Britain set to confront China with new aircraft carrier

[Zapper]

Chinese carriers that are being built aren’t super carriers...

Considering the Gerald R Ford class to be a Super Carrier which is around 100k tons, China's type 003 (85k tons) and type 004 (110k tons, 70-100 helos+aircrafts, nuclear powered) do fall in the class of super carriers. So your argument is clearly flawed

As for UK and it’s operations... they’ll be operating in foreign water and won’t have The anti ship BM that China will throwing at them. So try sharpen up your wits before engaging in stupid arguments

Carriers are armed with a flotilla of other naval platforms and I'm sure they'd collaborate with American Super Carriers. If carriers could be simply taken out by anti ship BMs & CMs, daddy china wouldn't be doing the same. Why don't you read up on defensive measures of Aircraft Carriers and the effort required to take down an entire flotilla

It's not as simple as a keyboard warrior ranting to attack em with a barrage of missiles

 

[Song Hong]

UK will never dare to fight China even if China sink her carrier.

In 1949, PLA fired on Royal Navy ships HMS Amethyst, HMS Consort, HMS London and HMS Black Swan sinking the HMS Amethyst. 22 were killed.

UK ran away like coward never even declared war on China.

Considering the Gerald R Ford class to be a Super Carrier which is around 100k tons, China's type 003 (85k tons) and type 004 (110k tons, 70-100 helos+aircrafts), nuclear powered) do fall in the class of super carriers. So your argument is clearly flawed


Carriers are armed with a flotilla of other naval platforms and I'm sure they'd collaborate with American Super Carriers. If carriers could be simply taken out by anti ship BMs & CMs, daddy china wouldn't be doing the same. Why don't you read up on defensive measures of Aircraft Carriers and the effort required to take down an entire flotilla

It's not as simple as a keyboard warrior ranting to attack em with a barrage of missiles

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Do you even know how jamming works? First you need to know how the missile is guided, then you can talk about jamming.

Most modern ships have an EW suite. Those things can mess with any missiles targeting system. The arleigh burke for example can give fake signal or even render missile dud. This & the hard kill option.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Most modern ships have an EW suite. Those things can mess with any missiles targeting system. The arleigh burke for example can give fake signal or even render missile dud. This & the hard kill option.

simple introduction to signal processing. this might fly over your head but it's more for the audience, not you.

when you recieve a radar pulse, the only information you know is energy, direction and time.

if it's a reflection of your own radar pulse, you know the frequency, since you sent it. but if it's an opponent radar pulse, you will have a single data point of energy, direction and time.

you can find out what the enemy's radar pulse is because most radars send out multiple pulses of the same frequency. take a FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) of the pulse train to transform it into the frequency domain, compare to known databases, you know what the radar is. Or at least, if it's an unknown radar, at least you know it's an enemy radar.

problem: AESA radar can change frequency every pulse. This means that a radar computer can't identify them as "all from the same source" as easily. pulse trains from the AESA radar look more noisy and blend into the background radio noise better. Since only the AESA radar operator knows their own frequency, you need to listen longer for a pattern to emerge, and it might be too late.

what is jamming? It is overpowering enemy radar signals with fake radar signals. There are only 2 ways to jam an enemy radar:

1. High intensity in a narrow frequency band targetted towards a particular radar.
2. Equal power in a wide frequency band because you don't know what the frequency of the enemy radar is, but this means the spectral power density is lower.

Here's the problem with trying to jam an AESA radar: you don't know what the next frequency is. So you must use broadband jamming. But AESA radar can use all of its power to broadcast on a single frequency (that changes) while your jammer has to spread its power across a wide frequency band. It can't win.

AESA is essentially unjammable.

Now you might say: but what if the missile isn't radar guided? What if it's optically guided? Gotcha! The datalink can be jammed. But wait, it's just as hard as jamming AESA radar. here's why: the same principle of frequency rotation with AESA radar can also be applied to the datalink. The datalink can change frequency every once in a while using a small phased array as a communication transceiver. Proof: this is already used in 5G towers

 

[antonius123]

SBM were not meant to target moving objects. It is originally designed to be fitted with nuclear warhead to target population center or stationary targets they were never meant to be accurate in the 1st place!

Use your logic. Ship is moving object, hence ASBM (Anti Ship Ballistic Missile) is meant to target moving object.
Dont repeat the same argument that has been debunked.

To target moving objects especially naval one accurately at an extremely long range it have to be fed constant data updates to the minutes. It is not a fire & forget system like the Sidewinder. They can't be trusted not to strike at civilian ships if their sensor mistake it for military.

