I think the current proposed Chinese strategy is to fire a salvo of three missiles per carrier, though realistically they would need to fire a lot more to take out the other ships of the carrier task force, and to account for errors or successful defences.
There is a possibility that carrier killer missiles might render carrier groups obsolete once they become reliable on an operational level, just purely on economics alone: the cost of one missile is a fraction of the cost of the carrier group or even the carrier itself. This does not even account for the cost of operating a carrier group and the potential risk of losing tens of thousands of sailors. Even if you don't care about loss of life, training is very expensive and time consuming. Maintaining and operating missile batteries are comparatively less expensive too.
In other words, if one carrier equals 20 to 40 missiles in cost, then China can afford to spam missiles at a carrier group if it absolutely positively has to take out a US carrier group.
Meanwhile, the US is developing countermeasures, such as anti-missile missiles or e-jamming or other decoy/deception techniques, to make spamming expensive.
Of course, none of these things have been field tested, aka in a real war, so no one knows how they would do in a real fight. It is quite nice that warfare between major military powers since the Cold War (i.e. the dawn of nuclear age) has largely been fought on paper rather than in real life.
0 comments :
Post a Comment