New Chinese Carrier, any thoughts?

[Big Jim P]

I say we stop inviting panda women to have their babies at our zoos. That'll show them.

There goes both my career AND social life. Have you no mercy?

[Minnysota]

Which isn't what's being discussed. If you need a refresher, my contention was that China has already began separating themselves from Russian tech as Chinese tech is steadily growing at a faster pace than Russian tech.

Which is false...

[San-Silvacian]

But you concede their status as integration testbeds and proof of concept aircraft until further revealed. (ESPECIALLY considering the engines....)

But I don't. You have to take these things as what they are, stealth fighters in a stealth fighter program. Whether their testbeds or for production is yet to be seen, but until then they're planes for a plane program, stealth fighters for a stealth fighter program.

No, I'm referring to every single Chinese aircraft program post-1950.

Which isn't what's being discussed. If you need a refresher, my contention was that China has already began separating themselves from Russian tech as Chinese tech is steadily growing at a faster pace than Russian tech.

Because Russia has a 15+ year lead over the PLA.

[Minnysota]

-snip blatantly biased bullshit-

please continue

[No endorse]

But I don't. You have to take these things as what they are, stealth fighters in a stealth fighter program. Whether their testbeds or for production is yet to be seen, but until then they're planes for a plane program, stealth fighters for a stealth fighter program.

These aircraft are in YF-22 status right now. So... they're where the US was 22 years ago? RIGHT ON!

Which isn't what's being discussed. If you need a refresher, my contention was that China has already began separating themselves from Russian tech as Chinese tech is steadily growing at a faster pace than Russian tech.

The primary reason for this is that CFM International is designing the Comac C919, and McDonnel Douglas designed the Comac ARJ21. :v

This is fairly common across the whole of Chinese industry.

[PapaJacky]

Which isn't what's being discussed. If you need a refresher, my contention was that China has already began separating themselves from Russian tech as Chinese tech is steadily growing at a faster pace than Russian tech.

Which is false...

China = Deployed Aerial AESA, Russia = nrly bro
China = Deployed Seaborne AESA, Russia = nrly bro
China = 2 Stealth fighter programs, Russia = just 1 bro
China = DF-41D AShBM, Russia = don't need 1 bro
China = 6 calibers longer bro, Russia = 6 calibers shorter, bro

Off the top of my head that's where the list ends. Comparatively Russia only has absolute technical advantages in SAM technology, ATGM/RPG technology, and engine technologies. Russia also has procurement advantages in other fields, but that's not my contention.

These aircraft are in YF-22 status right now. So... they're where the US was 22 years ago? RIGHT ON!

5 years ahead of schedule for the J-20 and in late 90's terms for the second one.

The primary reason for this is that CFM International is designing the Comac C919, and McDonnel Douglas designed the Comac ARJ21. :v

This is fairly common across the whole of Chinese industry.

Seems to be outpacing Russia too.

[Minnysota]

Off the top of my head that's where the list ends. Comparatively Russia only has absolute technical advantages in SAM technology, ATGM/RPG technology, and engine technologies. Russia also has procurement advantages in other fields, but that's not my contention.

Please explain how China can be ahead of Russia in aircraft technology when damn near all of their fighters were directly copied from Russia? I don't give two shits about the stealth fighters. The PAK FA is going to be multirole, while the J-20 is nothing more than a Chinese FB-22. That's a hell of a lot more tasks that the J-20 can really accomplish.

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_LMFS

Seems to be outpacing Russia too.

>has companies come in and virtually build airplanes for them
>somehow is outpacing Russia

btw I wouldn't even consider outpacing Russia that huge of an accomplishment, given their situation over the past few decades

[PapaJacky]

I can actually make arguments that China is advancing faster than Russia in most areas of military tech. In missile tech, Iskander is great, but China has the DF-41D, which I'd argue is more of wunderweapon than the Iskander. ATGMs and RPGs are all Russian dominated, though. Tank and APC wise, Russia and China have traditionally been closely linked. The difference though is that Russia hasn't deviated away from the stigma of the T-72 that much. The T-90 is essentially a T-72BM with T-80 FCS systems. The Chinese, in response to the American dominance of T-72Ms in Iraq, to which a similar variant was the main Chinese MBT, developed their own MBT which is heavier, and arguably more protective than the T-90A or even the T-90MS. APCs are a mixed bunch since both have similar attributes. The Su-25 is a joke in terms of CAS but it's actually better than the PLAAF's CAS due to their lack of a modern one on the offset. Bombers too you can argue that Russia has the historical advantage over simply due to having the necessity of completing their nuclear triangle.