Who said ASBM need "contant data"? Not really.

ASBM indeed need update of the ship position because the target is moving, but not necessarily constant. Ship is not hypersonic missile, not even jet fighter that run 2 mach; within 1 hour it can only move less than 80km away.

Initial phase is just like other ballistic missile, in the mid phase may need 1 or 2 update for correction, then the final stage that need constant update and will be done by onboard sensors.

Posting pictures from satellite are not the same as targeting one from it. For one the ships are constantly on the move & it have to take into account the distance & times to reached it, even if it reached the fleet, Onboard sensor can be jammed by EW suite the American especially are notorious to give fake signal for the enemy to target, to add radar & CAP still makes it harder for ballistic missiles to strike an enemy ship. They are not going to just let you strike them of course & no faster speed doesn't mean anything especially up against the AEGIS system which are designed to go up against SBM.

Onboard sensor can be jammed, if it is not AESA.

You dont know which radar installed on the DF-21D warhead. Also since it is hypersonic speed, you may not have enough time to play with jamming the warhead sensor; even if you are successfully jamming it, it may be already on the right track to the carrier and remain seconds to kabooom

 

[Song Hong]

You are familiar in EW. This is also my domain. Wideband frequency hopping aesa is almost unjammable.

The key thing is Wideband FH

simple introduction to signal processing. this might fly over your head but it's more for the audience, not you.

when you recieve a radar pulse, the only information you know is energy, direction and time.

if it's a reflection of your own radar pulse, you know the frequency, since you sent it. but if it's an opponent radar pulse, you will have a single data point of energy, direction and time.

you can find out what the enemy's radar pulse is because most radars send out multiple pulses of the same frequency. take a FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) of the pulse train to transform it into the frequency domain, compare to known databases, you know what the radar is. Or at least, if it's an unknown radar, at least you know it's an enemy radar.

problem: AESA radar can change frequency every pulse. This means that a radar computer can't identify them as "all from the same source" as easily. pulse trains from the AESA radar look more noisy and blend into the background radio noise better. Since only the AESA radar operator knows their own frequency, you need to listen longer for a pattern to emerge, and it might be too late.

what is jamming? It is overpowering enemy radar signals with fake radar signals. There are only 2 ways to jam an enemy radar:

1. High intensity in a narrow frequency band targetted towards a particular radar.
2. Equal power in a wide frequency band because you don't know what the frequency of the enemy radar is, but this means the spectral power density is lower.

Here's the problem with trying to jam an AESA radar: you don't know what the next frequency is. So you must use broadband jamming. But AESA radar can use all of its power to broadcast on a single frequency (that changes) while your jammer has to spread its power across a wide frequency band. It can't win.

AESA is essentially unjammable.

Now you might say: but what if the missile isn't radar guided? What if it's optically guided? Gotcha! The datalink can be jammed. But wait, it's just as hard as jamming AESA radar. here's why: the same principle of frequency rotation with AESA radar can also be applied to the datalink. The datalink can change frequency every once in a while using a small phased array as a communication transceiver. Proof: this is already used in 5G towers

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

simple introduction to signal processing. this might fly over your head but it's more for the audience, not you.

when you recieve a radar pulse, the only information you know is energy, direction and time.

if it's a reflection of your own radar pulse, you know the frequency, since you sent it. but if it's an opponent radar pulse, you will have a single data point of energy, direction and time.

you can find out what the enemy's radar pulse is because most radars send out multiple pulses of the same frequency. take a FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) of the pulse train to transform it into the frequency domain, compare to known databases, you know what the radar is. Or at least, if it's an unknown radar, at least you know it's an enemy radar.

problem: AESA radar can change frequency every pulse. This means that a radar computer can't identify them as "all from the same source" as easily. pulse trains from the AESA radar look more noisy and blend into the background radio noise better. Since only the AESA radar operator knows their own frequency, you need to listen longer for a pattern to emerge, and it might be too late.

what is jamming? It is overpowering enemy radar signals with fake radar signals. There are only 2 ways to jam an enemy radar:

1. High intensity in a narrow frequency band targetted towards a particular radar.
2. Equal power in a wide frequency band because you don't know what the frequency of the enemy radar is, but this means the spectral power density is lower.

Here's the problem with trying to jam an AESA radar: you don't know what the next frequency is. So you must use broadband jamming. But AESA radar can use all of its power to broadcast while your jammer has to spread its power across a wide frequency band. It can't win.

AESA is essentially unjammable.

