What did the Americans show during the operation in the Red Sea? Strength against the weak and weakness against the strong

25
What did the Americans show during the operation in the Red Sea? Strength against the weak and weakness against the strong

We have long been accustomed to the fact that Western intelligence services are actively studying everything that happens in the Northern Military District zone. If there is a raid on our rear, then no one even doubts that at that time there were or were NATO reconnaissance planes or drones.

If among the captured or killed members of the Wesseushki there is a mercenary from Western countries, then upon careful examination of his biography, his involvement in the intelligence of a Western country quite often emerges. I once served somewhere, collaborated, participated in operations, etc.



It is clear that combat operations, especially of such intensity as in the Northern Military District zone, reveal many military secrets. Starting from the equipment of soldiers and the structure of various units to new tactical and strategic ideas, everything is interesting to our enemy. But what about the other side?

Reconnaissance, as has been said many times, including in our publication, is carried out constantly, at different levels and using all the methods and capabilities provided by the development of modern technology. The classic “knowledge is power” has been and will remain the truth in any matter, including military affairs.

We talk a lot about military forces, but there are many military conflicts going on in the world. And many countries participate in them. Including those who openly declare that we are enemies and are preparing for a future war with us. If earlier in the scenarios of various exercises we were simply called an enemy, which always provided diplomats with the opportunity to dispute some claims, now no one is embarrassed or afraid to call a spade a spade.

Today we will talk about an episode from the recent past. There will be no heroic seizures of languages, penetrations into enemy headquarters and other cinematic tinsel. There will be routine work of observers, analysts, and other specialists.

We will talk about the operation that the Americans are conducting in the Red Sea. This operation was predictable, so intelligence from several countries naturally intensified in this area. Fortunately, “geography” simplifies the observation of objects even using the simplest means. The interest in how and by what means the American and British fleets would fight enemy attacks was far from joking.

How did the Americans defend themselves against Houthi attacks?


Let's start, probably, with the main thing. From the destruction of ballistic and cruise missiles, drones of various designs and everything that flew towards American ships. It must be said that shelling of such intensity is not a frequent occurrence, and they provide quite a lot of food for thought. Almost any shelling is quite individual, which means it provided valuable material for reconnaissance.

The defense of the ship group was carried out using the well-known Aegis (ACS) system. Perhaps for the first time in a real situation, the Americans organized the coordination of the actions of ships from different countries through this system. Let me remind you that this system is used by the fleets of Japan, Britain, Norway, Australia, South Korea, Spain, and Canada. Possibly other countries too.

A unified tracking, control and weapons guidance system made it possible to track Houthi missiles almost from the moment they entered the skies of the Gulf. And the missiles were destroyed not by a specific target ship, but by the one that was in the most advantageous position. In this case, not only anti-missiles were used, but also aviation.

American carrier-based aircraft proved themselves to be quite effective. And not only unmanned, but also F / A-18E / F Super Hornets. With appropriate targeting, the fighters completed the task 100%: not a single missile hit the target.

It is also interesting that the Aegis system quickly processed the results of the next attack and developed an algorithm to counter this specific attack scenario.

There is one more important observation.

"Aegis" is installed only on large ships. Smaller ones are equipped with a simplified COMBATSS-21 system. But during the shelling, an interesting detail emerged. Both the full and stripped-down versions of Aegis interact perfectly with each other and are easily built into a single control system.

Well, the last thing about Aegis. Its capabilities are significantly increased with the use of aviation. Almost any aircraft equipped with a SPY-1 phased array antenna is part of it: from airplanes and helicopters to drones. This allows you to create a fairly effective management structure.

Combating air and sea drones


Another important problem that the Americans have solved is drones. Drones themselves are not as dangerous as cruise and ballistic missiles, but the use of many drones at once can significantly hinder the actions of ships and drive them away from the coast.

Stealth and low flight speed, combined with low altitude, make the detection task quite difficult. At the same time, if you use aviation, as the Americans did, which would monitor the surface from above, the task is greatly simplified. Drones are detected at a sufficiently large distance from the target, and air defense manages to respond in time.

The same situation is with sea drones, small boats and boats, which are quite inconspicuous targets for a conventional radar. The use of aviation makes it possible to detect the presence of such objects at a fairly large distance, and carrier-based helicopters successfully destroy targets at a fairly significant distance.

