Chinese missiles fuel controversy over fate of US aircraft carrier

The range and speed of China's anti-ship missiles have raised doubts about the future of the US Navy's aircraft carrier fleet.

The US Navy's USS Nimitz aircraft carrier strike group. Photo: USNI

In late 1995, tensions between mainland China and Taiwan forced then-US President Bill Clinton to decide to send two aircraft carrier battle groups to the area to send a strong message to Beijing.

One carrier strike group led by the USS Nimitz, with fully armed fighter jets ready to take off on board, headed straight into the middle of the Taiwan Strait, less than 50 miles from mainland China, while the other carrier group acted as a standby force off Taiwan's east coast, according to Newsweek.

At the time, Beijing’s leaders were furious at what they called “foreign interference” in China’s relations with Taiwan. But lacking any weapons that could threaten American aircraft carriers, they were forced to back down in the face of President Clinton’s show of force.

This humiliation by the US aircraft carrier prompted China to develop a series of long-range anti-ship missiles that were unveiled at a military parade last September. The most prominent of these is the DF-21D, an anti-ship missile equipped with a warhead that can change direction, find and destroy targets at speeds 10 times the speed of sound, so fast that no weapon can intercept it.

According to US naval intelligence, just one DF-21D missile can disable or even sink a US aircraft carrier. Another equally formidable missile that appeared at the parade was the YJ-12, which can fly low over the water and then suddenly accelerate to twice the speed of sound when approaching its target.

As Chinese military officials warn the United States about the risk of a military clash in the South China Sea, many military analysts are taking seriously Beijing’s ability to disable US aircraft carriers and fighter jets with new anti-ship missiles.

Many US lawmakers have also begun to question the effectiveness of the US Navy's extremely expensive aircraft carrier construction program, with each ship costing up to $12.9 billion, which Senator John McCain said was "unacceptable".

The US Navy is not about to accept that its aircraft carrier fleet will eventually become obsolete. For decades, aircraft carriers have been the greatest symbol of US military power on the high seas. With 10 super carriers in its fleet, other superpowers like Russia and China cannot compare in terms of quantity or quality.

The nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, which are longer than three football fields, can carry 90 aircraft and 5,000 sailors, acting as a mobile military base that can reach the farthest corners of the globe. Earlier this month, the US Navy proposed buying three more Ford-class carriers to bolster its fleet.

Risk of obsolescence

But new Chinese anti-ship missiles—and possibly those of Russia, Iran, and North Korea in the future—are sparking unprecedented debate about the future of aircraft carrier warfare.

China's DF-21D anti-ship missile. Photo: Chinanews

Jerry Hendrix, a military expert at the Center for a New American Security, said that the US still does not have effective plans to protect aircraft carriers against China's anti-ship missile power.

Accordingly, all defense systems in the US aircraft carrier battle group are currently mainly used to deal with cruise missiles flying over the horizon. Meanwhile, the DF-21D is launched into the upper atmosphere, then its warhead plunges straight down to the target at supersonic speed, making it almost impossible to intercept. "I have never heard of any solution to stop this type of missile," Hendrix said.

Current US carrier-based fighters, such as the F-18 Super Hornet or F-35C, have a range of 800-1,046 km, meaning that in order to attack targets in mainland China, US carriers must approach the country's coast and be within the DF-21D's effective range of nearly 1,500 km.

This expert believes that in the event that a US aircraft carrier is hit by a DF-21D missile and is put out of action, or worse, sunk on the spot, the political consequences that the US will have to bear are unpredictable. US officials have revealed to him that even with a 10% chance of the aircraft carrier being sunk or disabled, they would advise the president not to send the ship to the war zone.

"The sinking of an aircraft carrier, along with the images of thousands of dead American sailors, fighter jets falling into the sea, and radar stations collapsing, is a very heavy political blow that Americans will find difficult to accept unless it is a battle to protect the homeland," he said.

Therefore, he believes that aircraft carriers are a huge asset that Americans created but dare not lose, because when this symbolic image is destroyed, it will greatly affect America's reputation in the international arena, and that is "a price that no military official dares to talk about".

According to this expert, the US Navy should abandon plans to buy three new Ford-class aircraft carriers at a cost of $13 billion each, and instead buy smaller aircraft carriers costing $5 billion that can operate safely out of range of China's anti-ship missiles.

He also proposed that the US develop heavily armed long-range drones to replace short-range carrier-based fighters. The US Navy plans to buy dozens of F-35C fighters with a range of 1,046 km, but has no intention of developing long-range drones.

Navy's response

Hendrix's proposals have attracted great attention from military experts, but they have met with fierce opposition from the US Navy, whose officials have tried to protect the strength of its aircraft carrier fleet and fighter jets.

When asked about the risk of aircraft carriers becoming obsolete in the face of Chinese anti-ship missiles, US Chief of Naval Operations John Richardson stated that the latest US warships possess advanced missile defense systems that can eliminate the threat from Chinese missiles, as well as sensors and targeting technology that provide real-time data to commanders, pilots and sailors on aircraft carriers.

"The Navy's aircraft carrier remains relevant in today's changing world, thanks to its flexibility, adaptability and lethality," Navy spokesman William Marks said. "The aircraft carrier remains the only sea-based force capable of executing a full range of military operations to defend the nation."

F-35C fighter jet lands on US aircraft carrier. Photo: Defensenews

Bryan McGrath, a former Navy officer who commanded a destroyer, also said that investing in aircraft carriers is not as wasteful as Hendrix claimed. For $13 billion, the US could own a nuclear-powered air base at sea that would operate for up to 50 years, providing benefits that "are worth the money."

He agreed that aircraft carriers are facing great risks when operating within range of Chinese anti-ship missiles, but eliminating the F-35C stealth fighter is not a wise solution. Instead, the US can upgrade the fighter's engine to be able to operate at longer ranges.

“Let's do what we've been doing for the past 70 years, which is to improve the carrier's weapons systems to better respond to threats,” McGrath stressed.

According to VNE