukraine thread, there has been mention of the power of the US fleet and the amount of immense firepower a single carrier group has,

However it is not 1960 anymore, and no matter how many state of the art aircraft a carrier has on board, if a country fired (for example) ten hypersonic guided missiles at one carrier, would it be helpless?

These precision weapons can literally land to within a few metres of a target.
How are you going to find the carrier in a war situation.

Without a carrier who is providing the air cover for your battle group? You just lost your outer layer of defence.

sherman

13,806 posts

222 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
A carrier group is more about announcing your presence in an area.
The US have 2 groups near Israel just now iirc for instance.
Its probably why all hell hasnt quite broken out yet in the whole middle east.

98elise

28,180 posts

168 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
SlimJim16v said:
The problem now is drones, but almost certainly many countries are now working seriously on counter measures.
Drones wouldn't stand a chance of getting through, and where would they be launched from?

98elise

28,180 posts

168 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Southerner said:
They’ve all got anti missile systems, surely? Wasn’t there one called Goalkeeper back in the day on Illustrious & Invincible?
Goalkeeper and Phalanx. It's mostly phalanx these days.

A missiles would more likely be taken out earlier though. That's why you have destroyers.

shouldbworking

4,773 posts

219 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Wacky Racer said:
if a country fired (for example) ten hypersonic guided missiles at one carrier, would it be helpless?

These precision weapons can literally land to within a few metres of a target.
That's simply not true though is it. Hypersonic missile= surrounded by plasma= no comms whilst hypersonic = no course correction = can't hit a moving target.

dogbucket

1,216 posts

208 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Grimreapers on YT do lots of naval battle simulations with DCS using current and future weapons/ships. Generally there is a point where defenses are over whelmed but in the order of hundreds of incoming missles.

98elise

28,180 posts

168 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
I often chime in on these threads because I was a Weapons Engineer on carriers (mainly Phalanx).

Rather than regurgitate my views/experince again this article sums it up pretty well and I agree with everything he says...

https://archive.ph/7ThwC

The guy knows his stuff (commanded 4 ships and is an anti-air warfare officer). Carriers are far from obsolete,

It's a long read but worth it to understand the role of carriers, layered defences and hypersonics.


Edited by 98elise on Wednesday 25th September 18:54

MrBrightSi

2,914 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
The potential hot war with china and the USA might test the idea of Carrier groups and modern carriers but i don't think they've had their day. To park a town sized ship close enough to a country to use modern airpower is the best form of hard power projection going. It also speaks to the overall power both financially and militarily of the country fielding them.

If a hot war with china breaks out in the south china sea over mischief or the spratleys the use of anti-ship ballistic missiles like the DF-21D will test a US carrier group but they do have anti missile missiles to counter this stuff and i don't think a carrier group will be operating in those areas alone and anything with china is going to involve Asian countries like Vietnam and the Philippines who will more than likely side with the US.

I think the Pacific is going to dictate the future of carriers due to states like Russia just no having the capabilities to do anything about them like they might have done when they were the USSR and even though drone technology has come along into some futuristic style nightmare there isn't going to be something like the USS cole happening anywhere near one.

aeropilot

36,519 posts

234 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
CBG's are still very useful.....if you can support them of course.....err, oops.

https://gcaptain.com/us-navy-oiler-usns-big-horn-a...


Sheets Tabuer

19,640 posts

222 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
I'm sure in the Falklands they had the ingenious idea of sticking Destroyers in front of carriers like some sort of shield, I'm also sure missiles have moved on.

Although I'm told each type 45 is like a little armada on it's own.

98elise

28,180 posts

168 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Sheets Tabuer said:
I'm sure in the Falklands they had the ingenious idea of sticking Destroyers in front of carriers like some sort of shield, I'm also sure missiles have moved on.

Although I'm told each type 45 is like a little armada on it's own.
Destroyers are there to protect ships like Carriers. It wasn't a new thing for the Falklands.

SlimJim16v

6,096 posts

150 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
98elise said:
Drones wouldn't stand a chance of getting through, and where would they be launched from?
I meant to say drone swarms, so probably impossible to stop all of them. You have a point about launching though.

Common Porpoise

755 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th September
quotequote all
Who is about to fire ten hypersonic missiles at a carrier and what might be the consequences of doing such a thing?.

Might be possible if you just ignore what the outcome might be