China's vast fleet is tipping the balance in the Pacific

[LeGenD]

Naval experts have shown in the past concern about a carrier group's defenses against ASBM, hinting there are no current defenses.

FYI

[1] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...ely-versatile-sm-6-missile-keeps-scoring-hits

SM-6 = terminal phase defense

[2] https://www.janes.com/article/85184...aytheon-perform-intercept-with-sm-3-block-iia

SM-3 = Midcourse phase defense

Example: https://www.dvidshub.net/video/647352/fti-03

And softkill measures also exist to confuse radar-guided and/or infrared-guided missiles.

Only Arleigh Burke class destroyers have these capabilities.

 

[zectech]

The jamming devises is why I have been stating to make the terminal phase in a faraday cage, which would lose connection with sats and make them less accurate. China would need 500 of them in faraday cages. They would go radar silent, and frequency silent. Russia is advanced in anti-jamming devises, so China should take notes.

The jamming to destroy missiles are not just for ballistic ones, the smaller anti-ship would also be vulnerable. 10% of any nation's missiles need to be jam proof, meaning they hit their target, with no chance of interference.

true on this:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...ing-make-chinas-carrier-killer-missiles-18766

Why I have been stating China needs 10K on stock of them to overwhelm a naval attack of several carrier groups.

If China looses the golden eye battle of sats, ASBMs become BMs until sats are back online.

 

[zectech]

Unless a sub could stay 40km away report the movement and location of a carrier group, launcher links up with information from a sub and destroy a carrier group with ASBMs.

 

[LeGenD]

I was referring to Naval defenses on the ship, the jamming devises is why I have been stating to make the terminal phase in a faraday cage, which would lose connection with sats and make them less accurate. China would need 500 of them in faraday cages. They would go radar silent, and frequency silent. Russia is advanced in anti-jamming devises, so China should take notes.

The jamming to destroy missiles are not just for ballistic ones, the smaller anti-ship would also be vulnerable. 10% of any nation's missiles need to be jam proof, meaning they hit their target, with no chance of interference.

Mk-41 VLS of the Arleigh Burke class destroyer for reference. SM-6 and SM-3 are designed to fit in.

SM-6 = anti-ship; anti-aircraft; anti-ASBM (Terminal phase)

Notable test: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...ing-make-chinas-carrier-killer-missiles-18766

SM-3 = anti-ASBM (Midcourse phase); anti-satellite

DF-21D and DF-26 ASBM are mounted on TEL. An example below.

Notable test: https://www.businessinsider.com/chi...le-test-proves-df-21d-lives-up-to-name-2013-1

American spaceborne and airborne surveillance assets can not only notice movements of TEL but alert USN to ballistic missile launch events on a moment's notice.

 

[Han Patriot]

ASBM are not suitable for striking at fast moving targets. Every test that I am aware of involves a 'stationary target'. ASBM is PsyOps in large part.

Secondly, USN is well-equipped to handle all types of contingencies in the seas at present. They can shoot down satellites as well (google Operation Burn Frost). In fact, US have stationed some satellite-killers in the space.

It's just a matter of testing and refinement, And you think China doesn't have sat killers? Beidou was tested to mm accuracy, higher than the decades old GPS.