Once had occasion to write about, In the United States in the face of already, generally, who came to the threshold of a hypersonic missile threat “raised his head” opponents carriers among sailors and politicians. Of course, in the fight “avianosnikov” and “protivoavianosnikov” within the Navy and the community have partly okolomorskih,the struggle for orders, “kickbacks” and influence. And “religious” like Swift's Battle “big-endian” and “ostrokonechnikov” (or, if you want to, Intel vs battles fans. AMD or NVidia vs. ATI and many other, shook the computer world). But there is a considerable grain of truth - someone who understands, that carriers lose the status of the most valuable surface ships for the US, and someone does not want to understand. At the same time, this problem is also facing assault forces, ie, US Marine Corps (KMP). A solution, then some may be?
[center]
Underwater monitor M-2 and British Navy submarine “Sjurkuf” French Navy
Commandant Berger in touch
The new commandant of the Commission (commanding) David Berger, General spoke with the concept of change in the actions of his troops. is he, in particular, He writes in his plan, that before the Soviet Navy already had tremendous potential long-range high-speed RCC, but the US Navy did not plan to do major landing operations there, where the Soviet Navy could concentrate its submarines with missiles and other means, and only there, from where the main operational areas of the Soviet Navy was far. Later the situation changed, and now I was again. And all of these threats require a new approach. In particular, He called for the reduction and phasing out of the current large and expensive UDC, DVKD and DTD. The main unit of the ILC in operations is MAGTF - landing compound, bearing the Air Group and the MEU - Expeditionary Unit Marines, ILC reinforced battalion (closer to the size of the shelf), 4 tanka, 4 155mm towed howitzer, dozens of armored vehicles. The compound consists of 1 UDC, 1 DVKD and 1 ASL, and bears 6 attack aircraft with short takeoff, 11 helicopters (of them 4 shock “Superkobry”) and 12 konvertoplanov “Ospri” and drones, And 7 landing craft. In his opinion, these expensive ships in the current environment to a landing site simply can not walk and can be damaged or sunk.
Berger was in favor of changing the Commission's structure and tasks, in fact, he generally stands for reduction of the share amphibious operations, because most of the Marines just come to the country, where it enables the local government. Instead of storming the unequipped shore with fight. For such operations Berger proposes to build more much cheaper “expeditionary support vessels”, built on the basis of dry cargo, equipped hangars, boats and platforms for helicopters. Them and not lose so sorry, and they cost less. Such ships are now being built in the US, but the tasks are more auxiliary. He also advocates a shift to more small-sized landing ship, but it is not very clear - it is something like our MDK? or larger?
New threats - development of old
aircraft carrier, AUG all surface fleet and the United States and its allies now threatens to spread advanced supersonic and the beginning of the emergence of armed Russian hypersonic RCC (as well as fears, that something similar appears in China, and then in other countries of the anti-American). And the range of new missiles could be even larger, than even the most powerful of the previous generation of supersonic ASM, such as P-700 “granite” or P 1000 “Volcano”. A time to counter attack hypersonic RCC can amount to tens of seconds or even seconds - depending on where she is discovered. Yes, and some opposition to some? Shoot down nobody and nothing, and this for a long time.
what, of course, caused activation in the US antiavianosnogo lobby. About the struggle with the order of an additional pair of aircraft carriers type “Ford” there has already been written previously, but it was unsuccessful. However, the discussion continues.
Kurdish rebels attacked a Syrian military in Latakia province
One problem carrier is its huge size and a sufficiently high vulnerability stuffed fuel and ammunition ship. Dimensions facilitate RCC and defeat the purpose, and its detection. Aircraft carrier has not affected naval modern “fashion” EPR reduce ships by applying various absorbing materials, reducing the number of protruding antennas and other nodes, transfer arms under the deck (with these criteria, the first such vehicle serial was our TARKR “Kirov”, and not the French frigate “Lafayett” or any of the candidates) and special “stealth” obstruction contours with beads and superstructures outside walls and the like. Some measures to reduce the ESR and other signatures on new projects carried out, but it should be understood any, that the elephant will not be much less noticeable for the hunter, if he cut off the tail and slightly sawed tusks. He's just too big for this.