By the way, another detail has come to light, which the Americans are trying to remain silent about.

So-called additional sources of information. The beautiful name hides the banal use of civilian information transmission systems, satellites and other objects for military purposes.

It's no secret that the majority drones, used in military conflicts today, are conversions of ordinary civilian drones used for completely peaceful purposes. Such drones are controlled on civilian frequencies. And it is necessary to fight them there too. This is why these additional sources are used to track “civilian” drones.

Instead of conclusions


It is clear that in this material I have touched upon only a very small part of what was revealed during the operation in the Red Sea. In general, the American fleet performed quite well in the confrontation with the Houthis. However, it was precisely for these purposes that it was equipped. Fight against those who have a less technological army.

The widespread use of new technologies allows the US Army to feel quite comfortable on the battlefield. All systems are interconnected. Computers are widely used. Communication is provided by satellites. Intelligence also operates in a wide range of possibilities. The dependence of battle results on the human factor is minimal.

At the same time, the complexity of the system increases the risk of its destruction. When confronted with an equal enemy, all the advantages of the Aegis will simply be lost. It is enough to simply destroy the communication system of system objects. The elimination of even one link will completely disorient everything. Let me remind you history ship in the Black Sea, over which a Russian bomber flew...

It is clear that the Americans will not be active where there will be Russian, Chinese or, as I think, Iranian ships, or where there will be the possibility of using aircraft, like that bomber. There is also an understanding of one’s own vulnerability fleet. And the Houthis have not yet announced an end to the blockade of the strait. So they also have some trump cards up their sleeves.

Did the US manage to scare the Houthis?

Doubtful. But the fact that land is mortally dangerous for American Marines is already clear. So the blockade will continue. Covering every vessel with a warship is costly and dangerous. "Aegis" works well only if there is a group of ships.

How this problem will be solved in the Pentagon is not yet clear. The fleet showed its capabilities and weaknesses. These were seen by both friends and enemies.
25 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +16
    23 January 2024 03: 30
    The fleet showed its capabilities and weaknesses.

    What are the weaknesses? Expensive? So war is always expensive.
  2. +18
    23 January 2024 04: 02
    What is the article about? Recently, there have been too many ideological dummies at VO. negative
    1. +10
      23 January 2024 04: 14
      Quote: Tucan
      What is the article about?

      About nothing ...
    2. +3
      23 January 2024 06: 40
      What is the article about?
      How did I understand that
      In general, the American fleet performed quite well in the confrontation with the Houthis.
      The author is also concerned about “how this problem will be solved in the Pentagon.” Staver was criticized to the point that he decided to take care of the American fleet.
    3. +10
      23 January 2024 07: 01
      Quote: Tucan
      What is the article about? Recently, there have been too many ideological dummies at VO. negative

      And with the old fairy tale about almighty electronic warfare. Which turned out to be that garden scarecrow.
    4. +2
      23 January 2024 21: 08
      Quote: Tucan
      What is the article about? Recently, there have been too many ideological dummies at VO. negative
      hi Agitprop, sir (agitprop production)...
    5. +3
      24 January 2024 12: 52
      Retired political leaders and political agitators - we try our best, there is no need to teach us, the PARTY taught us. In short, we can do what we can and don’t care that our vigorous activity leads to the opposite result.
  3. +5
    23 January 2024 04: 59
    How this problem will be solved in the Pentagon is not yet clear. The fleet showed its capabilities and weaknesses. These were seen by both friends and enemies.
    "Deep....digs deep" (c)
  4. +3
    23 January 2024 07: 07
    All military operations and reconnaissance are conducted in accordance with their policies. Basically, these policies are cumbersome, loaded with heavy weapons and external and internal problems. Another policy is light, mobile, flexible, but sharp on all sides. You will cut yourself if you touch it carelessly. This policy is not burdened with internal problems. Nowadays such a policy is very rare.
  5. +11
    23 January 2024 07: 53
    What a strange article by Comrade. political instructor! You read, the style is recognizable, but the content... is just an ode and hosanna to the US Navy laughing. Until the final part.
    At the same time, the complexity of the system increases the risk of its destruction.

