Can Anti Ship Ballistic Missiles reliably hit naval warships?

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

PN is pursuing a BM for AntiShip role probably b/c our in-house Super Sonic Cruise Missile program has failed.
Missiles, especially ballistic missiles,are called missiles instead of "hitiles" because they " miss " more often than they actually " hit " with pin point accuracy.
Now PN is integrating a P-282 AntiShBM (Locally produced Chinese BM CM401) on its Milgem corvettes But I fear they will not be able to reliably hit the moving warships.


BMs are easy to detect and engage.Khinzal interception by Patriot suggests that even Hypersonic BMs can be intercepted.

 

[GWXP]

PN is pursuing a BM for AntiShip role probably b/c our in-house Super Sonic Cruise Missile program has failed.
Missiles, especially ballistic missiles,are called missiles instead of "hitiles" because they " miss " more often than they actually " hit " with pin point accuracy.
Now PN is integrating a P-282 AntiShBM (Locally produced Chinese BM CM401) on its Milgem corvettes But I fear they will not be able to reliably hit the moving warships.


BMs are easy to detect and engage.Khinzal interception by Patriot suggests that even Hypersonic BMs can be intercepted.

1) You need UAVs, Radars, Satellites to find the hostile warship in the open sea before launching an Anti-Ship ballistic missile at it....Once location of the hostile warship is identified there are good chances that advanced Anti-Ship BM with maneuvering warhead will hit it....the problem is finding the moving ship hundreds if not thousands of miles away in the open sea.

2) Do you really believe that propaganda nonsense about shitty Patriot intercepting Hypersonic Kinzhal missile? Patriots in Saudi Arabia find it problematic to intercept even Yemeni SCUD missiles let alone Kinzhal...Even US AEGIS combat system with its expensive SM3 and SM6 interceptors probably will not be able to intercept a maneuvering warhead of Anti-Ship ballistic missile that moves at a speed of Mach 10

 

[Fish]

PN is pursuing a BM for AntiShip role probably b/c our in-house Super Sonic Cruise Missile program has failed.
Missiles, especially ballistic missiles,are called missiles instead of "hitiles" because they " miss " more often than they actually " hit " with pin point accuracy.
Now PN is integrating a P-282 AntiShBM (Locally produced Chinese BM CM401) on its Milgem corvettes But I fear they will not be able to reliably hit the moving warships.


BMs are easy to detect and engage.Khinzal interception by Patriot suggests that even Hypersonic BMs can be intercepted.

I should hope so, considering everyone is now investing in hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles.

The most effective weapon against aircraft carriers, by far.

We really need to invest in Chinese YJ-21 ("Carrier Killer") missile system to deter the threat posed by Indian aircraft carriers... which are about as useful as WWI battle tanks on a modern battlefield.

 

[DF41]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-struck-moving-ship-in-south-china-sea-report

REPEATING WHAT WAS VERY OFTEN SAID AND REPEATED BUT BROWN NOSERS OF MURICA MISSED, OR UTTERLY IGNORE, FROM ALL THAT THEIR NOSES COLLECTED FROM THE BUTT OF MURICA

 

[nahtanbob]

1) You need UAVs, Radars, Satellites to find the hostile warship in the open sea before launching an Anti-Ship ballistic missile at it....Once location of the hostile warship is identified there are good chances that advanced Anti-Ship BM with maneuvering warhead will hit it....the problem is finding the moving ship hundreds if not thousands of miles away in the open sea.

2) Do you really believe that propaganda nonsense about shitty Patriot intercepting Hypersonic Kinzhal missile? Patriots in Saudi Arabia find it problematic to intercept even Yemeni SCUD missiles let alone Kinzhal...Even US AEGIS combat system with its expensive SM3 and SM6 interceptors probably will not be able to intercept a maneuvering warhead of Anti-Ship ballistic missile that moves at a speed of Mach 10

Russia has not made a dent on Ukraine military capacity even with all those missile launches

 

[LeGenD]

2) Do you really believe that propaganda nonsense about shitty Patriot intercepting Hypersonic Kinzhal missile? Patriots in Saudi Arabia find it problematic to intercept even Yemeni SCUD missiles let alone Kinzhal...Even US AEGIS combat system with its expensive SM3 and SM6 interceptors probably will not be able to intercept a maneuvering warhead of Anti-Ship ballistic missile that moves at a speed of Mach 10

FYI

American military technology updates and general discussion

Learn about the Stryker Family of Vehicles in following videos:

pdf.defence.pk

 

[vikan]

I should hope so, considering everyone is now investing in hypersonic anti-ship cruise missiles.

The most effective weapon against aircraft carriers, by far.

We really need to invest in Chinese YJ-21 ("Carrier Killer") missile system to deter the threat posed by Indian aircraft carriers... which are about as useful as WWI battle tanks on a modern battlefield.

Oxymoron statement, if the carriers are as reliable as you state (source?) Why use yj21?

 

[Mehdipersian]

FYI

American military technology updates and general discussion

Learn about the Stryker Family of Vehicles in following videos:

pdf.defence.pk

Why you delete my comment?
You are abusing your authority.

 

[MeFishToo]

1) You need UAVs, Radars, Satellites to find the hostile warship in the open sea before launching an Anti-Ship ballistic missile at it....Once location of the hostile warship is identified there are good chances that advanced Anti-Ship BM with maneuvering warhead will hit it....the problem is finding the moving ship hundreds if not thousands of miles away in the open sea.

