China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says

[Guest]

some time ago, some one said:
4G fighter, NO way!
carrier-killer, NO way!

now, the same some one said:
4G fighter, not comparable to F22!
carrier-killer, can be countered!

why all the no ways become reality? maybe it is because that some one still live in yesterdays' laws of physics: such as Iron ships never flow, or communication lost definitely when enveloped by plasma cloud.

 

[gambit]

some time ago, some one said:
4G fighter, NO way!
carrier-killer, NO way!

When?

now, the same some one said:
4G fighter, not comparable to F22!

Is it? Any evidences it is?

carrier-killer, can be countered!

Any evidences it cannot?

why all the no ways become reality? maybe it is because that some one still live in yesterdays' laws of physics: such as Iron ships never flow, or communication lost definitely when enveloped by plasma cloud.

The laws of physics are applicable yesterday as today. If evidences to support certain claims obeys those laws, then we have no choice but to acknowledge those claims as valid. So are there any evidences?

 

[Gabbar]

 

[Star√ation]

Not...Because commies are not very smart. Else they would not be commies in the first place.

........

 

[Cambodia Spirit]

........

Someone is just laughing on themselves!?

 

[S10]

Not...Because commies are not very smart. Else they would not be commies in the first place.

I congratulate non-commie South Vietnam on its great wisdom, but they're too smart for this world and no longer exists.

 

[TechMan]

China Confirms Carrier-Killer

China's chief military officer has issued the first official confirmation of the existence of a programme to develop a ‘carrier-killer’ missile that could allow China to challenge US naval dominance of the Pacific decades before it’s able to field a carrier fleet.

Gen. Chen Bingde announced that the modified Dongfeng 21-D missile will be able to strike ships nearly twice as far away as previously believed by US naval analysts, at a maximum range of 2,700 kilometres after launching from land.

Speaking to the China Daily, though, Chen tried to play down the PLA’s progress in developing the advanced missile system:

‘The missile is still undergoing experimental testing and will be used as a defensive weapon when it is successfully developed, not an offensive one,’ Chen was reported as saying. ‘It is a high-tech weapon and we face many difficulties in getting funding, advanced technologies and high-quality personnel, which are all underlying reasons why it is hard to develop this.’

Still, US naval leaders estimated that the Dongfeng system had reached ‘initial operational capacity’ as early as last December, using a technical term referring to technology in development that’s ready to begin performing some, but not all, of its intended functions. Large technical projects in the Chinese government are often developed under wraps, with the full extent of their progress saved to be used as a surprise for foreign audiences. Chen may also have sought to soothe the fears of US naval experts, who have been shaken by news of DF-21's development.

Experts have pointed out that accurately targeting carriers will require more than better missiles – they will need long-range radar systems and advanced military satellites to guide them. But analysts estimate that China will be able to produce 10,000 of the new missiles for the price of a single US aircraft carrier – so even with poor targeting, they could pose a serious threat.

US military leaders have, for their part, generally attempted to project sangfroid in the face of news about China’s developing area denial power, arguing that a single missile won’t change the balance of power in the region. But a missile capable of striking a ship nearly 3,000 kilometres from China's coast could end the US’s traditional ability to sail through disputed waters with impunity. It would certainly lead future US presidents to think twice before sending carriers to pass through the Taiwan Straits during standoffs between the two Chinas.

 

[Juice]

A) Carriers have always been vulnerable, even in WWII carriers were sunk, even without missiles.
B) we have 11 going, more on standby (even WWII ones wich can carry helos)
C) everyone seems to forget that the US just MIGHT shoot back

 

[gambit]

A) Carriers have always been vulnerable, even in WWII carriers were sunk, even without missiles.
B) we have 11 going, more on standby (even WWII ones wich can carry helos)
C) everyone seems to forget that the US just MIGHT shoot back

WW II era carriers are %10 of the carriers of today. In fact, during and before WW II, aircraft carriers were converted from other ship and hull designs. It was after WW II that aircraft carriers became a truly distinct design class. If you want to know how difficult it is to actually sink a post WW II aircraft carrier, do a word search on 'oriskany carrier sinking'. There is an excellent documentary on how the ship became an artificial reef and the amount of work it took to sink her, and that was with the cooperation of the US Navy. Another keyword search is 'enterprise deck fire'. You will be surprised at how much damages the Enterprise suffered and technically could still perform air operations IF it was war time. Regarding the DF-21D, people talk of sinking an Enterprise class ship out of ignorance and hubris than out of any real understanding.

 

[Juice]

WW II era carriers are %10 of the carriers of today. In fact, during and before WW II, aircraft carriers were converted from other ship and hull designs. It was after WW II that aircraft carriers became a truly distinct design class. If you want to know how difficult it is to actually sink a post WW II aircraft carrier, do a word search on 'oriskany carrier sinking'. There is an excellent documentary on how the ship became an artificial reef and the amount of work it took to sink her, and that was with the cooperation of the US Navy. Another keyword search is 'enterprise deck fire'. You will be surprised at how much damages the Enterprise suffered and technically could still perform air operations IF it was war time. Regarding the DF-21D, people talk of sinking an Enterprise class ship out of ignorance and hubris than out of any real understanding.

