China’s Anti-Carrier Ballistic Missile Now Opposite Taiwan | Bloomberg

[gambit]

OMG why are you so disturbed!

all the while what you have been drooling on the net is talking accuracy and static tragets of DF-21D Now I trash all your arguments by quoting from your top brass

The paragraphs you quoted about usa counter measures are developments in progress,something in future. And send your distrust to your vet association sand lets see what they can do to you!

The only thing you trashed are your own arguments. All of you. I used the same wiki source you got and showed what our top brass said on how to defeat the DF-21D.

Bottom line is this question: Where are the DF-21D's open water testing?

 

[shuttler]

The only thing you trashed are your own arguments. All of you. I used the same wiki source you got and showed what our top brass said on how to defeat the DF-21D.

Bottom line is this question: Where are the DF-21D's open water testing?

bottom line is you have to ask your DoD for the privy information and to refute the DoD's statement as unreliable

in absence of these you are reconfriming your own mega failure in all the arguments

 

[gambit]

bottom line is you have to ask your DoD for the privy information and to refute the DoD's statement as unreliable

in absence of these you are reconfriming your own mega failure in all the arguments

So you guys cannot provide a single credible evidence that China conducted open water testing of the DF-21D.

- The US said nothing about it but that does not mean such testings were conducted.

- Missile launches cannot be hidden. Not covered by the media, may be. But it cannot be hidden.

- Such tests must be conducted between the Japanese and Philippines islands. That area is also shipping lanes in international waters. That means China must provide launch notifications to the international community.

Intelligent people, which clearly does not contains the Chinese members here, can see the logic presented. International launch notifications are nothing new. Even well publicized events like Space Shuttle launches obeys the treaty.

http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/SORegister/index.html

Under these arrangements information has been received from Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, China, Chile, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Venezuela as well as from the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT).

So where are the DF-21D's open water testings?

 

[shuttler]

So you guys cannot provide a single credible evidence that China conducted open water testing of the DF-21D.

- The US said nothing about it but that does not mean such testings were conducted.

- Missile launches cannot be hidden. Not covered by the media, may be. But it cannot be hidden.

- Such tests must be conducted between the Japanese and Philippines islands. That area is also shipping lanes in international waters. That means China must provide launch notifications to the international community.

Intelligent people, which clearly does not contains the Chinese members here, can see the logic presented. International launch notifications are nothing new. Even well publicized events like Space Shuttle launches obeys the treaty.

So where are the DF-21D's open water testings?

You are not entitled to the classified info!

Take the words from the wiki quote or leave it. In either case your babbles are distroyed, completely

 

[gambit]

You are not entitled to the classified info!

Take the words from the wiki quote or leave it. In either case your babbles are distroyed, completely

Neither are you and wiki.

So then by logic, what make you are so certain that the DF-21D will work as claimed? Based on technological achievements, the US is more credible regarding defense against the DF-21D than the DF-21D alleged accuracy claims.

 

[shuttler]

Neither are you and wiki.

So then by logic, what make you are so certain that the DF-21D will work as claimed? Based on technological achievements, the US is more credible regarding defense against the DF-21D than the DF-21D alleged accuracy claims.

did wiki mention the quote is from us DoD?

you are similar to the situation of people who are struggling on to grasp their last breath in your drivels!

 

[hk299792458]

So you guys cannot provide a single credible evidence that China conducted open water testing of the DF-21D.

- The US said nothing about it but that does not mean such testings were conducted.

- Missile launches cannot be hidden. Not covered by the media, may be. But it cannot be hidden.

- Such tests must be conducted between the Japanese and Philippines islands. That area is also shipping lanes in international waters. That means China must provide launch notifications to the international community.

Intelligent people, which clearly does not contains the Chinese members here, can see the logic presented. International launch notifications are nothing new. Even well publicized events like Space Shuttle launches obeys the treaty.

United Nations Register of Space Objects Launched into Outer Space


So where are the DF-21D's open water testings?

Photos already provided, simply ignored as usual.

Henri K.

 

[gambit]

Photos already provided, simply ignored as usual.

Henri K.

Provided photos were not even qualified as 'evidence', let alone 'proof'. Will ignore as deserved.