Now you might say: but what if the missile isn't radar guided? What if it's optically guided? Gotcha! The datalink can be jammed. But wait, it's just as hard as jamming AESA radar. here's why: the same principle of frequency rotation with AESA radar can also be applied to the datalink. The datalink can change frequency every once in a while using a small phased array as a communication transceiver. Proof: this is already used in 5G towers

Don't you think the US have a counter for that already?

Just like F-22 said the US already figured out China's defense to the smallest detail. That's why the USN just sends 2 carrier group to the SCS, so does the UK & France. Those guys are not afraid of Chinese missile batteries.

Again you are running under assumption that the USN have no counter-measure & just allowing their ships be attacked. Truth to be told they won't. China essentially have no tactics to go up against the USN & her allies other than betting on the DF will work as advertised.

In the real world what works on paper doesn't necessarily work in real life. The US have full spectrum dominance in the Pacific. Their AEGIS & other AAD systems are linked together to provide a near impenetrable shield in the area. Do tell me how the DF can pass through those system before they attack the ship?

China doesn't have tactics to go up against US/UK CBG other than full saturation attack & if that doesn't work then what's next?

 

[Song Hong]

The only counter EW or counter radar is to collect enemy radar EW signature.

That is why ep3 always spy on china

Don't you think the US have a counter for that already?

Just like F-22 said the US already figured out China's defense to the smallest detail. That's why the USN just sends 2 carrier group to the SCS, so does the UK & France. Those guys are not afraid of Chinese missile batteries.

Again you are running under assumption that the USN have no counter-measure & just allowing their ships be attacked. Truth to be told they won't. China essentially have no tactics to go up against the USN & her allies other than betting on the DF will work as advertised.

In the real world what works on paper doesn't necessarily work in real life. The US have full spectrum dominance in the Pacific. Their AEGIS & other AAD systems are linked together to provide a near impenetrable shield in the area. Do tell me how the DF can pass through those system before they attack the ship?

China doesn't have tactics to go up against US/UK CBG other than full saturation attack & if that doesn't work then what's next?

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

U
Who said ASBM need "contant data"? Not really.

ASBM indeed need update of the ship position because the target is moving, but not necessarily constant. Ship is not hypersonic missile, not even jet fighter that run 2 mach; within 1 hour it can only move less than 80km away.

Initial phase is just like other ballistic missile, in the mid phase may need 1 or 2 update for correction, then the final stage that need constant update and will be done by onboard sensors.

AShBM probably works like this:

OTH radar/wide area observation satellite guidance to point it in the right direction -> high res resolution satellite or recon drone for final correction.

It will only need a few points of data input:

1. pointing it in the right direction during boost 2. midcourse correction to put it in the same general area 3. reentry correction for accuracy within 20-30 meters.

It won't take 1 hour. Flight time will be 15-20 minutes.

OTH radar/low res wide area satellite points the missile in the right direction and distance. Midcourse, the missile is outside the atmosphere and recieves update from drone or low earth satellite to narrow the search box to within a few km. Just before reentry, drone or low earth satellite provide last bit of course correction data. Reentry phase with no possible communication lasts 3 minutes for the braked descent of the Apollo program; it'll last maybe 30 seconds with an unbraked missile reentry.

Don't you think the US have a counter for that already?

Just like F-22 said the US already figured out China's defense to the smallest detail. That's why the USN just sends 2 carrier group to the SCS, so does the UK & France. Those guys are not afraid of Chinese missile batteries.

Again you are running under assumption that the USN have no counter-measure & just allowing their ships be attacked. Truth to be told they won't. China essentially have no tactics to go up against the USN & her allies other than betting on the DF will work as advertised.

No US does not have an electronic counter. It's simple physics as explained above, enabled by the capability of AESA radars to jump frequency every pulse. China doesn't have an electronic counter to US AESA radar either, which is why after getting the J-20, China went all in on the hypersonic missile program - detection is one thing, doing something about it is another.

USN isn't afraid because they know China isn't going to start WW3 over merely 2 carrier groups patroling almost 1000 km away. In a real war, they won't be using 2 carrier groups. They brought 6 for Iraq. The USN brought merely 2 carrier groups because they knew that 2 carrier groups does not threaten China, yet is a show of force.

The only counter EW or counter radar is to collect enemy radar EW signature.

That is why ep3 always spy on china

this is also why China tries to use Su-30 and Su-35 as much as possible for air patrol near Japan, so they only reveal Russian radars instead of domestic radars. PLA also tries to not turn on their fire control radars as much as possible in unsecure environments.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

AShBM probably works like this:

OTH radar/wide area observation satellite guidance to point it in the right direction -> high res resolution satellite or recon drone for final correction.

