It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China to target U.S. aircraft carriers

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2002 @ 12:33 AM
link   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARS AND RUMORS OF WARS
China to target U.S. aircraft carriers
Improving naval capability meant to confront defense of Taiwan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 13, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jon Dougherty
2002 WorldNetDaily.com

China is improving its naval warfare capability not only to use in any future invasion of Taiwan, but also as a bulwark against American aircraft carrier battle groups that would be sent to defend the island democracy.

According to an assessment published last week in the Jamestown Foundation's weekly "China Brief," the People's Liberation Army navy "is developing methods to disable or sink American aircraft carriers and gathering the specific force packages to do so."

The analysis, written by China expert Richard D. Fisher Jr., says Beijing "has long anticipated that to militarily subdue democratic Taiwan it will first need to win a battle against the United States."

"The early 1990s saw much evidence of carrier-related research and nationalist-political advocacy, particularly from the PLA navy to build a Chinese aircraft carrier," Fisher wrote. "But, following the political crises of 1995 and 1996, which saw the Clinton administration deploy two battle groups around the carriers Independence and Nimitz near Taiwan in response to threatening PLA exercises in March 1996, sinking a U.S. carrier became much more pressing than building one."

In his analysis, titled "To Take Taiwan, First Kill A Carrier," Fisher says that China's naval strategy may be to make defending Taiwan too expensive for the U.S. in terms of manpower, assets and political pressure.

"By actually sinking" an American carrier, Beijing hopes "to terminate U.S. attempts to save the island," Fisher said.

According to recent Chinese media accounts cited by Fisher, PLA navy officials appear to be focused on neutralizing U.S. carrier battle groups.

"Missiles, aircraft and submarines all are means that can be used to attack an aircraft carrier," said Maj. Gen. Huang Bin, a professor at the PLA National Defense University, who was quoted by Hong Kong's Ta Kung Pao daily newspaper May 13. "We have the ability to deal with an aircraft carrier that dares to get into our range of fire."

Huang said once China committed to attacking Taiwan, Beijing will already have planned for U.S. intervention. And he said China's naval forces would have to strike at U.S. naval forces to keep them at bay.

But, while warning of China's increasing naval might, Fisher said Beijing's calculation that Washington would capitulate and leave Taiwan to its own defense if an American flattop were destroyed was "potentially dangerous."

"The United States likes vainglory; if one of its aircraft carriers should be attacked and destroyed, people in the United States would begin to complain and quarrel loudly, and the U.S. president would find the going harder and harder," Huang was quoted as saying.

Fisher's assessment may be on track; in March, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told a group of U.S. and Taiwanese military officials that the Bush administration "has said the United States is committed to doing whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend itself."

Nevertheless, China continues to hone its naval warfare capabilities and modernize its fleet.

The weekly military intelligence brief Geostrategy Direct reported Wednesday that China recently conducted a new anti-ship missile test in the South China Sea. Photos of the missile test and its launcher were disclosed July 4 in the official Communist Party newspaper, People's Daily, Geostrategy reported.

The paper quoted Chinese naval officials as saying the missile test was carried out to help PLA Navy personnel to "be familiar with the application of the new equipment, increase the ability of land-based logistics and marine rapid logistics, and win future local sea battles."

"The missile was identified by U.S. intelligence officials as a version of C-801 or C-802 anti-ship cruise missile," said the report, noting that the "test launch was conducted from a Luhu-class guided missile destroyer." Chinese military officials said the missile was of a "new type" with "over-the-horizon" capabilities.

"China's anti-carrier forces include new Russian-made Su-30 fighter bombers, Russian Kilo-class submarines and new anti-ship cruise missiles, like the C-801," said Geostrategy. Also, Beijing's generals have written that land-based ballistic missiles also could be used to target aircraft carrier groups.

Other reports said the Chinese navy was given "three major directions" in 1995: 1) place naval building in an important position and accelerate the pace of naval modernization, 2) ensure the security of China's coastal defense, and 3) promote the great cause of the unification of the motherland.

www.worldnetdaily.com...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




posted on Sep, 5 2002 @ 01:42 AM
link   
A few years ago China bought 2 ex-Russian Sovremenny class destroyers. They carry the SS-N-22 Sunburn anti-ship missile. This I believe their first anti-carrier capability.

fas.org...



posted on Sep, 8 2002 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Good thing I'm not in the Navy anymore, huh?



posted on Sep, 8 2002 @ 03:39 AM
link   
I would imagine a nucleur armed missile would be perfect for destroying a carrier...

Find it with the satalites, get the cordinates for it, drop a nuclear weapon on the area, ... BAM atomise the entire fleet ....

... try and stop that ....



posted on Sep, 8 2002 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Maybe that's why the US Navy is modifying the AEGIS system to shoot down ballistic missiles. I think thay are biulding a new Standard missile for it ( the Block IV, I believe )



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 08:22 AM
link   
they better not be my but is gonna be on one in about nine months!!! oh well... at least i will go out with a bang... haha



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by wetdog
they better not be my but is gonna be on one in about nine months!!! oh well... at least i will go out with a bang... haha

Which carrier are u going to be cruising on wetdog ?



