After digging 3 meters under earth, let me present one Made-In-China metal toy


C-803 250 KM range supersonic anti-ship missile



Let Chinese JH-7 Fighter Bomber carry this and fly to 100 KM near the Carrier

C-802/3 Flight Profil:
When the missile is launched, the solid rocket propellant booster accelerate the speed of the missile from
0 to 0.9 Mach in few seconds. After the booster burns out, it detaches from the missile body and the
missile's turbojet engine starts working. Controlled by the inertial autopilot system and radio altimeter, the
missile flies at a cruising speed of 0.9 Mach and a flight altitude of 20-30 metres.

When entering the terminal phase of flight, the missile switches on its terminal guidance radar to search
for the target. Once locking on the target, the missile reduced its flight altitude to 5-7 metres at a distance
of few kilometres away from the target. The missile may also manuever during the terminal phase to make
it a more difficult target for shipborne air defense systems. When approaching the target, the missile dives
to hit the waterline of the ship to make maximum damages.

Detailed info of C-802/3:
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/weapon/c802.asp


JH-7 Fighter Bomber:



JH-7 Carrying C802 ASM:



Details of JH-7 Figher Bomber:
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/...attack/jh7.asp

Originally Posted by England Expects (RAF Cdt)

What about Exocet-style missiles? I know during the Falklands war, the exocets were a big threat to the Royal Navy and that destroyers had sometimes to be sacrificed in order to allow the Aircraft carriers to remain undamaged.

Yes.

The use of cruise missiles which attracted the greatest public and official interest was undoubtedly in the Falklands War. An AM-39 Exocet fired by the Argentinians from French-supplied Super Etendard aircraft from a range of more than twenty miles, hit the destroyer HMS Sheffield, starting a fire which did so much damage that she eventually sank. Another air-launched Exocet hit and sank the large, but unarmoured, British container ship Atlantic Conveyor. A third Exocet fired from a make-shift ground launch system damaged the destroyer HMS Glamorgan. The success of the Exocet bit very deeply. The experience of the damage thus suffered by the Royal Navy has left a vivid and persuasive memory of the potential effectiveness of cruise missiles.


Exocet AM.39 / MM.40
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/m...M-39missle.jpg

the phalanx and goalkeeper systems were introduced due to the experiences of the royal navy in the falklands as before then they only used missiles but the hills of the islands disrupted the targetting systems and the missiles couldn't lock onto the exocets quick enough! the introduction of the gun systems now gives the defenses that the RN wold of loved and would of saved many lives! Credit goes to the Royal Navy for successfully winning back the falklands dispite being thousands of missiles from home!

I think it was 1997, during a NATO exercise, two german navy Tornados, each armed with four kormoran anti-ship missiles, managed it to fly beneath the radar shield and intruded the US CBG and had a simulated carrier kill. So it is possible.
But i think the best way are MANY missiles. How many targets can the AEGIS system track? 100? Did you read "Red Storm Rising" from Tom Clancy? I think he describes a well performed carrier attack.

NEWS ALERT!!! A USN NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER SUNK OFF THE COAST OF CHINA...


Well, it seems that the tactics discussed above have finally been used and a modern aircraft carrier is finally sunk!

one dark and stormy night...one kayak with explosives...one man with a lot of will to do it. and oh yes, a lot of explosives. He gets into the path of the carrier..waits till the last second...magnetically attaches his craft to the bow..places his explosives and blows the bow wide open. The momentom of the ship tears itself apart as it pushes the damaged bow through the water.

By the way...that scenario was written about 25 years ago in a fiction story so its nothing new...we were required to read the story for NJROTC.

Could equal one dead aircraft carrier.

It seems that many people want to see a big aircraft carrier sunk!
Poor old carrier! how many folks want to see you dead..!

Better buy life insurance before boarding a US carrier!

I remember reading or watching on t.v that some war games in the US that a retired navy admiral sunk a carrier with subs. He thinks it is the best way to do it and the only he was beaten was when they took his subs away from him, did anyone else remember reading or watching that.

Originally Posted by HERO

It seems that many people want to see a big aircraft carrier sunk!
Poor old carrier! how many folks want to see you dead..!

Better buy life insurance before boarding a US carrier!

So far i've counted three. but their to chicken to acctually do anything about it.

so its a challenge..i could never resist a challenge...

The trouble with getting the carrier with the sub is it had better be darn quiet. The escorts are way out from the group...they and the ever present sonar bouy dropping helicopters are listening very, very carefully for that sub.

Diesel electric subs actually have an advantage ...due to there almost no noise operations. Course, if a good sonar man was listening in on the 50-60 hertz frequency..he has a good prospect of picking up the contact if they screw up and come in too fast.

Now a nuke boat has an advantage by being able to dive deep...if the water was really deep...sneaking in and popping the carrier sucessfully.
This scenario would not play out in the yellow or china sea areas, because the water is comparatably shallow in these areas.

probly still the best way is saturating the carriers defense with missiles....