Cruiser battle group Vs. Carrier battle group

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

Share This Page

  1. blackadamx

    blackadamx Officer Candidate

    May 3, 2017
    Likes Received:
    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


    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.
  2. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant Colonel

    Oct 14, 2016
    Likes Received:
    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.