Britain set to confront China with new aircraft carrier

[Reashot Xigwin]

First of all, you need to explain why technically Balistic ASBM like DF21 or DF26 is not feasible with current technology.

You havent explained it yet but too far playing with assumption




Why according to you China can't put IR sensor and radar onboard of DF21D warhead? if they can put it on the much smaller missile like PL-10, PL-15, etc?

Well, you obviously need to do some research/study before commenting/debating on military technology

DF21D has IR sensor on board, not solely depend on GPS.

Why according to you satellite, and OTH radar can't find the US ship location in SCS?

Alleged Satellite Images Shows U.S. Aircraft Carrier Surrounded By 7 Chinese Warships In The South China Sea
October 1, 2019 Latest News 54,498 Views



Satellite images reportedly showing the USS Ronald Reagan being flanked by several battleships in the South China Sea circulated on social media Saturday.

A Chinese Weibo social media user published a satellite image allegedly showing U.S Navy aircraft carrier the USS Ronald Reagan surrounded by at least seven other, purportedly Chinese, warships on 24 September.
https://fighterjetsworld.com/latest...hinese-warships-in-the-south-china-sea/18560/




As explained above, could not engage 30 mach missile. No defence system can take down hypersonic missile at the moment.




No, not about ballistic trajectory, it is about "real time issue" that you always brag for the missile problem to hit the target.

As asked above: explain why sidewinder, amraam, pl-15 can hit supersonic target without "real time issue"? I have answered this to you many times => "onboard sensors".

Check internet, how sidewinder have onboard sensor such as IR sensor

SBM were not meant to target moving objects. It is originally designed to be fitted with nuclear warhead to target population center or stationary targets they were never meant to be accurate in the 1st place!

To target moving objects especially naval one accurately at an extremely long range it have to be fed constant data updates to the minutes. It is not a fire & forget system like the Sidewinder. They can't be trusted not to strike at civilian ships if their sensor mistake it for military.

Posting pictures from satellite are not the same as targeting one from it. For one the ships are constantly on the move & it have to take into account the distance & times to reached it, even if it reached the fleet, Onboard sensor can be jammed by EW suite the American especially are notorious to give fake signal for the enemy to target, to add radar & CAP still makes it harder for ballistic missiles to strike an enemy ship. They are not going to just let you strike them of course & no faster speed doesn't mean anything especially up against the AEGIS system which are designed to go up against SBM.

 

[Viet]

No need to do zig zag, just change trajectory a bit from original balistic trajectory.

SM-6 need to take down the warhead when it is still in the space, the distance from there to the target is relatively still large for this kind of maneuver.

It seems you are smart while other are not. Ok you can start the war. Nobody can intercept chinese missiles.

 

[ToddBing]

 

[antonius123]

SBM were not meant to target moving objects. It is originally designed to be fitted with nuclear warhead to target population center or stationary targets they were never meant to be accurate in the 1st place!

Cmon ....ASBM from the name "Anti Ship Balistic Missile", of course to target moving ship!
DF21 is designed to hit stationary target (land), while DF21D is designed to hit ship (moving target).
DF21 is ICBM, DF21D is ASBM.

To target moving objects especially naval one accurately at an extremely long range it have to be fed constant data updates to the minutes. It is not a fire & forget system like the Sidewinder. They can't be trusted not to strike at civilian ships if their sensor mistake it for military.

Not really. Accuracy will be needed at the final stage; during initial stage it will work like ICBM (ballistic), high accuracy is not needed.

As already explained above many times.
Accuracy will be handled by onboard sensor at final/terminal phase.
Directing the missile toward ship during initial phase and midcourse will be handled by OTH radar and Satellites.

Which part that you dont understand?

Posting pictures from satellite are not the same as targeting one from it. For one the ships are constantly on the move & it have to take into account the distance & times to reached it, even if it reached the fleet, Onboard sensor can be jammed by EW suite the American especially are notorious to give fake signal for the enemy to target, to add radar & CAP still makes it harder for ballistic missiles to strike an enemy ship.

So? The OTH radar or satellite can handle updating the ASBM the position of the targeted ship. Not a big issue.

Yes sensor can be jammed, but it doesnt guarantee. We dont know kind of radar China put into DF21D warhead, if it is AESA then you have very little chance to jammed it. Besides IR sensor is not easy to be jammed.

They are not going to just let you strike them of course & no faster speed doesn't mean anything especially up against the AEGIS system which are designed to go up against SBM.

Wrong! AEGIS is not designed to kill ASBM like DF-21D. You play too much misleading assumption.

A threat representative Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) target for operational open-air testing has become an immediate test resource need. China is fielding the DF-21D ASBM, which threatens U.S. and allied surface warships in the Western Pacific. While the Missile Defense Agency has exo-atmospheric targets in development, no program currently exists for an endo-atmospheric target. The endo-atmospheric ASBM target is the Navy’s responsibility, but it is not currently budgeted. The Missile Defense Agency estimates the non-recurring expense to develop the exo-atmospheric target was $30 million with each target costing an additional $30 million; the endo-atmospheric target will be more expensive to produce according to missile defense analysts. Numerous Navy acquisition programs will require an ASBM surrogate in the coming years, although a limited number of targets (3-5) may be sufficient to validate analytical models
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis...ulating_endo-atmospheric_flight_of_DF-21_ASBM

The only way available for US to handle DF-21D is by electronics counter measure, but still it is not a guarantee.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

The UK is only doing an exercise not occupying some territory or laying claim to it.