It's wrong to compare DF-41D with the Iskander. DF-41D is more of a Topol-style weapon, and I'll take the Topol over that crap. What? Compared to Topol, everything's crap

The reason that Iraqi tanks sucked, is that Saddam didn't know how to use his tanks. Additionally, the T-90 with the Shtora and Arena Integration Systems, and an INVAR, can take on any modern tank. Heavier tanks are just slower targets for artillery and missiles, tanks gotta be maneuverable. In terms of APCs - the BTR 80 is by far, the most underrated APC. It's not the best, nowhere near it, but if you need to make an infantry brigade mobile, it has the friendliest learning curve, and mobility, along with weapon customization, ain't bad. Also, it's not expensive. On the high tech side of things, the Russian VDV have the BMD-4, and that's just an awesome piece of technology! Su-25 is a precision bomber that might be used as a scout for short durations, and that's it. For quality CAS, pair it up with MiG-29s, and you have quality CAS.

To the smartasses saying: "Yars replaced Topol-M!" Nope - it's just a renamed upgrade of Topol-M.

Wasn't disputing that Iraqi tanks sucked, I'm talking about innovation. The T-90 is literally a T-72BM with the T-80's FCS and some other upgrades added on later depending on variant. The Type 99 was though similarly designed to the T-72/T-80s that it was inspired by, was different in most if not all rights, than those tanks it referenced, which was my point. I should also note that Shtora may be on it's death groans as the T-90MS didn't have it and ARENA has always just been that prototype that won't be used.

The BMD-4M is basically one of the few good things still coming out of Russia. If only they had money and stopped sulking from their glory days, it'd be great for us tank nerds out there. As for CAS, the Russians already have quality CAS, the Su-34, good thing to.

Active radar homing. Chinese missiles from the late 80's have been used in combat before, hit an Israeli corvette and killed a few of them.

A carrier battle group is not, as you appear to believe, defenseless.

The fun part is is that you were quoting my response to the answer to your assertions, lol. Basically (I'll sum it up), AEGIS is great, but it was a cost cutting system and isn't the best in the world (Type 45 from your royal Queen is). This, combined with arguably subpar missile systems (Sea Sparrow is a joke, ESSM has a chance, SEARAM/RAM are last line of defense, Phalanx is a joke, SM-2's have a chance, SM-3's and SM-6's aren't cost effective) and the proliferation of high quality AShMs means stranger danger. In such a scenario, the best defense would be the best offense, because if a Chinese/Russian/Iranian ship unloads more than a full salvo of the latest and greatest, the CBG is in serious danger.

Off the top of my head that's where the list ends. Comparatively Russia only has absolute technical advantages in SAM technology, ATGM/RPG technology, and engine technologies. Russia also has procurement advantages in other fields, but that's not my contention.

[qupte]Please explain how China can be ahead of Russia in aircraft technology when damn near all of their fighters were directly copied from Russia? I don't give two shits about the stealth fighters. The PAK FA is going to be multirole, while the J-20 is nothing more than a Chinese FB-22. That's a hell of a lot more tasks that the J-20 can really accomplish.

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_LMFS

It's "AESA", Jim. There's also apparently an assumption that the J-20 is a testbed? That's a hell of an assumption given the lack of proof it's a testbed.

Seems to be outpacing Russia too.

>has companies come in and virtually build airplanes for them
>somehow is outpacing Russia

btw I wouldn't even consider outpacing Russia that huge of an accomplishment, given their situation over the past few decades

Russia actually is still easily competitive with Europe. China, however, has already outpaced both, though less so in Europe since they still retain technological edges in some fields including IRSTs.

[Distruzio]

Good for them.

[Celebrity Sex Scandal]

Carries are great and all, but it's the Reavers that really do the dirty work.

[Vitaphone Racing]

I do still find it amusing that one's ability to produce cutting edge military technology is measured by how early they fitted AESA radars to their aircraft and how many stealth fighter programs they have running at any one time.

Therefore Belgium is militarily superior to China.

[PapaJacky]

I do still find it amusing that one's ability to produce cutting edge military technology is measured by how early they fitted AESA radars to their aircraft and how many stealth fighter programs they have running at any one time.

Therefore Belgium is militarily superior to China.

Strawmen are good for breakfast!

[San-Silvacian]

I do still find it amusing that one's ability to produce cutting edge military technology is measured by how early they fitted AESA radars to their aircraft and how many stealth fighter programs they have running at any one time.

Therefore Belgium is militarily superior to China.

I always knew it was them!

Those aren't waffles! Those are radar dishes!

[Vitaphone Racing]

I do still find it amusing that one's ability to produce cutting edge military technology is measured by how early they fitted AESA radars to their aircraft and how many stealth fighter programs they have running at any one time.

Therefore Belgium is militarily superior to China.

Strawmen are good for breakfast!

Please tell us more about how China is a world leading producer of military hardware after seeing some pictures of two possible stealth fighters and China's fitting of whoever's AESA radars to their aircraft.

[PapaJacky]

Strawmen are good for breakfast!

Please tell us more about how China is a world leading producer of military hardware after seeing some pictures of two possible stealth fighters and China's fitting of whoever's AESA radars to their aircraft.

Read above posts, it's really so simple, I even listed it for everyone!

[Vitaphone Racing]

Please tell us more about how China is a world leading producer of military hardware after seeing some pictures of two possible stealth fighters and China's fitting of whoever's AESA radars to their aircraft.

Read above posts, it's really so simple, I even listed it for everyone!

All you have said in previous comments is that China is proven to be able to develop top of the line military hardware because of two photographs of unknown sino-stealth fighters and that China has AESA but Russia doesn't. You've shown all these new projects that China has undertaken which doesn't put them ahead of anyone, it merely sees them catch up to where the west is today even though most of the equivalent western projects are being replaced as we speak. You've said how "China has already began separating themselves from Russian tech as Chinese tech is steadily growing at a faster pace than Russian tech." despite the fact that China's latest multirole is a carbon copy of the Su-33 with the engines and the avionics swapped out for Chinese equivalent systems, based on somebody else's research and designs.

[Shofercia]

This is from what I've heard/been able to glean from online military forums, so I don't know how accurate this is, but here goes:

the first step in a simulation is to identify the basic units that will be taking place in a fight. One of them is a Marine Fireteam, led by an NCO, (rank of Corporal,) and has 4 men, including the Cpl. The team is equipped with 3 M16s, and one M249 MG. The Cpl's M16 also has M203 GL attached. After getting the paper stats, you run computer sims, and after computer sims, you go out and watch an actual Marine Fireteam in action, and take measurements, akin to what they did on Deadliest Warrior, but slightly more complex.

You do this for virtually every unit that's involved on both sides, but since you already have some data, you just check for any modifications, (mods). (Yeah, by mods I don't mean moderators.) And then you work your way up: soldier, unit, squad, platoon, company, battalion, regiment, brigade, division, corps, army, task force, etc. In all cases you're doing paper-wise table-top, computer assisted sims and actual live fire drills.

Once you have all the data, you invite the big boys. The military brass, the generals, the...

And then you have team captains, and you pick your teams, and agree on what kind of weapons/forces the sides will have. This is incredibly detailed. You play both ways, table-top and computers, and then you have certain unique actions performed by soldiers, using non-live ammo, and if you want to retest something specific, you can involve live ammo and fake targets, or fake ammo and real targets, just don't mix them up.

Then the teams get to pick their units, and how they'll duke it out, etc.

Of course everyone wants to place the US, cause "hurr durr America's going to win" and few want to play Iran. One of the rumors is that the Millenium Challenge was originally intended against Iran, and after Van Riper trashed the Americans while roleplaying as Iran, there was a shift to Iraq. Van Riper had several issues with the Millenium Challenge.

First, he believed that it was too technology reliant, and second, it wasn't classy, as in classical. Usually, when you have a military sim, you have Army X attack Army Y to take objective Z. However the Millenium Challenge was radical, in that it was all about testing the brand new military doctrine of superior firepower. Considering that the unofficial Marine Motto is "Superior Thinking Overwhelms Superior Force" or something similar, van Riper took an issue with that. He also took issues with the whole plan, where there was heavy bias towards US winning, and realized that if shit hits the fan, and US runs out of Special Forces to send in, US will have two choices: send in the strategic reserve, or send in the Marines, and van Riper wants to protect the USMC.

As an aside, the reason that I was fascinated by USMC, is because they're more efficient and less expensive than the US Army. I find that interesting. Anyways, when few credible leaders wanted to command Iran, van Riper jumped on the scene.

