By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
The US Navy’s USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier recently fired RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles in the Pacific Ocean in what appears to align with the service’s ongoing effort to improve, refine, upgrade and maintain critical elements of its “layered ship defenses.”
While carrier defenses have always been critical to the Navy, the operational concern has been taken to new heights in recent years due to the arrival of Chinese so-called “carrier-killer” missiles reportedly capable of traveling 2,000 miles to attack carriers positioned off the coast. The PLA’s DF-26, for example, is reported to operate with an ability to track and destroy large carriers from distances up to 2,000 miles off shore.
These weapons, often tested by the People’s Liberation Army and referred to in the PRC’s government backed newspapers, present an anti-access/area-denial predicament for US Navy forces interested in projecting power and potentially launching an air-attack campaign from off the coast of mainland China. The existence of these weapons, which include the PLA’s DF-21 capable of traveling 1,000 miles off shore, have generated some concern within the Pentagon and US Navy weapons developers as paradigm-changing threats. Therefore, the Navy continues to take steps to counter these weapons and strengthen its “layered” ship defense systems.
Overall, the US Navy has been pretty clear that, while it takes the Chinese “carrier-killer” missile threat seriously, it can and will operate its ships wherever they may need to be in support of its operational and deterrence-focused missions in the Pacific.
There are several critical variables to consider here, such as the size of the PLA arsenal and the guidance systems of its carrier-killer missiles. How many do the Chinese have? Would it be sufficient to cripple a large US Navy attacking formation? Perhaps most of all, what kinds of guidance systems do these Chinese weapons have? Can they maneuver in flight, hit moving targets and stay on course against US Navy jamming technologies, countermeasures and interceptor weapons? This considerations may be part of why the US Navy regularly practices “dual-carrier” operations in the Pacific as part of its continued deterrence effort, as an ability to “mass” coordinated air attack power by networking two carriers could “double” the number of sorties the US Navy could launch and operate in an attack. These exercises, which require advanced networking and carrier-to-carrier coordination, adheres to the timeless and relevant Sun Tzu “mass matters” warfare concept. An ability to “mass” attack power is one of several concepts of operation designed to potentially counter Chinese anti-ship missiles.
Video: Congress Fights for More Aircraft Carrier Funding
Perhaps of greatest significance, the US Navy has in recent years made massive efforts to “ruggedize” its carrier force, add high-tech elements to its system of layered defenses and develop new tactics and concepts of operation sufficient to counter the Chinese threat. Some of these efforts include the addition of “refueler” drones such the emerging MQ-25 Stingray carrier launched drone refueler. This new system can potentially refuel fighter jets such as an F-35C or F/A-18 Super Hornet hundreds of miles away from the carrier it launched from to greatly increase mission dwell time and overall “range” enabling air-attacks from further offshore. In these instances, carriers could hold mainland China at risk from safe stand-off ranges greater than 2,000 miles off shore …. Ranges of course out of the striking range of the DF-26. Also, while US Navy carriers have for years been capable of some self-defense, they typically operate in Carrier Strike Groups in which service destroyers and cruisers provide protections to carries with advanced Aegis Combat Systems radar, interceptor missiles and forward-operating reconnaissance platforms such as ship-launched helicopters and drones. However, despite these protective ships, which themselves continue to be improved with new layered defensive technologies, carriers have also been further “hardened” with advanced layered defenses, such as the RAM missile being fired in the Pacific by the USS Abraham Lincoln. Certainly the specifics of many ship-defenses are likely not available for security reasons, the Navy has for years discussed critical elements of its layered defense systems in a general way. Of course nearby US Navy Arleigh Burke-class DDG 51 destroyers are armed with SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 interceptor missiles capable of blanketing and protecting short, medium and long-range ballistic missiles with precision tracking and intercept technology designed to “knock” incoming enemy anti-ship missiles out of the sky.
