China missile shifts power in Pacific

[gambit]

Adm. Robert F. Willard VS Adm. gambit, who should you believe? please pick your choice

Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.

"An analogy using a Western term would be 'initial operational capability (IOC),' whereby I think China would perceive that it has an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it," Adm. Willard told the Asahi Shimbun. "I would gauge it as about the equivalent of a U.S. system that has achieved IOC."
China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says - Washington Times

Did the admiral used the word 'killer'? Did the admiral explained how the DF-21 could be defeated? Did he refused to divulge how the DF-21 could be defeated or does he not know? Critical thinking skills, anyone? And I thought you are supposedly from a superior Asiatic stock...

 

[Thomas]

Untitled<<Link

that link is dated almost 5 years ago and 2 years prior to the chinese sub incident. Things have changed somewhat since then. No doubt U.S. ASW capabilities at gotten quite lax. Which is why I said the biggest threat to carriers is Subs. And as I said before the U.S. has awaken to this fact and currently taking steps to remedy that situation.

 

[gambit]

accoring to wikipedia:

Anti-ship missile C802 weighs 715kg. its warhead weights 165kg. its attacking speed is 1.6M

DF21 weights 15tonne, speed is 10Mach. I failed find the record of warhead weight for DF-21D, which is reportedly to be "AC killer". the payload of old DF-21A is 600kg.

Being a ballistic missille, it's far more destructive and faster than any anti-ship missiles, and surely much more difficult to intercept. AC, though large in size, however is a smart target, for ballistic missile to handle indeed.

but of course, you are free to believe AEGIS can take all of them

Critical thinking skills...

A missile, like anything in the air, carries weight penalties. So if the new engine is heavier, then there must be compromises somewhere, like fuel or warhead payload or shave off the fat elsewhere. So if the old warhead is about 600 kg, it would be safe to assume the new DF-21D to have its warhead approximately the same. This could be either nuclear or non-nuclear warhead.

Yes...If there is an impact, the kinetic energy plus the explosive force will do severe damages to an aircraft carrier but to sink it? Does anyone know? What tests were there to prove such lethality? Why does everyone assume that there is %100 certainty of hits? Why does everyone assume that the system has no vulnerabilities?

 

[scuthan]

Critical thinking skills, anyone? And I thought you are supposedly from a superior Asiatic stock...

Superior stock? thanks for your flattery. i received commie education and I believe everyone is equal. but i think being american gives one responsibility to lecture others how to think correctly, doesn't it?

 

[scuthan]

Critical thinking skills...

A missile, like anything in the air, carries weight penalties. So if the new engine is heavier, then there must be compromises somewhere, like fuel or warhead payload or shave off the fat elsewhere. So if the old warhead is about 600 kg, it would be safe to assume the new DF-21D to have its warhead approximately the same. This could be either nuclear or non-nuclear warhead.

Yes...If there is an impact, the kinetic energy plus the explosive force will do severe damages to an aircraft carrier but to sink it? Does anyone know? What tests were there to prove such lethality? Why does everyone assume that there is &#37;100 certainty of hits? Why does everyone assume that the system has no vulnerabilities?

Nobody suggests there is 100% certainty hits or no system vulnerablities.

Actually i only view the fancy "ASBM" as America's China threat hyping stuff unless china verify it officially. I was simply stating a fact that provided a ballistic missile were not destructive enough to destroy a boat, then all the modern anti-ship missile, numerous experts bend themselves in, would be useless design.

 

[Brotherhood]

Superior stock? thanks for your flattery. i received commie education and I believe everyone is equal. but i think being american gives one responsibility to lecture others how to think correctly, doesn't it?

Bro, no need to take a "viet-commie" too seriously, we have to excuse his hatred against China and Chinese for a reason=vanishing of South-vietnam from the world map.
Look at the bright side, its actually quite entertaining to "poke fun" at him once in while.

 

[gambit]

Bro, no need to take a "viet-commie" too seriously, we have to excuse his hatred against China and Chinese for a reason=vanishing of South-vietnam from the world map.
Look at the bright side, its actually quite entertaining to "poke fun" at him once in while.

The only thing, or persons, that is embarrassing and embarrassed, are YOU boys whenever you are confronted with an argument like post 16......People can see your automatic juvenile behaviors and will excuse from the discussion.

 

[gambit]

Superior stock? thanks for your flattery. i received commie education and I believe everyone is equal. but i think being american gives one responsibility to lecture others how to think correctly, doesn't it?

It is no secret in Asia that Chinese and Japanese believe themselves to be superior to the rest of us 'inferior' Asiatics. Judging from you boys' behaviors here, I would say you were raised with such racialist attitude. Why not? The personal attacks against me are quite automatic and revealing of that upbringing.