Some argue that the battle was rigged from the start. That's bullshit, because van Riper sank half of the navy, and come on, the US Armed Forces can rig better than that. After sinking half of the US Navy involved in the battle, van Riper thought that the Millenium Challenge will either proceed, or the landing will be redone. Instead, the commanders "took note" of van Riper's accomplishment, refloated the navy, and claimed that the landing took place. Van Riper asked to challenge the landing, and was promptly rebuffed. So apparently the Iranians took a break while Americans were landing.

Next up, van Riper began a guerrilla warfare, a modernization of that done against the USMC in Vietnam, set up ambushes, and continuously harassed the American Forces, causing more and more humiliation. When the Americans knocked out radio communications, van Riper sent messages by Minarets and high towers, akin to how the Russians parried invaders during the Middle Ages. You just need a really high building, knowledge of something similar to the morse code, and people with said knowledge willing to climb the buildings. Coded messages were sent by bikes. An intel spreading station was established, and Americans continued to take losses. This was when the brass once again intervened, and declared van Riper's communication system destroyed.

So, all in all, if the game was to be allowed to continue without intervention, it wasn't going to be a pretty picture. Here's military historian, Dolan, opining under the pen-name, Gary Brecher:



Another one: http://www.usni.org/news-and-features/c ... ill-weapon

yeah but heres the thing shof.

He kept them circling around the edges of the Persian Gulf aimlessly, driving the Navy crazy trying to keep track of them. When the Admirals finally lost patience and ordered all planes and ships to leave, van Ripen had them all attack at once. And they sank two-thirds of the US fleet.

I've been on training platoon night attack. it hard enough getting 25 guys in shouting distance to launch a focused attack. so my question is, did the magic of computer handled logistics, communications, training and subordinates allow Van Riper to pull off a technically true but unrealistic victory? did Van Riper win because he was a good general? or did he win because he's a good wargamer?

I know what ya mean, but think of it this way: Numidian Cavalry Tactics have been in use for millenia. It's not hard to train your small boat navy to use similar tactics, and with enough training, you can get it done. Once you have them coordinated and circling, and you see an opening, you just give the signal for all of the boats to attack at once. The problem with the AC is that it's a huge target. The boats don't really know which part of the target they're going for, they're just hitting anything. With enough things hurled at the AC, there are going to be quite a few hits of sensitive systems.

You can either give the signal via the radio, or, if you see the radio jammed, you make sure that someone, on every boat, knows what the signal is. For instance - you fire three green rockets, and off you go. Getting people coordinated based on a single signal is easy, it's just a matter of spreading the message. Think of it this way: how many students rush out of school when the final bell rings? You hear the signal - you rush. The Red Army, during the Battle of Kursk, in the Prokhorovka Engagement, had hundreds of tanks rolling in an instant with three code words. In hockey, once the puck drops - 12 players know exactly what to do.

Now, as the boats are going for the carrier, the US Navy is not going to stand aside and say "have fun with the AC guys!" The US Navy is going to engage. So you have another guy on the boat, with a missile launcher, with orders to shoot any ship that's coming towards him. Ironically, by engaging the boats, and closing the distance, the USN is causing itself more destruction. The smart thing to do would be to let them all hit the AC, let them sink it, but then take care of the uncoordinated masses. But no modern navy will make that happen, and Van Riper knows this. In a battle - you sense your opponent's weaknesses and play on them, and in this case, the USN engaging Van Riper's Boats just helps with the kill tally.

The other thing is that the boats are counting on the USN to attack them, because it's much easier to attack a ship that's coming at you, than it is to coordinate multiple attacks against multiple ships.

So the boat crew of, let's say 4, has simple orders. One guy to watch for the signal. Once the signal is seen, the driver of the boat heads towards the AC, the missile guy hits whatever boats/ships are coming at him, and the other guy reloads and preps explosives during the collision, and the signal guy runs around with a submachine gun, helping out others. They can do that, it's just simple orders. Once the signal guy gives the command, it's all on automatic.

At least that's how I'd pull it off if I was in Van Riper's shoes.

[San-Silvacian]

yeah but heres the thing shof.



I've been on training platoon night attack. it hard enough getting 25 guys in shouting distance to launch a focused attack. so my question is, did the magic of computer handled logistics, communications, training and subordinates allow Van Riper to pull off a technically true but unrealistic victory? did Van Riper win because he was a good general? or did he win because he's a good wargamer?

