Meet the US's answer to China's 'carrier killer' missile

[jhungary]

DF-26 can be suited as ASBM, just like DF-21, only the range is more than twice of DF21.

Nope, it doesnt work like DF-31 or any other common ballistic missile, it is terminally guided with assistance of satelite (Jianbing-5/YaoGan-1 and Jianbing-6/YaoGan-2) which offering targeting information. It doesn't need nuclear warhead to destroy a super carrier.

You don't understand my question. You launch a IRBM to a US base or US ship. You can broadcast it's intention that this is a nonnuclear ASBM, not a nuclear tipped IRBM, the problem is, would the US believe it? For the US navy, if you do launch these missile, they only know that you launch these missile, they don't know if they were nuclear or conventional warhead. The only way you will know is when they impact on their target, but do you think the US will wait for these missile to impact and bet whether or not that is a nuclear missile? Or do you think they will regard them as Nuclear tipped IRBM and launch retaliate strike in response?

Any ballistic missile you use run a risk of launching a full blown thermos nuclear war. That is one of the reason why US stick with cruise missile instead of ballistic missile, or you really do think US does not process such skill to develop such a weapon??

And you do not know anything about satellite guidance from your post, it does not work the way you describe. If you have worked with or on a satellite before, you will know Satellite cannot provide real time uplink to guide any missile, each satellite have come with a operational delay, such delay include target recognition, target tracking, and target management. That is the reason when we debrief with SATINT, we usually say this/these image is accurate as of XX:XX (Time)

 

[The SC]

You can blow US any time.

You people have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Here the relevant sentence...


This is not about going AGAINST the DF-21D, but allowing the carrier to stay BEYOND the DF-21D's reach.

You guys just have the typical knee-jerk reaction to the title, but not bothered to read the article itself and try to understand what the writer tried to say.

Ok, the effective range of the F-18 is less than 600 km, you double or triple it, it becomes at most 1800km..more likely to increase it to 1000km though, So what if China increases the range of the DF-21D to 2000kms? Hmmm, the Stigray idea is a bit stange in this refulling setting..

 

[antonius123]

You don't understand my question. You launch a IRBM to a US base or US ship. You can broadcast it's intention that this is a nonnuclear ASBM, not a nuclear tipped IRBM, the problem is, would the US believe it? For the US navy, if you do launch these missile, they only know that you launch these missile, they don't know if they were nuclear or conventional warhead. The only way you will know is when they impact on their target, but do you think the US will wait for these missile to impact and bet whether or not that is a nuclear missile? Or do you think they will regard them as Nuclear tipped IRBM and launch retaliate strike in response?

If we revisit your question in post #23, you were talking about error prone/accuracy of the missile, and the need of nuclear warhead to destroy the ships in Guam. I think my answer has addressed that well

The effect to trigger nuclear war is another issue that I will answer below

Any ballistic missile you use run a risk of launching a full blown thermos nuclear war. That is one of the reason why US stick with cruise missile instead of ballistic missile, or you really do think US does not process such skill to develop such a weapon??

And you do not know anything about satellite guidance from your post, it does not work the way you describe. If you have worked with or on a satellite before, you will know Satellite cannot provide real time uplink to guide any missile, each satellite have come with a operational delay, such delay include target recognition, target tracking, and target management. That is the reason when we debrief with SATINT, we usually say this/these image is accurate as of XX:XX (Time)

Do you believe USA will risk nuclear war which is "mutual destruction" because of seeing ballistic missile headed to Guam? or headed to USS carriers nearby China coast?

 

[jhungary]

If we revisit your question in post #23, you were talking about error prone/accuracy of the missile, and the need of nuclear warhead to destroy the ships in Guam. I think my answer has addressed that well

That's why I addressed this issue with my last comment, you assume your missile is tracked and helped with satellite, and you do not know satellite do not offer real time tracking, they do on TV, not in real life.

Do you believe USA will risk nuclear war which is "mutual destruction" because of seeing ballistic missile headed to Guam? or headed to USS carriers nearby China coast?

That's the question you need to ask the Chinese government, American here are not the one that suggest DF-26 for the Aircraft Carrier, would China risk a thermonuclear war on some foreign base and aircraft carrier? Cause if you launch those DF-26, that is what the Chinese implying, launching a nuclear missile.

 

[gambit]

Why dont you tell me why that laser could kill DF26? I am interested to hear.

This is your typical tactic. You make a claim and when challenged, you demand others disprove you.

 

[antonius123]

This is your typical tactic. You make a claim and when challenged, you demand others disprove you.

Do you want me to follow your tactic instead? LOL.

 

[gambit]

Ok, the effective range of the F-18 is less than 600 km, you double or triple it, it becomes at most 1800km..more likely to increase it to 1000km though, So what if China increases the range of the DF-21D to 2000kms? Hmmm, the Stigray idea is a bit stange in this refulling setting..

You cannot simply increase the range of a ballistic missile by adding more fuel, if that is what you are implying.

