Why China Can’t Sink U.S. Aircraft Carriers

为什么中国无法击沉美国航空母舰

China has spent decades building a layered A2/AD envelope featuring land-based DF-21D/DF-26 ballistic missiles and ship-launched YJ-21 hypersonics designed to sink U.S. aircraft carriers. However, executing a long-range strike requires an unbroken kill chain. With the unveiling of the Raytheon AIM-424 "Malice" Long-Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM), U.S. Navy F-35C and F/A-18E/F fighters can now eliminate PLA airborne early warning planes, bombers, and refueling tankers from over 280 miles away—breaking adversary targeting networks before anti-ship missiles can ever launch.

中国耗费数十年打造了一套多层反介入 / 区域拒止（A2/AD）防御体系，该体系配备陆基东风‑21D、东风‑26 弹道导弹，以及舰载鹰击‑21 高超音速导弹，目标就是打击美国航空母舰。然而，实施远程打击必须拥有完整的杀伤链。

随着雷神公司 AIM‑424 远程空对空导弹（LRAAM）亮相，如今美国海军的 F‑35C、F/A‑18E/F 战斗机可以在 280 英里以外，摧毁中方的空中预警机、轰炸机以及空中加油机。在反舰导弹发射之前，就破坏对手的目标锁定网络。

以下是印度网友的评论：

WillDasag
A ship with an overload of missiles aboard is not sinkable, yeah,okay.

难道船上多装导弹，船就打不沉了？行吧。

 

Robo_au-j9o
Like Iran has sunk 7* 230,000+dwt VLCCs in less than a week yet can't sink a 100,000t flat top , must be the paint or the flag ,IDK

伊朗不到一周就击沉7艘排水量23万吨以上的超大型油轮，却奈何不了一艘十万吨航母。难不成是船漆或者国旗buff生效了？搞不懂。

 

mgronich948
It's so difficult to sink a carrier that US carriers are 1000km from Iran.

正因为航母怕被击沉，美国航母才躲在离伊朗1000公里远的地方。

 

 

cnccarving
titanic was unsinkable
just saying

泰坦尼克当年也号称永不沉没。

supersmartan
And look where it is....plenty of room for US Navy !!!

可看看它最后结局，这教训够美国海军好好体会！

Vf1sgundam
True. And she was brand new and on her maiden voyage when she sank.

没错。而且泰坦尼克还是全新的，首航就沉了。

t74guard78
No one in the American military said carriers are unsinkable. They are extremely hard to sink. Big difference. Just saying

美军从来没说过航母绝对沉不了，只是说它极难被击沉。

hubertrobinson8825
And it didn't reach halfway to it's destination on it's maiden voyage

它首航连目的地一半路程都没走到就沉了。

1776neverfinished
The Titanic was sunk on purpose to kill the opposition to creating the Federal Reserve bank.

有阴谋论说泰坦尼克是被故意弄沉的，目的除掉反对建立美联储的人。

 

catterdz
Le porte avion c est comme un éléphant dans un couloir avec les moyens de reconnaissance d aujourd'hui satellite missile opto électronique awacs sous marin autonome a faible signature ....etc seul un idiot croit a son invulnerabilite

在如今卫星、导弹、光电探测、预警机、低噪自主潜艇一大堆侦察手段面前，航母就像走廊里一头大象，目标极其显眼。只有傻子才相信航母刀枪不入。

 

tompell3032
Yep. They said the same about battle ships before WW2. LMFAO

可不是嘛。二战之前，人们对战列舰也是这么吹捧的，哈哈。

 

Vf1sgundam
They don't need to sink it. Disabling it from being able to launch flight operations would be enough.

根本不需要把航母打沉。只要废掉它，让它没法起降飞机就够了。

 

TimG77
You don't need to sink a carrier to neutralize it; you just need to hit the deck with missiles to stop it's jets from launching.

想废掉航母，没必要击沉。导弹打穿甲板，战机没法起飞，它就失去战斗力。

 

katarinamaersksekkingstad4480
They likely haven’t sunk them because they’ve never tried to.