I know what ya mean, but think of it this way: Numidian Cavalry Tactics have been in use for millenia. It's not hard to train your small boat navy to use similar tactics, and with enough training, you can get it done. Once you have them coordinated and circling, and you see an opening, you just give the signal for all of the boats to attack at once. The problem with the AC is that it's a huge target. The boats don't really know which part of the target they're going for, they're just hitting anything. With enough things hurled at the AC, there are going to be quite a few hits of sensitive systems.

You can either give the signal via the radio, or, if you see the radio jammed, you make sure that someone, on every boat, knows what the signal is. For instance - you fire three green rockets, and off you go. Getting people coordinated based on a single signal is easy, it's just a matter of spreading the message. Think of it this way: how many students rush out of school when the final bell rings? You hear the signal - you rush. The Red Army, during the Battle of Kursk, in the Prokhorovka Engagement, had hundreds of tanks rolling in an instant with three code words. In hockey, once the puck drops - 12 players know exactly what to do.

Now, as the boats are going for the carrier, the US Navy is not going to stand aside and say "have fun with the AC guys!" The US Navy is going to engage. So you have another guy on the boat, with a missile launcher, with orders to shoot any ship that's coming towards him. Ironically, by engaging the boats, and closing the distance, the USN is causing itself more destruction. The smart thing to do would be to let them all hit the AC, let them sink it, but then take care of the uncoordinated masses. But no modern navy will make that happen, and Van Riper knows this. In a battle - you sense your opponent's weaknesses and play on them, and in this case, the USN engaging Van Riper's Boats just helps with the kill tally.

The other thing is that the boats are counting on the USN to attack them, because it's much easier to attack a ship that's coming at you, than it is to coordinate multiple attacks against multiple ships.

So the boat crew of, let's say 4, has simple orders. One guy to watch for the signal. Once the signal is seen, the driver of the boat heads towards the AC, the missile guy hits whatever boats/ships are coming at him, and the other guy reloads and preps explosives during the collision, and the signal guy runs around with a submachine gun, helping out others. They can do that, it's just simple orders. Once the signal guy gives the command, it's all on automatic.

At least that's how I'd pull it off if I was in Van Riper's shoes.

^ No understanding of naval tactics 10/10

[Novus Niciae]

This and plus why is it such a big deal? china's technology can't back up its army...

A bullet to every other man. We shall force those capitalist out, by our bullet.

China's real power is economic. That's pretty much it.

China's economic power is potential at the moment, In a generation or two when they complete industrialization they will be a force to be reckoned with.

[Ilvania]

Yeah? How good are China and America's Kangaroo Cavalry? Oh wait, they don't have any!

AUSTRALIAN PRIDE BITCHES!

[Shofercia]

Dyakovo - for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw

Which is false...

China = Deployed Aerial AESA, Russia = nrly bro
China = Deployed Seaborne AESA, Russia = nrly bro
China = 2 Stealth fighter programs, Russia = just 1 bro
China = DF-41D AShBM, Russia = don't need 1 bro
China = 6 calibers longer bro, Russia = 6 calibers shorter, bro

Off the top of my head that's where the list ends. Comparatively Russia only has absolute technical advantages in SAM technology, ATGM/RPG technology, and engine technologies. Russia also has procurement advantages in other fields, but that's not my contention.

Russia doesn't need AESA atm, we'd rather focus on our missile tech. In terms of Russian Stealth Programs, did it ever occur to you that Russian Stealth Programs might be classified and not yet discovered? And I already explained why the Topol is far superior to the DF-41D. I have no idea what you mean by calibers, but size ain't everything in battle. It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.

It's wrong to compare DF-41D with the Iskander. DF-41D is more of a Topol-style weapon, and I'll take the Topol over that crap. What? Compared to Topol, everything's crap

The reason that Iraqi tanks sucked, is that Saddam didn't know how to use his tanks. Additionally, the T-90 with the Shtora and Arena Integration Systems, and an INVAR, can take on any modern tank. Heavier tanks are just slower targets for artillery and missiles, tanks gotta be maneuverable. In terms of APCs - the BTR 80 is by far, the most underrated APC. It's not the best, nowhere near it, but if you need to make an infantry brigade mobile, it has the friendliest learning curve, and mobility, along with weapon customization, ain't bad. Also, it's not expensive. On the high tech side of things, the Russian VDV have the BMD-4, and that's just an awesome piece of technology! Su-25 is a precision bomber that might be used as a scout for short durations, and that's it. For quality CAS, pair it up with MiG-29s, and you have quality CAS.

