Military concept problem! Ask for advice on military issues, urgently

First of all, shoulder-fired missiles are generally for prevention and control, anti-tank missiles are too heavy to carry, and the recoil is not something that people can bear. The warheads of MANPADS are very small, and the advantage is that they are highly mobile, and they cannot penetrate the armor of the tank when hitting a tank, and they cannot inflict a fatal blow on the tank. The maneuverability of the anti-tank missile against the speedboat is a little worse, and the range is too close, so it will not work.

The height of the air defense radar cannot be mixed, the general radar cannot detect 306 degrees like the road-based radar, he can only detect one direction, look at the bottom and you can't see the top, the larger the detection area, the more the volume of the radar, which also limits his use location, like airplanes and tanks and ships can not be installed, no matter how strong the function is, it will not be used in vain.

In fact, each ** has several radars, each with different functions, and cannot be replaced by one step.

1. No, no, because the power is too small.

Second, it can, but the range is too short.

3. Different needs, the frequency of the sound waves of the detective low-altitude and the detective detective are different.

First, second, the key to "guided" missiles is to have guidance, and there are different guidance methods for different targets, and their speed, range, and power are also different, so air defense missiles cannot hit tanks, and anti-tank missiles cannot hit ships. Third, it is suitable for searching for electromagnetic waves of different wavelengths at targets at different altitudes, and the corresponding radar antennas and powers are also different, so they should be separated.

1；Harbin (Erbin) Fly Representative Model: Zhijiu.

Shen (Yang) Fei Representative model: J-8 11

Shi (Jiazhuang) Fly Representative models: Yun 5, Kitty Hawk 500 South (Chang) Fly Representative models: Strong 5

Guizhou (Zhou) Fly Representative Model: J-7 Higher Education.

West (An) Fly Representative Model: Yun X Series.

Chengdu (Du) Fly Representative aircraft: FC 1

Jingdezhen representative model: Z-11

In addition, there seems to be an aerospace manufacturing company in Shanghai, but the details are unclear.

2；China State Shipbuilding Corporation and China Shipbuilding Industry Co., Ltd., Jiangnan Shipyard.

The 052 series was built by the Shanghai Zhonghua Shipyard, the 054 series was built by the two shipyards of the Zhonghua Shipyard and the Guangzhou Huangpu Shipyard, the 051C was built by the Dalian Shipyard, the 022 was built by many shipyards such as Wuhan, and the nuclear submarine was built by the Huludao Shipyard.

3；Zhuhai Xingyu Aviation Technology Company; Guangzhou Jiaqi Intelligent Technology ****; SIA Group, Shenyang, China.

4；China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation;

5；China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation,

The planes are Chengfei, Shenfei, and Xifei.

**Dalian, Wuhan, Shanghai shipyards.

Drone Zhuhai UAV Industrial Park.

Aerospace Science and Industry Missile Manufacturing Plant.

1. (This Law is enacted in accordance with the Constitution for the purpose of building and consolidating national defense and ensuring the smooth progress of socialist modernization.) ）

2. Select all ABCDs

The Chinese People's Armed Police Force was established in June 1982 (the predecessor of the Chinese People's Public Security ** Column was established in August 1949). The Chinese People's Armed Police Force is a force entrusted by the state to undertake the task of internal security of the state, under the dual leadership of the Military Commission, and is composed of internal security, forest, water and electricity, communications, and other units, as well as public security border defense, firefighting, and guard units under the leadership of the Ministry of Public Security. ）

To tell the truth, due to the backwardness of military education and related theories, domestic generals lagged behind others by 20 years in their understanding of modern warfare.

The strategic thinking of the major generals at that time was basically stuck in the trench warfare stage in the early stage of World War I.

This gentleman did not pay attention to the use of German armored clusters in the Polish campaign, and his tactical thinking was seriously outdated. In addition, American journalists often have similar comments about the senior commanders of the GJ.

The gap is mainly reflected in the lack of understanding of modern warfare, the lack of knowledge of multi-service coordination, and the lack of understanding of overall warfare.

On the other hand, you can look at the fighting situation of the Volunteer Army and the Americans in Korea, at that time, it was the Korean troops of the Americans with the strength of the whole country, and depending on the geographical situation of Korea, the attack of the United States was mainly flat, and even so, the TG in the later period was also very difficult to deal with in large-scale battles (five battles).