Distributed Lethality – Upgraded Ship Weapons
In more recent years, the Navy has been innovating and refining a new generation of upgraded ship defenses, many of which are integrated onto carriers. Of course ships have the Rolling Airframe Missile, such as that fired by the USS Abraham Lincoln, yet US Navy destroyers and carriers each have different combinations of a number of additional key ship defenses. Carriers do not have Vertical Launch Tubes able to fire SM-2, SM-3 or SM-6 interceptors, yet they are often networked with supporting destroyers and operate with EW, Close-In-Weapons Systems, SeaRAM missiles and even “lasers” to a growing degree. Some defenses such as SeaRAM, Standard Missiles and certain lasers are only on Destroyers, yet the USS Lincoln is armed with RAM, Sea Sparrow Missiles and Close-in-Weapons Systems (CIWS) which use phalanx area-weapons to blanket surface and air areas with hundreds of defensive projectiles per second. Designed as the closest-in-defenses, CIWS can knock out small boats, drones and some incoming projectiles. Both SeaRAM and CIWS have been upgraded in the past 10 years as well; Raytheon has engineered SeaRAM to reach longer ranges and improved guidance, and CIWS has been upgraded into a “1B” variant capable of defending ocean surface areas from small boats in addition to countering air threats.
SeaSparrow interceptor missiles have in recent years been upgraded into the Evolved Sea Sparrow Block II interceptor missile. This weapon, utilized across the NATO alliance, is designed to intercept incoming anti-ship missiles, and the upgraded variant can operate in Sea Skimming mode closer to the surface to counter lower-flying incoming cruise missiles.
The USS Abraham Lincoln is also armed with decoys and electronic countermeasures designed to throw attacking torpedoes off course and, in some cases, “jam” the electronic guidance systems of incoming enemy weapons. Navy destroyers, and possibly carriers to some extent, are increasingly armed with an advanced EW technology called Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program Block 3 (SEWIP) which uses a new generation of advanced electronic countermeasures sufficient to identify and “jam” or “disable” incoming anti-ship missiles and other weapons.
All of these layered defenses, however, are increasingly enabled by “networking” technologies designed to share threat information, target-track loop data and radio signal communications between ships, drones, helicopters, aircraft or surfacing submarines. Advanced ship defenses can now operate beyond the horizon using networked aerial nodes or gateways positioned in the sky. For example, US Navy Hawkeye surveillance planes and even F-35s function as critical gateways within the Navy’s now-deployed Naval Integrated Fire Control – Counter Air (NIFC-CA) system. In service on destroyers for nearly 10 years, NIFC-CA connects ship-based command and control systems and Aegis radar with aerial gateway
s to identify and “see” threats from beyond the detectable radar aperture of ship-based systems. Using an aerial gateway, ship commanders can identify and destroy incoming enemy anti-ship missiles at distances beyond the radar horizon. This gives ship commanders a much improved time-window within which to decide which countermeasure to use or how best to implement ship-defenses or counter attacks. A critical element of NIFC-CA is a networked SM-6 interceptor missile which can, through the integrated system, be launched to intercept and destroy attacking anti-ship missiles at otherwise unreachable ranges. In recent years, the SM-6 has been made increasing capable with what Raytheon weapons developers have described as a “dual-mode” seeker, meaning software upgrades enable the missile itself to send its own forward “ping” and adjust course in flight to hit moving targets … without needing to rely upon a ship-based illuminator.
The implementation of NIFC-CA and many of these other ship-defense upgrades and additions go back more than 10-years to the Navy’s fleet-wide Distributed Lethality Program. This effort, begun more than 10-years ago, represented a sweeping initiative to better arm the surface fleet with offensive and defensive weapons to increase great power, “blue-water” major maritime warfare scenarios. These adjustments were critical to the service, and the impact of many of them is seen today, as the service sought to transition from the kinds of counter-terrorism, counter-piracy kinds of missions primarily focused upon during the 15-years of counter-insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan. While these missions, which included operations such as Visit Board Search and Seizure, are still important to Navy concepts of operation, have been massively supplemented by vastly improved and upgraded ship-integrated weaponry and defenses. The results of this strategic effort can now be more fully seen across the force, given that surface ships and carriers operate with new generations of layered ship defenses sufficient to better protect carriers at risk of anti-ship missile attack. Specifically, for example, a Chinese DF-26 could be seen at much greater stand-off ranges with NIFC-CA, advanced EW might detect its electronic signal, deconflict elements of the electromagnetic spectrum and “jam” its guidance technology or perhaps even “laser” weapons able to incinerate approaching anti-ship missiles from surface ships or even aircraft.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization and Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
