What's new

Yuanwang 4 Sunk by Carrier killer missle DF21 in One test?

Cute. Racist to boot. Way to stir that "evil whitey" pot. :tdown:

Why not address the test, or the system, instead?

Warhead would have to rely on kinetic energy, and/or chemical explosives. Of the two, the former is more important, as there simply isn't enough room for a devastating bomb blast. And the shell of the RV would necessarily have to be incredibly thick hardened steel to first penetrate, and then detonate, hence KE is the more probable tool.

The thing about KE penetrators at high mach - they tend to punch relatively clean holes. There is a lot of void space in a carrier. The penetrator could conceivably punch right through the whole ship, but a hole a foot or two across isn't going to sink it. It might cut critical systems if it gets lucky, or it might simply be an annoying hole for damage control parties to deal with.

If there is an explosive device within the missile to break it apart just before impact, the shrapnel will continue traveling at the same speed due to momentum conservation, but cover a larger area due to fragmentation. However, steel is extremely tough, deforms readily and needs to be thick to resist temperature gradients. This is why I believe the DF-21 will not utilize thick steel as the heat shield, but rather heat absorbing ceramic bricks on top of a thin steel/titanium shell. Ceramics are brittle due to microscopic cracks rapidly and spontaneously propagating due to their ionic structures, but they're extremely resistant to heat and friction. A small explosive device would be more than enough to completely shatter the heat shield and turn it into a numerous fragments. A DF-21 that explodes into hundreds of 100 cm^2 ceramic penetrators (which also tend to be self sharpening) would easily create a huge area of holes in the aircraft carrier, and if even 1 hits the fuel storage, the kinetic energy alone may be enough to ignite it.
 
.
1295394095.jpg
 
.
The kinetic penetrators hitting a carrier will have a small entry hole but may have a much larger exit hole similar to what bullets can do to flesh. They could also design a larger version of the dum dum round equivalents.
 
.
Correct, but the carrier is a lot more harder than the earth. And I'm curious how planes land or take off on a runway with a hole.
Nooo...The reason why we have a crater is because the Earth itself offers sufficient resistance to the meteor's impact force. If the DF-21's warhead is solid and its speed is fast enough, it will punch holes all the way through the ship.
 
.
I think the DF-21 reentry vehicle has room to be a bit bigger, the ICBM you show is American (better warhead miniaturization) and a MIRV, the DF-21 design is a single warhead missile and started in the 60's and given the size of Chinese warheads at the time, they most likely made allowances in design spec.
Even so, the missile's nosecone is not the warhead, which is contained inside the nosecone. Its size will not be much larger than the American ICBM's warheads.
 
.
ah...

it can carry nukes. there's no way a carrier can still be floating after it's been hit. hell, a 600kg nuke warhead can blow the carrier out of the water and make it fly.
 
.
ah...

it can carry nukes. there's no way a carrier can still be floating after it's been hit. hell, a 600kg nuke warhead can blow the carrier out of the water and make it fly.

Any use of nukes takes everything to a whole new level. The Chinese know this as well as the U.S.

China is not going to commit suicide to destroy a carrier.
 
.
Any use of nukes takes everything to a whole new level. The Chinese know this as well as the U.S.

China is not going to commit suicide to destroy a carrier.
There is a possibility where the US might consider a DF-21 attack will earn a nuclear retaliation: There is no way for US to know if a DF-21 is nuclear or non-nuclear.
 
.
There is a possibility where the US might consider a DF-21 attack will earn a nuclear retaliation: There is no way for US to know if a DF-21 is nuclear or non-nuclear.

I agree, that is why with the "prompt global strike program" Bush decided to pursue the hypersonic option. Instead of converting trident missiles for conventional use. It would be to easy to mistake a ballistic missile launch as a nuke attack. Unfortunatly Obama seems to have revived the conventional Trident option.
 
Last edited:
.
That is why with the "prompt global strike program" Bush decided to pursue the hypersonic option. Instead of converting trident missiles for conventional use. It would be to easy to mistake a ballistic missile launch as a nuke attack. Unfortunatly Obama seems to have revived the conventional Trident option.

Sir,
I think both options are worked upon. And hypersonic cruise missile technology is nothing new to US. All I want to know is wether it is going to be a Scramjet engine or a rocket engine?
 
. .
Sir,
I think both options are worked upon. And hypersonic cruise missile technology is nothing new to US. All I want to know is wether it is going to be a Scramjet engine or a rocket engine?


this video speaks volumes.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
Your wet dream of US nuking China will only happen when US is ready for a vietnamese as president.:lol:
May you have a nice wet dream tonight. :smitten:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html?_r=1
Be careful about that. Unlike China, there are regular regime changes. If it is possible for a black to become President, what make you think it is impossible for Viet to become President? :lol: Here in Las Vegas and in California's Little Saigon, Viets are more conservative than they are liberal.

Vietnamese American Republican Coalition

Ain't that a scary nightmare for China...??? :lol:
 
.
Sir,
Why would one go for a conventional trident when there is a cheaper alternative? Sounds a bit ridiculous to me!
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom