Breaking China's DF-21D missile kill chain: US expert

[shuttler]

True, but you can always reposition the ship. The 2 smaller ships have arrays in places so that a slight turn brings a blind spot in view. Admittedly, the carrier is drawn with only 1 emitter and it is the hardest to turn. It will probably have more, makes no sense to leave the biggest ship the least protected, though this is just my speculation.

dont forget you are floating on a 6000 tons ~ 100,000 tons vessels rocking and rolling on the high sea maneuvering to new positions (even turning with the laser aims) is not as easy as your think and suffer greatly in accuracy

 

[shuttler]

Really love you Chinese selectively reply part of my question, turn it and make it think I am wrong, when you disregard the titular thing in my post.

First, answer me this.

How are you supposed to have 100 J-31 making bomb run in the same time? and drop 1000 bomb on or AB Class destroyer to overwhelm them?? - Answer is, YOU CAN'T

going back to the focal point, which is how do we put all of our combat aircraft in Asia.

How many airbase do you know we own and we can use in the pacific? We own 5 Airbase in Japan and Korea 2 airbase in Guam and Marianas, we have agreement to use all the airbase from 7 of our friendly nation to launch our aircraft and service them. They are Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Philippine, Thailand, Afghanistan (until 2014, after that unsure) and your friend, Pakistan. Do you know how many air base were all those and how many aircraft they can hold??

Let's see

Japan Air Self Defence Force Air Bases (via Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan )

-Chitose Air Base
-Komatsu Air Base
-Ibaraki Airport Air Base
-Nyutabaru Air Base
-Tsuiki Air Field
-Naha Air Base
-Iruma Air Base
-Miho-Yonago Airport
-Hamamatsu Air Base
-Matsushima Air Field
-Shizuhama Air Base
-Hōfu Air Field
-Ashiya Air Field

US Airbases in Japan
-Misawa Air Base
-Kadena Air Base
-Yokota Air Base

Korean Air Force Bases (via U.S.–South Korea Status of Forces Agreement)

-Gimhae International Airport
-Seoul Air Base
-Wonju Airport
-Jang-ji dong Air Base
-Cheongju International Airport
-Gangneung Air Base
-Gwangju Airport
-Daegu International Airport
-Yecheon Air Base
-Gunsan Airport

US airbase operate in South Korea
-Kunsan Air Base
-Osan Air Base

ROCAF Air Base ( via Foreign Assistance Act, Mutual Security Act)

-Taitung Air Base
-Hsinchu Air Base
-Chiayi AIr Base
-Tainan Air Base
-Pingtung Air Base
-Hualien Air Base
-New Taipei Air Base
-Pingtung Air Base

Philippine Air Force (via Force agreement 2012)

-Villamor Airbase
-Basa Airbase
-Clark Air Base
-Fernando Airbase
-Danilo Atienza Airbase
-Wallace Air Station
-Benito Ebuen Air Base
-Edwin Andrews Air Base
-Rajah Buayan Air Base
-Lumbia Airport

Royal Thai Air Force Air Bases ( via Manila pact)

-Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base
-Don Muang Royal Thai Air Force Base
-Don Mueang International Airport
-Ubon Royal Thai Air Force Base
-Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base

Afghanistan Air Force Bases (well, we still in Afghanistan.....)

-Kabul International Airport
-Kandahar International Airport
-Shindand Air Base
-Herat International Airport
-Mazar-i-Sharif Airport
-Camp Bastion
-Bagram Airfield

Pakistan Air Force Air bases ( Not mention, see below)

-PAF Base Mushaf
-PAF Base Masroor
-PAF Base Rafiqui
-PAF Base Peshawar
-PAF Base Samungli
-PAF Base Mianwali
-PAF Base Minhas
-PAF Base Chaklala
-PAF Base Faisal
-PAF Base Risalpur
-PAF Base Shahbaz

United States Air Force Pacific Air Base

-Andersen airbase
-Hickam Field
-Elmendorf Field

Discount Pakistan, which also Chinese Allied, if war broke out tomorrow, there are 61 airbase we can use by invoking those defense pact I mentioned before. How many aircraft can 61 airbase in total can hold?? I wonder. Let's do a small estimation

JASDF have about 791 aircraft in service with 13 Airforce bases on their disposal. So, on average each air base can take on, umm, I don't know 61 aircraft.

