USN vs the rest of the Worlds Navies combined.

[JodoForce]

Great. Now to answer my other question

[Sea Skimmer]

The Moskit (SS-N-22 SUNBURN) does have impressive abilities- but it's range (250km) does not make it a credible offensive threat against an entire US carrier battlegroup without being supported by a host of other units, as in any naval engagement. If a US surface ship closes the distance to use Harpoons on it, then it's a threat.

It doesn’t help that there has never been a single over the horizon missile shot in history and the USN owns the skies, which makes a spotter rather difficult to obtain.

It was the military who shit their pants over the MiG-25. It's actually a pretty cool interceptor- it's not Mikoyan-Gurevich's fault that they got it's role wrong. They didn't shit their pants over the MiG-31, but the MiG-31 is an extremely effective interceptor for protecting the Motherland. It is capable of intercepting both bombers and low-flying cruise missiles, and it's radar is absurdly powerful

Nice planes, but rather useless for this battle since they lack the range reach the area.

[Sea Skimmer]

So what about the other navies launching their own sorties and defense patrols?

They've got two semi decent carriers, de Gaulle and Kuznetsov but there airgroups will face ten times the fighter aircraft. The only fixed wing AEW they have are two E-2's on de Gaulle which wont last long, anyway two aircraft cant keep up a constant patrol. Then there are eight lesser carriers which can fly Harriers and Skyhawks, however only the British Harriers would last more then five minutes. Almost all the rest are hauling iron bombs and 70's Sidewinders, basically fodder. Hell the Thai carrier doesn’t even have an airgroup.

The USN force could launch a huge alpha strike that would easily crush the defending fighters, making the carriers rather irrelevant, thought I'd expect a Hornet swarm would come along and introduce them to a few dozen Harpoons. Even with Japans AEGIS vessels to protect them its only a matter of time, and if they are busy protecting useless carriers then the rest of the surface forces are open to attack.

[Vympel]

It doesn’t help that there has never been a single over the horizon missile shot in history and the USN owns the skies, which makes a spotter rather difficult to obtain.

Yup- the Russians have done many practice OTH shots in their time with Granits though.

Nice planes, but rather useless for this battle since they lack the range reach the area.

Yeah, I wasn't including them in the fight, just clearing something up. Neither the FOXBAT or FOXHOUND have ever been part of the AV-MF force.

[Sea Skimmer]

Yup- the Russians have done many practice OTH shots in their time with Granits though.

Lots of things have been practiced. Actually pulling it off in action is another story. The Russians expected to be fighting close to home when they might be able to call on land based fighters to protect there many spotters.

[Vympel]

Lots of things have been practiced. Actually pulling it off in action is another story. The Russians expected to be fighting close to home when they might be able to call on land based fighters to protect there many spotters.

The question is just messed up. Maybe if we just get 'Homogenous Land Mass A' with all the supporting arms of the rest of the world's navies on it and pitted the entire USN against that, maybe then the USN just might actually get sunk. It'd have to be an all out burly brawl. In any real world scenario the USN dominates the waves.

[JodoForce]

How about the whole world tries to invade the US? Umm never mind

[Sea Skimmer]

The question is just messed up. Maybe if we just get 'Homogenous Land Mass A' with all the supporting arms of the rest of the world's navies on it and pitted the entire USN against that, maybe then the USN just might actually get sunk. It'd have to be an all out burly brawl. In any real world scenario the USN dominates the waves.

Certainly. Though creating an island with a greater airfield density then Tinian and sending the USN after it would be interesting. So many thousands of Standards to fire.

[Soulman]

If the USN is tied down to an objective and the RotW ships start off close enough the USN might lose. On the open seas the USN would win. Various carrier projects like the CVF (and I think an additional French carrier) will even it out somewhat in the future, at least making an attack against ships from NATO forces somewhat difficult.

[Crown]

The problem with this scenario, is the gross air-superiority by the US! There is no way anyone could take any other position other than a US victory ...

Now if the battle was to ge in the, oh I don't know, South Atlantic, say near winter, then it will be a slightly different story. The US will win, but the casualty would be greater.

[Sea Skimmer]

Now if the battle was to ge in the, oh I don't know, South Atlantic, say near winter, then it will be a slightly different story. The US will win, but the casualty would be greater.

