Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

gf0012-aust RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - gf0012 8/9/2005 2:40:32 AM

"Also we cannot ignore other systems the Russians would surely bring to bear like Motherland based Bear/Backfire with ASMs which could respond to a limited meeting engagement if necessary without expanding the scope of the debate. " hence my caveat of using only organic air for the exercise. the russian capability goes up considerably once you bring in land based air and long range stand-off.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - gf0012 8/9/2005 3:25:59 AM

gf, Organic air is fine. I still say the Russians have an offensive anti-ship strke and defensive anti-air advantage. The French have the offensive land attack advantage.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - gf0012 8/9/2005 3:47:35 AM

I've already said that the Russians have the better ASuW capability - but I'm not as convinced that they have a better anti-air warfare component. The French have a digital battle management system in place, they have air battle management, they have a far more stealthy submarine and hence strike capability. They also have a far more competent ASW capability at 3 levels, organic air generated, sub and skimmer capability. Russian ASW has never been a strong point, and they relied on saturation (eg Backfires "beating the brushes" as a line ahead regiment etc...) Battle Group against Battle Group with no landwarfare or land generated projection I don't see it as cut and dried. The French earned some well deserved respect out of Herakles, - the Russians haven't deployed a battle fleet on tempo for literally a decade - training and quality of training is critical. In addition, the French have had the luxury of ops at a maritime level with not only NATO through STANAVFORLANT - but also through exercises in the Pacific such as RIMPAC. They're far more conversant with dealing with Russian systems than vicer versa as they've been involved with numerous upgrades through entities such as Thales, Sagem.. etc... She's worked on Russian battle management and systems solutions for clients ranfing from the ME, East Asia and Sth America. OTOH, Russia does not have that degree of knowledge at a currency or competency level. It's not that cut and dried - and my money against a contemporary Russian battle group is to give it to the French. IMV French subs would dice up that fleet like chopped shallots. ;) IMV they'd be mobility killing the Russians long before the Russians were able to bring limited firepower advantage to bear.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - gf0012 8/9/2005 5:03:12 AM

gf I take your word for it on ASW and we agree on the ASuW. But anti-air goes to Russia in my opinion. Especially on defense and of course assuming Russian systems MTBF can be kept reasonable levels. Throw in the Flankers which AFAIK can carry full a2a stores from the ski-jump. And you have SAMs and AAMs that out range French air launched offensive weapons. Add to that Russian experience with data-links, Ka-31 and the crude but powerful Russian Radars. CdG looks a little light in the ASSets...;) Of course the Russian has to use a decent strategy as he is by no means overwhelmingly superior in any respect. Without Aster 30 the French have to keep enough Rafales dedicated to defensive a2a operations. Also the E-2 will need continuos protection as well. So if I am Russian I am pleased with the a2a situation. Given this reality, my first priority is to TWEEP the Rubis. Considering how difficult it would be to locate it, I would think the Russians would devise a strategy to bring the Rubis close enough to some spear throwers to take a shot at it before it initiated its attack.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please 8/9/2005 5:19:23 AM

I'd argue that the French have got a possible 200-250km interrogation and battle management advantage over a Russian CBG. They have superiority in battlespace management which means that the Russian CBG has to extend and advance assets to go ferreting. Any ferret is a give away, whereas the French are able to bridge that gap with earlier detection strengths. The K's jets cannot rotate at full load or full weaps load - it's been a known problem. they either take off with full AA kit, or they take off with a mix, and any anti-shipping mix reduces AA loadout and commensurate drops in capability. K also has a shorter squadron of FWCA on board, that means reduced sortie rates, higher tempo for existing sortied platforms and less aircrafy to divvy up for strike and or cap. Long range PGM's are also a damocles sword. ;) you telegraph your punches esrlier with stand-off weaps. Plus, the French have been in the battle fleet management game vis a vis fleet carriers for a long time - they're not amatuers. ;)