So, how many aircraft can 61 airbase took on??

as if these airbases do not have their own aircraft to maintain!

what an idiot - a floor mopping HK right winger pretending to be a military expert!

We could more than accommodate all our airforce in Asia. it's doable. But will we do it? No.
Does that sound familiar?? Oh, yea, I believe it's the same point of, oh yes, you can use 100 J-31 to attack a single destroyer?? LOL

It sounds absoultely absurd. everything is pure imaginery out of your kindergarten cranial cavity

Well, at least, there are higher chance all those country which bounded by treaty to lend us our airbase than you launch 100 J-31 and successfully sunk our single destroyer.

we dont need 100 J-31. We have our wide and numerous array of bombs and missiles to deal with you

And one more question, How do you know we are not deployed there already?? YOU WILL NEVER KNOW LOL

another dumb question. Satellite scans will reveal how much planes are there in the air bases - go away you kiddo HK right wing!!

Gambit already said what I want to say. Man, you have a very serious comprehension problem.

Can your radar, any radar, by looking at it, can tell you the different between an aircraft carrier and a cargo ship? No. YOU CAN ONLY SEE A VERY LARGE SHIP IN YOUR RADAR.

I have no comphrension problem. it is you who do not have the mental capacity to debate on topics completely out of your knowledge. We are talking about our missiles vs your warships. Again as I said, I dont have to ID accurately whether you are an aircraft carrier or a civilian tanker? what for? I just bomb the hell out of your floating ships! more tankers in the group means more defenseless block of iron sinking to the bottom of the Pacific!

What if our carrier towing a cargo ship in the back, and upon hearing your launch of ballistic missile, on your missile terminal approach, we release our tow and move away. Your missile will still think the cargo ship (Decoy) is the carrier and hit it.

We will try to sink everything floating along in the battle group! the tankers are defenseless blocks of floating irons that means high efficiency for our bombs and missiles!

This is just one of the point I saw why DOD do not put anything to it.

you have to be thankful they are not as dumb as you are! putting tankers as decoys - the most stupid nuthead will have this idea!

Point 1 is just random ranting no point to counter

you cant, because you are in no way figuring out the answer

Point 2, How do we accommodate our whole air force's combat aircraft in Asia is discussed before, in case you are still so thick on the result, yes, we can put 3600 combat aircraft on the 61 friendly airbases. 3600 > 2000 combat aircraft I mentioned.........So your point 2 is gone.

I have more than adequately answer your point

Point 3. You can bring down a destroyer with 100 J-31. How many of those you are willing to lose?? Your country don't have 1000 + gen 4 or above aircraft. I am not saying you can't, I never said you can't bring down a single destroyer with 100 of your most advanced aircraft, but is it worth it?? That's mean you have 100 less aircraft focus on one task and lift guard of your hard target. Do remember, we also have cruise missile too.

If you are dumb enough to put 100 J-31 on 1 single ship, we are dumb enough to put 2000 aircraft in Asia, which is doable.

I didnt even answer you with our J-31, dumb head! and I did not say sinking just one ship! I have said our target is one to the max of your whole fleet, by our bombs and missiles!

Finally. the guy I am referring to on my last post talked about Free fall bomb only. He specifically mean the word Glided bomb because they are cheap. Hence I specifically talked about unguided bomb. yes, you can launch missile or cruiser missile, but they will not be cheap.

I repeat:

sdb costs $40 grand a pc.- made in usa
one gerald ford class cvn costs $13.5 billion
one destroyer costs $1 bln

if you can still do simple math, do the calculation yourself

Read what other people wrote and what I reply first, before you post your reply

your dumb comments showed how much immense bragging and nonsensical drivel you have made all over the place

ol thanks for the add-on

man, these chinese member are sure thick as hell.

he is at your level. so you have a team playing bingo together at the senoir community ctrs - here comes a HK right wing - but fail to impress pretending to be a iraqi vet ( or a floor mopping private！）

 

[jhungary]

It's a glide bomb Einstein...try to keep up.

The range is stated on the information placard: 130 km.

Dude, Glide bomb is free fall (Glide is unpowered/unaltered flight). GUIDED BOMB is ranged munition.

Glide not = guided. Undertood?

Next time, choose your word better. Your word is misleading.

It would be economically disastrous to bring in all the eggs from different baskets to station them in S. Korea and Japan because you necessarily put their countries at risk of being nuked and the it would be considered per-emptive strike thus giving China an excuse to defend. And it does put US assets at danger because China has enough to destroy these assets as they would be stationed. So will US lose billions of dollars as operational costs as well as losing assets while stationed in s. korea and Japan and over the skies of China.

Lastly don't take China as fools they have second to Russians the best SAMs coverage and so dense that it would be considered suicide going into Chinese Airspace. Overall you have poor logic and strategy.

@Martian2 You presence is required.

Dude, i never said we should put all 2000 aircraft in Asia. I HAVE ALREDY SAID PUTTING ALL 2000 COMBAT FIGHTER AIRCRAFT IN ASIA IS STUPID AND DUMB. What more do you guys want? I am saying that to show a point. I said it to compare with the fact some Chinese member think using 100 J-31 on a single ship is worth the hassel. Same with US sending all their combat planes to Asia.

I started to wonder did you guys all having comprehensive problem or English is really really bad on your end of the world??

Let me dumb it down for you

A - using 100 J-31 to bomb a single AB class destroyer - Comment, Stupid and Dumb
B - US put all 2000 combat planes in Asia - Comment, Stupid and Dumb

A is simliar to B. I use B to compare to A with both stupid and similiarity.

There, you understand now, Mr. Thinktank??

We could more than accommodate all our airforce in Asia. it's doable. But will we do it? No.
Does that sound familiar?? Oh, yea, I believe it's the same point of, oh yes, you can use 100 J-31 to attack a single destroyer?? LOL


Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...ile-kill-chain-us-expert-6.html#ixzz2Qb9ML86x

@Post 80

then @ post 82

Then the second thing. Yes I do consider putting all the eggs in one basket is dumb. I believe putting all 2000 combat aircraft in Asia is dumb. But Whether it is dumb or not is not the question your fellow Chinese member asked here my friend. They are asking if putting 2000 combat aircraft in Asia is doable

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...ile-kill-chain-us-expert-6.html#ixzz2Qb9dNayI

34 missiles to destroy 61 aircraft on the parking ramps sounds like a good trade to me.

Don't forget the vulnerable JP-8 fuel storage tanks.

lol i won't even dignified that with a comment.

Let me say this again. Putting all the eggs in one basket is stupid, hence putting all 2,000 combat aircraft in Asia is stupid. Same thing i used to compare to the point you said using 100 J-31 to attack 1 destroyer is stupid. Do you think if we were to attack you. Will we really put any aircraft inside your cruise missile range?

Ever heard of a term Aerial-Refueling? Not to mention a term called "AWACS". The moment you launch your cruise missile. Well, i don't remember what Aircraft are supposed to do. Oh yes, fly away

so, i am afraid your 34 missile will only hit dirt.

Why you all really have a go with the example i come up with to compare the dumb things you say??

Again, look like you guys have some sort of dumb radar or filter to filter out every dumb thing we western guy says. regardless of the poster intention.

as if these airbases do not have their own aircraft to maintain!

what an idiot - a floor mopping HK right winger pretending to be a military expert!

It sounds absoultely absurd. everything is pure imaginery out of your kindergarten cranial cavity

we dont need 100 J-31. We have our wide and numerous array of bombs and missiles to deal with you

another dumb question. Satellite scans will reveal how much planes are there in the air bases - go away you kiddo HK right wing!!

I have no comphrension problem. it is you who do not have the mental capacity to debate on topics completely out of your knowledge. We are talking about our missiles vs your warships. Again as I said, I dont have to ID accurately whether you are an aircraft carrier or a civilian tanker? what for? I just bomb the hell out of your floating ships! more tankers in the group means more defenseless block of iron sinking to the bottom of the Pacific!

We will try to sink everything floating along in the battle group! the tankers are defenseless blocks of floating irons that means high efficiency for our bombs and missiles!

You have to be thankful they are not as dumb as you are! putting tankers as decoys - the most stupid nuthead will have this idea!

you cant, because you are in no way figuring out the answer

I have more than adequately answer your point

I didnt even answer you with our J-31, dumb head! and I did not say sinking just one ship! I have said our target is one to the max of your whole fleet, by our bombs and missiles!

I repeat:

sdb costs $40 grand a pc.- made in usa
one gerald ford class cvn costs $13.5 billion
one destroyer costs $1 bln

if you can still do simple math, do the calculation yourself

your dumb comments showed how much immense bragging and nonsensical drivel you have made all over the place

he is in your level. so you have a team playing bingo together at the senoir community ctrs - here comes a HK right wing - but fail to impress pretending to be a iraqi vet ( or a floor mopping private！）

All this irrational ranting does not warrant a rational answer.

I am not going to say it the third time. So, have a nice day

 

[shuttler]

Dude, Glide bomb is free fall (Glide is unpowered/unaltered flight). GUIDED BOMB is ranged munition.

Glide not = guided. Undertood?

Next time, choose your word better. Your word is misleading.

Dude, i never said we should put all 2000 aircraft in Asia. I HAVE ALREDY SAID PUTTING ALL 2000 COMBAT FIGHTER AIRCRAFT IN ASIA IS STUPID AND DUMB. What more do you guys want? I am saying that to show a point. I said it to compare with the fact some Chinese member think using 100 J-31 on a single ship is worth the hassel. Same with US sending all their combat planes to Asia.

you are just a sad loser. How many times have I said J-31 and 100 of them?

I started to wonder did you guys all having comprehensive problem or English is really really bad on your end of the world??

you are the one along with the senior on the block have caused all the melee

Let me dumb it down for you

perfect english!

A - using 100 J-31 to bomb a single AB class destroyer - Comment, Stupid and Dumb
B - US put all 2000 combat planes in Asia - Comment, Stupid and Dumb

A is simliar to B. I use B to compare to A with both stupid and similiarity.

it this the 4th or 5th time again for that repetition of "J-31"

lol i won't even dignified that with a comment.

perfect english for a floor mopper?

Let me say this again. Putting all the eggs in one basket is stupid, hence putting all 2,000 combat aircraft in Asia is stupid. Same thing i used to compare to the point you said using 100 J-31 to attack 1 destroyer is stupid. Do you think if we were to attack you. Will we really put any aircraft inside your cruise missile range?

you admit your stupidity, alrighit.

the 6th or 7th time about the J-31 again! OH my Heavens!

Ever heard of a term Aerial-Refueling?

that is how you demonstrate your military expertise.

Kids in kindergarten know about this! And how many refueling airplanes can you have for your 2000~3000 airborne fleet!

so, i am afraid your 34 missile will only hit dirt.

the dirt is usa made weapons

Why you all really have a go with the example i come up with to compare the dumb things you say??

it is only you and the dimentia vietnam private vet who participate in this comic show

All this irrational ranting does not warrant a rational answer.

I am not going to say it the third time. So, have a nice day

caused you cannot and never will with your Childish pretentious logic!

your english leave much to be desired after growing up a vast majority of your time in an english friendly environment!

 

[shuttler]

He grew up in Hong Kong, he looks down on people from the mainland like us. Now that we are no longer poor, and now that so many of us are well off and more and more are living better. He must find something else to make himself feel superior. I seen this before in Canada, England.

While some Hong Kongers are nice and patriotic, more look upon British accomplishments as their own and oblivious to them being a conquered people.

These people are "honoured" by being so “westernised" and "democratic" haha I have met some of these suckers in my life - childish, arrogant, heads stuffed with trash - most of them cant speak or write decent english so to speak of their "international" exposure! Westeners look down upon this bunch of losers!

 

[gambit]

you are a joke! EW and EM (electro0magnetic)! you are chickening out too late to recoup
Electronic war fare how does this cover your large fleet? computer jamming devices? We have counter jamming device chips on offer!

You are so funny cant distinguish the basic difference of what EW and EM meant and scared so much to rectify your own fault which is common to the inexperience and novice!

I have to save this for the readers to see...