 

[applesauce]

whether or not the df-21d is real, is not the most important, what important is that the US government think its real and its already having an effect on US planning/weapons research. the DF-21D may have already done its job.

 

[hk299792458]

As promised, some titles of open-source R&D documents related to ASBM development in China. Just for information.

The last one is an extract from a paper that I have, saying that "the active radar seeker currently applied in the balistic missile for anti-ship purpose is in Ku band...[...]", and forecasts to change it into "microwave" seeker.

Provided photos were not even qualified as 'evidence', let alone 'proof'. Will ignore as deserved.

And nothing proves the contrary neither.

The fact is that YW-4 has been transformed, as soon in the picture, and several months after this transformation it is officially announced as "retired".

As most of the thing you said here. Quoting part of books doesn't proof that you really understand it and can apply it effectively.

Henri K.

 

[Martian2]

Ignore Gambit unless he can provide proof to back up his trash talk

It's better to just ignore Gambit. He has no credibility.

I asserted China would use an EMP to stop an American carrier group. Gambit replied that there was no proof China had EMP warheads.

Firstly, I had posted citations from Jane's Defense (via MissileThreat.com) to show that China has multiple EMP warheads on its ballistic missiles.

Secondly, I quoted John Foster (the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) and he said China possessed EMP weapons and was likely to use them against an American carrier group.

Does Gambit apologize for his complete ignorance of Chinese EMP capability? No. He just keeps on trolling.

Hence, I encourage everyone to ignore Gambit unless he provides a "direct and reputable citation" to back up his claim. By a "direct and reputable citation," I mean a recognized authority on the topic. I do not mean the fifty-year-old irrelevant sketches and diagrams that Gambit keeps dredging up.

 

[jhungary]

Chinese member here really ignore one fact, which I mentioned in post #72 and I had not had one single answer even now.

How would DF-21D threaten our carrier even if we assume all the thing on paper the DF-21 Can do will do??

While the reported Range on DF-21D is 1900 mile (~1600 nautical mile) the combat range of USN Super hornet is 1,200 nautical mile (Minimal AA/AG configuration without Drop Tank). That meanOur carrier do not need to get into the range to launch our hornet, with mid-way aerial refuelling which extended our Hornet range to at least 1,800 nautical mile, our hornet can reach out to those DF-21 before they can reach our carrier.

Why no Chinese member answer me on this aspect here? but brag on what they can do, infact they did not do much

 

[Martian2]

Chinese member here really ignore one fact, which I mentioned in post #72 and I had not had one single answer even now.

How would DF-21D threaten our carrier even if we assume all the thing on paper the DF-21 Can do will do??

While the reported Range on DF-21D is 1900 mile (~1600 nautical mile) the combat range of USN Super hornet is 1,200 nautical mile (Minimal AA/AG configuration without Drop Tank). That meanOur carrier do not need to get into the range to launch our hornet, with mid-way aerial refuelling which extended our Hornet range to at least 1,800 nautical mile, our hornet can reach out to those DF-21 before they can reach our carrier.

Why no Chinese member answer me on this aspect here? but brag on what they can do, infact they did not do much

Are you an idiot?

A tanker is a giant target. How will it survive flying in the airspace between the carrier and the Chinese mainland? China has long-range surface-to-air missiles and fighter interceptors. How will a giant tanker manage to loiter in the airspace between a carrier and the Chinese coastline?

How many planes do you think it can refuel before it is shot down? One? Maybe two?

Are you an idiot?

Show me a citation from a reputable source (e.g. AviationWeek, Jane's Defence, Flight Global, Richard Fisher, Andrew Erickson, Naval War College, etc.) to back up your idiotic idea.

 

[jhungary]

A tanker is a giant target. How will it survive flying in the airspace between the carrier and the Chinese mainland?

Are you an idiot?

First of all, you obviously do not know what is "Mid-Way Refuelling".

Secondly, have you ever heard of a thing called "Buddy Refuelling" system?

Before you demonstrate the necessary knowledge on both term, I will ignore you from now on

 

[Abhishek_]

First of all, you obviously do not know what is "Mid-Way Refuelling".

Secondly, have you ever heard of a thing called "Buddy Refuelling" system?

Before you demonstrate the necessary knowledge on both term, I will ignore you from now on

you realize you're talking to martian? the guy is our resident comedian.