What's new

Fears grow that PLA may test 'carrier killer'

Kinetic

BANNED
Feb 12, 2010
11,201
-33
13,433
I believe your Indian lexicon has failed to help you understand his explaination of obvious ballistic missile characteristics. The missile is superior to the Brahmos in warhead weight (500K tons vs 300K grams), range (3000 km vs 290) and speed (Mach 10 vs 3).
You also failed to understand the difference between a tactical tri-sonic cruise missile with a MRBM. lol They can't be compared and they have different roles to play. Same way this new ASBm differs from C-803.
Did the Indians here really believe that Russia would build them weapons that are superior to China's?
We have much better weapons than Chinese. SU-30MKI, Brahmos, Barak, Phalcon, Scorpene, carrier, stealth ships and many others systems are far superior than similar Chinese systems.
 

Arjun MBT

BANNED
Apr 14, 2010
320
0
117
lol dude. why don;t you do some research before posting? Its very general for a 2000 km range ballistic missile to have a speed of Mach 10. There is nothing called 'hypersonic ballistic missile' all the ballistic missiles including our short range Prithvi is also hypersonic when reenter the atmosphere.
But this according a Member here, has Mach 10 . So I though at all altitudes.. Anyways He made my heart stop for a second...
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
25,383
138
23,345
Country
United States
Location
United States
So finally we have a potential test of this missile. All the previous debates before have been what...??? All the Chinese fanboys have been talking about as if this thing is done deal. But now this is about a potential test.
 

Nav

FULL MEMBER
May 11, 2010
1,093
1
409
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
You also failed to understand the difference between a tactical tri-sonic cruise missile with a MRBM. lol They can't be compared and they have different roles to play. Same way this new ASBm differs from C-803.

We have much better weapons than Chinese. SU-30MKI, Brahmos, Barak, Phalcon, Scorpene, carrier, stealth ships and many others systems are far superior than similar Chinese systems.
very wel said.. I got 2 words 4 ya..!
DREAM ON
 

you are fired

BANNED
Jun 19, 2010
117
0
31
So finally we have a potential test of this missile. All the previous debates before have been what...??? All the Chinese fanboys have been talking about as if this thing is done deal. But now this is about a potential test.

can you tell me what is cooking there

and how difficult is going for India if they get success as they have chance

show some light
 

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
25,383
138
23,345
Country
United States
Location
United States
can you tell me what is cooking there

and how difficult is going for India if they get success as they have chance

show some light
That is precisely the issue that I have been trying to explain to the Chinese fanboys here -- That absent any credible testing regime and that the results of those tests are presented without conditions, we do not know anything other than the fact that there are considerable technical problems involving hitting a moving target, even one moving as little as 30kts/hr.

But if China succeed in producing such a weapon, not only India but any navy that wields any ship, never mind an aircraft carrier, is seriously placed at a disadvantaged. The 'aircraft carrier' bit is really irrelevant as far as the technical aspects goes. If the DF-21 is proven to be a viable anti-ship ballistic missile, and proven mean beyond Photochop, then all ships, not just aircraft carriers, are at risk.
 

Ammyy

BANNED
Jun 8, 2010
7,393
-12
6,450
Country
India
Location
India
Did the Indians here really believe that Russia would build them weapons that are superior to China's?
How old you are ???

Chinese still trying to copy Russian Jets
Thts not trolling its well know fact
 

you are fired

BANNED
Jun 19, 2010
117
0
31
That is precisely the issue that I have been trying to explain to the Chinese fanboys here -- That absent any credible testing regime and that the results of those tests are presented without conditions, we do not know anything other than the fact that there are considerable technical problems involving hitting a moving target, even one moving as little as 30kts/hr.

But if China succeed in producing such a weapon, not only India but any navy that wields any ship, never mind an aircraft carrier, is seriously placed at a disadvantaged. The 'aircraft carrier' bit is really irrelevant as far as the technical aspects goes. If the DF-21 is proven to be a viable anti-ship ballistic missile, and proven mean beyond Photochop, then all ships, not just aircraft carriers, are at risk.
you know if and but are very powerful words

if they get success then what will be counter from USA and don't you think USA is confused about china how to deal with them in future

pls tell me your point of view
 

Hafizzz

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 28, 2010
5,026
0
3,522
Can someone explain to me how are these carrier killers special ?

Like what is the difference between a normal missile vs this carrier killer ....

Isn't it just a missile ?

So why does this missile is deemed a killer while other missile is just a missile ? :what:
Western Propaganda. The so called "carrier killer" is just a normal missile China had for ages (DF-21).

I hope China crank out TONs of these "carrier killer" because Pakistan should have them too to keep Indian Threat (Indian Subs) at bay.

The West will always come up with excuse to hype the China "threat".
Western Media can even picture a little Chinese boy holding a Lollipop stick as a threat to the Western civilization.
 

ao333

FULL MEMBER
Mar 15, 2010
1,289
0
547
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
You also failed to understand the difference between a tactical tri-sonic cruise missile with a MRBM. lol They can't be compared and they have different roles to play. Same way this new ASBm differs from C-803.

We have much better weapons than Chinese. SU-30MKI, Brahmos, Barak, Phalcon, Scorpene, carrier, stealth ships and many others systems are far superior than similar Chinese systems.
Sorry, maybe we have different definitions of what's "Indian."

You guys and Vietnamese always react to my trolls. It's so much fun...
 
Last edited:

maithil

SENIOR MEMBER
May 21, 2010
2,133
-34
1,159
Country
India
Location
India
Sorry, maybe we have different definitions of what's "Indian."

You guys and Vietnamese always reply to my trolls. I always have so fun...
really...well then well done indians..they could make atleast one person happy..

BTW on a side note Is CANDU stiil on sale..??
 

uday

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jul 9, 2008
46
0
4
Because we are...
Take U.S.A, E.U, Canada, U.K, and on and on, we hold higher positions in major organizations and government offices!!!
 

SomeGuy

FULL MEMBER
May 5, 2010
413
0
224
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
We have much better weapons than Chinese. SU-30MKI, Brahmos, Barak, Phalcon, Scorpene, carrier, stealth ships and many others systems are far superior than similar Chinese systems.
Debatable.

  1. MKI: Obvious advantages are Radar and Maneouverability. Radar can be countered by AWACS and maneouverability isn't too important with highly agile BVR and HMS/Off Bore-sight missiles.

  2. Brahmos only has speed.

    Being supersonic throughout entire flight means lots of fuel required, which means the missile is very heavy (3,000kg) and give off a lot of IR.

    There are a variety of LACM and AShM that China has that are just as capable and longer range. For example:

    YJ-12: (BrahMos spec)

    Weight: 1,000kg (3,000kg)
    Speed: Mach 2.5+ (Mach 2.8-3.0)
    Range: ~400km (~290km)
    Warhead: 205kg-400kg (~300kg)

  3. Barak II is not superior to HQ-9.

    HQ-9: In service in 1997.
    Slant range: 120-200km
    Flight Ceiling: 30km (>98,000 ft)

    Barak II is under testing, range is reportedly 70km.

  4. Chinese officials have said that KJ-2000 AWACS is superior to the Phalcon.

  5. Stealth ships:

    IN: 4 stealthy frigates
    PLAN: 8 stealthy destroyers, 14 stealthy frigates
 

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


Top Bottom