A South Atlantic winter would do a good job of sinking most of the worlds fleet, which consists of corvettes or smaller vessels.

[Crown]

Now if the battle was to ge in the, oh I don't know, South Atlantic, say near winter, then it will be a slightly different story. The US will win, but the casualty would be greater.

A South Atlantic winter would do a good job of sinking most of the worlds fleet, which consists of corvettes or smaller vessels.

True, but keeping Operation Corporate in mind, the US's air superiority could be nullified.

[Sea Skimmer]

True, but keeping Operation Corporate in mind, the US's air superiority could be nullified.

However any weather that rough pretty much rules out surface combat as well, ships can't make much headway and there sensors and weapons can't cope with the excessive movement. Only the submarines are still going at it and the US has an advantage in that respect. Indeed most of the SS and SSK swarm would be struggling to snorkel under such conditions and probably have to surface.

[JodoForce]

So even the mighty US fleet isn't immune to a little ol' shakeup by Nature, huh?

[Sea Skimmer]

So even the mighty US fleet isn't immune to a little ol' shakeup by Nature, huh?

Its far better off then most fleets with larger ships designed with harsh seas and long deployments in mind, the USN has conducted UNREP in seas that would sink some navies vessels.

[Pendragon]

If you switch battlegrounds to the North sea then?

In all fairness, the US Navy is built to take the fight to the enemy, while basically every other navy is designed to defend friendly waters (possible exception for royal navy).

Thus denying the USN land based air support, and making it possible for the rest of the world?

Or to be fair, granting it to the countries in decent range... Norway, Sweden, Denmark, UK, Ireland, possibly Russia, Finland, Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Poland would be pushing it, and as far as I know the only air force in Iceland is the american.

Hey, grant the US Forces whatever Air Forces usually stationed in Iceland.

IIRC, on US carrier group carries roughly the entire Swedish air force (200 multirole fighters or so, a handful of helicopters and a a few dozen light attack planes).

A note on submarine warfare... the US might have superior number of nuclear subs, but this doesent mean, non-nuclear subs are completely worthless. I hear the ones they build in lil' ol sweden (and exported to Australia and (North?) Korea) are the best non-nuclear subs around, due to some system for using diesel engines underwater.

Take a look at http://www.kockums.com

[Sea Skimmer]

A note on submarine warfare... the US might have superior number of nuclear subs, but this doesent mean, non-nuclear subs are completely worthless. I hear the ones they build in lil' ol sweden (and exported to Australia and (North?) Korea) are the best non-nuclear subs around, due to some system for using diesel engines underwater.

Take a look at http://www.kockums.com

It doesn’t matter, nothing without a nuclear reactor can sustain the speeds needed to hunt down a carrier group on the open seas. All an SSK can really do is sit on one point and wait for a target to pass over. AIP lets a boat wait longer. But on the open ocean the odds of something passing over are basically nil and if you fire up the diesels and snorkel you’re a sitting duck, and still quite slow one.

[Pendragon]

Theyre not snorkling. Theyre using Stirling engines. Not sure exactly how they work, but theres information on them at the site I linked to. One thing is for sure, they dont need air, so snorkels arent an issue.

Im not much of scientist though, so someone else will have to take a look at it.

It's hard to get any hard data on their range and (thats nice to know ) speed, but the Australian Collins class subs are listed as 20+ knots underwater and have supplies for 70 days. Still slower than most nuclear subs I guess, but hardly the crawling surface speed of 10 knots.

[JodoForce]

They don't use diesel engines now?

[Sea Skimmer]

Theyre not snorkling. Theyre using Stirling engines. Not sure exactly how they work, but theres information on them at the site I linked to. One thing is for sure, they dont need air, so snorkels arent an issue.

Im not much of scientist though, so someone else will have to take a look at it.

They burn diesel fuel and liquid oxygen, and then transfer the heat to helium, which expands, and contacts over the cylinders to drive the crankshaft. The exhaust is then cooled down and mixed with seawater so it can be vented without bubbles. However the boats speed under AIP is just five knots, there are many places where the current is stronger then that. In addition the boast only have LOX and air for a limited period of operation, they must transit to there operational area snorkeling under normal diesel power and need to come up every few days for air for the crew. Like I said, AIP lets you sit and wait for longer, it doesnt let you match the operational mobility of an SSN or do more then defend a point.