    “An ax is more reliable than a machine gun in battle”?
    When confronted with an equal enemy, all the advantages of the Aegis will simply be lost.

    Why? Probably because
    It is enough to simply destroy the communication system of system objects.

    So, in our time, only a nuclear charge (or preferably several) in the atmosphere above the group is guaranteed to be capable of this.
    The elimination of even one link will completely disorient everything.

    A strange idea of ​​a network-centric system in the form of a “house of cards”. It is more of a fine-mesh fishing net with several layers.
    Let me remind you of the story of a ship in the Black Sea, over which a Russian bomber flew...

    And what? "Kuk" was definitely supposed to shoot down the Su-24 and couldn't?
  6. +7
    23 January 2024 08: 31
    In general, the American fleet performed quite well

    This is what is really important, but our “unparalleled” people, of course, will not draw any conclusions; it’s easier and calmer to hang noodles on our ears...
    1. +12
      23 January 2024 08: 47
      Quote: Vladimir80
      In general, the American fleet performed quite well
      That's what really matters

      Oh no laughing! According to Staver
      In general, the American fleet performed quite well in the confrontation with the Houthis. However, it was precisely for these purposes that it was equipped. Fight against those who have a less technological army.

      Is it true that the author in the article forgot to indicate who these countries are that have a “more technologically advanced (or equal) army” than the United States?
      In general, the United States and its allies are vilely and dishonestly developing technologies and actively introducing them into the army and navy. There’s nothing knightly about putting on slippers, picking up an AK and fighting the Houthis on equal terms! Then they would have been shown exactly “where the crayfish spend the winter” laughing
  7. +7
    23 January 2024 09: 07
    To the author, your article does not contain the specifics to draw the right conclusions. An example is needed: on the part of the Houthis, so many missiles, drones, etc. were launched, on the part of the United States, so many ships repelled the attack, so many anti-missiles were used up, etc. As a result, all missiles, drones, etc. fired at the group of ships. were destroyed, no hits, no damage caused.
    Conclusion, the article is not for the analyst section.
    1. +2
      23 January 2024 11: 05
      Here’s a resume, but it’s two weeks old, I don’t want to look for a new one. These figures include about 30-40 new missiles and drones.
  8. 0
    23 January 2024 10: 04
    If the enemy has better communications and control, it is more profitable for the weaker side to fight if both the enemy and it lack them at all.
  9. -12
    23 January 2024 10: 32
    Some kind of ode to Aegis?
    Somehow this system did not help the Americans in Afghanistan with computers, UAVs, satellites and data processing
  10. +7
    23 January 2024 10: 54
    The article seems to have been written for propaganda purposes, to console hearts. And what are the facts? More than 100 missiles and drones were fired at the US-British force, but not a single drone or missile landed. The Americans tested the system in combat conditions, the crew gained experience, and will now draw conclusions and eliminate any weak points. So we have it the other way around.
    And I don’t understand the text about the Russian bomber flying over the ship at all, was it supposed to be shot down in peacetime? I would like to see a bomber from any country fly over American ships during the war. Probably only in a science fiction film.
  11. +6
    23 January 2024 16: 05
    High technology has not yet been canceled. And this can be seen in the example of the successful actions of the American fleet in the Red Sea. And an anti-example is actions in the Northern Military District of the Black Sea Fleet. Loss of the flagship, death and damage to many other ships. Some commanders still see the war on situational tablets, where female tablet users move figures of planes and ships, losing precious seconds. Hence the results... And the striped guys are great, they train and train very successfully. I hope our people will take this experience into account, if not now, then at least later. Otherwise, the fleet will remain as before in the 20th century, instead of the 21st, and will not survive in a modern war.
  12. +5
    23 January 2024 19: 54
    For Staver’s opuses, it’s time to open the “Humor” section.
    When confronted with an equal enemy, all the advantages of the Aegis will simply be lost.

    All that remains is to find a fleet on planet Earth that is an equal opponent to the US fleet.
    Let me remind you of the story of a ship in the Black Sea, over which a Russian bomber flew...

    It’s simply indecent to even remember this sticky thing.

