3 ms·
I believe the "subs as aircraft carriers" idea came from the fact that you generally want to interact with a target location on land. Nation states don't tend t
by ethbro 12y ago
I believe the "subs as aircraft carriers" idea came from the fact that you generally want to interact with a target location on land. Nation states don't tend to have too many strategic targets underwater off their coasts.
Options for interacting with a target land location (dates extremely rough, in rough historical order):
- Subsonic aircraft: outpaced by projectile-based anti-aircraft since ~1935
- Supersonic aircraft: outpaced and obsoleted by missile and satellite technology since ~1970
- Satellite: excellent for reconnaissance and elint, limited interactive capabilities due to treaty obligations
- Subsonic cruise missiles (aka light missiles): limited range (relative to coastal approach), limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses
- ICBM (aka heavy missiles): expensive, high risk of escalation due to detection, risk of nuclear payload, and ability to apply last minute target corrections
- Carrier launched aircraft: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses
- Supersonic cruise missiles: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses
- Drones: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses
You ideally want an aerial platform (freedom of movement, ability to interact with land targets), survivable in a hostile environment, as cheaply as possible.
This was solved by a carrier air wing.
However, the idea of A2/AD is to push the survivability line out far enough that the carrier can no longer approach close enough to let its air wing operate efficiently.
The obvious go to is to take a platform that can penetrate that A2/AD coverage to a greater depth with acceptable survivability. (It's a lot easier to hide a submarine than an aircraft carrier / it's a lot more expensive to build a submarine detection net across large ocean regions)
Then have that platform launch the equivalent of an air wing.
E.g. stealth submarines serving as carriers for limited-range (because that buys you design to make them stealthier / more survivable / faster) aerial drones
- cocoablazing 12y agoYour ICBM trade-off regarding corrections is outdated. Disarmament community has reported USN test administrators as stating latest W76-1/Mk4A LEP has introduced real-time GPS corrections throughout re-entry and terminal phase. A similar effort is underway to upgrade USAF RB's. Hypersonic aerodynamics and control research is going to pay dividends at some point, and apply to both hypersonic in-atmospheric and sub-orbital weapon control. The "risk of nuclear payload" is only a severe problem if overflight is necessary. The RF would be able to assess that a non-overflying SLBM was not targeting RF territory as soon as it traveled through the radar nets. Obviously this is still probably a stupid weapon to use in a conventional context.