It's hard to get any hard data on their range and (thats nice to know ) speed, but the Australian Collins class subs are listed as 20+ knots underwater and have supplies for 70 days. Still slower than most nuclear subs I guess, but hardly the crawling surface speed of 10 knots.

Twenty knots snorkeling at flank, and making so much noise the crew might as well scuttle the thing. On the other hand SSN's can run silent at 20 knots throughout their missions and hit 30 plus if needed. Under battery power speed is more four knots unless you want to drain the batterys in an hour.

[Sea Skimmer]

They don't use diesel engines now?

He is incorrect; The Gotlands have diesel engines along with Sterling AIP and must use them along with a snorkel or surfacing to travel any significant distance. That’s just fine in the Baltic, doesn’t work in the Atlantic.

SSK's are defensive weapons and can be very effective. But they simply don’t work in open waters. Just think about the geometry of trying to intercept a twenty knot target, typical CVBG speed, when you yourself can only make five knots without attracting a swarm of SH-60's.

[MKSheppard]

SSK's are defensive weapons and can be very effective. But they simply don’t work in open waters. Just think about the geometry of trying to intercept a twenty knot target, typical CVBG speed, when you yourself can only make five knots without attracting a swarm of SH-60's.

Ah, but what about the commecial ships? Submarines until the SSN were never
that good at sinking warships, due to the vast speed differences.

Sink a few commercial ships, and you force your opponent to devote vast
resources to hunt down a relatively cheep SSK.

[Sea Skimmer]

Ah, but what about the commecial ships? Submarines until the SSN were never
that good at sinking warships, due to the vast speed differences.

Sink a few commercial ships, and you force your opponent to devote vast
resources to hunt down a relatively cheep SSK.

Intercepting even a merchant ship without extensive snorkeling is fairly hard unless you have a nearby choke point. In which case that point is quickly swarming with ASW assets. They force you deep, you run out of air and power and within three days are forced to snort and die doing so.

SSK's are fairly good for fighting commerce but overall I think your better off with mines for drawing off assets. Though having an SSK to sink the minesweepers can make things fun. However you can do that with most anything, and an Exocet armed helicopter is a bit cheaper then a modern SSK

[phongn]

Oh, look, a troll.

More on the lines of no one has more then a fraction of the capability.

sure easy to say if you live in a bubble
You think other radar screens explode when the USN sends out its jammer aircraft? I could ramble off names of fighter jets, patrol jets I could list the seriel numbers, but anyone can name off a bunch of names, to hope to look half intelligent.

And yet you've given no counterargument other than "Americans suck and are ignorant!"

The USN has the strike assets that no other nation has. Period. They have jamming craft which will reduce the abilities of the World Fleet. They have the advanced datalinking system which improves the defensive ability of the US Fleet. They are homogeneous, which helps with doctrine.

where the hell are you getting these figures? puff out of thin air?
Quoting something the Pentagon said to the public? hah
Thats why congress was shitting their pants when they first heard of the Sunburn.

The SUNBURN is overrated. It's dangerous, yes, but to maximise its capabiltiies you need a spotter for over-the-horizon targetting - and the USN owns the air. An appeal to a nonauthority (Congress, in this instance) does not an argument make.

For that matter, most enemy ships do not have modern air-defense suites, unable to engage multiple targets at once (except for the Japanese Kongos and perhaps a few high-value combatants).

SSK's are fodder on the high seas.

of course they are, infact I heard their crews were so incompetent, that they ran into Moby Dick.

SSKs lack the range and endurance to effectively operate on the high seas. They are designed as defensive vessels, not offensive. Look at the various world navies and see why they've purchased SSNs or SSKs. Invariably those seeking a blue-water force (like the USSR, UK and USA) chose nuke boats while those who did not (like West Germany, the PRC and the DPRK) chose SSKs.

[Ender]

The simple fact is that we end up kicking the shit out of other countries when ever we preform joint tactical excersizes. They quite simply cannot do the things we can, and the ones they can they can rarely do as well.

Based on those excersizes alone, I say the USN takes it.