Yes, i know. But what use will be 2-3 cruisers for defeating long-range AShM's attack? Other than additional defence against AShM's? When AShM's are launched - it is already too later.
Admiral Kusnetzov Vs Charles De Gaulle What Is More Capable And Powerful ??
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
Grand Danois
Entertainer
To strike Russian bases one could form up a battle group of 3 CVN, 4-5 CG, 6-9 DDG and 6 SSN - then move into the "protected area.
This would be supported by the entire arsenal of shorebased air like P-3, E-3, B-1B, B-2, Rivets, etc.; satellites - you name it.
No come in with that expected swarm - or rather; try to launch it in a coordinated manner!
This would be supported by the entire arsenal of shorebased air like P-3, E-3, B-1B, B-2, Rivets, etc.; satellites - you name it.
No come in with that expected swarm - or rather; try to launch it in a coordinated manner!
Yes, without massive support. But which support let me ask?
And in case of such MASSIVE concentration of support - USSR can provide own counter-support. Like SSBN's, SSN, SSK, cruisers, etc. Even US dont have unlimited "support". And again, one of the Kuznecov objectives is to force US to provide such massive support to any CVBG.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
A fraction of what the US can bring to bear.
Again, one of the objectives of SINGLE Kuznecov carrier is force US to use such MASSIVE forces to have any chance for success!
Such attack scale is already premise for nuclear weapon use. At least tactical nuclear weapon. Again, CVBG's are VERY suspectible to tactical nuclear warheads - contrary to land based forces, which are, contrary, almost fully protected.
Remember, we are speaking about SINGLE, small USSR carrier and FRACTION of USSR maritime aviation. Ofc, it cant deal with several big CVBG's at once... Would be strange to expect more...A fraction of what the US can bring to bear.
If you want stright answer - USSR navy couldnt face head to head against WHOLE USA navy. USSR navy just werent objected for that.
I won't get into the details of the CWC concept and what the AAWC does for air defense. Unless you have exercised it and been a part of it, you may not ever understand. Thankfully no attacks such as you are constructing have taken place, however, numerous exercises and scenarios along those lines have been played out on the oceans and in simulators time and time again. That is were training and preparedness pays off. Every professional military organization knows this and hopefully puts it into practice.
So with your statement, "Dont worry, configure air defence, god will save us!", you are on your own mate.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I wouldn't expect that much of Russian naval aviation to be active. Current activity levels are for maintaining basic mission/crew skills.
But anyhow - that's the point: A CSG wouldn't expose itself in a way that would make it vulnerable. It wouldn't play to Russian doctrine and certainly wouldn't let initiative pass to the Russians. The CSG has the advantage of strategic initiative - and it would engage with overmatch at a temporal window and place of its chosing.
I wish some one could answer my question,
contedicavour
New Member
Well the De Gaulle has a nuclear reactor on board, I certainly hope their firefighting capabilities are top level indeed...
The Kuznetsov carries a dozen VLS for SS N 19 Shipwreck heavy cruise missiles which are just below the flight deck and could wreck havoc if they were to explode after a direct hit.
cheers
AD self defence - Kuznecov without a doubt. Internal damage control... impossible to tell without in-depth research. Btw, i wouldnt care that much about Shipwrecks - they warheads will not simply detonate, and they fuel is no more dangerous than aircrafts fuel.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I wonder if there is an analogy with the Long lance torpedo carried by IJN cruisers during WW2...
They had to be ditched over board when the vessel came under [aerial] attack, the alternative being that they blew the vessel to smitherines when hit.
They had to be ditched over board when the vessel came under [aerial] attack, the alternative being that they blew the vessel to smitherines when hit.
Dont know about cruisers, but imagine how much various weapons and fuel stored onboard a carrier... dont think few AShM's would make any difference...
Of course any warhead blast in or nearby a magazine would be catastrophic. Especially in a missile magazine where the main danger is missile boosters (solid propellant) and missile sustainer motors (solid or liquid fuel). Heat from a nearby fire will also hazard the magazine space and the normal procedure is to flood the magazine or spray the munitions with seawater. Heat buildup is extremely rapid in enclosed burning ship compartments, so keeping everything cool is paramount. SS-N-19s are pretty big missiles which hold a lot of fuel. I hate to be close by if they begin to cook-off.
As far as the reactor is concerned, most certainly it will be scrammed. Let`s also hope it cools down quickly and the casualty power systems are working. On a nuke carrier they will no doubt take great care of their casualty power system.
Damage control will of course depend on the readiness of fixed and portable firefighting equipment, personnel training and if fires can be brought under control.
I doubt the Kusnetsov's SS-N-19 can be ditched. Their location in the middle of the forward flight deck is quite interesting. If one or more of these explode, the forward flight deck will be useless including the take-off ramp.
Ya, i also doubt. But as i already said - it doesnt matter much. Imagine how many aircraft's AShM's are stored generally on average carrier, and some of them even openly on the deck or attached to aircrafts...
The SS-N-19 is a ship launched not air launched. You must be commenting on air launched missiles. USN carriers keep their munitions stored in magazines and do not leave them out openly on deck or on the aircraft for safety reasons. Only mission aircraft will be armed by the red shirts.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Perhapse they could be ripple launched without guidence? You would achieve the same effect.
I would imagine that they have magazine sprinklers and some sort of deluge for protection against that sort of thing.
Is there much difference in terms of damage if something goes wrong?