This sea drone stuff in the Black Sea makes me think there could be an evolution in sea warfare. I know there are military guys here and wanted to pick their brains. Its wild how successful Ukraine has been with these things.
Have aircraft carriers become obsolete?
- Thread starter SquatchinPoke
- Start date
I can see how the defensive systems could be overwhelmed if numerous drones were sent in waves. Drones are cheap when compared to the defensive systems required to defeat them. Add in the time it takes to rearm those systems and the carriers could be sitting ducks. Kind of like the Japanese in the battle of Midway.
Normally these ships would have screening vessels & a better nightwatch who would have engaged the Magura v5 drones way out.
How Magura V5 Drones Destroyed Caesar Kunikov: Detailed Video Analysis and Mayhem on the russian Landing Ship | Defense Express
The success in sinking the big russian warship is attributed to a refined tactics of a well-coordinated swarm attack on the Ukrainian side, while the russian response was sailors armed with rifles
en.defence-ua.com
Intelligence officers demonstrate use of Magura drones in sinking of Tsezar Kunikov â video
The large Russian landing ship Tsezar Kunikov was sunk with the help of Magura V5 maritime drones, the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine reported.
www.pravda.com.ua
I'm going to guess there were all kinds of russian screw ups to not detect & at least try to destroy the drones before they closed & hit the ship.
Carriers are vulnerable but the screening force & early detections should prevent them from being a victim of surface drones. I would think hypersonic missiles would present a bigger threat in the end.
Outside of submarines, I have that Navy's in general are outdated sitting ducks. Seems like drone swarms, hypersonic missiles ans small nukes can and could take care of them.
My previous assessment that drone technology was still a way out, is incorrect. I was surprised at the success of drones in Ukraine, and both sides have adapted them into their service. Nothing like a war to advance technology faster than anticipated. They are still not the main attacking force in a battle area, and humans are at this time still needed to take ground. Advanced AI combined with drone swarms is scary on so many levels. Anti-drone technology can and is being developed if not already in the field.Normally these ships would have screening vessels & a better nightwatch who would have engaged the Magura v5 drones way out.
How Magura V5 Drones Destroyed Caesar Kunikov: Detailed Video Analysis and Mayhem on the russian Landing Ship | Defense Express
The success in sinking the big russian warship is attributed to a refined tactics of a well-coordinated swarm attack on the Ukrainian side, while the russian response was sailors armed with rifles
Intelligence officers demonstrate use of Magura drones in sinking of Tsezar Kunikov â video
The large Russian landing ship Tsezar Kunikov was sunk with the help of Magura V5 maritime drones, the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine reported.
I'm going to guess there were all kinds of russian screw ups to not detect & at least try to destroy the drones before they closed & hit the ship.
Carriers are vulnerable but the screening force & early detections should prevent them from being a victim of surface drones. I would think hypersonic missiles would present a bigger threat in the end.
Success in these matters is more of an ability to surprise than anything else. As Navys starts to anticipate these things, the effectiveness will decrease. In other words, Russia was not as prepared for Drone warfare as it should have been.
Hypersonic nukes are probably a bigger threat to Naval fleets at this time. I would be shocked if the Navy had not anticipated based on Ukraine the drone threat and have countermeasures already in place. However, that would assume that the government is thinking ahead of itself, which rarely happens. It's just the fact that costs for the Navy are high for missing this obvious threat.
The timetable for unmanned combat has significantly been shortened. We will see wars fought with robots and drones before 2050, maybe even 2040. The problem I see here is that politicians may be more eager to go to war when robots are the only thing they are risking militarily. Human costs of collateral damage will still be a factor. It's just easier to risk what they will see as a hunk of metal than a human. I think there is a danger when you add AI to the mix, as you would be teaching AI how to kill humans.
This thread delivers.
I wouldn't equate the amateur hour of the Russian military in all forms to the defensive and offensive capability of a US carrier strike group. As apples and orange as could be.
Our carriers have rings and rings of defenses surrounding them, thousands of miles of open ocean to reach them, and offensive reach to eliminate anything that could serve as a threat. The Black Sea fleet has none of that.
Our carriers have rings and rings of defenses surrounding them, thousands of miles of open ocean to reach them, and offensive reach to eliminate anything that could serve as a threat. The Black Sea fleet has none of that.
You know with the AI and machines. I wonder were wars will be fought? Will they be sea and infrastructure type stuff of will they actually unload an army of robots and try to invade.
If we aren't making sub drones like out nuclear subs then we are failing.
If we aren't making sub drones like out nuclear subs then we are failing.
