Alright /k/ what is he smallest force that could reliably take

>>33207815
>A Russian/Chinese CSG?

DO they even exist?

>>33207815
ur mum belly flopping in between them all would cause havoc

File: 1486599255216.jpg (916KB, 4619x2816px) Image search: [Google]

916KB, 4619x2816px

>>33207815
What kind of scenario?
And Russian/Soviet carrier groups follow a defensive doctrine, they're not really comparable.

TO sink all of it? Fuck knows.

To sink the carrier? A single decent AIP sub and down it goes.

File: image047.jpg (25KB, 794x285px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 794x285px

>>33207815
one sub is all you need if you are going just for the carrier

>the whole CSG?
another US CSG

>>33207870
Won't the sub get detected by the ASW systems on the Burkes?

>>33207852
What's the point of having a carrier if you aren't going to use it for projection

>>33208199

In theory, in reality chinese diesel subs seem to have no issue walking through a U.S carrier screen.

>>33208396
Really? If it's true then why are we putting so much money into a non functioning system?

>>33208199
ASW is much more difficult in reality than you might think, we nearly rammed a sub during CAS-Ex once. Sometimes you are lucky, sometimes you aren't. Also it makes a difference if you expect a sub to be around or not

>>33207815
One thousand anti-ship missiles.

File: 1384984177194.jpg (1MB, 4256x2832px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4256x2832px

>>33208374
But they are? Defensive doesn't mean it can't project, the Soviet carrier and over all naval doctrine was essentially projecting a force of maritime area denial outside of the USSR.

>>33208505
It's not true.

They get through OCCASIONALLY. We stop (or at least detect) them 99% of the time.

Same deal with all the subs that have "gotten through" during wargames. Half the time they're detected and the OC's go "pretend like they weren't" and the other half the CSG has so many arbitrary and bullshit rules against them it's like they're hogtied, blindfolded, and piss drunk.

>>33207815
Corrosion and Time

>>33207815

>Alright /k/ what is he smallest force that could reliably take on a singer US Carrier Strike Group and have a decent chance of winning?

Another carrier strike group and I'm not even kidding.

The only reason Chinese diesel subs can get within range of a CSG is because it's peacetime. Otherwise, ASW systems would actually be used and a lot of dead chinks and whales would be had.

File: russia__s__carrier-killer__moskva_enters_mediterranean.jpg (96KB, 690x388px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 690x388px

The great and mighty Slava-class would like a word with you, Comrade!

Slava-chan mounts 16 P-500 Bazalt or P-1000 Vulkan anti-ship missiles, each with 1000kg warheads at ranges of 300nm. Nuclear light show is optional, of course. Missile is designed for low level penetration with pop-up pathfinders for real time update.

With silly capitalist switch to Super Hornet,
Ivan predicts halfway good chance to step on freedom's face since lacking proper standoff interception capabilities. Slava also install enough AA for small city to guard against reprisal from tiny bugs. Maybe not so well maintained, but Stalinium never rust, so splash with vodka, probably be okay.

File: SSGN AShM tubes.jpg (34KB, 570x400px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 570x400px

>>33207815
>smallest force
A single SSGN with a full load of nuclear AShM would severely fuck up a carrier group.

With a non-nuclear requirement your best bet is need more subs. Surface ships are fairly shit for offensive action and no one can match a US CBG in terms of air assets. What is left is subs, the number needed depends on area, tech, US alert status, luck and a number of other factors.

>>33208505
>If it's true then why are we putting so much money into a non functioning system?
Why did France put so much money into the Maginot line?

>>33207815
none. An American CSG is effectively invincible

>>33207815
One Ekranoplan armed with moskits and a mad commander willing to die for his country?

>>33208555

Why are their planes stained with coffee?

>>33208815
>>33207891
If all the blowhard American jingoists are to be believed re. the invincible layered defense of a CSG, even that wouldn't be enough. It'd go down like the old ironclad battles with both sides firing off their entire magazines to no effect.

But somehow I doubt that's actually the case, and that in truth missile defenses are more of a safety blanket than anything else.

>>33207815

A force that is reasonably within the capabilities of the Russians and Chinese to assemble.

It is not without reason that the Navy is calling for serious recapitalization of the fleet, and investing in "Distributed Lethality".

>>33209923

>"Warships need armor" faggot spotted
>Do not engage in conversation or do not expect rational replies if you choose to do so
>Subject will insist that Russian anti-ship missiles are impossible to shoot down

File: 949a antey k-186 omsk.jpg (48KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 900x600px

>>33207815
A Project 949A Antey submarine.

File: 1144 pyotr velikiy & 1143.5 admiral kuznetsov & 1164 marshal ustinov.jpg (135KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1024x768px

>>33207832

>>33210089

>Pictured, the entire blue water segment of the Russian navy

File: su-33 (14).jpg (688KB, 2892x1928px) Image search: [Google]

688KB, 2892x1928px

>>33208374
Air defence.

File: 956 boyevoy in san diego.jpg (283KB, 1686x1086px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1686x1086px

>>33210108
>Way to sound like a retard on the internet

>>33209917
Matches the color of their skies.

>>33210033
>"Warships need armor" faggot spotted
Nope.

>Subject will insist that Russian anti-ship missiles are impossible to shoot down
Not impossible, but you're not going to be able to do it frequently enough to make a substantial difference.

That goes equally-so for Western missiles as well. Air defense is difficult, period. You're far better off going on the offensive and killing the other guy before he kills you.

File: 1486346974702.jpg (81KB, 379x364px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 379x364px

>>33210160

>>33208973
Half serious
Top kek

>>33207815
A minefield.

>>33209666
satan trips confirm

File: 20170305ran8247532_366.jpg (2MB, 3600x2313px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3600x2313px

>>33207815

Nice meme carrier group, AUSTRALIA rules the waves now.

>>33208758
You don't seem to realize the US Navy actually maintains its vessels

>>33207815
A volley of nuclear warheads of some sort. Missiles, torpedoes, whatever.

How do you determine what the smallest even means between completely different systems? These things are utterly incomparable.

How do you determine reliability? What is your definition of such? How do we even know that they'd be reliable?

>>33213116
pictured: the entire australian navy

>>33213408

If you actually choose to look something up once in your life you would find it isn't cuck.

>>33213536
kek somebody is mad over their navy being a glorified fishing company

>>33213549

No actually I'm here just for the (you)s, Thanks.

>>33213563
me too :^)

>>33213572

Thanks again, and here's another

>>33208973
>Maybe not so well maintained, but Stalinium never rust, so splash with vodka, probably be okay.

My sides you glorious bastard.

File: raketnyiy-kreyser-Ukraina.jpg (396KB, 2816x1584px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 2816x1584px

>>33208973
>Maybe not so well maintained
You are confusing her with her sister who was unfortunate enough to get stuck on Ukraine.

>>33213145
Yes I do, but he asked for the "smallest" force.