[ATTENTION!] Official article admits DF-21(X) has ability of attacking moving target

[Speeder 2]

but one question, how do you know they're purple?

The purple pumps are without canards , very strealthy they say, the standard issue...

 

[new wave]

The purple pumps are without canards , very strealthy they say, the standard issue...

Hey guys, wait a minute, "Target super-store" in US is selling "purple pumps for dick enlargement", are you kidding me ? i got a store 10 min from my house, the place i shop my grocery, never saw such things ?

 

[Speeder 2]

Hey guys, wait a minute, "Target super-store" in US is selling "purple pumps for dick enlargement", are you kidding me ? i got a store 10 min from my house, the place i shop my grocery, never saw such things ?

the keyword is "stealthy" gambit will explain it to ya...

 

[new wave]

the keyword is "stealthy" gambit will explain it to ya...

HaHaHa, Speedy, you are so crazy, now we got ourself a "secret weapon" for anti-gambit purpose and yes "stealthy" will be the keyword, i will keep that in mind.

 

[Speeder 2]

HaHaHa, Speedy, you are so crazy, now we got ourself a "secret weapon" for anti-gambit purpose and yes "stealthy" will be the keyword, i will keep that in mind.

who said I am anti-gambit?

So it's gonna be DF-21(X) (with potential multiple warheads) VS stealthy single-warhead enlargement purple pumps. Am I right, gambit?

 

[new wave]

who said I am anti-gambit?

So it's gonna be DF-21(X) (with potential multiple warheads) VS stealthy single-warhead enlargement purple pumps. Am I right, gambit?

, you two are made for eachother, go Speeder go," ko" that old man, Comrade, you have all the support from people of China.

 

[Speeder 2]

but seriously, gambit has yet to answer me how USN AC is able to creditablly counter satuated attacks by DF-21s. If no, then it'll be 1 for Speeder 2 , and 0 for the millitary professional

 

[below_freezing]

the USN can easily counter the DF-21: by staying out of range.

 

[gambit]

Please, no personal attacks, it just shows how low you are, that goes for everybody, lets have a constructive thread...... thx

Constructive? This is exactly what I expected from the Chinese members of this forum. Anything 'constructive' pretty much ended after post 28 pg 2. So far not one Chinese fanboy managed to point out how is Mr. Wang's few sentences are more informative than the example I gave. The only thing the children can do is flood the thread with personal insults to hide Mr. Wang's propaganda.

 

[gambit]

That's why I said you know nothing about Chinese way of expression. This kind of article is not a technique paper with experiment data to prove weapon ability. And why should PLA prove something to end your doubt?
I post the article just to tell the people here, China admits this weapon is completed.

Doubt? Sorry, no person or unit on this planet can be more authoritative than CASIC in the field of Chinese missiles.
I can't help you with Chinese language, so, doubt as you wish.

Maybe you are a specialist in missile, but after all you admitted what you said is based on personal experience, NOT reality.
As my personal experience, no missile denfence system can ensure a probability of sucess >80% (what a high evaluation~) when engaging with multi targets in real battle. 20%? That's enough, and that's why DF21 Anti-CV type exists and why ballistic missile still exists.

I don't care whether your or sb's previous theory or reviews are reasonable or not. What you should learn is that there're many thing in this world you do not know even in the field you are familiar with so don't be so worried to teach others sth even before you know exactly what the article says.

P.S.
I don't want to tangle with you. But don't think Chinese people are fools without knowledge and only listen to the government.
I looked through some threads and found you hates communist, saying they are liars. OK, this is your right, but I can also tell you, that is your, how to say, pride and prejudice.

In summary, what this really means is that if a Chinese fanboy post something from the Chinese government making some claims, any challenges to those claims should be dismissed because the challenger is not well versed in Chinese language and thoughts. If the person continues to express doubts, his doubts and criticims should be construed as hatred to the Chinese people.

 

[gambit]

forget it guys, you will never win a retired(80%), low ranking(60%) US mechanican or support unit(40%).

judging by his comment, his 21st century knowledge goes only as far as wiki tells. if you tell him only 1-2 DF is enough to shower the carriers, he will tell you that it is 1000-2000 that needed bacause you can only locate the carrier 30-60 minutes before you launch the missile. does he know what intelligent informations grid is? probably not!

and for those he knows, he only konws the facts but not why. he will keep telling you that FBW systen can not be turned off only because there is no "off" on those USAF ACs. why is that? sorry, i was told that way and i don't ask why. but when you tell him that Russian and Chinese ACs used the mechanic system to backup their quad-reduntent FBW system, he just tell you that "that is not a true FBW system".

besides that, he posted many aged info on stealthy design showing how important the appearance is. but did he mentioned why F-22 is much larger than F-35 yet much more stealther.

and when being asked can an AWACS guide the Fighters (radar off) to launch their missiles. he posted something about how missiles were guided to their targets. just like this could be done as picking up a phone to tell the missile where your targets are. but he never mentioned how many preparation works needed to be done and how important the the prerequisition is.

I cannot help it if you do not have relevant experience but are too gullible to know any better.

 

[gambit]

Readers,

Here is what Mr. Wang reported that got all the Chinese fanboys Viagrous...

here is the full translation and please correct me if i am wrong

Review and Consideration of the Chinese ballistic missile

China Aerospace Science and Engineering Group 4 deputy director Wang Genbin

<snipped>

(C) created a research team
China's solid missile from scratch, from small to large development team is also, by the team, "bombs and one satellite" spirit of the traditional spirit of space, developed missiles of China's first generation of solid, then 20 years from 1988 to the present time, the state invested only 3.0 billion development costs, has developed east on the 21st A, B, C, D four models, complete from the nuclear to both nuclear and conventional attack fixed targets to attack slow moving target changes, the precision CEP realized tens of meters from a few hundred meters and then to progress to truly create a model series, to meet the Second Artillery Corps in the new era, "responsible for deterrence against China's use of nuclear weapons, conducting nuclear counterattacks and precision strikes with conventional missiles." made important contributions to the country. The team win without pride, by defeat, hard work, walking is a better and more economical for development.

There is NOTHING there to indicate to educate the interested layman on how the DF-21 is supposed to track and target a moving ship. There is no need to reveal any 'top secret' information, no testing data, no locations...Zilch...And here is an example of how it could be done that will educate the interested laymen and increase the credibility of the report...

===

The latest variant of the DF-21 has reaction thrust steering mechanisms. The radar system is high PRF X-band with a scan limit of 60deg. due to nosecone dimension. Since the target is moving, proportional navigation is employed to provide continuous target track. Despite the fact that the target is moving at only 33 knots, the PN guidance output is then converted to bang-bang guidance commands to provide the vehicle with near instant lateral acceleration to reduce interception probability by air defense missiles. Due to vehicle structural constraints, bang-bang guidance commands are limited to 10g. Standard fighter aircraft air to air missiles, because of their smaller warhead, can have bang-bang guidance forces up to 40g with no catastrophic structural failure.

Given the developmental maturity of ballistic defense missile system like the latest US SM-3, it is determined that the best execution altitude for vehicle deceleration for evasive maneuvers to be at 25 km above ground level (AGL). The longer the vehicle remains static, it will provide air defense radars with consistent vehicle profile and descent rate, also with the lower altitude, the higher air density would not allow the 20g evasive maneuvers, therefore the greater the odds of a successful interception. Further, this 20g bang-bang guidance limit is necessary to prevent the vehicle's radar system from losing target line-of-sight (LoS).

If this vehicle is used against fixed land targets that has air defense deployments, the vehicle can afford to lose target LoS with higher g-rating evasive maneuvers as target geo-coordinates are also fixed in memory. The vehicle will remember heading offset and deviation rate and can make appropriate return bang-bang guidance commands for the radar to reacquire target information. Against a moving target, even though one moving at only 33 knots, the current technology level does not afford the vehicle to lose a moving target LoS.