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 11:18 AM
link   
1) How many air carriers are in services in the USN ?

2) Sinking an USN air carrier. It's a good idea if they ( the Chicoms) want to have a total war with the USA. I don't think that the USA will look the chicoms sinking 1 of their AC without any riposts.

In China mainland, it will smell the napalm.



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Yes...."the smell of victory"



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 12:11 PM
link   
UP, I think there are 12 carriers in the Navy. China doesn't have any.

I read or hear somewhere that if the Navy took all the ships that aren't in active duty, meaning ships that are on display, are a museum, moth-balled, etc, that those ships would make up the worlds 3rd largest Navy


[Edited on 10-9-2002 by Bob88]



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Didn't China buy a 70,ooo tonne class carrier from Russia. I think it had been stationed with the Black Sea Fleet.



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Did they? I know they got one from Australia but weren't allowed to use it for their navy. They were turning it into a amusement park or something.

[Edited on 10-9-2002 by Bob88]



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Bob888, it sounds like you are talking about the HMAS Melbourne which was sold off as scrap to the Japanese in the 60's.
It collided outside of Jervis Bay with the destroyer HMAS Voyager, I think, ( in the 60's as well ) sinking it with extensive loss of life.
At school one of my teacher's was a sailor on the Voyager and had a limp from his injuries.



posted on Sep, 10 2002 @ 01:33 PM
link   
You're right about it being the Melbourne, and heres where I probably originally read what I was talking about, at FAS.org (the poor man's Janes, lol)

www.fas.org...



posted on Sep, 11 2002 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob88
UP, I think there are 12 carriers in the Navy. China doesn't have any.

I read or hear somewhere that if the Navy took all the ships that aren't in active duty, meaning ships that are on display, are a museum, moth-balled, etc, that those ships would make up the worlds 3rd largest Navy


[Edited on 10-9-2002 by Bob88]


That's a good new BoB88.
I think that without the USA and his powerfull navy, many country would have been in deep troubles.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   
A suprise attack with a nuke is the only way that they might get one. They have to ask if it is worth the risk. If I was a country with a third rate military I would think twice about trying it. Yes, I mean third rate. China has a military built on quantity not quality. I know the old saying "Qunatity has a quality of its own". I am not saying that China is not improving itself militarily, it is but it is nowhere near on a level playing field with the US. China's largest advantage is its land forces. They have no real way of projecting power. Their navy does not stand a chance against a determined US Navy. The same holds true for their air force. The last thing that China wants is to launch a nuke against the US. If that happens it is all over. In a conventional land war the Chinese would be very hard if not impossible to stop just by their sheer numbers. If they pop a nuke that advantage goes bye bye. The US has long stated that they will not be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict, but I don't think that we would hesitate one second to be the second.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
^^ Very true.

Unfortunately, that will probably be "flamed" with things such as: "Well look at Iraq!" etc. etc.

Truth is, the reason the U.S. is suffering casualties in Iraq is because we are fighting an enemy that is invisible. We don't know who is friend and who is foe. If we had someone to actually fight? I think it'd be over quickly.

As to China, their land force is definitely something to be reckoned with, but hey, you never know what an outnumbered, determined, back-against-the-ropes U.S. military can do, just look at ww2, and if I may say,

"nuts"


-wD



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
If China sinks one carrier, remind you that it has to get past the aircraft, subs, destroyers, etc then it would be screwed. US nuclear subs would have free reign on the Chinese navy. Hundreds of ships would sunk. If China used a nuke to sink a carrier then China would be a smoking crater.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Carriers being targeted is not a new thing. Carriers being targeted by fast, large-warheaded missiles launched from surface or sub-surface is not new either. US Navy has been dwelling on this for several decades.
Sunburn is a formidable weapon. The Russians build good missiles. I'm not sure whether USN point-defense systems will cope against it but it's not just a case of hardware vs. hardware.
Can Chi-com sub or surface skippers use this improving hardware effectively? Can they think and fight a blue-water war? USN may have sailed the Taiwan straits in peacetime but doubt that they will just drop the hook, wait for imminent destruction when it comes to shooting. The CVBG is still a very dangerous unit to fight and it's manned by men (and gals-but I won't go there) who expect to go into harm's way. Just my opinion but I don't think that PLAN can come up with anything new that USN hadn't expected the CCCP to do to them. PLAN is basically using the same equipment. I do miss the F-14's tho. They would have been useful in this kind of scenario. Tomcats forever!
Salutations to all



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Nukes on carriers? Someone's been playing too much CnC Generals. China's nuclear policy is: retaliation only. Besides, launching a nuke means nuclear retaliation from the US. They're not that stupid.

I heard from somewhere they have a sub launched missile that cruises as missile but dives into the water and becomes torpedo when close enough. Just a rumour, I have no details.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join