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please 8/9/2005 12:38:22 PM

"I'd argue that the French have got a possible 200-250km interrogation and battle management advantage over a Russian CBG. They have superiority in battlespace management which means that the Russian CBG has to extend and advance assets to go ferreting. Any ferret is a give away, whereas the French are able to bridge that gap with earlier detection strengths. The K's jets cannot rotate at full load or full weaps load - it's been a known problem. they either take off with full AA kit, or they take off with a mix, and any anti-shipping mix reduces AA loadout and commensurate drops in capability. K also has a shorter squadron of FWCA on board, that means reduced sortie rates, higher tempo for existing sortied platforms and less aircrafy to divvy up for strike and or cap. Long range PGM's are also a damocles sword. ;) you telegraph your punches esrlier with stand-off weaps. Plus, the French have been in the battle fleet management game vis a vis fleet carriers for a long time - they're not amatuers. ;)" --gf0012 ---Since we are only talking about organic assets I assume you are refering to the Hawkeyes on the CdG. I would have to agree. CdG has two of them and would likely keep them in rotation around the clock in a high threat scenario such as this. To exploit the radar horizon advantage you would want to fwd deploy this aircraft 50nm to 200nm along the enemies most likely avenue of approach to give early warning especially against Russian long range ASMs. Thats going to require Rafale escort with double the sortie rate due to lower endurance. The Escort would also require an alert element to be able to backup the Escorting Rafales which all together would be about 4 Rafales escorts included. So for continuous operations I would imagine that tempo would be a strain. My estimate is that just this recon and security mission would require 24 fighters and 2 E-2c for sustained operation. Rafale isnt fully deployed so I say the French would have about 10 to 16 of them on CdG. Maybe 20. This is less than desirable for 24 hour operations in my opinion. The French could get away with it by halving the number of Rafales used for defense. But do you want to do this vs up to 2 dozen SU-33? They may have to. But this is somewhat mitigated by the early warning provided by the E-2c. But I also dont want to be stuck on defense. But with only a dozen or so Etendards available for anti-ship strike. I dont have the mass for saturation attack. So I concentrate On the picket ships and try to work my way into the K group. Against Russian SAMs and a 2 to 4 defending Flankers this could be a tough task. My Rubis is clearly the best offensive option and unless the Russians use a careful strategy it is going to win the day for France. The Russians would make the E-2c a very high priority. If its taken down and even a few Flanker survive they could briefly hold air superiority over the CdG group provided the remain outside Aster 15 range. But they could using R-77 supress overwhelme French Aircraft attempting to respond peicemail. Also without that E-2C those SS-N-19/SS-n-22/AS-17 are going to raise hell in the CdG group. Another Russian concern is the Rubis. Probably the primary consern. The Russians could deploy considerable ASW helo for local defence. Also the Russian SSN could attempt to stop Rubis. Although base don GF assessment this seems like it would be playing into French advantages. A Russian deception would be necessary. Perhaps a regular sortie of Flankers to a location 100km+ away from the K careful to remain below the radar horizon and then a brief pop up manuver and simulated landing approach, including radio traffic, where once the Flankers go below the radar horizon they RTB to the K. At the simulated K position ASW Helo, Anti-Air FFG/DDG and/or SSN could lurk. Hopefully this would draw the in the Rubis and decoy away French alpha-strikes. Meanwhile the K main body closes on CdG under strict EMCON and using ESM data. If the Russians can close to within 300km of CdG then I believe the fight will go in their favor. P.S. The Russian skipper is really wishing for an ELINT Bear or May and the French Skipper wants those Horizon Frigates now! This is actually a pretty good match up IMO.

Quote Reply

Phaid RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please 8/9/2005 1:35:03 PM

Realistically, though, the Charles de Gaulle is a real, useful, power projection platform. Its design is based on years of experience operating smaller carriers, and its operators are seasoned and well trained. And a CdG task force organically includes everything it needs to truly operate independently -- AEW, strike, reconnaissance, etc. The Kuznetsov is pretty much an experiment. The Russians have no prior experience in full-deck carrier ops, and the Kuznetsov's design reflects this -- STOBAR is a quick and dirty way to get some kind of credible fixed wing operations going, relying less on shipboard systems and lower technological risk, but limiting what the aircraft can do. The Kuznetsov still reflects the basic Soviet philosophy; its goal was to put CAP over a Kirov and/or submarines and to operate with land-based reconnaissance assets, not to be the centerpiece of its own strike group. In terms of power projection, say to support peacekeeping, the French have a lot more capability as they bring airspace control and coordination and better multirole aircraft, and all of their tactical aircraft can perform air to air refueling with buddy tanks. The Russians could put some fighters over the beach, but the French would have a much higher sortie rate and better endurance and coordination. In terms of a naval battle between typical French vs Russian CVBG with no outside support, the Russians have essentially no hope of using their SU-33s in a strike role and they would have to rely on them as CAP. The French group on the other hand is limited (today anyway) to about 14 Super Etendards with Exocet for maritime strike, which I'm skeptical could really demolish the Russian group. Basically it boils down to the problem that the French can detect the Russians but probably can't sink them, while the Russians have a tremendous amount of SSM firepower but wouldn't be able to find the French to shoot at them. And of course in real life it's unlikely the Russians could scrape together enough working ships to form a strike group, and if they do they don't have enough logistical support to conduct flight operations outside their own waters for any length of time.

Quote Reply

Phaid RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please 8/9/2005 1:43:41 PM

A Moscow Times article on the last major sortie by the Kuznetsov: link Full text: link

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - Phaid 8/9/2005 1:54:30 PM

Phaid, Why do you think the Russians could not find the French? link or link Flying Recon based on ESM data? Also IIRC the SU-33 can carry the Moskit: link Admittedly though I do not know if they deploy operationally with this capability but they at least advertise the capability. If so its considerably more powerful than Super Etendard/Exocet and much more likely to get through Aster 15 than exocet is through SA-N-6 Grumble.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica RE:Carrier Duel: Charles de Gaul vs Kuznetsov --Opinions Please - Phaid 8/9/2005 2:08:29 PM

Thats very embarrassing. Unless the Russians got their act together the French could really put a hurting on them. Most likely via submarine as they are light on a2g firepower and ship to ship firepower. Just one Oscar II, if it managed not to explode, could ravage the CdG. Or at least it seems that way to me. But I'll let gf decide who wins that fight. And the Article suggested 2 or more Oscars in the group. Ouch! Also the French arent without their Carrier Aviation problems too! Was it not too long ago that a French Carrier Air Wing had to make a "discretionary landing in Atlantic City" and didnt the CdG have a screw loose...;)

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT