What's new

DF-21D: The Aircraft Carrier Killer Missile That Makes Navy Admirals Freak Out

ozranger

FULL MEMBER
Jul 3, 2012
608
1
1,029
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
With the new IRBMs and hypersonics being introduced as well as future X37B type with MARV nuclear warheads parked over or near China, it's possible to catch up.


Its possibly true. With the anti ship ballistic missiles, China's aircraft carriers will become obsolete before it could enjoy using them.

That's just what China wants the US to do and therefore the future Euro-Asia continent trade union can be made feasible.

If the US chooses to do so, by that time they should have lost their long reach to most developing countries along the key trade routes (think about Iran) because the US would have to abandon most of its current sea based military assets which are highly effective in suppressing resistance from smaller countries but useless for battles with super powers. Remember, unlike America, China don't use bombs to enforce ties with developing countries.

It is financially impossible to develop a large hypersonic arsenal while you put big money to running and maintaining some rapidly aging fleets and feed a large amount of oversea bases for deployment of stealth fighters which require highly costly maintenance. Besides, developing hypersonic weapons requires building a lot of expensive infrastructure including large hypersonic wind tunnels.

Worse than that, China is challenging the US in traditional arms development as well, which can be seen at their ship building capabilities. Yes, they are building new carriers but they definitely don't worry too much about being sunk by an ASBM as they know such ASBMs can only come from the US or Russia as no other countries have capability to run super scale sensor network to target a sailing carrier, hence they can retaliate equally with ease.

They are also expanding nuclear arsenal at crazy pace with newly developed warhead delivery mechanisms as seen in their July and August hypersonic tests. They are doing so to make sure they don't need to worry too much about an escalation to nuclear exchange if they sink some American carriers at around second island chain. Therefore the US will have to struggle in 3 fronts against China at the same time.

That's why the US leadership including the congress and the military is so hesitant to put all bets to development of hypersonic weapons.
 
Last edited:

Battlion25

BANNED
Jul 18, 2021
2,052
-2
1,724
Country
Pakistan
Location
Malaysia
Its possibly true. With the anti ship ballistic missiles, China's aircraft carriers will become obsolete before it could enjoy using them.

I don't think China will count much on it's carriers it fully knows about aircraft carriers limitions in this time and age
 

Oldman1

ELITE MEMBER
May 28, 2011
8,129
-1
3,676
Country
United States
Location
United States
US is forced to operate from Hawaii.

US can no longer operate from Guam.

Nah, Guam will have their long range missiles that China can't operate from their own home soil.
That's just what China wants the US to do and therefore the future Euro-Asia continent trade union can be made feasible.

If the US chooses to do so, by that time they should have lost their long reach to most developing countries along the key trade routes (think about Iran) because the US would have to abandon most of its current sea based military assets which are highly effective in suppressing resistance from smaller countries but useless for battles with super powers. Remember, unlike America, China don't use bombs to enforce ties with developing countries.

It is financially impossible to develop a large hypersonic arsenal while you put big money to running and maintaining some rapidly aging fleets and feed a large amount of oversea bases for deployment of stealth fighters which require highly costly maintenance. Besides, developing hypersonic weapons requires building a lot of expensive infrastructure including large hypersonic wind tunnels.

Worse than that, China is challenging the US in traditional arms development as well, which can be seen at their ship building capabilities. Yes, they are building new carriers but they definitely don't worry too much about being sunk by an ASBM as they know such ASBMs can only come from the US or Russia as no other countries have capability to run super scale sensor network to target a sailing carrier, hence they can retaliate equally with ease.

They are also expanding nuclear arsenal at crazy pace with newly developed warhead delivery mechanisms as seen in their July and August hypersonic tests. They are doing so to make sure they don't need to worry too much about an escalation to nuclear exchange if they sink some American carriers at around second island chain. Therefore the US will have to struggle in 3 fronts against China at the same time.

That's why the US leadership including the congress and the military is so hesitant to put all bets to development of hypersonic weapons.

The U.S. already have hypersonic wind tunnels. The U.S. will build the hypersonic as well as conventional IRBMs no matter what you said. It pushes China have to contend with something else like future X37Bs with nuclear warheads from space in other words SSBNs in space.
 

Stryker1982

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 5, 2016
2,626
-2
4,329
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
Nah, Guam will have their long range missiles that China can't operate from their own home soil.


The U.S. already have hypersonic wind tunnels. The U.S. will build the hypersonic as well as conventional IRBMs no matter what you said. It pushes China have to contend with something else like future X37Bs with nuclear warheads from space in other words SSBNs in space.

Every month I see an article about how the carrier killer is the end of US Navy hegemony in the South China Sea and a little bit beyond that encompassing the waters around Japan and Taiwan, and then another one saying how theirs no worry about it.

Suffice to say their is a lot of propaganda about this method of anti-shipping warfare that has been adopted by both China and Iran, and while it does work in theory, we have no real life examples to reference, so I guess it remains up for debate.

I would image if the Aegis system unloads several interceptors per incoming warhead, the numbers suggest it should be able to handle it, but I think at this point the size of the offensive missile operation would be the determining factor of success. If the fleet is located, and 200 accurate missiles are prepped. It might be quite dangerous at that point.

I would have to disagree with you on Guam. Guam is relatively safe, but it will not remain this way over time. I think the Chinese recognize it's importance and will be working to make sure it is not possible to operate properly from it.
 

Oldman1

ELITE MEMBER
May 28, 2011
8,129
-1
3,676
Country
United States
Location
United States
I would have to disagree with you on Guam. Guam is relatively safe, but it will not remain this way over time. I think the Chinese recognize it's importance and will be working to make sure it is not possible to operate properly from it.

Yes China recognize the importance of Guam, they always have and the U.S. knows it hence why they parking THAAD, submarines, destroyers, bombers, aircraft, etc. and in the future IRBMS and hypersonics.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom