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

[damm1t]

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

You say so? But using a satellite as a weapon is serious...

It was proposed to the UN by Russia and China themselves because they both know if US decides to militarise the space no one even match them since US centuries ahead at space tech than whole world combined. That's why US voted againts.

Wiki says ;

--------------------------------------------------------

....The Space Preservation Treaty was a proposed 2006 UN General Assembly resolution against all space weapons. Only the United States of America voted against the treaty, with Israel abstaining.

In February 2008, China and Russia together submitted a draft to the UN known as the Treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT). The US opposed the draft treaty due to security concerns over its space assets despite the treaty explicitly affirming a State's inherent right of self-defence. On December 4, 2014, the General Assembly of the UN passed two resolutions on preventing an arms race in outer space.

The first resolution, Prevention of an arms race in outer space, "call on all States, in particular those with major space capabilities, to contribute actively to the peaceful use of outer space, prevent an arms race there, and refrain from actions contrary to that objective." There were 178 countries that voted in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (Israel, United States).....

 

[gambit]

Maybe derease the payload and use more effective explosives?

Yes, a new missile.

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

In other words, you cannot support this statement...

That laser gun can only hit cruise missile (< mach 2) at best.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/meet-the...er-killer-missile.445091/page-3#ixzz4IAiS70uQ

...At all, can you ?

You have just essentially declare a law of nature, that a laser can hit only a cruise missile that travels less than Mach 2.

Please show us how not.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

You say so? But using a satellite as a weapon is serious...

It was proposed to the UN by Russia and China themselves because they both know if US decides to militarise the space no one even match them since US centuries ahead at space tech than whole world combined. That's why US voted againts.

lol, the first artificial satellite was made in 60 years ago, so centuries ahead?

Try harder next time.

 

[antonius123]

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.

You know how ballistic missile work right?
All you have to do is locate your target and direct the missile to it, and for ASBM let the satellite keep the terminal on track to the target. It doesnt need the capabiliity to recognize the shape of the carriers or Guam.

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.

So you mean once China ballistic missile flying headed to Guam, USA will simply put the knob then duaar the retaliating nuclear missile directly launched to China and USA doesnt need to wait?

 

[damm1t]

lol, the first artificial satellite was made in 60 years ago, so centuries ahead?
Try harder next time.

It's just an expression buddy.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

It's just an expression buddy.

Obviously they are not, stop overrating the US, since they don't possess the Martian technology.

 

[gambit]

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

The currently accepted context of 'weaponization of space' mean you cannot orbit a long term weapon in space.

Technically speaking, if an astronaut sneaked a pistol into the ISS, he effectively 'weaponized' the ISS. It could be debated that since the pistol is not an integral component of the ISS -- an add-on feature -- the ISS cannot be considered to be a 'war machine'. But the counter argument is that stationing a platoon of 'space marines' would make the ISS a 'war machine' even though the humans are not integral components of the ISS. So there are a lot of gray areas when it comes to what constitutes the 'weaponization of space'.

 

[antonius123]

Yes, a new missile.


In other words, you cannot support this statement...

...At all, can you ?

You have just essentially declare a law of nature, that a laser can hit only a cruise missile that travels less than Mach 2.

Please show us how not.

This, has shown you have no clue on the topic. Sorry.

 

[jhungary]

Lols. You dont know how ballistic missile work?
All you have to do is locate your target and direct the missile to it, and for ASBM let the satellite keep the terminal on track to the target. It doesnt need the capabiliity to recognize the shape of the carriers or Guam.

I know how ballistic missile works, but you don't know how satellite guidance work.

I have explained it to you a thousand time, you don't just punch a coordinate and you expect the missile to just fly there.

You do know the meaning of the word "Terminal Guidance" right?

So you mean once China ballistic missile flying headed to Guam, USA will simply put the knob then duaar the retaliating nuclear missile directly launched to China and USA doesnt need to wait?

Yes, that's a standard protocol for someone launching a ballistic missile over a US target.

 

[gambit]

Obviously they are not, stop overrating the US, since they don't possess the Martian technology.

No, we do not. We just possess human technology, but better than expected.

 

[antonius123]

I know how ballistic missile works, but you don't know how satellite guidance work.

I have explained it to you a thousand time, you don't just punch a coordinate and you expect the missile to just fly there.

You do know the meaning of the word "Terminal Guidance" right?

Who said it just simple as as just punch coordinate?

But why according to you satellite need to recognize which cargo which carrier in order the balistic missile keep on track to the target?

 

[jhungary]

Who said it just simple as as just punch coordinate?

But why according to you satellite need to recognize which cargo which carrier in order the balistic missile keep on track to the target?

You do know if target information is not continuously update, any satellite and radar will lose track of any target.

Do explain to me how you can

1.) put in the initial coordinate of your target (or target pegging)
2.) update where they are during the course of flight

If you cannot recognize your target at any time?

You do know the target do move, right? You are talking about an aircraft carrier, it move at a speed of 30+ knots

 

[antonius123]

You do know if target information is not continuously update, any satellite and radar will lose track of any target.

Do explain to me how you can

1.) put in the initial coordinate of your target (or target pegging)
2.) update where they are during the course of flight

If you cannot recognize your target at any time?

You do know the target do move, right? You are talking about an aircraft carrier, it move at a speed of 30+ knots

I've told you thousand times about the help of synthetic aperture radar for the terminal guidance of ASBM DF21 / 26.

SAR (SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR) IS A RADAR IMAGING TECHNIQUE THAT PRODUCES HIGH RESOLUTION MAPS OF THE RADAR CROSS SECTION OF A SCENE BY PROCESSING THE COHERENT PHASE HISTORY OF THE RETURN SIGNAL OVER MULTIPLE PULSES. SAR SYNTHESIZES AN ANTENNA THE LENGTH OF WHICH IS TWICE THE DISTANCE THE SAR PLATFORM FLIES DURING ONE COHERENT DWELL; SINCE THE AZIMUTH RESOLUTION IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ANTENNA LENGTH, SAR ACHIEVES MUCH SMALLER AZIMUTH RESOLUTION THAN CONVENTIONAL RADAR PROCESSING. SAR CAN PROVIDE DATA FOR TARGETING BEFORE LAUNCH OR FOR INFLIGHT UPDATES. BETTER TARGET DATA WOULD RESULT IN BETTER BALLISTIC MISSILE POINTING AND ACCURACY. SAR DATA FOR TERMINAL POSITION FIXING CAN INCREASE MISSILE ACCURACY BY PROVIDING THE GUIDANCE COMPUTER WITH A HIGH-RESOLUTION MAP OF THE GROUND.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6870972&url=http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6870972

 

[jhungary]

I've told you thousand times about the help of synthetic aperture radar for the terminal guidance of ASBM DF21 / 26.

SAR (SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR) IS A RADAR IMAGING TECHNIQUE THAT PRODUCES HIGH RESOLUTION MAPS OF THE RADAR CROSS SECTION OF A SCENE BY PROCESSING THE COHERENT PHASE HISTORY OF THE RETURN SIGNAL OVER MULTIPLE PULSES. SAR SYNTHESIZES AN ANTENNA THE LENGTH OF WHICH IS TWICE THE DISTANCE THE SAR PLATFORM FLIES DURING ONE COHERENT DWELL; SINCE THE AZIMUTH RESOLUTION IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ANTENNA LENGTH, SAR ACHIEVES MUCH SMALLER AZIMUTH RESOLUTION THAN CONVENTIONAL RADAR PROCESSING. SAR CAN PROVIDE DATA FOR TARGETING BEFORE LAUNCH OR FOR INFLIGHT UPDATES. BETTER TARGET DATA WOULD RESULT IN BETTER BALLISTIC MISSILE POINTING AND ACCURACY. SAR DATA FOR TERMINAL POSITION FIXING CAN INCREASE MISSILE ACCURACY BY PROVIDING THE GUIDANCE COMPUTER WITH A HIGH-RESOLUTION MAP OF THE GROUND.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6870972&url=http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6870972

Keyword : RADAR CROSS SECTION

Again, how do you know the target is right to begin with? Dude, It's not something you just read or you just say, if and when you do have a chance to use radar and satellite, you will know.

Or you are saying you don't care what you are shooting at, and you shoot at all RCS contact in open oceans. Well, that's honestly, insane

 

[antonius123]

Keyword : RADAR CROSS SECTION

Again, how do you know the target is right to begin with? Dude, It's not something you just read or you just say, if and when you do have a chance to use radar and satellite, you will know.

Or you are saying you don't care what you are shooting at, and you shoot at all RCS contact in open oceans. Well, that's honestly, insane

That is the same question of how do you know the target is right to begin with, for a ballistic missile. You dont just simply shoot right?

I dont know how the algorithm works just as explained in the article as it is too technical, but the source is credible enough for simple explanation how the radar could help guide the missile.