To the smartasses saying: "Yars replaced Topol-M!" Nope - it's just a renamed upgrade of Topol-M.

Wasn't disputing that Iraqi tanks sucked, I'm talking about innovation. The T-90 is literally a T-72BM with the T-80's FCS and some other upgrades added on later depending on variant. The Type 99 was though similarly designed to the T-72/T-80s that it was inspired by, was different in most if not all rights, than those tanks it referenced, which was my point. I should also note that Shtora may be on it's death groans as the T-90MS didn't have it and ARENA has always just been that prototype that won't be used.

The BMD-4M is basically one of the few good things still coming out of Russia. If only they had money and stopped sulking from their glory days, it'd be great for us tank nerds out there. As for CAS, the Russians already have quality CAS, the Su-34, good thing to.

About the Shtora - could be upgrading issue. Same with Arena - but should real long term war come - those are ready to be upgraded. Additionally, the Russians aren't going to pump out a new tank design, because modern fighting's about missile tech. What's the sole purpose of drones that worked so well in Af-Pak? Launching missiles or scouting locations that can be hit by missiles. Because of Iskanders, US Aircraft Carriers can't come anywhere near the Russian coast lines.

[Soviet Russia Republic]

Russia actually is still easily competitive with Europe. China, however, has already outpaced both, though less so in Europe since they still retain technological edges in some fields including IRSTs.

hahahaha. Is that why China is trying to copy everything from jet engines to ant-air missile systems from Russia? Both Russia and the EU are ahead of China in military tech. Countries around the world want Russian and EU arms far more than Chinese arms and even China still wants to copy the latest tech from outside sources, on a large scale.

[Grand Britannia]

Yeah? How good are China and America's Kangaroo Cavalry? Oh wait, they don't have any!

AUSTRALIAN PRIDE BITCHES!

Fuckin' Kangaroos....

[Dyakovo]

Dyakovo - for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw

[Priory Academy USSR]

I know what ya mean, but think of it this way: Numidian Cavalry Tactics have been in use for millenia. It's not hard to train your small boat navy to use similar tactics, and with enough training, you can get it done. Once you have them coordinated and circling, and you see an opening, you just give the signal for all of the boats to attack at once. The problem with the AC is that it's a huge target. The boats don't really know which part of the target they're going for, they're just hitting anything. With enough things hurled at the AC, there are going to be quite a few hits of sensitive systems.

You can either give the signal via the radio, or, if you see the radio jammed, you make sure that someone, on every boat, knows what the signal is. For instance - you fire three green rockets, and off you go. Getting people coordinated based on a single signal is easy, it's just a matter of spreading the message. Think of it this way: how many students rush out of school when the final bell rings? You hear the signal - you rush. The Red Army, during the Battle of Kursk, in the Prokhorovka Engagement, had hundreds of tanks rolling in an instant with three code words. In hockey, once the puck drops - 12 players know exactly what to do.

Now, as the boats are going for the carrier, the US Navy is not going to stand aside and say "have fun with the AC guys!" The US Navy is going to engage. So you have another guy on the boat, with a missile launcher, with orders to shoot any ship that's coming towards him. Ironically, by engaging the boats, and closing the distance, the USN is causing itself more destruction. The smart thing to do would be to let them all hit the AC, let them sink it, but then take care of the uncoordinated masses. But no modern navy will make that happen, and Van Riper knows this. In a battle - you sense your opponent's weaknesses and play on them, and in this case, the USN engaging Van Riper's Boats just helps with the kill tally.

The other thing is that the boats are counting on the USN to attack them, because it's much easier to attack a ship that's coming at you, than it is to coordinate multiple attacks against multiple ships.

So the boat crew of, let's say 4, has simple orders. One guy to watch for the signal. Once the signal is seen, the driver of the boat heads towards the AC, the missile guy hits whatever boats/ships are coming at him, and the other guy reloads and preps explosives during the collision, and the signal guy runs around with a submachine gun, helping out others. They can do that, it's just simple orders. Once the signal guy gives the command, it's all on automatic.

At least that's how I'd pull it off if I was in Van Riper's shoes.

^ No understanding of naval tactics 10/10

Nonetheless, the Red force in said operation won a decisive victory. Keeping to standard military tactics, when you know your force is no match for your opponents, is suicide.