The latest US SM-3 missile is capable of reaching speed of 9600km/h with a climb rate of 5km/m in altitude, making early descent phase evasive maneuvers important to reduce interception probability. Missile against aircraft engagements typically occurs at or below 10km altitude, making feasible aerodynamic forces exploitation. But because this vehicle will begin to execute evasive maneuvers at very thin air altitude that reduces aerodynamic forces exploitation effectiveness, reaction thrust mechanisms are necessary and this will cost vehicle warhead payload.

During development, in post evasive maneuvers, an interface was thought to be required between bang-bang to proportional navigation guidance. Velocity compensated proportional navigation guidance (VCPN) was briefly tested as that interface and but was found to offer statistically negligible improvement in target tracking and guidance. Target lead angle and its rate change are nowhere as extreme as in a missile versus aircraft engagement and any vehicle descent rate change is already reflected in closing speed calculations. Therefore, it was decided to use only proportional and bang-bang navigation guidance methods.

Another developmental exploration was the order of guidance laws. The program decided to conduct dual testings. One strategy was bang-bang guidance for initial vehicle-target orientation, evasive maneuvers, then switches to PN guidance at 2km AGL. A parallel strategy has the reverse, PN for initial vehicle-target orientation and bang-bang guidance for evasive maneuvers. It was found that because bang-bang guidance is already sensitive to LoS change and rate of change, hardware related LoS noise can induce evasive maneuvers thrust command oscillations as the guidance laws attempt to null the LoS rate after every execution. This condition is similar to constantly oversteering an automobile, either due to driver ability or steering mechanism 'slop'. When PN guidance takes over at 2km AGL, the program recorded a higher miss rate than the pn_bang-bang strategy. In some instances, the vehicle's radar could not reacquire the target after several violent maneuvers to evade air defense missiles.

===

So the only respond they have is to call the challenger a 'gook'.

 

[Speeder 2]

Readers,

Here is what Mr. Wang reported that got all the Chinese fanboys Viagrous...

There is NOTHING there to indicate to even the interested layman on how the DF-21 is supposed to track and target a moving ship. There is no need to reveal any 'top secret' information, no testing data, no locations...Zilch...And here is an example of how it could be done that will educate the interested laymen and increase the credibility of the report...

...

Yeah right, damn, PLA should have had a burning need to reveal their top secret information, with its testing data, with its locations, and with its pricetags too for God's sake in case WalMart wants order some as well

...

The latest US SM-3 missile is capable of...

Is that fully opeational?

And its test data and locations, please?

So the only respond they have is to call the challenger a 'gook'.

That's not fair, old chap!

How about the stealthy purple pumps and some integrity, huh?

 

[gambit]

Yeah right, damn, PLA should have had a burning need to reveal their top secret information, with its testing data, with its locations, and with its pricetags too for God's sake in case WalMart wants order some as well




Is that fully opeational?

And its test data and locations, please?





That's not fair, old chap!

How about the stealthy purple pumps and some integrity, huh?

Sonny...You have been severely outclassed. You ain't gots the brains to see that what I posted is only an EXAMPLE, not an exposition of what the DF-21 or the SM-3 is capable of. When one of you resort to racist epithets as a comeback, no one, including YOU, has the spine to condemn what you would be so trigger happy to do against anyone else. So not only are you clueless about the subject but a coward as well.

 

[gambit]

So a good-for-nothing naturalized gook...

List of ethnic slurs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gook-eye, Gooky, Gook
a derogatory term for Asians, used especially for enemy soldiers.[78] Its use as an ethnic slur has been traced to U.S. Marines serving in the Philippines in the early 20th century.[78][79] The earliest recorded example is dated 1920.[80] It gained widespread notice as a result of the Korean and Vietnam wars.[7]

So to all the Chinese here, how does it feel to cheer on a white Canadian when he make a racist insult applicable to all Asians? How does it feel to do your part, even if just a little, to perpetuate racism in this world? Proud of yourselves?