Not stop, but seduce/distract. Assume an AWACS overhead to alert the ship of this incoming wave of Chinese CM. The ship would then project an EM wall and an IR blanket, each covering hundreds or even thousands of km/sq, well before any CM could achieve sensor lock.

we dont need to fire many shots. the crewmen will all be wiped out sooner or later by self created radiation and the contaminated vessels

A long time ago, we have a Chinese member who claimed to be a university/college level professor in physics boldly asserted that the 10-lambda rule violate Born Approximation. He provided no credible scientific sources to support that assertion.

For interested readers, basically, Born Approximation (keyword search) is about 'guessing' the total amount of scattering radiation from a body based upon known energy level from a source, such as a radar antenna. To say that something violate the laws of physics is to say that such a thing cannot exist. It is made up. It is magic. Therefore, according to this Chinese member who claimed to be a physics professor, the 10-lambda rule is a made up rule. A Western magical invention.

Let us see what real Chinese engineers have to say about the 10-lambda rule...

Note what these real Chinese engineers said: When the geometric dimension of an object is large enough (>10 &#955, the quantity of the creeping wave on the backward direction can be neglected.

λ = lambda, which represent wavelength. Any wavelength. The highlighted say: greater than 10 wavelengths, aka the 10-lambda rule...

- If the diameter of a sphere/cylinder is greater than 10-wavelengths, then the creeping wave behavior will not exist.

- If the diameter of a sphere/cylinder is less than 10-wavelengths, then the creeping wave behavior will exist.

I have been out of aviation for a long time, approaching 15 yrs. I used to be able to do radar range calculations in my head out in the field. But even though I am one of those guys that if I do not use it, I will lose it, I do not forget the foundations of what I discard through lack of use of the tools. No one can. The math is the tools and they have gotten more complex over the years through new discoveries but the fundamentals remains.

The 10-lambda rule is FUNDAMENTAL in how to design a finite body with controls of scattering mechanisms in mind, specifically of cylinders and half spheres on an aircraft. In other words, in how to design a low radar observable, aka 'stealthy', body, the 10-lambda rule is why missiles are enclosed inside the fuselage, why there are exaggerated curvatures on the B-2, F-22, F-35, and finally the J-20. The last is a Chinese product.

And yet we have on this forum a Chinese member who claimed to be a physics professor asserted that the 10-lambda rule is solely a Western construct. We can only wonder what senors Jinkui Yan, Changlong Xu, and Deming Xu, of Shanghai University, thinks of this assertion. May be these three gents do not exist? Neither does the 'Asia Pacific Microwave Conference'? Neither does Shanghai University?

NOW we have another Chinese member who asserted that EM transmissions from EW systems will kill the user. This man have no military experience and clearly no relevant technical experience. And he says that EW warfare is basically suicidal in nature: death from self created radiation.

Who can refute this? No one can. No one should even try. These two gems, and there are plenty more, are prime examples of the old advice about arguing with fools who drags you down to their level and beat you with their experience. Or in this case -- lack of.

 

[shuttler]

I have to save this for the readers to see...


A long time ago, we have a Chinese member who claimed to be a university/college level professor in physics boldly asserted that the 10-lambda rule violate Born Approximation. He provided no credible scientific sources to support that assertion.

For interested readers, basically, Born Approximation (keyword search) is about 'guessing' the total amount of scattering radiation from a body based upon known energy level from a source, such as a radar antenna. To say that something violate the laws of physics is to say that such a thing cannot exist. It is made up. It is magic. Therefore, according to this Chinese member who claimed to be a physics professor, the 10-lambda rule is a made up rule. A Western magical invention.

Let us see what real Chinese engineers have to say about the 10-lambda rule...

Note what these real Chinese engineers said: When the geometric dimension of an object is large enough (>10 &#955, the quantity of the creeping wave on the backward direction can be neglected.

λ = lambda, which represent wavelength. Any wavelength. The highlighted say: greater than 10 wavelengths, aka the 10-lambda rule...

- If the diameter of a sphere/cylinder is greater than 10-wavelengths, then the creeping wave behavior will not exist.

- If the diameter of a sphere/cylinder is less than 10-wavelengths, then the creeping wave behavior will exist.