You can think about what kind of ending it would be if it was on a vast battlefield against famous generals like Manstein and Zhukov.

Modern warfare strategy is only useful if the two sides are equal in strength, and the difference in strength is too great, so it is impossible to have very famous generals.

The first question, let's show you two sets of data, I believe you will have your own judgment after reading it: the "Kuznetsov" has a total length of meters, a standard displacement of 53,000 tons, and a full load displacement of 65,000 tons. Its flight deck is 72 meters long and 72 meters wide.

The Varyag is its sister ship, see also).

The aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle has a length of meters, a width of meters, and a draft of meters, with a standard displacement of 35,500 tons and a full load displacement of 39,680 tons. The flight deck is meters long and wide.

The second question, first of all, whether the gliding bomb can be intercepted is certain, but the success rate of interception depends on different situations. But what kind of gliding bomb this is you did not give, and secondly, as it was said upstairs, the range of missiles is too large. So it's hard to judge.

Hope it helps.

"Varyag" is a large conventionally powered aircraft carrier. Hangar: 152 meters long, 26 meters wide, high meters, more than 50 carrier-based aircraft: 26 Su-33 carrier-based fighters.

Charles de Gaulle is the first nuclear-powered medium-sized aircraft carrier of the French Navy, with a flight deck of meters long and wide, and can carry more than 40 carrier-based aircraft such as Rafale M fighters, E 2C Hawkeye early warning aircraft and NH 90***.

Gliding missiles: generally can reach 15 to 40 nautical miles. This is a new type of intelligence guided by a globally locatable inertial system and automatically hogged by a set of coordinate systems.

In fact, it is a cruise missile) because its flight trajectory is controllable and close to the sea level, so it is more difficult to intercept, but it is not impossible to intercept, for example: the "goalkeeper" of the United States, the "Kashtan" of Russia, and the "multi-barreled close-in defense artillery" of China, which can be relatively effectively prevented by intensive fire.

Compared with missiles, the speed of missiles is faster, but there are many kinds of missiles, and their speed cannot be generalized.

1.The Varyag is a little bigger, and a little more planes.

2, of course, the missiles are fast. The interception of gliding bombs does not seem to have heard about this. Personally, I think it's okay.

It can be pushed from several aspects: 1, now the technology for intercepting ballistic missiles is available (American Standard 2, 3 missiles, etc.), and ballistic missiles can reach several times the speed of sound, which is much faster than bombs. 2. The technology of intercepting anti-ship missiles has also been developed for many years, and of course, anti-ship missiles are faster and larger than gliding bombs.

3. To give one of the most powerful examples, the rocket interception technology developed by Israel is to intercept rockets, which is fast, the radar reflection area is small, and even rockets can be successfully intercepted, why can't gliding bombs succeed?

First, the hangar in the Varyag may be a little larger, but it is difficult to say who will have more planes. It should depend on the size of its carrier-based aircraft. If the aircraft is smaller, the hangar can also hold more aircraft.

Second, it can be intercepted. It's still okay to rely on barrage interception. As for the speed of the missile, it is not comparable. The missile has its own thruster, it has its own power. There are no gliding bombs, the tower just glides on its initial power.

In order to achieve stealth performance, Charles de Gaulle's radar and ** systems are superimposed, which also occupies a small amount of flight deck and can carry 35 to 40 fighters, 2 AWACS aircraft and 2 anti-submarine aircraft. Mainly, the Charles de Gaulle was built in 1989 and its latest technology was incorporated into it. And the Varyag is a product of the Soviet era, when it was built, its radar and ** system were relatively large, and the area of the armor wrench also occupied a lot, their tonnage is about 30,000 to 35,000 tons, all of which belong to medium-sized aircraft carriers, although the Chinese side installed its own radar and ** system on the Varyag, but its original solid base size will not change.

Although I don't know how many carrier-based aircraft can be carried on the Varyag, it is certainly not as many as the Charles de Gaulle... Question 2: Can gliding bombs be intercepted? Who is it faster than the missile and the missiles?

Missiles are also divided into subsonic and supersonic, you didn't specify which kind of missile it is, how to compare it..? As long as it can be caught on the radar, it can be intercepted...

Charles de Gaulle 、、、

It should be an electromagnetic catapult bomb. Electromagnetic fast.