一直没击沉航母，大概率是压根没动手尝试过。

 

Rayxxx19741
yes and they haven t tried probably because they can t. its a fortress to call it short the rings of protection around a carrier from air and sea and with missiles full of water doesn t help. its like russian nukes that most of doesn t work. i learned something when you are confident of your weapons you don t show them up in parades.

没错，没动手，多半是没这个本事。航母就是海上堡垒，天上海上层层防护。光堆一堆导弹没用。就像俄罗斯很多核武器实际已经失效。我算是明白，真正对自家武器有底气，就不会总拿出来阅兵炫耀。

 

elfrad1714
The French maintained in April 1940 that the Maginot Line could not be breached.

1940年4月法国还一口咬定，马奇诺防线不可能被攻破。

 

aggiemullins
I don’t think finding them is an issue anymore. Iran was easily finding and targeting the carrier off its shore with the help of either Russian or Chinese satellites. They did it twice.

现在找到航母已经不算难题。靠着俄罗斯或者中国卫星，伊朗两次轻松锁定近海的美国航母。

 

andrewmcgifford8647
Absolute drone magnets. The age of the fighter jet protected carrier IS OVER.

航母就是无人机的活靶子。靠战斗机护卫航母的时代已经结束。

 

rockybalboa9133
Air Craft Carriers are just that enemies do not have to sink them only damage the runways which also usually contains the jets. Once that is done they can no longer launch or allow jets to land.

敌方不需要击沉航母。只要毁掉跑道，甲板上的战机也一并受损。航母就既不能放飞飞机，也接收不了降落战机。

 

sumojames3540
As an american, I know one thing for certain you always have to take you're enemy seriously. If they come out and publicly say something, you have to take them seriously.

我是美国人，有一点我很确定：永远要正视对手。对手公开发表的表态，必须认真看待。

 

tompell3032
Arrogant fools are their own worse enemy. Look at what happened to Germany during WW2. They had the best weapons the best army and airforce earlier in the war only to lose because of arrogance

狂妄自大，才是最大敌人。看看二战德国。战争初期武器、陆空军全是顶尖水平，最后输就输在狂妄。

 

shawhavy
It's not about whether or not the missiles can sink the ship. It's whether or not it can take out its mission‑critical systems.

重点不是导弹能不能把船打沉，而是能不能摧毁航母关键作战设备。

 

baobo67
All ships contain vast quantities of ordinance and fuel making them very vulnerable with carriers being the biggest.

军舰都会携带大量弹药和燃油，本身就很脆弱，航母体量最大，风险更高。

 

Kai‑xw6ut
imagine Pete the minister of war has publicly said that China can sink groups of carriers in 20 minutes yet I see this random video about how China can't.

美国国防部长都公开表态，中国20分钟就能打掉美国的航母战斗群，结果你们现在说中国做不到。

 

briandonovan9091
China knows where every single carrier group is, every second of every day. from dock to mid ocean. Don't fool yourself.

每分每秒，中国都掌握每一支航母编队位置。不管停靠港口，还是远在大洋。别自欺欺人。

 

patrickservice9257
It’s a ship that floats, a barrage of anti ship missles could smoke it no problem. That said, they’d have to sink a US aircraft carrier which would result in a real nasty backlash from the US

航母终归只是一艘船，反舰导弹齐射完全能重创它。但真击沉美国航母，会招来美国极其猛烈的报复。

 

grndzro777
China could have over 300 DF27 anti ship ballistic missiles at this point. If we get into a serious military conflict with China they will use their WZ9 high altitude drones to guide enough ballistic missiles to sink the carriers immediately.

目前中国列装的东风‑27反舰弹道导弹可能超过300枚。一旦爆发大规模冲突，无侦‑9高空无人机引导大批弹道导弹，就能立刻击沉航母。

 

danielbecker4365
IN WW2 first the japanese sank battle ships with small airplanes the US completed the demonstration. Now with missiles it would be the turn of the big flat tops

二战时，日本先用小飞机击沉战列舰，美国后续也印证这点。现在轮到导弹来对付大型航母。

 

rendonpeake258
Why are we so fascinated with sinking and aircraft carrier all that has to happen is hit one and make it ineffective. A floating pile of scrap

干嘛总执着于击沉航母？只要击中，废掉航母的战斗力就够了，直接变成海上漂浮废铁。

 

richarddear4294
You don't have to sink it, you just leave it a burning wreck with no deck. It's like anti personnel mines....the idea is to maim, NOT kill.

