tanlixiang28776
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2011
- Messages
- 3,948
- Reaction score
- 0
So this means, USA has 9 years to attack China, otherwise its game over for them?
Why? Both would have missile defenses so its no game over for both.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So this means, USA has 9 years to attack China, otherwise its game over for them?
Why? Both would have missile defenses so its no game over for both.
Absolutely not. In the event of a full scale nuclear war, everybody still dies. However ABM systems are very effective against smaller states with nuclear ambitions (Iran, North Korea ect) to destroy any loose rocket.So this means, USA has 9 years to attack China, otherwise its game over for them?
Absolutely not. In the event of a full scale nuclear war, everybody still dies. However ABM systems are very effective against smaller states with nuclear ambitions (Iran, North Korea ect) to destroy any loose rocket.
The Chinese ABM system is only useful against countries like Iran, India and North Korea. It would be useless against the US or Russian missile stockpile.
The Chinese ABM system is only useful against countries like Iran, India and North Korea. It would be useless against the US or Russian missile stockpile.
The American ABM system is only useful against countries like Iran, India and North Korea. It would be useless against Russia or China missile stockpile.
The Russian ABM system is only useful against countries like Iran, India and North Korea. It would be useless against America or China missile stockpile.
Not true. China has the KT series: KT-1, KT-409, KT-2, KT-3, etc, missiles that are designed to shoot down ballistic missiles and satellites.
Midcourse interception tests are in fact anti ballistic missile tests; the Chinese one in 2010 destroyed a ballistic missile in its midcourse stage.
---------- Post added at 12:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:18 PM ----------
Or the Chinese KT series.
China dont have any ABM system deployed. They performed one artifical test that is useless in real world conditions. China never did a single succesful interception of ballistic missle in terminal phase and dont have such capability. And this is the basic technology you need for real working ABM system. Midcourse interception is not reliable and works only against few missles that follow some specific trajectory and meet some additional criteria.
Yes, they do. The HQ-9/10/15/18 all possess terminal interception capabilities. The HQ-9 is deployed aboard the Type 052C destroyers.
The KT missiles were tested in 2010, and according to NASA recordings of impacts outside of the atmosphere, the KT missile destroyed a ballistic missile during its midcourse stage. That is called a test.
China has been testing terminal interception since the 1970s. They had the FJ series of ABMs and five out of six tests succeeded.
Midcourse interception, on the contrary, is much easier and effective than terminal interception because (1) the enemy missile is at its lowest velocity at this stage, (2) the enemy missile is unlikely to make any evasive maneuvers at this stage, and (3) this stage is the longest part of the missile's flight.
Terminal interception would be very difficult because the enemy might employ MaRVs (which the pre calculated interception points would not work), the short time available (30 seconds for an ICBM), and the extremely high speed (in this stage the ABM must hit the warhead in order to destroy it).
China and the US are the only countries that have tested midcourse interception.
China and the US are the only countries that have tested midcourse interception.
USA will suffer way more lives and financially to attack China, when they have a missile defence after 2020
Nor S-300 nor its copy HQ-9 have true ABM capabilities. They cannt operate at high altitute and work only against some most primitive ballistic missles. These systems are not designed for ABM purposes and comparing that to real ABM is laughable. S-300 maximum altitude - 30km, real russian exoatmospheric ABM missle SH-11 Gorgon can operate at altitude of 350km. See the difference? Thats why Russia developing S-500 that will have true ABM capabilities. Chinese FJ series is the same story - they had the same subpar pseudo ABM capability like S-300 and similar systems. China up to this day still not able to create real terminal phase ABM system like THAAD or SH-11 Gorgon or SH-08 Gazelle thats why only two countries in the world have working ABM systems at the moment - US and Russia.
And about midcourse interception. It will be useless if your missle will not be able to reach enemy missle before it will enter terminal phase. Just a slight maneuver of enemy missle and your interception is doomed because you will have to perfome much more extreme maneuvers and it will be really impossible. Thats why unreliable midcouse interception is just used as optional addition to real terminal phase ABM and not as replacement.
Now Russians can only talk about military base on imagination, not base on facts. Because they don't have. Poor Russian.