Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!xanth!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!military@att.att.com
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Are Aircraft Carriers Obsolete?
Summary: Re: Just some carrier questions
Message-ID: <3493@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 26 Jan 89 14:51:28 GMT
References: <3364@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Lines: 111
Approved: military@att.att.com


From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)

rds@lzfmd.att.com (rds) writes:
>
>While reading the "Aircraft Carrier Obsolete" articles the following
>questions occurred to me:
>
>-Did the Nazis have aircraft carriers? Did they consider them?


The Germans did indeed have carriers, sort of.  They initially began
construction of two sister-ships, Graf Zeppelin and Peter Strasser.  The 
latter was scrapped on the slip in 1940, while Graf Zeppelin continued
building in an intermittent manner, never actually nearing completion. She
was scuttled at the war's end, but raised by the Soviets, and was lost
while being towed to Leningrad.
	Also, the heavy cruiser Seydlitz (Adm. Hipper class) was earmarked
for completion as a carrier; little was done.  Finally, consideration was
given to converting the liners Potsdam, Europa, and Gneisenau, but the
idea was dropped.

The Italians were working on one carrier, Aquila, converted from the liner
Roma; she, too, was incomplete by war's end.  Also, they were working on
another called Sparviero.

Both the German and Italian CV's were of the British style; armored 
equivalently to a cruiser, small ( <30000 tons) displacement, and with a
relatively small complement ( <50 ) of aircraft.


>-Did WW II England have them?

Certainly !  Quite a few, in fact.  Among their important victories were
the critical rudder hit to Bismarck, the sinking of the Italian fleet
in Taranto, and providing air cover for the Malta convoys.  In addition,
the British operated American-built escort carriers for convoy protection,
and converted several merchantmen for similar roles.

>-Which nations today have them now? I seem to remember the Argentines 
>  having one.

As of 1984:   (note: [heli] => helicopter only, [V/STOL]=> V/STOL only)

Argentina:  25 de Mayo (British-built Colossus class; ex-HMS Warrior)

Australia: Melbourne (British-built; ex-HMS Majestic) now in reserve.

Brazil: Minas Gerais (Colossus class; ex-HMS Vengeance)

France: Clemenceau, Foch (Clemenceau class)
	Jeanne D'Arc [heli carrier]
	plus a new design in the works, I believe.

Great Britain: 
	Bulwark, Hermes (Centaur class) in reserve
	Invincible, Illustrious, Ark Royas (Invincible class) [V/STOL]

India:  Vikrant (Majestic class, ex-HMS Hercules)

Italy: Giuseppe Garibaldi (Garibaldi class) [heli]

Soviet Union: Moskva, Leningrad (Moskva class) [heli]
	Kiev, Minsk, Novorossisk, Kharkov (Kiev class) [V/STOL]
	Leonid Brezhnev (under construction, and I think name has changed)

Spain: Dedalo (ex-USS Cabot) [V/STOL]
  	Principe De Asturias (under construction) [V/STOL]

USA: Lots and lots...


Reference: Roger Chesneau, "Aircraft Carriers of the World", 1984
Naval Institute Press, Annapolis.  

>Also:
>
>-What kind of N-warhead would it take to knock out a US task force given
> the current Soviet missile accuracy?

The entire task force ?  A very big one, or several MIRV's.  As I recall
from the Bikini test (and this is a vague recollection), large ships
several hundred yards away from an airburst nuke (of low yield, relative
to modern weapons, I'm sure) were considered "combat worthy", while 
those within about a thousand yards of a subsurface expolosion suffered
serious flooding or were sunk.   I doubt you'd get more than one or two
ships with a given nuke, as they space out under combat conditions.

Nuclear torpedoes would probably cripple even the largest carrier, but I'm
not sure a singe hit would sink one.  I've never heard what sort of yield
these torpedoes have.

>-What would be the differences in attack using Conventional (which I think
> already has been adequately addressed) vs Nuclear weapons?

Nuclear attack would be very effective against modern ships, but your
problem is delivering the nuke. ICBM's are out, because the ships are
moving targets; and if you use a cruise missile, etc, then the TF's
missile defense gets a chance to shoot it down.  

>-If a Carrier is lost does a task force exist?

Sure, it's just not good for much.


-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - 
Bill Thacker      moderator, sci.military      military@att.att.com

"War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life
or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be 
thoroughly studied."   -  Sun Tzu