So let me get this straight, you take every Type 45 the Brits

Yeah, the two Virginia SSNs just wreck the Type 45s with torpedoes and the CSG goes about it's business like nothing was ever there.

From an AAW perspective nothing can get past PAAMS(S). Bugs can't carry good enough munitions to beat the screen.

So they'd approach from a different angle. The DDGs would move in with guns or more likely the CSG sub would take a shot at them.

>>31211409
>Could anything pass over the airspace in the middle?
With enough Growlers sure, exactly how many is the realm of patriotic shitposting.

>Could a CSG sink all 6 eventually?
If you gave it a anti-ship biased weapons load knowing you had to break such a picket then I expect you could empty the 45s ammo supplies with prolonged missile spam before the carrier+escorts runs out of missiles. And that's ignoring the subs as >>31211425 points out, which are typically there whilst there's no solid doctrinal support for this random DD only taskforce to have a sub screen fof its own for sure. Having to carry out ASW against boats that aren't Soviet clankers whilst simultaneously defending against prolonged overwhelming air attacks is a world of suffering for group of DD you care to throw into the scenario.

>>31211603
*for any group of DD

>>31211409
the question is if you have more than 260 missiles/planes. But in respect to the amount of targets that can be tracked and combatted I'd say about 5/6 planes per ship attacking from one direction might be the maximum the system can work with

File: tumblr_inline_niiamgxftd1rnnsez.png (117KB, 372x351px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 372x351px

>>31211603
>With enough Growlers sure
>Shit tier ALQ-99s up against a 4 GHz AESA
pfffttt

>>31211643

0/10 reverse bait to try and stir up Americans against the Bongs.

>>31211409

One of the things that these stupid scenarios actually make me wonder. How many munitions does a carrier carry anyway? We talk about how many ASMs planes can spam, but do we know how many Harpoons a Nimitz usually trucks along with? Not how many it DOES, but the normal amount? Silly classified I guess, but it just struck me as a factor that doesn't get discussed much.

Also it's dumb as fuck to make a scenario like this. Naval affairs are just as combined arms as ground warfare. So singling out things is utterly pointless.

Escorts go to visual range with the 45s but just beyond gun range and just keep flinging standard missiles at them until the 45s run out of interceptors.

>>31212029
>How many munitions does a carrier carry anyway?
Well you kind of answered it yourself in that exact loadouts are of course classified, but it's probably safe to assume that it varies depending on where a carrier is being sent and what mission its being sent there to cover. A carrier being sent to sit off the coast in the middle east is likely to need a lot of guided bombs of various sizes and relatively few AShM with a small number being carried just in case, whereas one being despatched to the far east will probably carry a significantly greater number of AShM, since in the unlikely event of having to suddenly deal with a PLAN threat they would be swatting a bunch of ships from as far away as possible, with relatively little in the way of bombing missions, at least initially. The same likely holds true for the VLS on the escorts, since those can be configured with various payloads too.

>>31212092
>visual range with the 45s but just beyond gun range

So you want that sweet spot where you are closer than 12 miles but at the same time outside of 17 miles?

God this thread is shit.

>>31211409
Anything will pass through but yo momma.

>>31212112

Yeah, I know. I just found it an interesting side of things that rarely gets talked about. Same going for the overall munitions stockpile of a country to utilise such tactics. Obviously, the US undoubtedly has a much larger amount. But for example, France only has 100 SCALP cruise missiles for the Rafale in their entire inventory, with no current plans to purchase more. That's less than the number of equivilent munition types the US fired off in a single conflict, let alone through all the years.

It often strikes me as something rarely considered. We hear talks of scenarios firing hundreds of Harpoons at a time, but do we even know how many air launched Harpoons the US Navy even possesses? They need to be spread out to different carriers after all too.

Not saying it'll matter to these fucking dumb "scenarios", but it just got me thinking. This goes for any country really.