    It is clear that the Americans will not be active where there will be Russian, Chinese or, as I think, Iranian ships, or where there will be the possibility of using aviation, like that bomber
    .
    yes, yes ... the invincible Iranian armada or the American air group will be very afraid of the Su-24. For the Black Sea Fleet, one and a half dozen ancient Soviet bombers became simply an unsolvable task...
    They will be active...they have already tried. The results are clear.
  13. +1
    23 January 2024 21: 07
    If among the captured or killed members of the Wesseushki there is a mercenary from Western countries, then upon careful examination of his biography, his involvement in the intelligence of a Western country quite often emerges.
    If we are talking about “careful consideration,” then why wasn’t there any specifics?
    At the same time, the complexity of the system increases the risk of its destruction. When confronted with an equal enemy, all the advantages of the Aegis will simply be lost. It is enough to simply destroy the communication system of system objects. The elimination of even one link will completely disorient everything. Let me remind you of the story of a ship in the Black Sea, over which a Russian bomber flew...
    The statement about the loss of all advantages by the enemy is both serious and unfounded. Especially considering the author’s simply indecent reference to a ship over which a Russian bomber flew... winked
  14. +3
    23 January 2024 21: 16
    Again about Khibiny...
    Why?
  15. +4
    23 January 2024 21: 36
    Again about Khibiny...
    Why?

    Although on the other hand, look ...
    Careful.
    And from the point of managing the manipulation of feelings.

    What did Staver want to say?
    And he wanted to say not directly, but with indirect conclusions the following:
    1. The American Navy is very strong.
    Strong with its technology.
    2. The NATO fleet has its joint coordination, built on the basis of Aegis systems, installed on all modern ships of NATO countries, and where it is not installed, the compatibility of data protocols is almost 100%.
    3. US aviation (Navy and Air Force) already has a working NIF-CA protocol. And it automatically interacts with Aegis to exchange information about detection, tracking, and targeting in two directions.

    4. The main thing.
    Staver deliberately mentioned the nonsense about Cook. Because he knows that this is a lie.
    But not for the purpose of denigrating Cook, as it seems, but for another “second” purpose.
    Consciously emphasizing delirium creates the opposite effect of “denial” of this delirium.
    Patriotism, driven to the point of insanity by turbo-stupid patriots, leads to rejection of the very ideas of patriotism, even by people who sympathize with patriotism. As they say, “with such “friends” there is no need for enemies.”
    Let's return to the insert about Cook.
    With this phrase, Staver clearly emphasized that we really have nothing to oppose the US fleet.
    What is necessary in the discussion is that all our mistakes in the Northern Military District and all our losses, and all our turbo-patriotic dummies will be recalled with reason.
    I hope everyone understands that the words about Cook are not propaganda, not Political propaganda, but a veiled message for those who want to say otherwise. And Staver wants to say otherwise, but he is not allowed. So it introduces “double meanings” into the texts.
  16. +4
    23 January 2024 22: 39
    Quote: SovAr238A
    Again about Khibiny...
    Why?

    In order to restore faith in the unparalleled electronic warfare, about which at VO to NVO, almost every week a sheet came out that somewhere, a hell of a lot of kilometers away, an imperial destroyer was planted and silenced. And the author decided to modestly forget that an article was published in VO that the Khibiny were never installed on Su 24 and they are not capable of drowning out a destroyer. Generally a classic.
  17. +2
    27 January 2024 09: 03
    Elimination of even one link will completely disorient everything

    You probably do not quite understand the ideology of building a network like IJIS.
    It is precisely the ABSENCE of a center that is her strong point.
    Due to this, the destruction of one of the links of the network does not destroy it at all, but only weakens it.
    Which, in general, can be quickly corrected either by bringing into operation another link from the reserve ones or by redistributing the capacities of the remaining ones to the threat area.
  18. 0
    25 February 2024 21: 33
    The Americans have once again shown themselves to be morons. For - the Saudis tried to do the SAME - in the end - they washed themselves. It is IMPOSSIBLE to defeat the Slippers without 1. ground operations. 2. without finding allies “in the enemy’s camp.” The United States can launch at least 100-500 missiles at the Houthis - they will be fine. But the ships of the United States and allies will suffer losses that cannot be counted on. As a result, they will stupidly stop going through the straits - what is the most sacred thing for Westerners - their dough, that's all.