The maximum range of a BM is designed in. The missile have a fixed quantity of fuel. Every item even down to the assembly hardware like bolts and rivets must be accounted for. The flight control computer is programmed to recognize certain real time parameters thru flight and if those parameters do not match what is expected, the computer is designed to flag an error condition. If the DF-21D is deployed, making it longer range would require designing a new version, if not outright a new missile.

Do you want me to follow your tactic instead? LOL.

Yes, my tactic is I explain and support my claim.

But I will give you a clue as to why you are wrong: intensity and tracking.

 

[damm1t]

Why not? Just like the RQ-170, so the transmitted signal of the X-47B/C can also be decrypted.

What about the agreement about no weapon in space? If the satellite can be used that way makes it a kinda weapon imo.

 

[antonius123]

That's why I addressed this issue with my last comment, you assume your missile is tracked and helped with satellite, and you do not know satellite do not offer real time tracking, they do on TV, not in real life.

Well some source said the satellite will also offer: synthetic aperture radar, naval ocean surveillence system; not to mention the over horizon radar to guide the missile.

That's the question you need to ask the Chinese government, American here are not the one that suggest DF-26 for the Aircraft Carrier, would China risk a thermonuclear war on some foreign base and aircraft carrier? Cause if you launch those DF-26, that is what the Chinese implying, launching a nuclear missile.

Both China and USA dont want to risk nuclear war. But Furthermore China wont also risk their land being attacked/invaded by USA. Therefore possibility of using ASBM is there as anti access weapon; but USA wont be that reckless by launching nuclear missile to China abruptly just because of seeing a missile is headed toward Guam or carriers nearby china coast.

 

[The SC]

You cannot simply increase the range of a ballistic missile by adding more fuel, if that is what you are implying.

The maximum range of a BM is designed in. The missile have a fixed quantity of fuel. Every item even down to the assembly hardware like bolts and rivets must be accounted for. The flight control computer is programmed to recognize certain real time parameters thru flight and if those parameters do not match what is expected, the computer is designed to flag an error condition. If the DF-21D is deployed, making it longer range would require designing a new version, if not outright a new missile.


Yes, my tactic is I explain and support my claim.

But I will give you a clue as to why you are wrong: intensity and tracking.

Maybe derease the payload and use more effective explosives?

 

[Place Of Space]

What about the agreement about no weapon in space? If the satellite can be used that way makes it a kinda weapon imo.

haaah, whatever, firstly you need to have the ability. How to use it or whether to use it, that's other consideration.

 

[antonius123]

Yes, my tactic is I explain and support my claim.

But I will give you a clue as to why you are wrong: intensity and tracking.

Could you stop this garbage and low value post that would derail this thread? Please stick to the topic.

@antonius123
Or is it you feel more chinese citizen than indonesian one that make you so hostile to your own country

I don't understand from where you judge me being hostile to my own country. Like I said: i'd rather tell the plain truth instead of being hypocrite.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

What about the agreement about no weapon in space? If the satellite can be used that way makes it a kinda weapon imo.

Mostly lip service, no one will genuinely believe that the space should be weaponization free if the technology is available.

 

[antonius123]

You cannot simply increase the range of a ballistic missile by adding more fuel, if that is what you are implying.

The maximum range of a BM is designed in. The missile have a fixed quantity of fuel. Every item even down to the assembly hardware like bolts and rivets must be accounted for. The flight control computer is programmed to recognize certain real time parameters thru flight and if those parameters do not match what is expected, the computer is designed to flag an error condition. If the DF-21D is deployed, making it longer range would require designing a new version, if not outright a new missile..

The DF-26 range itself is 3000KM - 5000KM, twice of DF-21 range and beyond capability of stingray.

 

[jhungary]

Well some source said the satellite will also offer: synthetic aperture radar, naval ocean surveillence system; not to mention the over horizon radar to guide the missile.

If you ever look at a radar, you will know the radar only pick up something called "Signature" of an object, it will not tell you what it was, or even its exact position.

It could be an aircraft carrier, it could be a cargo ship, it could simply be an interference, just looking at a radar and satellite image will not tell you what it was. You need to be able to positively identifying a target before you can acquire it path, and to do that, you will need to use human input.

Look, you can recognize an aircraft carrier from afar because your brain can match the image to an actual 3-D object, so you look at something, you will instantly know what that was, a computer cannot do that, they use pixel-point comparison. For an radar, it will only know it picked up something, it will not know, nor care what it picked up.

Unless you are telling me there exist a computer which you can put in a EM signature and they will know what it was jut by analyse thes EM signature, what you said would not ever exist.

Both China and USA dont want to risk nuclear war. But Furthermore China wont also risk their land being attacked/invaded by USA. Therefore possibility of using ASBM is there as anti access weapon; but USA wont be that reckless by launching nuclear missile to China abruptly just because of seeing a missile is headed toward Guam or carriers nearby china coast.

How do you know it was a ASBM? When it's signature tell you it was an intermediate ballistic missile? Again, would China come on the Television and say this was not a nuclear missile and as the US to trust them? You cannot use the word "Trust" in war, because if you get to that point, whatever the Chinese said is not trustworthy. And in this case, US will launch a thermonuclear package.

You launch these missile, the end response will be nuclear, regardless on whether or not it was nuclear in the first place, cause to the US, they won't know.