situation Revised
What can there be options to correct the situation? Well, especially strengthening the air defense compounds, but wait, when the Americans and their allies will be able to cope with hypersonic RCC, when and supersonic all extremely difficult until now, It can be very long. It is for us until a considerable problem even on land, despite, that recent firing C-400 simulators hypersonic missiles (as were the type of missiles 5V55, converted to the target complex “Favorit-RM”) We were very successful. But hypersound hypersonic discord, and how it maneuvered the target, if maneuvered, We do not know. A rocket will do it for sure. Anyway, with protection against these missiles Americans still worse, than with their creation. Protection options EW, of course, always good, but will it help, a very big question.
The ideal would be not to go to those areas, which may be, let us say, Russian or Chinese (when such weapons will be in China) submarine, surface ships and aircraft carriers hypersonic RCC, or else completely avoid conflicts with such powers. But if Russia and China, let us say, possible, the spread of new weapons for the world, including various apparent “convenient enemy” for the US Armed Forces to countries and movements, It makes it impossible. As is common conventional subsonic ASM, which still can be a dangerous weapon, especially when mass application, although not comparable in danger of supersonic and hypersonic missiles the more. Those RCC lightweight class has a simple and different guys in sneakers and a lump in his cheek kata, and the guys from Lebanon in a well-fitted and sensible “snaryage”, and many who still. Who will give a guarantee, that through 25 years for regular guys in sneakers appears far more dangerous for the United States Navy AUG weapons?
Instead of an aircraft carrier - BPLAnosets?
One option, offered, true, while at the level of ideas, It is the transformation of an aircraft carrier. But what? The answer - in support of reconnaissance and strike UAVs, which carrier with reduced signatures physical fields. Offered as a semi-submersible, and low profile (“sitting down” below in the ballast water after adoption), and even underwater aircraft carriers. more precisely, BPLAnostsy, while also equipped with silo launchers of cruise missiles. The most curious, that this has happened before, on another turn of the evolutionary spiral. There were submarines, bore one or more aircraft (such, as the pre-war French submarine cruiser “Sjurkuf”, for many years remained the largest non-nuclear boat in the world, or Japanese type “I-400”, British submarine type monitors “M”), and projects a large submarine aircraft carriers. for example, American underwater atomic carrier AN-1, designed in the 50s, capable of displacement in the underwater 14700 t carry on board 8 interceptor firm “Boeing” with a maximum speed flight to M = 3, and VTOL three engines, two of which are dumped and can be reused. There was also an option of using interceptors F-11F provided equipping them with the same take-off system, “Magic carpet” (It was the title of this detachable propulsion system). It was underwater unmanned vehicles shock. if you can call “flying bombs” type “Regulus-1” and “Regulus-2”.
Submarines “Khelibat” and “Greybek” US Navy, carriers “Aircraft missiles” “Regulus-1” and “Regulus-2”
Schematic representation of the nuclear submarine carrier AN-1 and its Figure
But such aircraft had to carry the submarine aircraft carrier
Among other well-known researcher and underwater military subjects H. I. Sutton offered as an option low-profile semi-submersible vehicle UBPLA with silo launchers for rockets, longitudinal runway without a corner of the landing deck (the type of aircraft carriers of wartime). At the same time the rise of devices should not be handled by catapults, a Jumping. Which the, in respect of aircraft carriers “Soviet” type love to criticize experts - usually farther from the carrier-based aircraft, the stronger. Deck with aircraft it can be fully automated, Unlike ejection. In addition, the take-off from a catapult with this low ship simply more dangerous springboard. Such a ship really will have a much smaller signature and be a much more difficult target for missiles. Of the benefits can also be called the, he is sure to be cheaper in the nuclear aircraft carrier 100 thousand. tonnes, bearing, currently and in the future only a 44 fighter (plus helicopters and UAVs). Another plus of the project - no rescue helicopters.