Sensationalist article, nothing more.

 

[ToddBing]

The UK is only doing an exercise not occupying some territory or laying claim to it.

Sensationalist article, nothing more.

Still in their "the empire on which the sun never sets" dreams...
PLAN‘s 054A acrossing the English Channel.

 

[Dalit]

LOL These Brits are going to be buried deeper than the Titanic.

 

[Michael Corleone]

How does it matter when they can still be taken out by Super & Hypersonic missiles per your logic!!

Also, China's Type 003 is supposed to have a displacement of 85k tonnes while Type 004 is expected to be >100k tonnes, nuclear powered with a total of 70-100 helos and aircrafts. So, you are wrong...daddy has already invested in Super Carriers

While China can outbuild the UK navy now, Royal Navy can’t do the same.

 

[Zapper]

While China can outbuild the UK navy now, Royal Navy can’t do the same.

But you just said China isn't investing in supercarriers and now you're contradicting your own statements...try sticking to one narrative

 

[Michael Corleone]

But you just said China isn't investing in supercarriers and now you're contradicting your own statements...try sticking to one narrative

Chinese carriers that are being built aren’t super carriers...
As for UK and it’s operations... they’ll be operating in foreign water and won’t have The anti ship BM that China will throwing at them. So try sharpen up your wits before engaging in stupid arguments

 

[truthseeker2010]

Lol on one hand uk needs china's investment and on the other this.

I would want that all 14 flat tops of nato and 2 of japs in the SCS and settle this ones and for all. Does the west has the guts to take on the dragon. I highly doubt that this digital generation has even seen blood spilling from human, they can at best fight with mouth bcoz with hand they can only do.....

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Cmon ....ASBM from the name "Anti Ship Balistic Missile", of course to target moving ship!
DF21 is designed to hit stationary target (land), while DF21D is designed to hit ship (moving target).
DF21 is ICBM, DF21D is ASBM.




Not really. Accuracy will be needed at the final stage; during initial stage it will work like ICBM (ballistic), high accuracy is not needed.

As already explained above many times.
Accuracy will be handled by onboard sensor at final/terminal phase.
Directing the missile toward ship during initial phase and midcourse will be handled by OTH radar and Satellites.

Which part that you dont understand?




So? The OTH radar or satellite can handle updating the ASBM the position of the targeted ship. Not a big issue.

Yes sensor can be jammed, but it doesnt guarantee. We dont know kind of radar China put into DF21D warhead, if it is AESA then you have very little chance to jammed it. Besides IR sensor is not easy to be jammed.




Wrong! AEGIS is not designed to kill ASBM like DF-21D. You play too much misleading assumption.

A threat representative Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) target for operational open-air testing has become an immediate test resource need. China is fielding the DF-21D ASBM, which threatens U.S. and allied surface warships in the Western Pacific. While the Missile Defense Agency has exo-atmospheric targets in development, no program currently exists for an endo-atmospheric target. The endo-atmospheric ASBM target is the Navy’s responsibility, but it is not currently budgeted. The Missile Defense Agency estimates the non-recurring expense to develop the exo-atmospheric target was $30 million with each target costing an additional $30 million; the endo-atmospheric target will be more expensive to produce according to missile defense analysts. Numerous Navy acquisition programs will require an ASBM surrogate in the coming years, although a limited number of targets (3-5) may be sufficient to validate analytical models
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis...ulating_endo-atmospheric_flight_of_DF-21_ASBM

The only way available for US to handle DF-21D is by electronics counter measure, but still it is not a guarantee.

On the final stage yes but the ship would be long gone before or not in optimum position by then if not fed steady streams of data Also DF used an ARH not AESA & IR doesn't work in terminal velocity.

Why do you think NATO doesn't do coastal ballistic missiles if they're really that effective? Conventional wisdom state that the most effective way to take out a ship is to close in with cruise missiles. Not chuckling ballistic missiles over 1000k away.

China's spec ain't exactly cutting edge. It's not even close to American technology let alone European one. Slightly above the Russian but that's not even a high praise.

It will be jammed & or intercepted by the USN or even the RN because that is what their navy are trained & equipped to do. You are operating on the assumption that it will hit despite the enemy overwhelming technological advantages over china.

Even you say it's possible for the enemy navy to jam DF missiles.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

On the final stage yes but the ship would be long gone before or not in optimum position by then if not fed steady streams of data Also DF used an ARH not AESA & IR doesn't work in terminal velocity.

Why do you think NATO doesn't do coastal ballistic missiles if they're really that effective? Conventional wisdom state that the most effective way to take out a ship is to close in with cruise missiles. Not chuckling ballistic missiles over 1000k away.

China's spec ain't exactly cutting edge. It's not even close to American technology let alone European one. Slightly above the Russian but that's not even a high praise.

It will be jammed & or intercepted by the USN or even the RN because that is what their navy are trained & equipped to do. You are operating on the assumption that it will hit despite the enemy overwhelming technological advantages over china.

Even you say it's possible for the enemy navy to jam DF missiles.

Do you even know how jamming works? First you need to know how the missile is guided, then you can talk about jamming.

 

[KAL-EL]

It seems you are smart while other are not. Ok you can start the war. Nobody can intercept chinese missiles.

I mean yeah, if it’s so easy and effortless they should try it immediately. Launch the first strike.

I mean the US won’t retaliate right? It will basically just be a one-way war

 

[Song Hong]

Not a single UK soldier was willing to sacrifice himself to prevent HK handover in 1997.

Not a single one.