Ten different ways to kill a carrier

[Martian2]

Ten different ways to kill a carrier

1. Megaton-class EMP (electromagnetic pulse) via DF-5 ICBM five megaton warhead or DF-3A IRBM with 3.3 megaton warhead

2. Conventional-powered EMP with limited range

3. DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM)
a. high explosive
b. flechettes
c. cluster bombs

4. WU-14 hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) at prototype stage

5. CM-400AKG Wrecker air-to-surface missile with terminal hypersonic steep dive and powered by a solid-rocket motor

6. Luoyang/CASC LS-6 guided glide bomb with 60km range

7. C-803 anti-ship missile with a supersonic terminal phase

8. Stealth cruise missile (like the AGM-129 ACM)

9. Yu-6 (Mark 48 class) heavyweight torpedo

10. EM-66 torpedo-shaped self-propelled mine

China's Military Modernization: Building for Regional and Global Reach | Richard D. Fisher (p. 166)

----------

Today, I want to discuss the Chinese Luoyang/CASC LS-6 glide bomb with 60km range. If you send out a squadron of J-20 stealth fighters and/or Lijian stealth UAVs with LS-6 glide bombs (or possibly classified stealth glide bombs), it would be a standoff simultaneous attack that would be extremely difficult to defend against.

PLA Guided Bombs | Air Power Australia

Luoyang/CASC LS-6 Satellite Aided Inertially Guided Bomb Family

Above, below: 500 kg Luoyang/CASC LS-6 at Zhuhai 2010 (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).

The LS-6 designation is applied to a family of guidance kits for a range of low drag bomb bodies. Known variants of the tailkit are for 500 kg, 250 kg, 100 kg and 50 kg bombs. The former variants are glidebombs, the latter variants strake equipped analogues to the US GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb (SDB).

The 500 kg / 250 kg LS-6 glidebomb design is modelled in many respects on the concept of the Australian developed planar wing Kerkanya glidebomb kit, more recently adapted to form the JDAM-ER. Unlike the Kerkanya which uses a low wing monoplane configuration with a blended adaptor fairing, the LS-6 glide wing kit is much simpler in design and the weapon flight configuration is that of a high wing monoplane. Cited range for an 11 km release altitude at 900 km/h is 60 km, considerably less than the Kerkanya/JDAM-ER design[4].

In 2010 Luoyang displayed 100 kg and 50 kg derivative designs, which are clearly intended to be analogues to the US GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) which has developed to fit the weapon bays of the F-22A Raptor[3].

These weapons are clearly designed for compact internal carriage, and it is reasonable to conclude that the intended launch platform is the J-20 stealth fighter.

Both the 100 kg and 50 kg derivatives are fitted with nose mounted electro-optical seekers, with high quality planar windows. JDW's Hewson reports this to be a semi-active homing laser seeker, however, such a seeker is not compatible with a weapon intended to be released in multiple round salvos[5].

50 kg Luoyang/CASC LS-6 EO terminal seeker window (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).

Imaging seekers are one technique which provides satellite aided inertially guided bombs with genuine precision capability. The US Navy DAMASK/HART effort is a good example. A typical design for such a seeker will see the bomb seeker take a snapshot of the target surroundings, which is then compared with a preprogrammed image to fix the bomb's position. Once the error is found, the target aimpoint is corrected and the bomb dives into the target. MilliMetric Wave Imaging (MMWI) techniques were demonstrated in the Orca program, while DAMASK demonstrated an uncooled low cost IIR seeker, based on automotive technology. Both techniques have growth potential for attacks on moving targets such as vehicles or shipping (Author/USAF)[4].

Luoyang Description for 500/250 kg Variants (Cite):

LS-6 guided glide bomb is a low-cost but highly effective air to surface weapon for standoff precise attack on fixed ground targets, such as airports, seaports, bridges, commander centers, etc. With a wing kit and GPS/INS guidance unit, the conventional low-drag aerial bombs are modified into precision guided bombs with standoff attack ability.