2) Do you really believe that propaganda nonsense about shitty Patriot intercepting Hypersonic Kinzhal missile? Patriots in Saudi Arabia find it problematic to intercept even Yemeni SCUD missiles let alone Kinzhal...Even US AEGIS combat system with its expensive SM3 and SM6 interceptors probably will not be able to intercept a maneuvering warhead of Anti-Ship ballistic missile that moves at a speed of Mach 10

The SM3 and SM6 interceptors would most probably never take a shot at a maneuvering anti-ship warhead moving at Mach 10. Its all hypersonic hyperbole.

 

[DF41]

Why you delete my comment?
You are abusing your authority.

4 of my comments here deleted as those comments deemed to have no value.

Only comments that sing hosannas to Murica might got any value.

Folks here seen enough of my comments to know Murican brown nosers shiver away at what is written.
Such as this entry.

China's 'Carrier Killer' Anti-ship Ballistic Missiles - an Overview​

76,825 views 26 Aug 2022
We provide an overview of Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles in the context of anti-access/area denial, including the DF-26B, DF-21D and DF-17. We respond to some common questions, e.g. How do these missiles find their targets? Do they actually work? Want to support the channel? - https://www.patreon.com/EurasiaNavali...+
+
CHAPTERS 00:00 – Long-range DF-26B04:15 – Medium-range DF-21D & DF-1709:19 – How do Chinese ASBMs find their targets?14:06 – Short-range ASBMs17:06 – Do they actually work?REFERENCES:https://www.fpri.org/article/2021/05/...https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinas...https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1128...

 

[Fish]

Oxymoron statement, if the carriers are as reliable as you state (source?) Why use yj21?

Really?

Do I have to spell out everything?! What I meant was that:

We really need to invest in Chinese YJ-21 ("Carrier Killer") missile system to deter the threat posed by Indian aircraft carriers... which are about as useful as WWI battle tanks on a modern battlefield... due to the rise of supersonic missiles.

Happy?

 

[vikan]

Really?

Do I have to spell out everything?! What I meant was that:



Happy?

Really? You mentioned carrier killer missiles, then said carriers are ww2 era then bring in super sonic missiles? What super sonic missiles are you talking about? Carriers dont carry any super sonic missiles other than AD missiles. Do some research, then compile your post then review it and then post it.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Anti Ship Ballistic Missiles can be serious threat to Carriers but the problem is carrier will be operating far away from our ballistic missile effective range and BMs are not effective against Smaller war ships (corvettes &Frigates) but Corvettes and Frigates can be dealt with subsonic cruise missiles since they are relatively less defended.
We need serious investment in naval surveillance in the form of stealth UAVs.
@Fish

I wonder if we can launch anti Ship cruise missiles from submarine then we can get close to AC and engage it
But problem is still there Stealth UAV will be still needed for locating the AC Battle Group.

 

[LeGenD]

Why you delete my comment?
You are abusing your authority.

You need to recheck Forum Rules. I can delete propaganda / posts of no value if they are repeatedly posted and emphasized in the face of provided evidence.

If it takes this step to push people to improve their posting standards, so be it.

WE try our best to ensure Freedom of Expression but I see lack of quality on PDF on a regular basis.

The SM3 and SM6 interceptors would most probably never take a shot at a maneuvering anti-ship warhead moving at Mach 10. Its all hypersonic hyperbole.

SM-3 is designed to intercept ballistic missiles and the sort in midcourse phase while SM-6 is designed to intercept ballistic missiles and the sort in terminal phase. Both are technically validated to defeat incredibly fast projectiles, maneuvering or not. SM-3 has ASAT capability as well.

This level of defensive capability is rare on ships. SM-3 is exported to only two countries while SM-6 is exported to only one.

 

[aziqbal]

1) You need UAVs, Radars, Satellites to find the hostile warship in the open sea before launching an Anti-Ship ballistic missile at it....Once location of the hostile warship is identified there are good chances that advanced Anti-Ship BM with maneuvering warhead will hit it....the problem is finding the moving ship hundreds if not thousands of miles away in the open sea.

2) Do you really believe that propaganda nonsense about shitty Patriot intercepting Hypersonic Kinzhal missile? Patriots in Saudi Arabia find it problematic to intercept even Yemeni SCUD missiles let alone Kinzhal...Even US AEGIS combat system with its expensive SM3 and SM6 interceptors probably will not be able to intercept a maneuvering warhead of Anti-Ship ballistic missile that moves at a speed of Mach 10

first and foremost to detect in real time a warship out at sea is a very difficult

real time monitoring requires a whole spectrum of surveillance and sensors and takes large amount of high end assets

to hit a warship at sea which has a layered defence like a USN Aircraft Carrier is almost impossible

Chinese could do it against the USN forward deployed Carriers at Yokosuka but to hit one during wartime in the Pacific when full assets are activated not so easy

which is exactly why US is willing to spend $13 billion on a Ford Class even although North Korea has cheap ballistic missiles

the ocean is vast and open and a Carrier although it seems big is a tiny speck in the sea, and most importantly its moving at over 30 knots and that is a very fast speed for a Carrier Strike Group