>>31212134
Can't find hard numbers for the US, just 7,500 Harpoon Block II produced ever, but that's for all customers.

The US authorized a sale of 650 SLAM-ER and 400 Harpoons to the Saudis back in 2013 though, so I don't think they're hurting too much for them.

File: I came here to laugh at you.jpg (37KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x450px

>>31212029
>American can't handle the fact the ''''''electronic warfare''''''' systems on the growler would get curbstomped by a Type 45's radar

>>31211409

Pretty unlikely given how OP PAAMS is.

To put into perspective, each Type 45 has the capability of *six* ships in previous class, the Type 42.

>>31212276
I mean I would hope so, the Type 42 used arm-launched AA missiles.

>>31212299

You know, no one has explained to me why arm-launched is inferior, besides the obvious space requirement and smaller magazine.

Does it seriously limit the capability of the missile?

>>31212322
Rate of fire is the main issue. With arm-launched you'll get a launch every 10-20 seconds, vls can achieve simultaneous launches. So when dealing with saturation attacks arm-launched missiles are obviously insufficient.

>>31212343

Makes sense.

>>31212134

We're also failing to consider threat level. If British CBG is facing a threat that can overwhelm the defences of the escort group, why wouldn't that escort group have additional support from allies? Like one or two Burkes and one or two Euro/local escorts.

>>31212255
wtf i hate plane based radar now

>>31212343
>vls can achieve simultaneous launches
Stop. You know for a fact VLS launches are staggered to avoid exhaust damaging other missiles launching. Even on big 36 cell blocks the missiles are launched furthermost away from each other in 1-2 second intervals.

>>31212129
>Not being n+1 dimensional shipkin

God you're shit

>>31211603
>>31211643
>>31212255
>>31214844

pls explain to a retard like me what this all means

File: EF-18G Growler EW capability.jpg (88KB, 690x490px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 690x490px

>>31211643
>>31212255
>anime troll posting


EF-18G Growlers (plural.. as in 6+ of them), outfitted like in the picture, COULD jam a Type 45..

The Type 45 would eventually swat them out of the sky.. if it hasn't been hit by anti-ship missiles by then.

HOWEVER.. having all six Type 45's working together. No fucking clue what it would take to jam then, that's a lot of radars data linked together shitting out a lot of juice.

>>31211409
Yeah an F35 could get thru, you can't kill it if you can't see it.

>just a hypothetical
Wow really I thought it was a news story.

>>31215823
There is enough long wave radars on the Type 45 that it would see the F-35 coming and flying around up above..

It wouldn't be able to get a target lock on the F-35 though.

>>31211409
Between two Burkes and one Tico you have 314 cells. So hypothetically if you just filled them all with Standard missiles and shit them out at the Darings (max load-out 288 for six) you'd probably kill most of them. Obviously they never actually carry a load like that (apparently a Tico generally carries around 80). There's sometimes more Burkes than that however, and there's also air-launched cruise missiles to consider, as well as Harpoons from the Tico or older Burkes, and the sub escort's VLS cells/torpedos. So a CSG probably has enough missiles to saturate the 6 Darings. Plus any lost Darings immediately cuts the missile load-out of the group by alot, while it's pretty doubtful the Darings are going to take out any member of the CSG.

>>31216015
>pretty doubtful the Darings are going to take out any member of the CSG.

Yeah, given they've only four of them have Harpoons and all of them two helicopters with light-weight AShMs.

Just curious, how would an SR-71 do simply gunning it's engines at high altitude over the formation?

>>31216147
Aster 30 apparently has a flight ceiling of 20km, so the Blackbird should be able to just fly over it.

>>31214873
its all explinations and arguments about the variations of equipment, funding, capabilities, and doctrine that different countries have and how they'd plan on attacking or defending against attack based on the unclassified info thats available to us.

so basically a giant shitposting clusterfuck thread with a retarded premise

>>31216185

I see.