System features：

Launched outside mid/short range air defense firepower
All-weather, day & night attack capability
Low cost but highly effective
Fire and forget capability
Excellent anti-interference capability
Modular guidance and control unit
Single target or multiple targets attack capability

Weapon delivery:

The LS-6 standoff guided glide bomb (SOGGB) utilizes high-altitude and high-speed launching, high lift-drag ratio aerodynamic configuration and suitable control scheme to ensure a remote gliding control. Before the bomb is dropped, its on-board INS coordinate system must be aligned with that of the aircraft and the fire control system downloads the mission planning into the bomb. Within a specified period of time after the bomb being dropped, the stabilizing system of the bomb starts to work to ensure the bomb and the aircraft being separated safely. And then, the folded-wings expand, putting the bomb into the autonomous flight course, and the on-board control system of the bomb starts to operate to keep the bomb body stable. A combined GPS/INS navigation is adopted during this course. The guidance system translates and calculates the guidance commands and outputs to the autopilot to ensure the bomb flying in a planned trajectory. Based on the relative position of the bomb to the target, the bomb will enter its terminal guidance at a preset distance from the target. On the terminal course of the trajectory, attitude control will be performed via a vertical lead-bias to improve the kill effect.

Technical data：

a) Kill Area：
For normal target：5,000 - 10,000 m2
For armored targe：100 - 500 m2
b) Operational Altitude and Speed：
Launch altitude：4,000 - 11,000 m
Launch speed：600 - 1,000 km/h
c) Maximum Launch Range：No less than 60 kilometers with a launch altitude of 11,000 meters and an initial speed of 900 km/h.
d) Guidance Mode：Combined GPS/INS guidance.
e) Guidance Accuracy： ≤15 meters CEP

----------

The following provides a good explanation of the capabilities of glide bombs. The section on "Real Time Maritime Strike" starts at 1:55 in the video. Note the part where the narrator says, "a four aircraft formation releases 64 250-pound weapon simultaneously to destroy a large quantity of enemy targets from a safe distance."

 

[j20blackdragon]

Let me propose an even better idea.

Use the DF-21D to drop a torpedo.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

The mine stuff is unreasonable since you would have to lay mines in an arc like 800 miles out hoping for a hit. Again people have this notion that a US carrier is going to come close to shore. Even in WW2 the Doolitle raid had to be launched early because they were spotted 400 miles out. They had to turn around quickly to evade a launch of a swarm of Japanese Air Force bombers.

You think modern day Air Force bombers can't fly 500 miles in no time? A carrier has to be way way way out in the ocean.

 

[Martian2]

The mine stuff is unreasonable since you would have to lay mines in an arc like 800 miles out hoping for a hit. Again people have this notion that a US carrier is going to come close to shore. Even in WW2 the Doolitle raid had to be launched early because they were spotted 400 miles out. They had to turn around quickly to evade a launch of a swarm of Japanese Air Force bombers.

You think modern day Air Force bombers can't fly 500 miles in no time? A carrier has to be way way way out in the ocean.

Use a quiet diesel-electric submarine to lay smart mines in the anticipated path of an aircraft carrier.

Also, lay smart mines around Yokosuka Naval Base in Yokosuka, Japan. The carrier USS George Washington (which will soon be replaced by the carrier USS Ronald Reagan) is based there.

----------

Biggest U.S. ships called vulnerable

"Other potential dangers are a new generation of ultra-quiet diesel submarines and sophisticated underwater mines."