Lived in Newport News and Bremerton, sizable reserve fleets at both places (among others). Both had carriers, particularly many at Bremerton (on the Pacific)

(I don't doubt they MIGHT hit a carrier with this, but ballistic missiles hitting moving targets and getting even most (not all) would be a long shot.)

 

[fatman17]

Date Posted: 14-Jul-2011


China's top general confirms 'carrier killer'


J Michael Cole Correspondent = Taipei


General Chen Bingde, the People's Liberation Army Chief of General Staff, provided the first official confirmation on 11 July that China is developing the Dong Feng DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM).

The DF-21D (CSS-5 Mod-4) has caused concern in US intelligence circles as it would provide China with an anti-access, area denial capability in the West Pacific. US officials believe it could limit the movements of the US Seventh Fleet if it was sent to assist Taiwan in a conflict with the mainland.

While confirming its existence, Gen Chen cautioned that the DF-21D was still in development. "The missile is still undergoing experimental testing and will be used as a defensive weapon when it is successfully developed, not an offensive one," he told reporters.

Gen Chen added that to be deployed the DF-21D "requires funding inputs, advanced technology and high-quality talented personnel ... these are all fundamental factors constraining its development".

Gen Chen did not mention any range for the missile. The state-owned China Daily reported on 11 July that the DF-21D had a range of 2,700 km, but assessments by the US Office of Naval Intelligence last year put it at about 1,500 km.

Jane's has learnt that the reference to 2,700 km was added by China Daily staff and is not corroborated by other Chinese reporting on the DF-21D.


ANALYSIS

Although doubts remain over whether the DF-21D is nearing deployment, Andrew Erickson, Associate Professor of Strategy at the US Naval War College, said it was unlikely Gen Chen would have spoken publicly if the PLA was not "confident that it was maturing effectively and already had reached the necessary development level to begin to credibly shape regional strategic thinking in Beijing's favour".

A source with intimate knowledge of Chinese missile development told Jane's that Gen Chen's caution might tone down rhetoric that has grown up around the DF-21D.

"This suggests the programme might not be going as smoothly as hawkish China watchers might expect, and certainly the technical difficulties are legion for a country that doesn't even have a global positioning system in place yet ... which would be essential for the guidance of such missiles to target," the source said. "Apart from the missile itself, a whole host of other technologies would need to be in place, such as over-the-horizon radar."

Gen Chen's comments come during the visit to Beijing of Admiral Mike Mullen, the first Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff to visit China in four years. The timing echoes that of the unveiling of the Chengdu J-20 fifth-generation fighter prototype in January, which coincidentally occurred during a visit by then defense secretary Robert Gates.

"I think Chen wanted to let the US know that China is indeed developing effective ways to counter US 'hegemonism' in the Pacific, but without making it sound too threatening, hence the caveat on the difficulties in its R&D," the source said.

 

[Way to go]

It's perfect if someone post links.

 

[amalakas]

WW II era carriers are %10 of the carriers of today. In fact, during and before WW II, aircraft carriers were converted from other ship and hull designs. It was after WW II that aircraft carriers became a truly distinct design class. If you want to know how difficult it is to actually sink a post WW II aircraft carrier, do a word search on 'oriskany carrier sinking'. There is an excellent documentary on how the ship became an artificial reef and the amount of work it took to sink her, and that was with the cooperation of the US Navy. Another keyword search is 'enterprise deck fire'. You will be surprised at how much damages the Enterprise suffered and technically could still perform air operations IF it was war time. Regarding the DF-21D, people talk of sinking an Enterprise class ship out of ignorance and hubris than out of any real understanding.

Yes, that is why the russians wanted to use tac nukes on the battle group, to be sure the carrier is destroyed. Conventional tipped anti-ship missiles (even russian) are not enough to sink the carrier, well, perhaps if a couple of dozen actually hit it, but that would mean 12 planes' loadout was aimed and successfully delivered to the carrier, without even attacking the rest of the battle group

However, and without knowing the specifics, the kinetic energy of a re-entry vehicle without any braking would be enough to go through all the carrier decks and more... utter devastation ... not sure how the thing is supposed to hit the ship though

 

[UKBengali]

In a few years China will have a whole array of weapons in order to attack US aircraft carriers and their escorts. These will be the DF-21D missile, new generation Type-095 SSN and the cruise missiles that it can fire from subs, ships and aircraft. China only wants to present a credible enough threat that the US carriers stay well away from it's coast.

 

[Juice]

In a few years China will have a whole array of weapons in order to attack US aircraft carriers and their escorts. These will be the DF-21D missile, new generation Type-095 SSN and the cruise missiles that it can fire from subs, ships and aircraft. China only wants to present a credible enough threat that the US carriers stay well away from it's coast.

This is certain. Do remember though, the US might being doing some R&D of some sort, at least an off-hand chance.