View Single Post
  #17  
Old 11-02-2019, 10:14 AM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bash View Post
Citation needed for that claim, the Iowas were refit and recommissioned because of the perceived "cruiser gap" with the USSR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirov-class_battlecruiser

" The appearance of the Kirov class played a key role in the recommissioning of the Iowa-class battleships by the United States Navy in the 1980s"

Other sources......

* Cold War Cruisers of the Soviet Union Paperback – 2010 by Books LLC

* https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...cruisers-54777

* https://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/milita...ip_service.htm


Quote:
Originally Posted by bash View Post
The US DDGs are very different from the logic behind the Kirovs. They were meant to threaten an area all by themselves. Their endurance let them be a menace to a wide area unless NATO dedicated a lot of resources keeping tabs on them.
The Kirov's were never designed to operate independently, no Soviet surface warships was due to the threat from Western airpower and submarines. However they were capably of doing so in certain conditions due to their heavy missile armaments and nuclear reactor. Some think they could have operated as a commerce raider in the North Atlantic like the German Bismarck, but realistically they were only going to this in Soviet controlled waters well to the north of the GIUK Gap. The chances of any Soviet warship and especially a ship the size of the Kirov penetrating the GIUK Gap in wartime were practically zero. And a Kirov taking on a US Navy carrier battle group by itself is a suicide mission.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bash View Post
The Arleigh Burkes aren't designed or meant to be mini fleets unto themselves. While they can fight independently they are often ASW and AAW pickets for battle groups. The key there is they're part of a battle group.
The Burkes are multi-role and can be used for a wide range of missions that include air defence and ASW. They also carry Tomahawk LACM and Harpoon ASM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bash View Post
Like I said, China can build them if they want but big ships without escorts are targets and battle groups are really expensive and have huge logistical tails. They can harass smaller countries in and around the South China Sea but they're unlikely to keep the USN from going where they want.
The National Interest article specifically mentioned that such hypothetical Chinese warships would operate in waters close to China. That would mean they would be protected by Chinese surveillance, airpower and air defence systems, and probably by alleged Chinese land based anti-ship ballistic missiles. The Chinese would not be trying to stop the US Navy from going were it wanted, just to stop it from interfering in operations close to China. That may include disputed island archipelago's in the South China Sea, Taiwan and the Senkaku Island dispute with Japan. Chinese thinking would be that if it can put up a powerful enough deterrent in the waters around China and keep pushing the radius of that deterrent westwards the US Navy won't risk harming their aircraft carriers when China wants to throw its weight around. That logic is probably seriously flawed for a number of reasons, but don't tell China that!!
Reply With Quote