Top 10 future weapons of CHINA

[lordwedggie]

[/COLOR]
Does not matter if you read it or not. Others will and in their objective minds, you will be that laughing stock. They will see my explanation as logical and technically valid based upon certain principles I posted here before.[/QUOTE]

I can't resist anymore. I have been reading here for two years and clearly remember you did indeed say the J-20 couldn't fly because of some software issue non-sense, and then refused to admit your mistake after the J-20 flew in a couple of days. The laughing stock had been and is still, you, Gambit.
Martian2 please keep up your gallant effort fending off these trolls. Because for a less knowledgeable readers such as myself, Gambit there did get me worried that the J-20 could not fly at the time. I have learned much from you over the years reading your debate against Gambit and the other, lesser trolls.

 

[DrSomnath999]

I can't resist anymore. I have been reading here for two years and clearly remember you did indeed say the J-20 couldn't fly because of some software issue non-sense, and then refused to admit your mistake after the J-20 flew in a couple of days. The laughing stock had been and is still, you, Gambit.
Martian2 please keep up your gallant effort fending off these trolls. Because for a less knowledgeable readers such as myself, Gambit there did get me worried that the J-20 could not fly at the time. I have learned much from you over the years reading your debate against Gambit and the other, lesser trolls.

U have been reading from 2 & half years ,but now u have got the time to be a member here just to tell this

 

[Martian2]

Does not matter if you read it or not. Others will and in their objective minds, you will be that laughing stock. They will see my explanation as logical and technically valid based upon certain principles I posted here before.

I can't resist anymore. I have been reading here for two years and clearly remember you did indeed say the J-20 couldn't fly because of some software issue non-sense, and then refused to admit your mistake after the J-20 flew in a couple of days. The laughing stock had been and is still, you, Gambit.
Martian2 please keep up your gallant effort fending off these trolls. Because for a less knowledgeable readers such as myself, Gambit there did get me worried that the J-20 could not fly at the time. I have learned much from you over the years reading your debate against Gambit and the other, lesser trolls.

Thank you for the vote of confidence. I believe a multiple-warhead DF-21D ASBM is one of the "top ten future weapons of China" (see below). Please take a look.

----------

Multiple-warhead DF-21D ASBM

An efficient method to attack an aircraft carrier or a destroyer is to use an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) with multiple MARV (maneuverable re-entry vehicle) warheads.

With multiple MARV warheads, a ballistic missile will have reduced range. This can be fixed by building a larger missile to accommodate the larger number of warheads.

My original proposal was to use a simultaneous attack on each capital ship with ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, torpedoes, stealth cruise missiles if available, and mix of subsonic (with supersonic terminal phase if available) and supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles.

I want to elaborate on the anti-ship ballistic missile discussion. It is more efficient and effective to arm each ASBM with multiple MARVs. Let's say each DF-21D ASBM is armed with three MARVs. Firing 25 ASBMs at each destroyer within a five-minute window would total 75 MARV warheads or an incoming warhead every four seconds.

I had proposed launching 50 ASBMs at each aircraft carrier. That is a total of 150 MARV warheads within a five-minute window. This means an incoming warhead will attempt to strike the carrier every two seconds for five minutes non-stop.

We would have to run computer simulations, but another option is to time the arrival of all 50 ASBMs within a ten-second window by using computerized coordination. Basically, the sky will drop down on the carrier with 150 warheads in ten seconds.

With an intense ballistic missile bombardment coupled to an equally intense simultaneous cruise missile and torpedo attack, I don't think an aircraft carrier battle group will survive in Chinese waters.

Feel free to create your own attack plan, such as an initial EMP warhead to fry the carrier group's electronics and a follow-up of 150 MARV warheads in a short time-frame.

It is logical to equip Chinese DF-21D ASBMs with multiple MARV warheads by reducing the range or building a larger ballistic missile.

A MARV (maneuverable re-entry vehicle) is basically a warhead with thrusters.

Multiple warheads (MIRVs) can be placed on top of a ballistic missile. Similarly, multiple warheads with thrusters (e.g. MARVs) can be placed on top of a ballistic missile.

[Note: Thank you to Dr. Somnath999 for the composite images of China's ASBM.]

 

[lordwedggie]

​

U have been reading from 2 & half years ,but now u have got the time to be a member here just to tell this

Yep, solely to support martian2, although I've came to the conclusion that the only way to deal with the likes of you is probably just to ignore u'al

 

[sweetgrape]

U have been reading from 2 & half years ,but now u have got the time to be a member here just to tell this

Many chinese like listen and read, then do action, we don't like talking more than doing action!! we don't like you, who do less, talk more!! And in fact, in this forum, india defence forum also have much more threads than china, also many are "future" weapons that are ivory tower!!!
You can easily get the difference through comparing "chinese defence" and "indian defence", especially the content of sticky thread!

 

[lordwedggie]

Backup plan in case the carrier BG somehow survived the DF-21D attack:

UAV attack. Use a couple of stealth UAVs (darksword?) each acting as leader to control and coordinate squadrons of less expensive less smart drones, perhaps modified J-5/6/7s, as missile launching suicide bombing platforms. This in combination with normal missile attacks...