It will only need a few points of data input:

1. pointing it in the right direction during boost 2. midcourse correction to put it in the same general area 3. reentry correction for accuracy within 20-30 meters.

It won't take 1 hour. Flight time will be 15-20 minutes.

OTH radar/low res wide area satellite points the missile in the right direction and distance. Midcourse, the missile is outside the atmosphere and recieves update from drone or low earth satellite to narrow the search box to within a few km. Just before reentry, drone or low earth satellite provide last bit of course correction data. Reentry phase with no possible communication lasts 3 minutes for the braked descent of the Apollo program; it'll last maybe 30 seconds with an unbraked missile reentry.



No US does not have an electronic counter. It's simple physics as explained above, enabled by the capability of AESA radars to jump frequency every pulse. China doesn't have an electronic counter to US AESA radar either, which is why after getting the J-20, China went all in on the hypersonic missile program - detection is one thing, doing something about it is another.

USN isn't afraid because they know China isn't going to start WW3 over merely 2 carrier groups patroling almost 1000 km away. In a real war, they won't be using 2 carrier groups. They brought 6 for Iraq. The USN brought merely 2 carrier groups because they knew that 2 carrier groups does not threaten China, yet is a show of force.



this is also why China tries to use Su-30 and Su-35 as much as possible for air patrol near Japan, so they only reveal Russian radars instead of domestic radars. PLA also tries to not turn on their fire control radars as much as possible in unsecure environments.

The counter also include tactics. Of which the US have decades worth of training dealing with hypersonic threat. This also goes to the RN & other NATO allies Like I said it will not be able pass through without being detected earlier by CAP, ship's & land based radar. Not to mention SBM are above the curvature making shooting it down easier.

 

[Song Hong]

Many people think EW/radar is panacea to everything. EW/radar is like God.

My experience is EW/radar is damn difficult to use with lots of false positive. It really depends on operators and system.

The counter also include tactics. Of which the US have decades worth of training dealing with hypersonic threat. This also goes to the RN & other NATO allies Like I said it will not be able pass through without being detected earlier by CAP, ship's & land based radar. Not to mention SBM are above the curvature making shooting it down easier.

 

[Michael Corleone]

Considering the Gerald R Ford class to be a Super Carrier which is around 100k tons, China's type 003 (85k tons) and type 004 (110k tons, 70-100 helos+aircrafts), nuclear powered) do fall in the class of super carriers. So your argument is clearly flawed

Are you seriously comparing a nuclear powered behemoth with a conventional one. Great

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Many people think EW/radar is panacea to everything. EW/radar is like God.

My experience is EW/radar is damn difficult to use with lots of false positive. It really depends on operators and system.

As opposed to AESA radar is God & can do anything. You put AESA on everything somehow it's infinitely better. Yeah I agree those kind of people are douche. People forget that there's an environment in place & yeah AESA & others tech is important but most of the times tactics are more important.

EW are just 1 of many defenses in place to protect a ship. A regular CAP oftentimes can do a better job protecting the mother ship from any threat.

 

[Zapper]

Are you seriously comparing a nuclear powered behemoth with a conventional one. Great

I clearly mentioned China's type 004 is nuclear powered...looks like you have severe comprehension issues or blindly sticking to your narrative

 

[Michael Corleone]

Carriers are armed with a flotilla of other naval platforms and I'm sure they'd collaborate with American Super Carriers. If carriers could be simply taken out by anti ship BMs & CMs, daddy china wouldn't be doing the same. Why don't you read up on defensive measures of Aircraft Carriers and the effort required to take down an entire flotilla

It's not as simple as a keyboard warrior ranting to attack em with a barrage of missiles

Well it doesn’t depend upon what you and I have to say. Chinese missile stockpile has been built to effectively counter US navy deployed in pacific from mainland... were not even taking into account surface combatants that China can outbuild... this is the Chinese strategy and this is why US have been seeking to introduce direct energy weapons.

I clearly mentioned China's type 004 is nuclear powered...looks like you have severe comprehension issues or blindly sticking to your narrative

If you haven’t updated yourself, China has cancelled plans to construct that carrier for the foreseeable future

UK will never dare to fight China even if China sink her carrier.

In 1949, PLA fired on Royal Navy ships HMS Amethyst, HMS Consort, HMS London and HMS Black Swan sinking the HMS Amethyst. 22 were killed.

UK ran away like coward never even declared war on China

It’s not because Royal Navy isn’t capable or that Chinese navy is superior but because UK by end of WW2 has been nothing but a broke nation... its superpower status, long lost in WW1 building dreadnoughts till broke... it couldn’t afford a war in 1949 or budget to run its colonies.