“Low-profile semi-submersible vehicle shock UAV” in representation of Mr. Sutton
Another question, what, despite the advances in technology, UAVs can replace manned aircraft fully except in exploration. With shock function is all not so clear, and even in the medium term, a substitute, likely, will not work. A fighter with features even more difficult. Also, If the machine, remotely-controlled, their command lines are vulnerable to electronic warfare, and the modern means of radio intelligence quickly intersect itself control channel, and find a place, how it works. And if self, the question arises with the group management apparatus reliability, their resistance to electromagnetic pulse, ability to respond to emergency situations, etc.. In addition, instead of fighting the impact of UAV armed with a tanker will be the US Navy - X-47B have “bad happen”. And when there will be the next approach to a bar called “creating a shock of jet UAV deck”, still unclear. But, Nevertheless, It can be assumed, that something like this would create a decision quite aircraft carriers, much more resistant to current and future threats, which can be used there, where it can drown these same funds. And potentially dead on this ship will be an order of magnitude smaller, than on an aircraft carrier.
repair method “Trishkin robe”
But it's still only offers a variety of experts. And in the meantime, continuing construction carriers “the last war”. Recently started work on launching a second aircraft carrier-type housing “Ford” — “John F. Kennedy” (CVN-79). At one of the two, which I did not want to order the Minister of Defense Mattis and very reluctantly agreed to their construction of its temporary successor Shanahan. In this case, the, that this project has not been solved a bunch of problems, in particular the mass driver, that Trump demanded to replace back to the steam (Now we will see, obeyed whether its representatives naval and industrial carrier-mafia). Already approved by the, what “Dzheralyd Ford (CVN-78) reaches a state of readiness for rapid deployment before 2024 of the year. More recently, it was a 2022 city, before from 2021 city, and before this ship with fanfare “introduced into the fleet” (for check).
Continues and repair of existing ships, although it is still not clear, whether the core at a recharging “Nimitz”, or it will write off.
But also to repair and recharge cores have problems. So, early autumn “Harry Truman” (CVN-75) I could not go out to sea in a scheduled six-month military service. In preparing the ship to trek it took serious failures in the power supply system. As a result, the only way the US Navy aircraft carrier on the East Coast stood in for repair at the shipyard Newport News Shipbuilding (NNS) - a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, in Norfolk. In this recently vice president Chris NNS Meiner told, that for the repair of the CVN-75 components and assemblies removed from “George Washington” (CVN-73), which with 2017 g. It is on repair and recharging the active zone in the same yard. In this case, the ship has recently taken out of the dry dock and planned to return to duty at the end of 2021 city, but now this deadline will be postponed - the nodes took off. By itself, the cannibalization facing repairs or waiting for repair of ships is not something out of the ordinary. We do this also happened, but that, it is happening now with the most important for the US Navy ships, It is not the best for them a signal. It is seen, tramp, claiming, America at its military strong, more than ever, “bit wrong”, about how nuclear power, where is he “wrong” exactly the opposite?
Since the end of February 2019 year in Norfolk worth “George Bush” (CVN-77) to Overhaul, which was scheduled for the period 28 months. But there is not all plain sailing - part of the crews took him to the broken “Truman”, who needs “blood from his nose” quickly repaired, so as not to disrupt the final schedule of military service. A “John Stennis” (CVN-74) all I had to stand in the dock after “George Washington”, but instead to put “George Bush” (CVN-77). a “Stennis” there is a struggle - there is a desire to abandon it and send it to recharge thus sucks, i.e, in fact, copy. But anyway, yet nowhere to put it and work on it there is no one. There are in fact in the NNS is also “Dwight Эyzenhauэr” (CVN-69), 36-month technical readiness recovery loop.
Even if carriers will no longer be the real basis of the above-water military might of the US Navy, then make them wanting hardly diminished. However, these problems are, probably, both before any serious kind of navy fleet “the first three” (USA, RF, China), and even in the frivolous flotikom - like the poor African Navy or Navy “nebratskoho North Somalia”.
I. Vyatkin, especially for “military review”
