What's new

[ATTENTION!] Official article admits DF-21(X) has ability of attacking moving target

. .
this is an essay, allegedly from China aerospace science and technology Group (the website of which never posted it) and allegedly written by a Chinese missile expert (though he wrote CEP in the wrong way and also made mistake about his colleague's name).

and we cannot rule out the possiblity as well, that the essay is misrepresented, that someone inserted something which is not from the author himself.

indeed there are also technical mistakes in the essay.

DF-21A contract is signed in Dec.1987, not 1988. Y1 and Y2 missile test failures happened in april and november 1992, not 1991.

like i said, dont wanna discuss ASBM matters, just wanna make it clear that the credibility of the essay is questionable. believe in ASBM or not, totally ur call.
 
Last edited:
.
I want the original source from 中国航天科工集团, not some second hand source.

mate, that essay might very well not from 中国航天科工集团. like i said, the website of 中国航天科工集团 never posted it.

for now, the link i posted is the very first source the essay came from.
 
.
oh...and i dont quite understand ur Guangdongnese. i dont appreciate vulgarity either.
 
.
oh...and i dont quite understand ur Guangdongnese. i dont appreciate vulgarity either.

Oh, thanks for being honest for a change, so if you don't understood cantonese, then why accuse me for "vulgarity", if imagine something out of nothing =fact, i feel sorry for you. same could apply to your "credibilty" of your opinion regarding this article.
 
.
Oh, thanks for being honest for a change, so if you don't understood cantonese, then why accuse me for "vulgarity", if imagine something out of nothing =fact, i feel sorry for you. same could apply to your "credibilty" of your opinion regarding this article.

one simple answer to ur childish question: People use Google.

and, even if i say nothing of my own opinion, the obvious mistakes are enough to make one alerted to the credibility of the essay.
 
Last edited:
.
one simple answer to ur childish question: People use Google.

Thats the reason i use local cantonese pronunciation, so that trolls like you will be lost even with the help of google translator.
Btw, just like to let you know, google translate sucks in translating Chinese, thats a well known fact. Tough luck, my friend being 愚昧無知 get you no where.
 
.
Thats the reason i use local cantonese pronunciation, so that trolls like you will be lost even with the help of google translator.
Btw, just like to let you know, google translate sucks in translating Chinese, thats a well known fact. Tough luck, my friend being 愚昧無知 get you no where.

naja, weisst du was, ich bin mit dem Thema fertig. Mit dir weiter zu reden macht mir kein Spass. Was zu glauben was nicht, es ist deine Sache. Schuldigung dass was ich geschrieben habe dir so verletzend peinlich ist. ich habe es nicht gewollt.:D
 
.
naja, weisst du was, ich bin mit dem Thema fertig. Mit dir weiter zu reden macht mir kein Spass. Was zu glauben was nicht, es ist deine Sache. Schuldigung dass was ich geschrieben habe dir so verletzend peinlich ist. ich habe es nicht gewollt.:D

See, am i right ? now you fully exposed yourself of who you are.
And heck, i smell curry.:sick:
 
. . . . . .

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom