Cruiser battle group Vs. Carrier battle group

Discussion in 'Naval' started by blackadamx, May 3, 2017.

Share This Page

  1. blackadamx

    blackadamx Officer Candidate

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    thailand
    Hobby:
    iam gay
    During the Cold War the Soviet doctrine is the cruisers warface (even cruisers can carry aircraft. Kuznetsov, Kiev). US naval doctrine is the carriers warface depend on attack by aircraft on carrier.
    I think The US certainly has the advantage in Carrier warfare, but the Russian’s cannot be beat in Cruiser warfare, especially if instead of modernizing their navy they were to say, start selling off ships or dismantling them and build a small sized but effective fleet centered around say two or three Kuznetsov-Class ships, half a dozen to a dozen Kiev-Class, and a couple Kirov’s, plus some Sovremenny’s for escort. Now even a US Carrier Group would have trouble encountering a Russian force of Kuznetsov’s, Kiev’s, and Kirov’s. The trouble is, the Russian’s build their ships to jump right into the fight and survive the journey to the fight, America builds it ships to attack the enemy before the enemy arrives at their location.
    Also keep in mind, the Kuznetsov carries warheads that can be Nuclear-tipped, and yes missiles can be intercepted, but a barrage of these warheads, Nuclear-tipped, and the famed Nimitz plus its large battlegroup, go up in a mushroom cloud.
    If both this fleet
    includes cruisers, destroyers of Russia and the United States participated in one confrontation, who would win?
    Moskva, Kirov, Admiral Nakhimov, Admiral Lazarev, Pyotr Velikiy, Kiev, Kuznetsov VS. Forrestal, Kitty Hawk, Enterprise, John F. Kennedy, Nimitz (or 10x Nimitz-class aircraft carrier + 3x Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier)
    Both parties have not the support of submarines or air defense destroyers

    [​IMG][​IMG]

    In 1971, the U.S. Navy Almost Fought the Soviets Over Bangladesh
    In fact, some argue that Task Force 74 was actually intended to pressure the Soviets to make India call off the war. According to this explanation, the task force would harass Soviet ships in the Bay of Bengal, not attack India — a plan which Navy leadership thwarted by slowing the Enterprise’s cruise with a fueling stop in Singapore and assigning it to a corner of the Bay of Bengal where there was a low probability of encountering Soviet ships. They were worried an accident could provoke World War III.
    Indeed, a Soviet naval task force from Vladivostok consisting of a cruiser, a destroyer and two attack submarines under the command of Adm. Vladimir Kruglyakov intercepted Task Force 74 in the makings of a deadly Cold War standoff. Kruglyakov gave a rousing account in a T.V. interview of “encircling” the task force, surfacing his submarines in front of the Enterprise, opening the missile tubes and “blocking” the American ships.
    https://warisboring.com/in-1971-the...viets-over-bangladesh-c65489bc72c0#.eh9ov0jyt
     
    Pathfinder and Osmanovic like this.
  2. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant Colonel

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    863
    Location:
    Russian-Federation
    Hobby:
    Wh40k, Battletech
    It depends from many things.
    If it is a scenario of "free duel" - somewhere in Pacific two battlegroups want kill each other - no additional forces, no other orders, no external sources of information - I'll bet on Yanks - they are good sailors, and here first place will be human factor. Even in duel of same ships with Yank and Russian crews I'll bet on Yanks.

    But if both sides have good external sourses of information, or if Yanks are very predictable and can not avoid battle - cruisers will win.

    But sinking of carriers is not primary task for cruisers. Their primary target - trade routs and cargo ships.
    Cruisers "in being" force enemy to make convoy system, and with convoys it will be only 30% (from maximum) of delivery volumes. Without supply Yanks expeditionary forces will be eliminated by our and local forces.
     
    Pathfinder and Osmanovic like this.
  3. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant Colonel

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    863
    Location:
    Russian-Federation
    Hobby:
    Wh40k, Battletech
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ica-s-aircraft-carriers-could-become-obsolete

     
    Osmanovic likes this.
  4. Osmanovic

    Osmanovic 1st Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    329
    Location:
    United-States
    The issue with large ships is that one can be destroyed with easy to produce and relatively cheap missiles, Argentina almost pulled it off in the Falklands in the 80's. If they had more experience the Brits would have been stopped in their tracks.

    War comes down to many factors, a primary factor being that of resources. It takes a lot of economic resources to pump out a massive ship like an aircraft carrier whereas smaller frigates and cruisers are much easier to build and do not require a high level of ship building technology (sub systems are a different story). Lets be honest, America has a massive economy and is a very wealthy country so America can afford 12 aircraft carriers. Other nations cannot and must revert to other tactics and equipment that fall within their means.
     
  5. Pathfinder

    Pathfinder Lieutenant Colonel

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    2,440
    Location:
    United-States
    The article seems to be comparing the Russian Navy and the US Navy, both Navy's have different strategic requirements. Russia isn't really a blue water power, its navy is preoccupied with keeping the baltic and black seas open. Russia has a pacific fleet but is mean for operations in the Northern Pacific around Alaska, its not really meant to fight American Carrier Battle Groups out in the Philippines or around Malaysia etc.

    If Russia or the Soviets needed more Carriers I guarantee you they would have more. Russia at this moment doesn't even have an operational carrier at this moment as it is under repair.

    With that being said if a "Cruiser Battlegroup" faces off against a Carrier Battle group I believe that in the end the Carrier Battlegroup will win. You not only have the destroyers and guided missile cruisers you have to deal with but also dozens of fighter jets and other reconnaissance craft that can provide vital intelligence and tactical mobility.
     
Loading...