news
Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:
-
To learn about and discuss meaningful news, analysis and perspectives from around the world, with a focus on news outside the Anglosphere and beyond what is normally seen in corporate media (e.g. anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, Marxist, Indigenous, LGBTQ, people of colour).
-
To encourage community members to contribute commentary and for others to thoughtfully engage with this material.
-
To support healthy and good faith discussion as comrades, sharpening our analytical skills and helping one another better understand geopolitics.
We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.
Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:
The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.
-
Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.
-
Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.
-
Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.
-
Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.
-
Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.
-
Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.
-
American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.
-
Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.
-
AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.
view the rest of the comments
That ignores the most valuable asset of a carrier strike group, the air wing, 48 aircraft capable of shooting down drones and cruise missiles. Or the F-15s and F-16s available at bases in the Middle East, which can also shoot down drones and subsonic cruise missiles, equipped with APKWS laser guided rockets. One F-15 or F-16 can be equipped with up to 42 APKWS rockets. That's a deep magazine for shooting down drones and subsonic cruise missiles. Propeller driven one way attack drones fly slowly, given the potential position of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group around Oman, these drones will take 8+ hours to reach it. That's 8+ hours to figure out an intercept solution before they get close to the carrier and require the destroyers to engage them.
There are multiple models of one way attack drones with the required range, but how many are equipped to track and engage a moving target at sea? That's going to require some sort of datalink to give the drone an updated position of the moving target so it can alter it's course towards it. Most are for striking static land targets, which won't be able to target ships, and reduces the available inventory of appropriate drones.
As for subsonic cruise missiles, their significantly increased speed makes them more of a threat and a viable tactic for a swarm attack on a target, they'd probably take between 60-90 minutes to reach the position of aircraft carrier. But again, Iran's short range cruise missile arsenal won't have the required range, and their long range arsenal for hitting static land targets won't be able to engage ships, Iran will be limited to using longer range cruise missiles with the guidance systems needed for anti ship missiles (Paveh anti ship version). And the cruise missiles can be engaged and shot down by aircraft, including those equipped with APKWS.
Anti ship ballistic missiles (ASBM) are probably Iran's most viable weapon. They can't be shot down by aircraft, take 6-12 minutes to arrive, and require the use of specialised interceptor missiles (SM-3 and SM-6) to shoot down. However, the aircraft carrier will likely be positioned outside the range of most of Iran's shorter range ASBM arsenal, requiring the use of more exotic longer range weapons to engage the carrier strike group, like Qassem Basir. Not all of Iran's ballistic missiles are anti ship capable, the ones that are usually have electro optical guidance (a camera) in the warhead to try find and then steer the maneuverable warhead/re-entry vehicle towards the ship. This is quite different from a cruise missile and difficult to get accurate enough to hit a ship, yet alone a moving ship.
That's the main effect Iran's arsenal of shorter range anti ship weapons accomplishes, keeping the aircraft carrier further away at this stage.
As for surface strike, yes the destroyers will have a few Tomahawks and likely expend them very quickly. But that's not the only option for cruise missile strikes. An Ohio class guided missile submarine can be equipped with 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles and get very close to Iran, much closer than surface vessels. And then there's the AGM-158 JASSM series of cruise missiles that can be launched by tactical fighter aircraft in the Middle East, and strategic bombers flying out of the continental USA. One F-15 can carry up to 5 JASSM, one B-52 20 JASSM, one B-1B 24 JASSM. And the USA is not going to be firing cruise missiles endlessly. With the kind of aircraft they are moving towards the Middle East (F-35s and EA-18Gs with NGJ pods), the US plans to enter Iranian airspace, suppress air defences and conduct an air campaign in that manner, if the decision is made to do so.
I also don't think they'll send the destroyers to reload Tomahawks once they've fired all of them, a more relevant constraint is the amount of anti ballistic missile interceptors onboard the destroyers (SM-3 and SM-6) vs stocks of Iran's long range ASBM arsenal (Qassem Basir and Zulfiqar Basir), and any sort of left of launch defeat strikes the US will aim to impose on these long range ASBM fireteams. If destroyers run out of SM-3 and SM-6, they'll need to go and reload somewhere. As for intercepting cruise missiles and other aerodynamic targets, the Evolved SeaSparrow Missile (ESSM) can be quad packed into a MK 41 VLS cells using the MK 25 canister, meaning a single MK 41 VLS cell can hold 4 ESSMs. So that's worth keeping in mind, it's mentioned in the article.
In a "kill chain", the required steps to successfully complete and verify a "kill" in military doctrine are Find, Fix, Track, Target, Engage, and Assess (F2T2EA). That's a lot more difficult than it seems, especially with regards to naval warfare. This is why a lot of the constraints above apply.
So no, I don't think the aircraft carrier strike group will run out of steam within days, unless Iran manages to fire a large amount of long range ASBMs to exhaust interceptor stocks and force the carrier strike group to go defensive and leave the area.
A bucket load of cheap decoy drones would help with attrition against APKWS and other cheap munitions. but honestly we saw how well swarms worked in t1-t3, it's just a way to tie up a few fighters/helicopters but otherwise does shit all.
I know that 'engage' is the proper term but not using 'attack' to make it a clean F2T2A2 is hard for me to cope with.
Good analysis comrade, too much underestimation of imperialist forces in peoples comments and analysis these days. Your posts and research are much appreciated in keeping expectations level headed.
I think a lot of people are still under the influence of that US military exercise where they fought an "Iran-like" enemy and lost. That was like 20 years ago with 20 years old tech. Today, the technological gap is so big we don't even know where to begin...
They failed completely to bring Yemen to heel like a year ago. Iran has more targets for the US to shoot at but I don't seem them capitulating either
Iran has shot down a grand total of one UAV and no aircraft during the defence of their territory a few months ago while their air defences and ballistic missiles were getting destroyed one by one.
TBF to Millenium Challenge 2002 -all the Generals tomfoolery notwithstanding- that was a specific scenario for a land-based invasion, as comrade Marmite points out many a time, they don't really need to do that and have the capability to just airstrike and standoff strike whatever they want these days, and that serves their interests insofar as they want to try and instigate regime change. I still believe the US would effectively lose a land-based invasion, though that has more to do with American logistic strains than anything else, and it would be a months to years long siege conditions where Iran suffers immensely.
At this point, the propagation of that exercise is a disinfo campaign to make people underestimate the US military.