不必非得弄沉，把甲板炸烂，让其燃烧就够。就像反步兵地雷，核心目标是致残，不是致死。

 

colinlee9678
Realistically there aren't enough US carriers for China's huge arsenal of carrier killer missiles to sink!

现实来讲，美国航母太少了，都不够中国反航母导弹打的。

 

cls297
Sinking a carrier would be an environmental catastrophe. Disabling a carrier is more effective. And possible.

击沉航母会造成严重的生态灾难。废掉航母，效果更好，而且更可行。

 

PooWernKang‑j7l
Disabling one just requires a few holes in the runway. Can’t launch aircraft if they don’t hv enough runway to use.

想废掉航母，只要航母甲板上的跑道被炸出几个大洞。跑道被破坏了，战机就起飞不了。

 

ricardosy5247
Anything that floats will sink. Anything that sail needs a port.

只要能浮在水面，就有沉没可能。只要出海，就需要港口。

 

HideBuz
One hypersonic into the engine room or destroying the rudder and the carrier is a floating nuclear wasteland.

一枚高超音速导弹命中轮机舱，或是毁掉船舵，航母就成了海上核污染废船。

 

benphan6265
That what they said about the titanic.

当年人们也是说泰坦尼克号永不沉没的

 

DeepfriedDumpling‑n1o
Aircraft carriers are dinosaurs out of date, in reference to war in Iran.

参照伊朗周边局势来看，航母就是过时的老古董。

 

CarlinComm
Great points about Navy damage control. Ships, especially carriers, are ridiculously difficult to actually sink. Damage, maybe, sink? Not likely.

舰艇损管这块说得很到位。军舰尤其是航母，想要彻底沉掉难度极大。受重创有可能，直接击沉，概率很低。

 

regularsizechuy
Of our carriers, which one, You won't miss that much ...
Gerald.. for me .

我们的航母里面，如果非要损失一艘，哪艘损失了最不心疼？我选杰拉尔德号。

 

hansmoss7395
Several years ago there was a Naval exercise involved were US and foreign Naval Ships.
A Swedish submarine managed to break theough the protection and get next to the US aircraft carrier.
It was not discovered.

几年前多国海上演习，瑞典潜艇突破美军的防御，摸到美国航母身旁，全程没有被发现。

 

keithox
It's not about sinking an aircraft carrier. Damaging the deck, whether catapults, arresting systems or runway will stop or delay operations on an aircraft carrier. If aircraft cannot safely launch or land, the carrier is basically out of commission.

重点不是击沉航母。只要打坏甲板、弹射器、阻拦装置或者跑道，航母就没有作战能力，就会瘫痪。战机没法安全起降，航母基本就丧失战斗力。

 

tomfrombrunswick7571
One would think that the critical thing is whether the US would move a carrier anywhere near China. If so the Ukraine war has shown surface ships are vulnerable. A carrier is of course surrounded by ships that have anti missile capability. Now as these are ships they have a finite number of protective missiles. China can simply seek to overwhelm the defensive capability by launching numbers of drones and missiles to overwhelm the defense.
Of course this does not work if the US carriers are in home port. However if the carriers are a long way away from China they lose their offensive capability anyway

关键要看美国敢不敢把航母开到中国附近。俄乌冲突已经证明水面舰艇生存能力薄弱。航母虽然配属带反导能力护航舰，但护航舰携带防空导弹数量有限。中国可以大批量发射无人机、导弹，压垮防御系统。

当然，航母停靠本土港口这套就不起作用。可航母离中国太远，它本身进攻能力也就微乎其微

 

stanpotter8247
Iran has hit the US carriers with drones. They are not the fortresses the USA believes them to be.

伊朗已经用无人机袭扰过美国航母。它并不是美国想象中坚不可摧的堡垒。

 

true3d
First, break it in half, then let it sink. It demonstrated plenty of times. A torpedo explodes under a ship do the job. It is a matter of size

先把舰体炸断，自然就沉了。实战案例数不胜数。鱼雷在船底爆炸就能做到，就看爆炸威力够不够。