-----

CHINA PROGRAM TOUTS ITS ABILITY TO SINK US AIRCRAFT CARRIERS « Prophecy Updates and Commentary

"Indeed, China is developing an entire range of weaponry to try to make it absolutely certain that they can overwhelm US carrier defenses and sink them quickly at the beginning of a future war. Besides ICBMs targeted at carriers, these weapons include “cruise missiles, submarines, torpedoes and sea mines.” One Chinese sub demonstrated back in 2007 that it could penetrate US carrier defenses when it surfaced in Pacific waters within easy “kill” range of a US aircraft carrier. That incident demonstrated that Chinese submarines were far more able to penetrate US defenses than previously thought and that US naval planners were seriously underestimating Chinese naval abilities. The link below also cites a source from the Office of Naval Intelligence that China is rapidly advancing weapons systems from the conceptual stage to the deployment stage. The link indicates the US Navy is aware of the rapidly-growing threats to the survivability of US carriers, but it unclear what the Navy is doing to insure that US carriers could survive a war with China."

-----

More Than the Navy’s Numbers Could Be Sinking | TIME.com

"The Mine Threat

Diesel-electric submarines are not the U.S. Navy’s only undersea problem: in the post-World War II-era 19 of its ships have been sunk or seriously damaged, 15 of them by sea mines.


The mine countermeasures ships USS Pioneer, USS Devastator, USS Sentry, and USS Dexrous (l-r) approach Afloat Forward Staging Base (Interim) USS Ponce to get supplies, somewhere near Iran, in August. (Navy photo / MCS 2nd Class Toni Burton)

In the 1980s “tanker war” in the Persian Gulf, the guided-missile frigate Samuel B. Roberts struck a 1908-design Russian mine and was kept afloat only after heroic damage control efforts by the crew. In 1991, during Operation Desert Storm, the Aegis-class cruiser Princeton and the amphibious warship Tripoli were both seriously damaged by mines.

The Navy became sufficiently intimidated by the mine threat laid by Iraq that the Marines cancelled plans for an amphibious assault against Kuwait city. Things have not improved since then: in 2012 the Navy conducted join anti-mine exercises with 34 allies in the Persian Gulf; over 11 days, 24 ships (including eight of the U.S. Navy’s paltry fleet of 14 minesweepers) with 3,000 sailors found only half of the 29 simulated mines laid for the exercises.

The Navy asserts that retiring and not replacing the specialized Avenger-class of U.S. mine-hunting ships will result in an increase in anti-mine capabilities with 24 mine-warfare modules added, at times, to Littoral Combat Ships. That the capability may increase is entirely theoretical; the LCS mine countermeasures module has proven problematic, and operational testing of it will not even start until 2014.

It is a real question whether ships not primarily designed for mine hunting with organic crews that have little to no experience in such specialized tasks (but augmented by 38 mine specialists) can outperform the specialized capability—albeit quite limited—being retired with the Avenger class.

While the Navy has ignored mine warfare, allowing capability to remain inadequate, others have not: China reportedly has 80,000 sea mines, Iran has from 2,000 to 3,000, and worldwide 50 nations have an inventory of 250,000.

Just as primitive land mines (euphemistically called Improvised Explosive Devices) made an unpleasant surprise from the start of the Iraq war continuing to this very day in Afghanistan, sea mines — even primitive ones — constitute a present and real threat to the U.S. Navy that it has not demonstrated an ability to deal with effectively."

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Obviously mines are something to take seriously. Mining is nothing new. If you scatter 80,000 mines out in the middle of an ocean there certainly will be a problem...for everybody....for years.

 

[Oldman1]

Obviously mines are something to take seriously. Mining is nothing new. If you scatter 80,000 mines out in the middle of an ocean there certainly will be a problem...for everybody....for years.

Oh yeah mines are very effective. Especially against the Japanese during WW2. But it be a waste on mines in the middle of the ocean. Its usually at enemy ports or ships using trades routes close to the country. So in this case if the U.S. Navy and Air Force wants to prevent the Chinese from coming out of their own ports and naval bases as well as stop shipping. Mines dropped from planes or submarines is the way to go.

Let me propose an even better idea.

Use the DF-21D to drop a torpedo.

A ballistic missile carrying a torpedo?