China made the news for threatening to sink U.S. carriers. Under their reasoning they argue that America is too casualty averse and they would slink away and retreat with the sinking of two carriers. The counter to that argument comes from both Pearl Harbor and the 9/11 attacks where the Americans were roused like a sleeping giant (to quote the Japanese admiral after the Pearl Harbor attack.)
America has become casualty averse after they withdrew from Somalia after the Black Hawk Down incident and the steady drip-drip of casualties in Iraq eroding support for the war. Both attest. But I think a massive casualty event would stir American hearts as a writer at Fox News recently stated.
But this kind of tit-for-tat tough-guy rhetoric from both sides misses a fundamental point: It is highly questionable if China could sink a single carrier, let alone two. The best way for them to do so would be with “carrier killing” ballistic missiles. As part of China’s strategy they have developed swarms of new and faster cruise missiles that are designed to strike and kill American carriers. This has led to hand-wringing among American analysts and even discussion of the carrier being obsolete.
The U.S. is well aware of potential threats and, with modest adjustments, the carrier remains dominant on the battlefield. Chinese missiles are simply the newest versions of technology that has been around for 70 years. London had to worry about Hitler’s vengeance rockets but the U.S. has sophisticated defenses against them, developed over the last 70 years. The first line of defense is the combat air patrol (CAP). The F-35 has been networked with older planes, the first line of defense against missiles, to extend their range “beyond the horizon.” The F-35s can also be networked with Aegis destroyers, the next line of defense, to extend their sensors as well. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers finished refitting their radar to be 30 times more powerful. So the range at which the first two lines of defense against missiles has been extended and improved, and they are increasingly able to destroy missiles before they get near the carrier.
Lockheed Martin continues to receive criticism over production delays and cost overruns of the F-35, but their anti-ballistic missile program is receiving high marks. They are developing land-based missile batteries and improvements on Aegis ships that can intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles such as the ones that North Korea has launched towards Japan, the kind that Russia fields in Eastern Europe, and definitely the supposed “carrier killing” missiles introduced by China.
On top of engaging missiles at long-distance, the U.S. has the ability to launch missiles and destroy Chinese batteries. The Ohio-class submarine, for example, was originally designed as a platform for nuclear missiles but it’s been refitted to fire Tomahawk land-attack missiles. They carry as many as 154 missiles and, given the typical composition of a carrier strike group and the need to defend against Chinese missiles, the Ohio-class might have more Tomahawks than all the other ships combined! The original missions as a nuclear sub means the ship produces a small signature even when firing the missiles, and it quickly disappears from radar thereafter. The combination of stealth and rate of fire means that a single submarine can close within a short distance of enemy targets and launch its full complement of missiles in six minutes. Not even including the many missiles that can be launched from land, ship, and air-based platforms, the U.S. Navy contains ships which have the potential to significantly degrade the threat of Chinese missiles in minutes!
The final layer of defense is the close-in weapons systems of ships, and these are being upgraded as well. The U.S. Navy plans to fire new high-speed rail guns at the same time the Chinese South Sea Fleet is adding a submarine squadron to its operations. The new developments show the response and counter-response of ratcheting tension between the U.S. and China in the South China Sea, but also show that the U.S. retains a commanding position in that contest.
The Hyper Velocity Projectile, or HVP, can travel at speeds up to 2,000 meters per second when fired from a Rail Gun, a speed which is about three times that of most existing weapons. According to the future Naval Capability Program, “The rate of fire is 10-rounds per minute. Also, due to its ability to reach speeds of up to 5,600 miles per hour, the hypervelocity projectile is engineered as a kinetic energy warhead, meaning no explosives are necessary.”
The final result is a new smart projectile that can be fired faster, with more accuracy, and at longer ranges than current weapons. The missiles can be used for both offensive and defensive missions including countering drones and missiles, and striking other ships and land-based targets such as radar stations, airfields, and missile batteries. This gives American commanders another option to counter such new dangers as missile or drone swarms.
The United States has significant advantages in technology, training, and countermeasures that suggest a need to avoid overstating the Chinese advantage or thumping our chests every time they rattle their sabers. It’s true that Chinese weapons seem dangerous, but they could also fail to deploy them in a war. China has a history of aggression, but not everything is necessarily a prelude to war or should be viewed that way. America has a technological advantage, but it doesn’t mean they can safely neglect training or rest overconfident. Making wild predictions and doomsday prophecies is easier than taking a nuanced view of the subject. Because in reality, preparing for war is a series of technological responses and counter-responses combined with training that leaders hope will be effective in combat.
