Judging from the eighth round of airstrikes carried out by the United States and Britain against the Houthis in Yemen some time ago, we can basically conclude that the Americans are preparing to normalize the airstrikes in Yemen. And it is precisely because the US military launches ship-based missiles with high frequency that it has exposed one of its fatal flaws.
What flaws?
The U.S. Navy does not have the ability to resupply ammunition at sea, and when the ammunition on the ** is empty, it must be driven back to the base for reloading.
What needs to be explained here is that modern ** loading ammunition is not as simple as many people imagine, as long as the ammunition is transported through the supply ship and then moved to the ** that needs to be replenished. In fact, the current ** basically uses vertical launch devices. After emptying the missile in the vertical launch device, it is necessary to use a professional lifting device to accurately place the missile into the launch unit in a vertical way. Replenishment at sea is not as good as port operations, which will be affected by weather, sea conditions and other factors. Once it is crooked, it is very likely that the launch system and the missile will be damaged, and the fun will be great.
Then the question arises again, can the US military, which has the hegemony of the seas, really not be able to do it?
The answer is that it used to be, but now the Americans have lost this critical capability.
How did you lose it?
As a matter of fact, the Americans, who have been able to exert power at sea for decades, have long solved the problem of replenishing ammunition at sea in order to ensure the continuity of operations. For example, a long time ago, the U.S. Navy developed an ammunition reloading device called the "MK41 Vertical Launch System". It is very easy to use, but the defects are not small, the biggest problem is that the volume of the device is too large, and it will occupy three launch units when assembled on the **.
And less firing units means less firepower. As a result, after the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, the Americans, who were in a state of "invincibility in the world," thought that they had sufficient firepower and that it would be difficult for them to run out of ship-borne vertical ammunition, so they banned this device that "lacked practical value."
And when the Americans found out that the level of modernization of the PLA was developing rapidly, they began to feel that something was wrong, and even began to have chills down their spine.
What's wrong? Last year, U.S. Secretary of the Navy Carlos del Toro said that in the event of a conflict between the U.S. Navy and China, both sides only need.
After one or two rounds of fighting, then the US warships will easily empty all the missiles, and then have to withdraw from the battle to resupply. But the problem is that there are not only a few ports far away from the mainland of the United States that have the ability to resupply **, but they are basically within the long-range fire coverage of the PLA, and they can be easily destroyed.
What does this mean?
That is, the United States, which has run out of ammunition, must spend at least half a month to travel back and forth to Hawaii or the mainland of the United States before it can return to fighting. However, the PLA does not have such concerns, because the PLA is at the doorstep and can go back to supply at any time.
So the Americans, after realizing the seriousness of the problem, did they want to go over and solve it? Absolutely.
It's just that, as the saying goes, the ideal is very plump, and the reality is very skinny. Like many other fields, the Americans, who are seriously "hollowed out of industry", can no longer afford to pick up the things they once lost. The same is true for the US military, which wants to once again realize the capability of "reloading the hair system at sea." In the last year alone, the United States has carried out many related developments and experiments, but this flaw has not yet been resolved.
To be honest, it seems to me that even if the US military regains this capability, it will not help. With the current strength of the People's Liberation Army, if there is a real fight, it doesn't matter what kind of warship your US military is, it has come to our doorstep, and you still want to go back to replenish supplies? Daydreaming belongs to yes.
All in all, in this Red Sea game, the Houthis have once again brought out the weakness of the United States. And for our PLA, there is another opportunity to "cross the river by touching the eagle sauce". After all, the current PLA is striding towards the deep blue, and having this "sea replenishment ammunition capability" is indeed a good idea.
In conclusion, I just want to say that I would like to thank the American "old iron" for sending us valuable experience again.