The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - December 1, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest

Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: only 10 50. cals on a modern aircraft carrier!
stinger    11/4/2007 8:12:19 PM
now somethings got to be wrong with this, they have missiles and then they have small arms nothing in between. i know they can out run any boat in the world in the open waters but what about in the straits. they shoulnt rely on the destroyers to protect them. they are just asunder guned if you call it that. lets get some real weapons back on our ships..
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2
gf0012-aust       11/4/2007 8:28:18 PM
the area of transit defines the ROE and protection level for that transit (thats one of the results of the post USS Cole assessment)
 
they also have Phalanx
they also have organic CAP via rotors
they also have light skimmers (eg RHIBS) deployed depending on area of transit.
 
the rules changed after USS Cole, so I'm not sure why you think that they have less capability to deter - let alone the fact that the area of transit heavily influences tolerance and response levels.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

stinger       11/4/2007 8:34:45 PM
think about it carriers never changed there mtoe on small arms ,, I'm just saying phalanx is being phased out hellos give a little support, but lets get some fire power on there some 30mm the new 57mm that give you better dead space protection.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/4/2007 8:52:31 PM

dead space protection.


dead space protection in transit or in port?
as I said prev, the SOPs for vessel protection are defined by the location.
if the issue is one of transit in restricted waters, then that also is defined by location.  In restricted transit areas, the organic air will be up, and local authorities are also involved.
 
I'm confused as to what general scenario you have in mind.
 
You can stick a mini typhoon on anything, the issue is relevance in light of other systems already in play. - or do you just want cross calibre overwatch/overmatch?

 
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       11/4/2007 9:10:10 PM
TOW could be a cheap addition and a swell solution if needed.  It isn't.  See gf's posts as to the why.

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

Crazyhorse    Guns on Carriers   11/9/2007 4:19:10 PM
   

There are several things to consider, space, logistics, and extra crew. Also if something gets past it's escorts, and air cover there is little chance anything can be done about it any way. A small craft with explosives would also present a minimal threat to a carrier, other than having to send the bosn?s mates over the side to repaint her.

 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith       11/20/2007 10:06:35 PM
The lesson from WWII was that you could not depend entirely on your screening destroyers.  The only place to stop the leakers is from the target itself.  That said, I can't much imagine a boat or small plane threat that could deal with a Phalanx.  And anything with a gun, that seems to drive the opening comment, will be toast against fighters, helos and the destroyer screen.  A carrier is not going to get into a gun fight with a surface combatant.
 
Quote    Reply

KlubMarcus       11/21/2007 10:47:33 PM

now somethings got to be wrong with this, they have missiles and then they have small arms nothing in between. i know they can out run any boat in the world in the open waters but what about in the straits. they shoulnt rely on the destroyers to protect them. they are just asunder guned if you call it that. lets get some real weapons back on our ships..
The air defense systems on aircraft carriers should be able to hit boats. If they can hit missiles traveling at supersonic speed at wave-top height, them hitting a much slower and bigger boat should be a whole lot easier. Don't underestimate the .50 cal because an aircraft carrier is very high above the water. Approaching vessels are slow targets on an open field with a gunner shooting down at them from behind armor plate.
 
Quote    Reply

larryjcr    CLOSE WEAPONS   11/22/2007 3:05:19 AM
I know that the RAMs are supposed to be better, but I'm opposed to taking the Phalanx off, exactly because it can be used against thing besides a/c.
As for the suggestion on installing TOWs, there may have been some changes in the last decade or two, but when I knew 'em, TOW wasn't very useful shooting across water due to the guidence wires shorting out.
 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith       11/23/2007 12:47:05 PM
What would be the advantage of a TOW over a Phalanx?  TOWs are armor peircing.  There is no armor on a small boat or plane.  A Phalanx would turn either into matchsticks, and probably at greater range.
 
Not sure how effective a RAM would be.  RAM uses a Sidewinder hot spot tracker.  Would it be able to reliably pick out a boat?
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       11/23/2007 5:51:15 PM
So it's a ship specialized for a specific task?

Deviating away too much from that might make it less effective for what it's supposed to do in my opinion.








 
Quote    Reply

ambush       11/23/2007 7:51:50 PM
As for the suggestion on installing TOWs, there may have been some changes in the last decade or two, but when I knew 'em, TOW wasn't very useful shooting across water due to the guidence wires shorting out.
 

 Way back when the Corps was still replacing the good old 106 RCL with the TOW we underwent some TOW training. If I remember correctly (and this was with the earliest versions) the TOW could fire over water but range was reduced to around 1,800 meters if both launcher and target were on the water. This was because of the increased capacitive coupling between the wires when the wires were submerged over a long distance. The higher the target or launcher are above the water the greater the range because less wire was submerged during flight.

I agree with other posters.  Deense should be basedon circumstances and let us nto under sell th fireopwoer 10 .50 cals giv e you when dealign with a small craft threat.
The CSG has a whole has more than adequate resources to deal with such a threat

 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       11/25/2007 11:41:51 PM

I hadn't thought that anybody would interpret my mention of TOW in a literal sense.  I was simply attempting to illustrate there are many different types of weaps out there which *could* be useful for defending a CGN but they aren't necessary for the reasons GF had stated.  It had been my idea to choke off an escalating "we need something with more oomph than a mere .50, let's bring back hull casements" thread creep.  That was all.  FWIW it may not be the best of ideas to shoot Phalanx in a harbor filled with friendlies and fuelies ;>)

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/26/2007 5:46:30 PM
I have mentioned this before, but I think mortars are ideal for protecting warships.  Todays threats are in the form of small boghammer type gunboats armed with RPG's, and fast suicide boats packed with explosives.
 
With the introduction of guided mortar rounds for engaging tanks, you can have a central rotating mortar mount which can provide all round protection out to several km's, while landing a large HE air-burst charge onto the target.  With delayed detonation munitions you could even use it against small diesel submarines or mines in the litorials. 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/26/2007 7:00:16 PM

With the introduction of guided mortar rounds for engaging tanks, you can have a central rotating mortar mount which can provide all round protection out to several km's, while landing a large HE air-burst charge onto the target.  With delayed detonation munitions you could even use it against small diesel submarines or mines in the litorials. 

NLOS

 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith       11/27/2007 9:10:54 PM
I would stick with the Phalanx.  a) they're already on the ship, complete with integration with fire control system or their own sensors. b) their response is near instantaneous.  You decide the boat should go away...it's gone.  As opposed to having a boat closing on your ship at 50-60 knots and you sitting there staring at your watch waiting for that mortar shell you threw into the air to come down.  a) Phalanx can fix pretty much anything that is going to ail you; aircraft, boats, cruise missiles, the other guys mortar shells, rockets.  Won't do submarines or swimmers.  Sorry.
 
Firing in port?  Reload Phalanxes with time delay shells when in port.  They blow up on contact or after incindiary burnout.  Puts a fixed range on their reach.
 
Not a delay fuze for sub.  Contact fuze like hedgehog.  Submarines are not as thinskinned as surface ships.  A mortar going off anywhere except in contact is just going to ring their bells.  Depth charges that were used as proximity warheads were 600 pounds.  And even then you had to get the depth right.  Also, if the sub actuallly has evil in its heart, its torpedoes will outrange the mortar.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy