Chinese missile could shift Pacific power balance

[Thomas]

Yes this laser has managed to destroy ballistic missiles, but ONLY IN THE BOOSTING PHASE

After the boosting phase the ICBM moves at MACH 10

Anti-ship ballistic missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is a quasiballistic missile, of medium or intermediate range, designed to hit a ship at sea. Currently, there are no ship-board defense mechanisms that can counter an ASBM. A single hit from an ASBM has the potential to cripple or outright destroy a supercarrier.


Even the US naval institute admits that they cannot stop the Dong Feng 21
Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers | U.S. Naval Institute

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.



China can also fire multiple of these, as they are dirt cheap compared to the cost of a carrier

You keep repeating the same fallacy over and over again. The naval report does not say the DF-21 can not be defended against. It says that it is harder to defend against. (as is any mirv type weapon) Which by the way all ballistic missile mirv's re-enter at hypersonic speeds.

And there are a number of Ballistic missile defense systems designed to destroy at the terminal phase currently.

Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) now undergoing advanced flight testing

The Aegis BMD nearterm Sea-Based Terminal Defense capability using the SM-2 Block IV missile - Current carrier battle groups carry hundreds of the SM-2.

The U.S. Army’s PATRIOT Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3).

To carry on with your assertion that the DF-21 can not be defended against. Is to say that all those defense systems are lies. And the tests conducted in their development were staged.

One side note to the DF-21 is not the first Ballistic missile able to do what it claims. Though designed against land targets the single warhead of Pershing missile had the same capabilities. The U.S. shelved it years ago becuase of treaty obligations with the Russians.


Ballistic Missile Defense Intercept Flight Test Record
(last updated July 1, 2010)

 

[manojb]

whats US navy testing near Ocean City, MD ??

 

[warton]

china could shift Pacific power balance ;that is after many years in the future;not now. this is the game of competition. america can not stop because of DF21 ;they just regard real general strength. china just need more time not only DF21 .catch the time ;I believe somebody will smile and the other cry

haha........

 

[Chinaownseverything]

You keep repeating the same fallacy over and over again. The naval report does not say the DF-21 can not be defended against. It says that it is harder to defend against. (as is any mirv type weapon) Which by the way all ballistic missile mirv's re-enter at hypersonic speeds.

And there are a number of Ballistic missile defense systems designed to destroy at the terminal phase currently.

Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) now undergoing advanced flight testing

The Aegis BMD nearterm Sea-Based Terminal Defense capability using the SM-2 Block IV missile - Current carrier battle groups carry hundreds of the SM-2.

The U.S. Army’s PATRIOT Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3).

To carry on with your assertion that the DF-21 can not be defended against. Is to say that all those defense systems are lies. And the tests conducted in their development were staged.

On side note to the DF-21 is not the first Ballistic missile able to do what it claims. Though designed against land targets the single warhead of Pershing missile had the same capabilities. The U.S. shelved it years ago becuase of treaty obligations with the Russians.


Ballistic Missile Defense Intercept Flight Test Record
(last updated July 1, 2010)

I think the US naval institute knows their capabilities better than a armchair general like you. Even they admit that they have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

These ballistic missile intercept test records are pointless as it doesn't state which stage the ballistic missile was in when it was destroyed. Was it destroyed during the boost? midcourse? or reentry phase?

In a real situation the ballistic missile will only be detected when its already barreling down at Mach 10 and well within the reentry phase.

 

[Thomas]

I think the US naval institute knows their capabilities better than a armchair general like you. Even they admit that they have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

These ballistic missile intercept test records are pointless as it doesn't state which stage the ballistic missile was in when it was destroyed. Was it destroyed during the boost? midcourse? or reentry phase?

In a real situation the ballistic missile will only be detected when its already barreling down at Mach 10 and well within the reentry phase.

Point out exactly where they said there is no defense against a ballistic missile attack. The fact is you can't!

you definitely have no idea what the technical aspects of each weapon system I named earlier are. Or you wouldn't speak with such ignorance. You would know those systems are designed to destroy in the terminal phase. And it does not matter if the warhead is traveling at mach 10.

Also the missile will be detected the moment it is launched.

 

[Stormweaver]

In a real situation the ballistic missile will only be detected when its already barreling down at Mach 10 and well within the reentry phase.

Umm... No. Ballistic missile launches are detected as soon as they are launched. A lot of countries bordering China have advanced space capabilities and enough recon assets in orbit to detect a ballistic launch within seconds.

Secondly, a carrier is constantly moving and by the time the missile is launched it would have moved several miles from its initial position. Also, maybe I'm wrong here, but course correction opportunities at mach 10 might be lot more difficult to achieve.

Thirdly, as Thomas pointed out a Carrier Group is protected by a hefty air defence and recon screen. Literally hundreds of SAMs, 360 radar coverage for hundreds of miles and enough orbital recon coverage.


Finally, the US defence community needs to hype up these claims of a seemingly invincible system to keep the defence budget dollars flowing.

 

[lcloo]

I am sure the Chinese are well aware of the US and its allies satellites, and as well as the capabilities of the layer defence of carrier combat group. And with their current technology level, they will have very hard time to crack the carrier group defence.


But that does not stop China from seeking ways to deter the deployment of carrier group near China, the more the appearance of a carrier near China's coast, the more the desire they will search a way to stop it.

They can't attack a carrier in a conventional means, so new weapons and tactis like DF21D, mass saturation attacks, destroying/blinding satellitesis are being developed. They will never stop as long as they fell threatened.

 

[Stormweaver]

But that does not stop China from seeking ways to deter the deployment of carrier group near China, the more the appearance of a carrier near China's coast, the more the desire they will search a way to stop it.

They can't attack a carrier in a conventional means, so new weapons and tactis like DF21D, mass saturation attacks, destroying/blinding satellitesis are being developed. They will never stop as long as they fell threatened.

Yes, the -approach- is the right one... spin offs or breakthroughs China can get through R&D in the defence sector could increase China's capabilities. What I think is that this new missile may be more of a tech demonstrator than a heavily deployed weapon. But it is a step forward in the evolution of the modern Chinese military tactics.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Point out exactly where they said there is no defense against a ballistic missile attack. The fact is you can't!

Straight from The US naval institute, and YES you can detect it during launch but the US has NOTHING fast enough to intercept at the boosting stage since the missile will be launched 3,000 KM away. Once the ICBM hits MACH 8+ its gameover

Even the US naval institute admits that they cannot stop the Dong Feng 21
Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers | U.S. Naval Institute

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Umm... No. Ballistic missile launches are detected as soon as they are launched. A lot of countries bordering China have advanced space capabilities and enough recon assets in orbit to detect a ballistic launch within seconds.

Secondly, a carrier is constantly moving and by the time the missile is launched it would have moved several miles from its initial position. Also, maybe I'm wrong here, but course correction opportunities at mach 10 might be lot more difficult to achieve.

Thirdly, as Thomas pointed out a Carrier Group is protected by a hefty air defence and recon screen. Literally hundreds of SAMs, 360 radar coverage for hundreds of miles and enough orbital recon coverage.


Finally, the US defence community needs to hype up these claims of a seemingly invincible system to keep the defence budget dollars flowing.

Patriot missile moves at MACH 5, Ballistic missile moves at mach 10

The issue with the ICBM is that it moves too fast, by the time that it is detected (after reentry) there is around 1.5 seconds before it hits.

 

[chauism]

Patriot missile moves at MACH 5, Ballistic missile moves at mach 10

The issue with the ICBM is that it moves too fast, by the time that it is detected (after reentry) there is around 1.5 seconds before it hits.

Mach 10 is the average speed of ballistic missile. Reentry vehicle reenters the Earth's atmosphere at its maximum speed, then as the RV passes through the atmosphere, atmospheric friction decelerates it to its terminal speed around Mach 1 ~ 4. Early RV even decelerates to below sonic speed for impact speed. So it is more or less the same as a typical supersonic missile for missile defense at the terminal stage, it is just the widow of interception is shorter for ballistic missiles.

 

[Thomas]

Straight from The US naval institute, and YES you can detect it during launch but the US has NOTHING fast enough to intercept at the boosting stage since the missile will be launched 3,000 KM away. Once the ICBM hits MACH 8+ its gameover

Why are you so hung up on speed? And what makes you think you know more then all the missile defense manufacturers? You are starting to make a fool of yourself trying to say black is white.

Have you actually read the Navy report? It says absolutely nothing about there being no defense against ballistic missiles. Yet you still keep saying it does.


THAAD Theatre High Altitude Area Defense - Missile System - Army Technology

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Have you actually read the Navy report? It says absolutely nothing about there being no defense against ballistic missiles.

Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers | U.S. Naval Institute

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

Why are you so hung up on speed? And what makes you think you know more then all the missile defense manufacturers? You are starting to make a fool of yourself trying to say black is white.

Have you actually read the Navy report? It says absolutely nothing about there being no defense against ballistic missiles. Yet you still keep saying it does.


THAAD Theatre High Altitude Area Defense - Missile System - Army Technology


YouTube - ‪Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense - FTM 04-1‬‎

YouTube - ‪Lockheed PAC-3 promo‬‎

Just finished watching these videos, you can't be serious.

The ballistic missile that they intercepted was a 1960's era SCUD. No modern day ballistic missile follows on a predetermined path. They have mechanisms that randomly generate pitch and yaw. The interceptor missiles cannot adjust fast enough so they miss.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

­­­­­­­­­­­­