 

[1000VA]

How It Works: China's Antiship Ballistic Missile

Last week, U.S. Navy officials stated to a Japanese media that the Chinese are moving closer to deploying long-range missiles capable of targeting U.S. aircraft carriers. Here's how they work.

The most alarming weapon China is developing to deny the U.S. Navy access to the East and South China seas is the antiship ballistic missile—the first such missile able to change course to hit a moving aircraft carrier. Mounted on a mobile launch vehicle, an ASBM would rise in two stages, reach space and then use fins to maneuver at hypersonic speeds on its way back down. The warhead then glides along a level path to permit synthetic aperture radar, which processes multiple radar pulses to form a single picture to target the carrier. Finally, the warhead’s infrared seeker locates a carrier’s signature and closes in for the kill.
How it Works ASBM - China's Antiship Ballistic Missile - Popular Mechanics

 

[Jigs]

that link is dated almost 5 years ago and 2 years prior to the chinese sub incident. Things have changed somewhat since then. No doubt U.S. ASW capabilities at gotten quite lax. Which is why I said the biggest threat to carriers is Subs. And as I said before the U.S. has awaken to this fact and currently taking steps to remedy that situation.

What kind if steps ? They are still sticking with a Nuclear submarine force.

 

[gambit]

How It Works: China's Antiship Ballistic Missile

Last week, U.S. Navy officials stated to a Japanese media that the Chinese are moving closer to deploying long-range missiles capable of targeting U.S. aircraft carriers. Here's how they work.

The most alarming weapon China is developing to deny the U.S. Navy access to the East and South China seas is the antiship ballistic missile—the first such missile able to change course to hit a moving aircraft carrier. Mounted on a mobile launch vehicle, an ASBM would rise in two stages, reach space and then use fins to maneuver at hypersonic speeds on its way back down. The warhead then glides along a level path to permit synthetic aperture radar, which processes multiple radar pulses to form a single picture to target the carrier. Finally, the warhead’s infrared seeker locates a carrier’s signature and closes in for the kill.
How it Works ASBM - China's Antiship Ballistic Missile - Popular Mechanics

Let me guess...You genuinely believe there is not a single -- not one -- vulnerability in that chain, vulnerability that already has a countermeasure?

 

[below_freezing]

gambit: thank you for the professional analysis. however, the DF-21 is not the "only" anti aircraft carrier weapon avaliable. it is merely one of numerous ways to disable a carrier: J-10/Su-30/JH-7 antiship strikes, submarines, 052C destroyers, ground based antiship cruise missiles, as well as DF-21 ballistic missile. the number of fighters that we can bring in against even 4-5 carrier battle groups outnumbers what they carry.

 

[faithfulguy]

gambit: thank you for the professional analysis. however, the DF-21 is not the "only" anti aircraft carrier weapon avaliable. it is merely one of numerous ways to disable a carrier: J-10/Su-30/JH-7 antiship strikes, submarines, 052C destroyers, ground based antiship cruise missiles, as well as DF-21 ballistic missile. the number of fighters that we can bring in against even 4-5 carrier battle groups outnumbers what they carry.

The Chinese planes are out of questions. It would be at least 30-50 year before a Chinese plane can approach a carrier group and shoot a missile at a carrier. The surface ship is even less likely. The only option for China is this missile, which has many weak points. And the subs. The subs are actually the one legitimate threat to a US carrier task force.

 

[Thomas]

What kind if steps ? They are still sticking with a Nuclear submarine force.

the main reason for leasing nato diesel/electric subs is to develop more effective ways for detecting them. They are also in the process of building new training ranges for navy personel to hone thier skills in the latest ASW.

 

[cloneman]

The Chinese planes are out of questions. It would be at least 30-50 year before a Chinese plane can approach a carrier group and shoot a missile at a carrier. The surface ship is even less likely. The only option for China is this missile, which has many weak points. And the subs. The subs are actually the one legitimate threat to a US carrier task force.

Nah.Many options.For example,Anti-ship version of CJ10 LACM.Dont forget they initially called the CJ10 the DongHai10(&#19996;&#28023;10, or east sea 10).I wont expect it could reach 1500km to 2000km like its land attack version,but a rang about 800 km to 1000km could be expected.Also YJ-12 and YJ-62 which are easy to reach 500km.Of couse closer is better in an anti-ship combat,but it would give the JH7A and SU30MKK a chance to fire something at their maxim range.The rest options will be the SSN and SSK in the PLAN of course.Again the point here is the anti-ship BM is just one part of the navys whole anti-carrier system.And its not the PLANs only option.
The first leaked picture about CJ10 or DH10 in internet

Later LACM CJ10 in 2009