Breaking China's DF-21D missile kill chain: US expert

[antonius123]

Am sure they are. But they subscribe to real physics, not 'Chinese physics' like the Chinese members here.

Let me remind you once again .. chinese physics is among the best, and the only one who has no clue in real physics and has been busted many times is YOU.

 

[visom]

a variety of reasons like mis-handling by the operator

there is no point in supporting your claim with crazy comparisons which aim to blindly defame made-in-China products
If vietcongs can make quality earphones, we can make them better, more affordable to the folks. That is why in the past decades, our export covers everything and everywhere. It is still growing well at this time when most economies of the world face difficulties

"Variety of reasons like mis-handling"
Don't make assumptions just save your non-existent point, it only makes you look less credible. It's a stapler, I staple with it, not bounce it like a basketball. Don't blame it on me.
"We can make better and more affordable"
Until I see a $3 earphone that is made of the finest quality from China, I'm putting your claim on the BS list.

My claims are based on what is already there, yours are based on what-if's, see the difference?

 

[Awesome]

Only one way to find out for sure!

 

[jhungary]

@ Gambit

No point arguing with someone holding something non-tested in battlefield condition.

If they think their 1 million dollars Mid-Range ballistic missile can sink our Carrier on the move, let them believe it. You are arguing with a wall here, you put your point against what he said. In the end of the day, he or they would just resort to personal insult and name calling

I'll say, show your point and move on, ignore those troll.

 

[jhungary]

technically true, but for the sake of everyone involved a reliable weapon should be defined as one that has undergone multiple successful tests in their intended operational environment, whether as part of a war exercise or a standalone test. This doesn't necessarily have to include simulated countermeasures.

At the very least the weapon should have one successful test in the intended environment under its belt, though a single successful test does not really conform to any definition of reliable.

If the DF-21D is considered a 'reliable weapon' under this definition, Then the railguns and lasers the US is developing are also considered 'reliable' weapons. Both have been tested, if not in their intended environment.

I would just say this, anyone claim their weapon is reliable is lying thru their faces.

Been to war, I saw too many "Equipment" that does not work. Tank does not work cause they overheat. The sole of your boots melted under the desert sun. Even the straw is blocked in your camelbak. IN the most desperate time, even your chocolate bar in your MRE just melted away... It's the same with every country.

If a guy come to me and say our weapon is totally reliable. I would say, would you test it on yourselves first. If not, please keep saying your stuff is "Reliable"

In reality, at war. A reliable item will only have 30-40% works. Then you can call your stuff "Reliable"

 

[araz]

you make no sense in commenting and from now on you are ignored!

My friend dont blame others for what you dont have. As to being ignored by you, Iassure you I am the least bothered about it.
Araz

 

[Developereo]

He is insulting my comments too!

You are right.

I have also informed the mods of gambit's tendency to use personal attacks and demeaning language.

Post #22 is a prime example of how HE lowered the level of discussion in this thread.

 

[gambit]

You are right.

I have also informed the mods of gambit's tendency to use personal attacks and demeaning language.

Post #22 is a prime example of how HE lowered the level of discussion in this thread.

Actually, being able to bring credible technical relevance to the discussion raised the quality of the discussion, no matter how low it was to start.

 

[gambit]

@ Gambit

No point arguing with someone holding something non-tested in battlefield condition.

If they think their 1 million dollars Mid-Range ballistic missile can sink our Carrier on the move, let them believe it. You are arguing with a wall here, you put your point against what he said. In the end of the day, he or they would just resort to personal insult and name calling

I'll say, show your point and move on, ignore those troll.

One of the more common criticism, based on ignorance, is that China succeeded where the US failed. The ignorance here is that the US could not design such a weapon because the US is bound by the Inter-mediate Nuclear Forces Treaty...

Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) is a 1987 agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union.

The treaty eliminated nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges, defined as between 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles).

...Which is based solely upon range and comprehensive to all payload types. Since China was never a signatory, China can build a nuclear ballistic missile within that range. But it is clear to all that these guys really have no interested in learning. If the US wanted, we could design and build a truly effective version faster than China can.

 

[shuttler]

You are right.

I have also informed the mods of gambit's tendency to use personal attacks and demeaning language.

Post #22 is a prime example of how HE lowered the level of discussion in this thread.

what I have found most repugnant to his ignoramus comments is the trashing of China and his trying to create a "China physics" label, equating it with poor quality. It is a reckless showing of contempt towards the advance and contributions of all Chinese physicists who have earned high regards in the world of science and many of them are still serving in some of the cutting edge labs all over the world

His comments sometimes may be rewarding to some of his readers but others may find it elementary. It is the readers choice.

 

[shuttler]

This is a description of Beidou Navigation System:

Accuracy

There will be two levels of service provided; free service to civilians and licensed service to Chinese government and military users:

The free civilian service will have a 10 meter location-tracking accuracy, will synchronize clocks with an accuracy of 10 ns, and measure speeds within 0.2 m/s.

The restricted military service will have an accuracy of 10cm. To date, this service has been granted only to the People's Liberation Army and to the Military of Pakistan. The military signal will be available to the Pakistani Armed Forces from June 2013.

The licensed service will be more accurate than the free service, can be used for communication, and will supply information about the system status to the users.

Beidou Navigation Satellite System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Safriz]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...sile-tunnels-fallout-shelters-true-false.html

 

[j20blackdragon]

The DF-21D was never a big deal to begin with because ballistic missiles are expensive.

The US Navy also has anti-ballistic missile capability in the SM-3 and SM-2 Block IV.

However, I would love to see how a Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke would stop 100 J-31s launching 800 CM-506KGs.

A single Aegis ship wouldn't have enough VLS cells to do it even if it could intercept every single glide bomb.

Oh yeah, the J-31s can also launch a barrage of LD-10 anti-radiation missiles at the SPY-1 radar.

 

[gambit]

The DF-21D was never a big deal to begin with because ballistic missiles are expensive.

The US Navy also has anti-ballistic missile capability in the SM-3 and SM-2 Block IV.

However, I would love to see how a Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke would stop 100 J-31s launching 800 CM-506KGs.

A single Aegis ship wouldn't have enough VLS cells to do it even if it could intercept every single glide bomb.

Not stop, but seduce/distract. Assume an AWACS overhead to alert the ship of this incoming wave of Chinese CM. The ship would then project an EM wall and an IR blanket, each covering hundreds or even thousands of km/sq, well before any CM could achieve sensor lock.

Finally...One hundred fighters and nearly one thousand CMs just for one ship? THAT is a laugh, assuming China can wield 100 J-31s in the first place.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Finally...One hundred fighters and nearly one thousand CMs just for one ship? THAT is a laugh, assuming China can wield 100 J-31s in the first place.

No, not one thousand cruise missiles. One thousand glide bombs.

Find out the unit cost of the SDB.

An Arleigh Burke is well over $1 billion.