157
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
157 points (100.0% liked)
technology
23303 readers
420 users here now
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Isn't modern US doctrine that aircraft carriers are the dominant force in the navy? China has limited aircraft carrier capability and lacks the self-sufficiency of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.
The War Nerd: This Is How the Carriers Will Die (2009)
hypersonic missile tech has only become more asymmetric since then
Amen
If someone can build a hypersonic missile, someone can also build a hypersonic missile interceptor missile... And you can fit a lot of missiles in a CVBG.
Sure, the CVBG doctrine only really works against the Japanese (where both babies are fighting over small islands that are far from their respective homelands)... But I don't think that hypersonic missiles obsolete carriers in that role.
I do think that that role is useless against China or Russia given that they aren't really colonial imperial powers with territory around the world, but...
The whole point of the hypersonic missiles is that you cannot intercept them.
We don’t even have the technology today to intercept (fixed) ballistic missile trajectory at an acceptable rate (the US Patriots had enough problem dealing with Iraqi Scuds made in the 1950s!), and the hypersonic missiles with maneuverable and unpredictable flight paths made them orders of magnitudes harder to intercept.
The Russian Zircons (hypersonic cruise missile) fly at Mach 8-9, which means if a CVBG can detect flying objects 200km from the horizon, they literally have 72 seconds to react. That’s slightly over a minute to detect, track, calculate intercept paths (they can’t against unpredictable targets), and launch the interceptor missiles with literally no second chance if the first wave fails to hit their target (and they will fail).
It doesn’t matter how many missiles you can fit into your entire carrier battle group, if the success rate is 1/1000 (and that’s a BIG if), then good luck lol.
IIRC the US' missile interception system has a 40% success rate when the ballistic missile has a known origin and a normal parabolic trajectory
so yea, that nuke is hitting whether ppl like it or not, even if we went back in time 50 years people would still be able to nuke today's US, only half as effectively
Even this claim has been called into question.
From NY Times: Did American Missile Defense Fail in Saudi Arabia?
And going into the second linked article:
What had likely happened was that the Patriots intercepted the discarded missile body after it had been separated from the warhead at the terminal phase:
Check out the NY Times article I linked above.
Hey it's the they missed the point meme
The whole point of hypersonic cruise missiles is that they don’t have a fixed flight path while also moving 10 times the speed of sound.
Intercepting such a target is physically impossible.
I know
I'm just saying that even 1970s China could still nuke 100 US cities (assuming the US knows the exact origin point of each Chinese nuke, if they don't then it goes up to 200)
What even is the turning radius of an HGV? Sure, you're not constrained by silly things like pilot blackout and whatever, but that doesn't mean it can zig zag at will.
I don't think hypersonic missile interception is possible, unless the US gets laser weapons working or something like that. Hypersonics are incredibly fast, and Russia's fighter jet launched hypersonics easily defeated the Patriot air defense systems in Ukraine, when they targeted them. Even intercepting normal supersonic and subsonic cruise missiles is a crapshoot, the iron Dome in Israel gets defeated by homemade rockets at times. Interception technology is very overrated currently.
Also hypersonic missiles fly so fast that they generate a plasma cloud around them and rendering them very difficult to be tracked by radars. So you might not even see them coming at all! And even if you do, your radars can’t track them. And even if you can track them, they’re too unpredictable to calculate an intercept path.
Interceptors are more difficult to make than the missiles themselves, and often are more expensive. They also don't have 100% interception chance so you need to fire 2-4 just to be sure.
Aircraft carriers are only good for shows of force against vastly inferior militaries where the US can easily enforce complete air superiority
Otherwise, they're just a massive sitting defenseless duck against modern anti-ship missiles