How close can you get to an aircraft carrier at sea (and live to tell about it)?

Factual Questions
1

There is another thread in GQ asking how you’d go about sinking an aircraft carrier (US Nimitz class). The discussion in there brought up a few questions for me.

Just how close can you get to an aircraft carrier before they start shooting? Assume the carrier is at sea and not in American controlled waters (essentially no-man’s land…err…water). Being interested I sail from a nearby island in my pleasure yacht. Say I’m rich so this yacht is sufficient for the ocean, long range and fast if it wants to be. Considering that no one ‘owns’ the ocean out there is there anything the navy can legally do to keep me away from the carrier and its battlegroup? Forget for a moment if this is a smart thing to do…I’m wondering if maritime law or international treaty allows the US to legitimately tell me to stay away or they will blow me out of the water?

I have the same question for planes. Say I want to fly my Cessna out and buzz a carrier in international waters (assume I’m not an American or otherwise subject to American laws).

As food for thought is the following:

During the Cold War the USSR would often put ‘fishing trawlers’ near US naval vessles. Why they bothered disguising them as fishing trawlers is anybody’s guess as I believe it was understood these constituted spy vessles. The US could do nothing to make them go away short of blowing them up and that would be an act of war.

Likewise Russian aricraft would overfly US naval assets. Partly for intelliegence and partly (I imagine) to establish precedent bot to show the US they don’t own that territory and to give them a window of opportunity if they ever wanted to launch a surprise attack.

On the flip side we have the USS Cole getting severly damaged by an explosive laden ship coming near and detonating and we have the WTC attacks showing the use of commercial aircraft to strike targets. I can’t see the navy being thrilled at letting any unauthorized ships or planes near their vessles.

So again, do militaries claim a no-go radius around their ships that other countries are obliged to follow? If the perimeter is pierced is the navy free to open fire without too much worry of international consequences? Is it damn the consequences…shoot first ask questions later? Or do they just growl a lot at the approaching vehicle and hope nothing bad happens if they ignore those growls?

2

This thread seems to be (to me) a bit more dangerous than the “how to take out a carrier” thread, because people can much more easily own a boat than a cruise missile.

That being said, I’d think anyone piercing the carrier battle group that is percieved as a threat, would become target practice. As for ways of being deceptive enough to get close, I’d rather that information not be known (or shared).

If someone posted “how to disable a Bradley fighting vehicle”, I’m sure our boys in Iraq wouldn’t appreciate it.

This is certainly apples and oranges, but they’re both fruit. I’m not trying to be a wet blanket or a NARC, I’d just really hate to see another Cole incident.

3

A classmate of mine served in the US Navy back in the Eighties, and he said that the Soviet faux-fishing boats would get close enough to the ships that the sailors on the US ships would start pelting the Soviets with garbage.:smiley: (Eventually the captain would get on the PA and order them to stop.)

I believe it all depends upon the location of the US ships at the time, and IIRC, the investigation into the USS Cole incident revealed that the captain aboard the US ship failed to follow proper proceedures when the terrorist boat approached.

4

Whack-a-Mole,

YOUR ON THE LIST

J. Ashcroft

:smiley:

Seriously it seems like it could be an interesting subject but perhaps one we should not get an answer to.

5

I would think it might depend on what type of boat you are in. If you are in a small boat I hope they would not shoot at you if you accidently get too close. If you are in a big 100 ft boat then I think they would treat that more seriously.

6

Ok people…I’m not looking for ways to blow up naval vessles or to inform those who would how to do it. Clearly the folks who got the USS Cole have already been down this road and implemented it. If they want to fill a ship with explosives and attempt to sail it into an aircraft carrier this thread isn’t going to tell them anything they don’t already know.

I am curious if there are international treaties or such that a navy can use to legitimately say ‘stay away or you’re a target.’ Of course might makes right. Our navy already shot down an Iranian Airbus years ago thinking it was a combatant and while there was a stink about it not much really came of it. The Russians shot down a Korean 747 and likewise got some bad press but in the end nothing came of that either. Given the attacks on the Cole and the WTC our navy might very well shoot first and ask questions later. These days I think it’d be a good policy. You don’t ‘accidentally’ sail your boat next to an aircraft carrier. If you are there you are there on purpose. Maybe you’re just stupid and think it’d be cool or fun or maybe you are a terrorist…both would get you killed.

7

Just a bit of trivia, but the Soviets got close enough to a carrier to collide with it:

From Here

8

What is it with the USS Kitty Hawk that makes it a Russian magnet? Maybe that’s unfair but two cites have now been given detailing three separate overflights of an aircraft carrier and a collision with one…all the USS Kitty Hawk. A dubious distinction if you ask me.

9

Maybe they’ve got a bullseye painted on it somewhere? :wink:

10

This doesn’t seem to be a responsible thread (NO whack-a-mole I have NOT reported you to anyone - just relax).

Still, it seems to me, having ANY knowledge that may be of a sensitive nature concerning the US Military would be that much more of an advantage to an enemy. The terrorists who attacked the USS Cole had a good idea of what they were doing. Now that plan would not work.
So let’s suppose terrorists learn that 6.5 nautical miles is now the closest distance you now may approcah a US military vessel in international waters. Don’t you think they would start thinking of ALL the ways of harming a ship from 6.5 nautical miles?
As a crude analogy, ever play cards (poker, bridge, old maid, whatever) and noticed a card with a slight crease, blemish, etc? At one point in the game doesn’t having this knowledge give you a great advantage over the other players?
Note - the 6.5 Nautical Mile figure was used just as an example. It does NOT represent any current US Navy policy.
Thank you.

11

I think you’re going to have a damn hard time finding an aircraft carrier - or any other kind of ship - at sea, unless you have good intelligence, like satellite photos or something.