Yea, lets give AI and drones nukes. What could go wrong there? Don't forget to power that with a black hole just for good measure.
The Aircraft carrier battle group is our most visible way to project Naval power around the world. We are not going to send them into a situation where they are under legitimate threat. The US has weapon systems both offensive and defensive which are so highly classified that you would never know they existed until they would have to be used. All you have to do is look at Ukraine. They are shooting down Russian Hyper-sonic missiles ( which Putin said were impossible to defense against) with older versions of the Patriot system.
I am not a Naval person, but, I do know a lot about the technology that we have developed and honestly, it would blow your mind. Could the Russians or Chinese have technology that could surprise us?....Sure, but I wouldn't bet on it
I am not a Naval person, but, I do know a lot about the technology that we have developed and honestly, it would blow your mind. Could the Russians or Chinese have technology that could surprise us?....Sure, but I wouldn't bet on it
I was very surprised how they were able to down the Russian aircraft also with those. I did notice how well they defended against those. I think this drone mess is a bigger issue then the hyper-sonic weapon.
Russian aircraft are not very good. But, the biggest issue is their training, its terrible. I think the F-16s Ukraine will get, although older will still be the best aircraft in theater. The Russians are introducing the SU-35S, but I still think these F-16s will be better. Even their SU-57, which is their 5th generation aircraft would be considered more of a 4th generation here in the west. Drones are a huge issue, that's why we are putting a lot of resources into electromagnetic systems to counter them. A lot more efficient to defeat them electronically than attempt to shoot them all down
I know a decent amount about military technology, and I always look at what information we are releasing to the public about our capabilities , I can usually get a good idea of what capabilities we actually have , I do think it would just blow people's mind what we actually have
I know a decent amount about military technology, and I always look at what information we are releasing to the public about our capabilities , I can usually get a good idea of what capabilities we actually have , I do think it would just blow people's mind what we actually have
What publications/websites do you peruse for the latest publically obtainable military hardware info UK?
Completely unrelated sorta of. Have a fraternity brother that flew F4's (loved them) for 4 years & then F-16's for 23 years. We often talk about his experiences & not long ago I asked him if the Ukrainian govt started a program similar to the old AVG, would he go fly in Ukraine. His response "in a heartbeat." He said his only real concern would be S-300's but that due to technological superiority, the relentless live time training & material quality that the F-16 would for the foreseeable future outclass russian aircraft. I forget the disparity of actual flying time a US pilot gets per month versus russia, china & north korea, but it was huge.
F-16's will get blown away in this theater. Anything that is not a 5th generation fighter will get destroyed quickly. It's a nest of S-300 and S-400 systems.
Russian aircraft are very good.
No aircraft is "safe" in that environment, but, the F-16s will be the best aircraft in theater (until Sweden gives them JAS 39s) , no question. The Ukrainians are holding their own with outdated Mig-29s and SU-27s........The SAM threat is real and it would take a lot more assets to take those out overall.......The F-16s have a much smaller radar cross section that makes them harder for a SAM system to acquire, and they have a much more robust TEWS to electronically defeat them,....nothing is 100%, but, they will still be the best aircraft out there
BTW......the SU-35 ( their newest model the "S", can give a 30 year old F-16C with equally trained pilots a good fight) is a decent aircraft but the Russian training programs are terrible........their evaluations are geared towards making their Commanders look good instead of actually training pilots
Back to the original topic, protecting the Aircraft carrier from attack........one thing many people may not realize.....we can actually "hide" an entire battle group from detection for an extended period of time. I can't go into it much, but it is a capability that we have. The biggest thing on a Battle groups side is the expanse of the Ocean, to physically find the group is like looking for a needle in a haystack. They erase, or severely limit their electromagnetic signature. Communication for Flight operations are done using very low power radios and they use passive systems for threat detection......They basically create a bubble around the group where no electromagnetic radiation escapes , thus making them virtually invisible. They also have to "hide" the water displacement signature and the electrical current produced by a metal object moving through water......they can do all this electronically.........
The myth that Russian equipment and training is inferior to NATO is going up in smoke as we speak.
This capability has no value given the strike distances the F-18 and and F-35 need. The Carrier strike group eventually has to go into China's anti access area denial sphere and a hail of cheap missiles comes their way.
The fancy western tanks sent into the theater (Leopard, Abrams) take a lot of upkeep. They have not proven to be superior to Russian T-72's or T-90's. It's sort of like comparing an ak-47 to an AR-15. The AK can get dirty, wet, stomped on. It will fire. The western gear is not designed for combat. It's designed to look good on paper. Western Artillery is also wearing out over a few thousand rounds. Russian gear is low tech but designed to last. It's proving it on the battlefield.