Martian, with all the current platforms such as J-20, DF-21D, UAVs, new missiles and new subs in development, when they are all in service, how close do you suppose an US carrier group would dare to venture near China?

 

[Martian2]

Backup plan in case the carrier BG somehow survived the DF-21D attack:

UAV attack. Use a couple of stealth UAVs (darksword?) each acting as leader to control and coordinate squadrons of less expensive less smart drones, perhaps modified J-5/6/7s, as missile launching suicide bombing platforms. This in combination with normal missile attacks...

Martian, with all the current platforms such as J-20, DF-21D, UAVs, new missiles and new subs in development, when they are all in service, how close do you suppose an US carrier group would dare to venture near China?

The U.S. is all bark and no bite.

Aside from words, did the U.S. support Vietnam against China? No. Vietnam receives zero military aid from the United States.

Aside from words, did the U.S. support the Philippines against China? The U.S. gave the Philippines a measly $30 million in military aid for 2012, which cannot buy a single $35 million Chinook helicopter.

Action speaks louder than words. As I see it, here's the compromise between China and the United States. You don't flatten the U.S. military bases in South Korea and Japan and we leave your transport ships alone. That's the understanding.

Regarding some 1,000-year-old Chinese islands in the South China Sea, the U.S. will cheer Vietnam and the Philippines from the sidelines. Once the shooting starts, the U.S. Navy will be a thousand miles from the war zone and nowhere to be seen.

 

[iamopenminded2]

J20 is a stolen copy of the F22.

 

[Martian2]

J20 is a stolen copy of the F22.

The J-20 follows the design principles (e.g. chine line, continuous curvature, faceting, smooth underside, etc.) of the F-22. In that sense, it does bear some resemblance to the F-22.

Due to the constraints of physics, fifth-generation stealth fighters will look similar. By the same principle of "form follows function," all rockets look similar (e.g. long fuselage, engines at bottom, fairing at the top, bullet-shaped capsule, multiple stages to minimize weight during transit, etc.).

 

[DrSomnath999]

Multiple-warhead DF-21D ASBM

It is logical to equip Chinese DF-21D ASBMs with multiple MARV warheads by reducing the range or building a larger ballistic missile.

A MARV (maneuverable re-entry vehicle) is basically a warhead with thrusters.

.

MY DEAR MARTIAN
U never forgot to give credits to those members from whom u copy the pics but why have u not given credit to that guy from
which u have got these pics

 

[Martian2]

MY DEAR MARTIAN
U never forgot to give credits to those members from whom u copy the pics but why have u not given credit to that guy from
which u have got these pics

I can't remember where I clipped it from. You made a good point. Let me go look.

 

[DrSomnath999]

​

Yep, solely to support martian2, although I've came to the conclusion that the only way to deal with the likes of you is probably just to ignore u'al

Lollz

really but ur great martian is so great he copy pasted my pics & doent even bother to give credit to me while posting those pics
check this thread from where he copied my pics
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...mos-2-hypersonic-ascm-layman-comparision.html

 

[Martian2]

Lollz

really but ur great martian is so great he copy pasted my pics & doent even bother to give credit to me while posting those pics
check this thread from where he copied my pics
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...mos-2-hypersonic-ascm-layman-comparision.html

Oh crap, I clipped them from you. :-(

Okay, let me go fix my posts and give you proper credit. It's my bad luck that it was you. I can't believe it. How embarrassing.

I had originally grabbed the pictures off of Google Images when I passed through.

Sorry about that.

 

[DrSomnath999]

Many chinese like listen and read, then do action, we don't like talking more than doing action!! we don't like you, who do less, talk more!! And in fact, in this forum, india defence forum also have much more threads than china, also many are "future" weapons that are ivory tower!!!
You can easily get the difference through comparing "chinese defence" and "indian defence", especially the content of sticky thread!

Atleast i am not a egoistical fraud like someone who pretends to be stealth specialist
& I dont give a damn whether u like me or not .GO & join chinesedefence .com & post ur hatred post about india there ,their they would appreciate ur views,not here

Many chinese like listen and read, then do action, we don't like talking more than doing action!! we don't like you, who do less, talk more!! And in fact, in this forum, india defence forum also have much more threads than china, also many are "future" weapons that are ivory tower!!!
You can easily get the difference through comparing "chinese defence" and "indian defence", especially the content of sticky thread!

Atleast i am not a egoistical fraud like someone who pretends to be stealth specialist
& I dont give a damn whether u like me or not .GO & join chinesedefence .com & post ur hatred post about india there ,their they would appreciate ur views,not here

Oh crap, I clipped them from you. :-(

Okay, let me go fix my posts and give you proper credit. It's my bad luck that it was you. I can't believe it. How embarrassing.

I had originally grabbed the pictures off of Google Images when I passed through.

hhaaa.haaa

 

[Martian2]

You could have given me a free pass. But no...you couldn't do that.

By the way, let me commend you on your excellent illustrations.

I'll be more vigilant next time to ensure there is no repeat. I did look kinda silly there.