I have been out of aviation for a long time, approaching 15 yrs. I used to be able to do radar range calculations in my head out in the field. But even though I am one of those guys that if I do not use it, I will lose it, I do not forget the foundations of what I discard through lack of use of the tools. No one can. The math is the tools and they have gotten more complex over the years through new discoveries but the fundamentals remains.

The 10-lambda rule is FUNDAMENTAL in how to design a finite body with controls of scattering mechanisms in mind, specifically of cylinders and half spheres on an aircraft. In other words, in how to design a low radar observable, aka 'stealthy', body, the 10-lambda rule is why missiles are enclosed inside the fuselage, why there are exaggerated curvatures on the B-2, F-22, F-35, and finally the J-20. The last is a Chinese product.

And yet we have on this forum a Chinese member who claimed to be a physics professor asserted that the 10-lambda rule is solely a Western construct. We can only wonder what senors Jinkui Yan, Changlong Xu, and Deming Xu, of Shanghai University, thinks of this assertion. May be these three gents do not exist? Neither does the 'Asia Pacific Microwave Conference'? Neither does Shanghai University?

NOW we have another Chinese member who asserted that EM transmissions from EW systems will kill the user. This man have no military experience and clearly no relevant technical experience. And he says that EW warfare is basically suicidal in nature: death from self created radiation.

Who can refute this? No one can. No one should even try. These two gems, and there are plenty more, are prime examples of the old advice about arguing with fools who drags you down to their level and beat you with their experience. Or in this case -- lack of.

try harder! you are wasting everyone's time on irrelevant drivels!

1. you have cited an article written by Chinese physicists - much to shut up your foul mouth ranting and degrading "Chinese Physics"

2. it is you who wrote " EM" wall blab blah blah and then chickened out to swift to " EW' electronic wall so as to fire up the comedy

3. this is the quote, and read it loud to readers from which department is this quoted?

Electromagnetic radiation hazards (RADHAZ or EMR hazards): Hazards caused by a transmitter/antenna installation that generates electromagnetic radiation in the vicinity of ordnance, personnel, or fueling operations in excess of established safe levels or increases the existing levels to a hazardous level; or a personnel, fueling, or ordnance installation located in an area that is illuminated by electromagnetic radiation at a level that is hazardous to the planned operations or occupancy. These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices; (b) cause harmful or injurious effects to humans and wildlife; (c) create sparks having sufficient magnitude to ignite flammable mixtures of materials that must be handled in the affected area. —Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

 

[gambit]

try harder! you are wasting everyone's time on irrelevant drivels!

1. you have cited an article written by Chinese physicists - much to shut up your foul mouth ranting and degrading "Chinese Physics"

2. it is you who wrote " EM" wall blab blah blah and then chickened out to swift to " EW' electronic wall so as to fire up the comedy

3. this is the quote, and read it loud to readers from which department is this quoted?

Electromagnetic radiation hazards (RADHAZ or EMR hazards): Hazards caused by a transmitter/antenna installation that generates electromagnetic radiation in the vicinity of ordnance, personnel, or fueling operations in excess of established safe levels or increases the existing levels to a hazardous level; or a personnel, fueling, or ordnance installation located in an area that is illuminated by electromagnetic radiation at a level that is hazardous to the planned operations or occupancy. These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices; (b) cause harmful or injurious effects to humans and wildlife; (c) create sparks having sufficient magnitude to ignite flammable mixtures of materials that must be handled in the affected area. —Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

Another gem...!!!

Too bad you did not even read your own source. Probably because you already demonstrated an obvious reading comprehension problem.

These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices;

EM transmissions from EW systems are not strong enough to detonate explosives. Those transmission are only strong enough to overwhelm the attacker's sensors. If I want to detonate explosives with a radar transmission or an EM 'jamming' signal, I would have to practically put the antenna and the explosive face to face. But we are talking about transmissions that reaches out to several kms here.

Do continue to make a fool out of yourself.

 

[jhungary]

you are just a sad loser. How many times have I said J-31 and 100 of them?

When did I say you did?? Wow you are now just randomly barking on people without even looking who did that person reply to??