IIRC, an aircraft carrier battlegroup can haul ass in excess of 30 knots - so in a 24 hour period, you’d have to be able to search an area as large as 1.6 million square miles to find 'em. Then, of course, you’ve got to catch up with them.

12

Good grief people…I’m going to give the terrorists everything they ever wanted:

Blowing-up US Aircraft Carriers 101:

  1. Load boat with as much explosives as you can fit.
  2. Drive boat next to aircraft carrier.
  3. Say prayer to Allah.
  4. Push red button.

There…now I’ve done it and doomed the US navy to the bottom of the ocean.

Get real people. Either you drive an explosive laden boat next to your target or you shoot missiles or torpedoes at it. It’s hard enough for terrorists to get their hands on Stinger missiles and keep them working much less a Silkworm, Exocet or Shipwreck not to mention the launching platform for missiles like those (seen a lot of terrorists with a destroyer or submarine?). Not a whole lot of other choices. Terrorists aren’t learning anything here.

13

Hello? Ever see “Under Siege”?? :wink:

Seriously, I think the answer, as usual, is it depends. I’m guessing it depends on what FP (Force Protection) level the ship is operating at, where they are, and what exactly is going on in the world at that moment.

My guess of an answer is this: In international waters, the carrier group will not let anything near the carrier, and will destroy anything that approaches it if it ignores the many verbal and visual warnings that it gets. Military units nowadays are awfully jumpy, and with good reason.

Carriers sailing into foreign ports will most likely have some type of agreement and relationship with the port state that provides security to the ship, and sets out the rules of engagement ahead of time. They will also rely on their own security forces based on the FP level.

Carriers sailing into US ports generally have a 500 yard security radius, that is well broadcast to the boating public, and enforced by the Coast Guard, Navy and various local and state forces. For narrow channels and such, the entire waterway may be closed during transit.

Again, all guessing on my part, but here goes. I would assume that in todays environment, if the Navy can articulate that your vessel posed a threat, and they indeed perceived you as one, then that’s all they’ll need. Also, consider the COLREGS, rules of the road. Basically, mariners all have a duty to avoid situations where a risk of collision exists. I’m guessing a carrier battle group will consider itself to be “restricted in its ability to maneuver”, and thus you will be required to get out of its way, regardless of which direction you approach from. Failing to do so, will put you in violation of international maritime law.

14

Im not an expert, but there is no “law” international or otherwise that would prevent the US or any other navy from blowing the hell out of any craft that it perceived as a threat while in international waters.
I say law with quotes because of the current argument of the enforcability of any International Law (ongoing arguement in the political sciences dept at my university. Not to be gone into here). Having said that, it would be a VERY BIG international incident for any navy to sink a non combatant craft, (which might be one reason why the Soviets dressed up their boats as fishing trawlers). All sorts of bad political repercussions would ensue.
If I were to make a wag I’d say that in circumstances such as those you stated you would be warned away as soon as you got withing missle firing distance, and if you continued to get close they would a) board your craft if its the yacht or b) have some fighters “escort” your plane elsewhere. (Im also certain that any identifying marks such as registrations numbers and such would be sent to intel who would then see why owner of said vehicles would show so much interest in their battle group. Prolly not fun for you if in a place where the US had any political influence).

15

The Russians could get close because we pretty much knew what the threat from them was, if we had fired on them or they on us there was always the threat of nuclear war or just plain bad public relations. It was a game between two superpowers.
If an ordinary Joe drives his boat out in a threqtening matter and don’t break off when ordered too he is a goner, and nobody is goint to shed tears for him

16

Ok, here’s about as much of an answer as you are going to get. My job involves conducting aerial surveillance and we occassionally come across foreign warships. Our company policy is not to approach any closer than 5NM, however a US aircraft carrier recently asked one of our aircraft to maintain a 10nm seperation.

I would suspect that 10nm should be your prudent closest approach, and you should make sure you monitor all the distress/calling frequencies ie 121.5, 243.0 and Marine CH16. If you are in an aircraft make sure your Mode C transponder is operating.

There is a NOTAM (notice to airmen) floating around at present which also states that anyone flying anywhere near the carrier should be prepared to proved details of last airport, next airport, aircraft type, persons on board, etc.

17

whack-a-mole
I agree that terrorists aren’t the brightest bulbs on this planet.

Remember Feb 26, 1993 the first WTC attack? Granted, it was tragic, but those terrorists clowns couldn’t make a decent bomb if you paid them. SO, I guess one of the terrorist “geniuses” came up with a better plan - let’s fly a really big planes into really big buildings. I do not mean to make light of either attack on the WTC, just agreeing that terrorists are NOT in any danger of becoming Nobel Prize winners.

You said that terrorists would have a hard time getting their hands on missiles, submarines, etc. Well, I remember the USA in 1979 gave Afghanistan Stinger missiles in order to repel a Russian invasion. It’s great to see how “grateful” they were. Russia invades them yet WE are the Great Satan.

Also, Afghanistan had a good opium crop growing before we invaded it in 2001. No doubt, the Koran scholars found some passage that said opium-growing is in total agreement with the Islamic religion. (ROFLMAO) The reason I bring this up is that drug money (also oil money) could be used to purchase some serious weapons. I vaguely remember a story of a drug kingpin (probably Columbian) that literally was trying to buy a submarine for drug trafficking.

Basically, I feel that any possible information these bozos could obtain would be an enormous help to them.

By the way, I am not some 150% American super-patriot. (but, I am an American nonetheless). Among other things, I have started several anti-John Wayne threads on this Message Board. (Which given his God-like status is bordering on treason).
Think I’ll start another one.

18

From snopes

I’d say it depends on who the agressor is.:smiley:

19

Colombian drug submarine.

20

Thanks Ringo for the website link.