Thanks @COWBOYintheUK you were who I was hoping would give an opinion.
Would you say the lack of a real battle group in the Black Sea is what is helping Ukraine then? I see what everyone is saying in the sense our aircraft carriers aren’t going to be alone just chilling.
I think all UFO is military no doubt. Love getting to pick your brain on this stuff.
Would you say the lack of a real battle group in the Black Sea is what is helping Ukraine then? I see what everyone is saying in the sense our aircraft carriers aren’t going to be alone just chilling.
I think all UFO is military no doubt. Love getting to pick your brain on this stuff.
lol
Longest sniper shot on record what popping a rusky’s dome. Russia is weak and Putin will be dead in less than three years.
I could see drone carriers in the mix.
“Hive” attack and defense systems leveraging many aquatic and aerial drones through basic gaming engines (AI/machine learning) helping them move/work together like you see in sci-fi film.
These could be deployed in massive scale via current carriers and much smaller/faster submarines that can release the aerial drones when surfaced and the submersible drones at any depth.
“Hive” attack and defense systems leveraging many aquatic and aerial drones through basic gaming engines (AI/machine learning) helping them move/work together like you see in sci-fi film.
These could be deployed in massive scale via current carriers and much smaller/faster submarines that can release the aerial drones when surfaced and the submersible drones at any depth.
We’ve poured trillions off the books in military research.
I’ll be disappointed if we don’t have a Megatron stashed somewhere.
I’ll be disappointed if we don’t have a Megatron stashed somewhere.
Russian equipment and training is very much inferior to NATO.......what you are seeing in Ukraine is superior numbers.......its like in WW2, it would take six Sherman tanks to take out one German Panther tank......the problem for the Germans is that we had six Sherman's for every Panther.......Russian training is terrible, but they do gain experience fighting in a war and do improve, but, Their aircraft technology is significantly inferior, especially their Avioincs..........these 30 year old F-16s they are getting will hold there own against their most modern SU-35s
What is interesting, women can typically withstand G forces better than men. Women have wider hips and their body structure naturally keeps more blood in their upper body which is needed for the brain to avoid black out.
You deserve a bottle of tequila. I'll buy.
I tend to think most of that is what NATO tells themselves. The Russians start slow but once they learn they are state of the art. They have integrated drone and Cyber into their doctrine and you are starting to see the results on the battlefield.
The Russians long ago conceded Air superiority in that they could not match the latest 5th generation tech. SO they invested more in cheaper solutions like the S-400 systems which I think would be a major problem for F-35's and F-22's. Even then, The Russians don't concede that the F-22's could just take over the sky. The thing is about having stealth you can shoot without being seen. But once you do Russian Jets like the S-35 and 57 are going to easily defend a missile from that far out. Then close on where you are and once you have a dog fight only the F-22 is built for that. The F-35 will be in trouble against more maneuverable Russian jets.
US army doctrine likes to think it is the modern day Wehrmacht and will win battles with fancy tanks and Maneuver. The Russians still believe Artillery is the Queen of the Battlefield. The average Russian Brigade has twice the Artillery firepower as an AMerican one. The AMericans think static war is over and Manuever is King. Ukraine has proven that wrong IMO.
Didn't the Abrams obliterate a lot of Iraqi T-72's in both the Iraqi Conflicts, Desert Storm and whatever the hell W called the Invasion of Iraq looking for WMD's that were not there?
Truly breathtaking in its juvenile gullibility. Using Ukraine's military capability to fight against the invading Russian military as a proxy for how modern NATO militaries would fare in a similar fight is truly Pravda-level silly. But you keep doing you.
The Russian SU-57 is their only 5th Generation aircraft, to us its actually a 4th Generation and they have only 12 of them and are not dedicating them to combat, except for standoff weapons......the SU35s which is their most modern of the series is still outclassed by the F-15C and F-15E and most variants of the F-16. An F-35 and F-22 could fire on any other combat aircraft , including the F-15C and the F-16s before those aircraft had any idea the F-35 / F-22s are even in the area. S-300 and S-400 SAM systems would never be able to lock onto an F-35 or F-22, if they could even detect them..........The TEWS on the F-15E can prevent S-300 / 400s from acquiring them. The proof is in the pudding, The Ukrainians , with a comparatively small ground and air forces are more than giving the Russians a run for their money, and I know they have NATO weapons, but they do not have the full array of NATO weapon systems or the numbers
I think that is false.
The overmatch is showing up now. The Russians have been very gentle. But they now have over 400,000 in theater and the push is just beginning.