@ post 58

The DF-21D was never a big deal to begin with because ballistic missiles are expensive.

The US Navy also has anti-ballistic missile capability in the SM-3 and SM-2 Block IV.

However, I would love to see how a Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke would stop 100 J-31s launching 800 CM-506KGs.

A single Aegis ship wouldn't have enough VLS cells to do it even if it could intercept every single glide bomb.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...ile-kill-chain-us-expert-4.html#ixzz2QbXhKGEx

you are the one along with the senior on the block have caused all the melee

perfect english!


it this the 4th or 5th time again for that repetition of "J-31"

perfect english for a floor mopper?

you admit your stupidity, alrighit.

the 6th or 7th time about the J-31 again! OH my Heavens!

that is how you demonstrate your military expertise.

Kids in kindergarten know about this! And how many refueling airplanes can you have for your 2000~3000 airborne fleet!

the dirt is usa made weapons

it is only you and the dimentia vietnam private vet who participate in this comic show

caused you cannot and never will with your Childish pretentious logic!

your english leave much to be desired after growing up a vast majority of your time in an english friendly environment!

All off topic rant. By the way a "Floor mopper" does not exist, the word you are looking for is janitor

and I literally don't understand what you said by

your english leave much to be desired after growing up a vast majority of your time in an english friendly environment!

what is an English Leave??

 

[Genesis]

what is an English Leave??

opposite of an French leave in English and exactly the same in French.

 

[shuttler]

Another gem...!!!

Too bad you did not even read your own source. Probably because you already demonstrated an obvious reading comprehension problem.

These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices;

EM transmissions from EW systems are not strong enough to detonate explosives. Those transmission are only strong enough to overwhelm the attacker's sensors. If I want to detonate explosives with a radar transmission or an EM 'jamming' signal, I would have to practically put the antenna and the explosive face to face. But we are talking about transmissions that reaches out to several kms here.

Do continue to make a fool out of yourself.

you are making a fool of your self! hard time on you!

When you said you have to create “EM” wall to deter our missiles and bombs assaults you need to highly intensify the charge of electromagnetic fields to do that then you are frying your brains like egg yolks on frying pans

The academic paper is for results out of lab tests far from a war-time scenario
Our physics esearchers from Shanghai U alone is more than enough to shut up some foul mouths!

 

[jhungary]

Another gem...!!!

Too bad you did not even read your own source. Probably because you already demonstrated an obvious reading comprehension problem.

These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices;

EM transmissions from EW systems are not strong enough to detonate explosives. Those transmission are only strong enough to overwhelm the attacker's sensors. If I want to detonate explosives with a radar transmission or an EM 'jamming' signal, I would have to practically put the antenna and the explosive face to face. But we are talking about transmissions that reaches out to several kms here.

Do continue to make a fool out of yourself.

lol I was thinking, if what he said is true, then where should we store our C4 or any plastic explosive on that matter.....Or anything that have explosive in nature........

And you don't need to bring your own bomb for terrorist attack anymore, just brought your own mobile, stand next to a army munition depot and .............BOOM

 

[gambit]

you are making a fool of your self! hard time on you!

When you said you have to create “EM” wall to deter our missiles and bombs assaults you need to highly intensify the charge of electromagnetic fields to do that then you are frying your brains like egg yolks on frying pans

The academic paper is for results out of lab tests far from a war-time scenario
Our physics esearchers from Shanghai U alone is more than enough to shut up some foul mouths!

If that is the case, then every time an airborne 'jammer' like an EF-111 or a EA-6B lit up, all aircrafts, including itself, would fall out of the sky.

Your no experience continues to amuse everyone. Do continue...

 

[jhungary]

opposite of an French leave in English and exactly the same in French.

French leave is AWOL. I never heard of anything called English leave

 

[shuttler]

When did I say you did?? Wow you are now just randomly barking on people without even looking who did that person reply to??

@ post 58

I regard the poster as my team

All off topic rant. By the way a "Floor mopper" does not exist, the word you are looking for is janitor

and I literally don't understand what you said by

havent you learnt "lively english" in HK?

google "floor mopper" and look at the pictures

what is an English Leave??

is this an english primer?

is that adequately answered?