Thanks for your reply, but few things are unanswered... Assumption: This missile is Ballistic or at most Quasi ballistic missile..
All missiles have ballistic trajectories. Just that for distances of several hundreds km, the ballistic path is most prominent, hence the convenient association. A rifle bullet does have a ballistic trajectory, albeit a much 'flatter' one.
1. Between missile launch and target hit the time gap will be more than 15-20 minutes, by the time Carrier group can move 10-15 (16-25 KM) knots (Assuming 30 knots/hr) from the missile path(in any direction)... How this missile will track it path in between?? ballistic missile don't use Active homing or any similar technology.
That is the question that the DF-21 fanboys have been unable to answer, other than to make personal attacks against challengers to distract attention from the challenge.
You should first understand that a missile is essentially a throw-away weapon, meaning you throw away the launch vehicle along with the payload. An aircraft deliver its payload and return to base to rearm. A missile cannot. That mean a missile must be even more stingy about overall weight. A guidance system consists of a sensor system and a flight control system. So if a ballistic missile has a guidance and flight control systems, its payload will be reduced proportionately, assuming the missile's propulsion remains the same.
So how can the DF-21:
- Acquire a target ?
- Track this target?
- Adjust its path to match the target's continously changing location?
These are not technically impossible. Very difficult to design and implement-- yes. But not technically impossible. The problem here is that for a non-nuclear payload, even if there is a direct hit, the payload may be too small to do any crippling damages. It is too small because the warhead assembly must have room for the sensor and flight control systems. Another issue -- not problem -- is what is the reaction time for any maneuvers to adjust for a moving target? Lateral accelerations, meaning maneuvers, will create structural stresses, this mean the warhead assembly must be robust enough to withstand these stresses at Mach speed, this mean a reduced payload.
Take a look at this example...
bigEfire.com Ordeal of the USS Enterprise
The USS Enterprise came within a step of dying on 14 January, 1969. Exploding weapons on the flight deck blew the ship apart all the way down to the waterline. Flaming jet fuel from the thirty two aircraft involved cascaded down through those many great wounds firing the interior of the ship.
If this level of damages occurred in war, the Enterprise would have continued, not return to port. Air operations would have been limited, but not eliminated. But because it was peace time, and we do not want to send damaged ships to patrol, the Enterprise had to return to port for repairs. This should give you a rough guide on how tough it really is to actually sink a post WW II aircraft carrier.
Final thing to remember...Assuming this is still a non-nuclear engagement, in a ship versus missile situation, if the missile failed by even just one meter off, the ship win. So depending the sensor type, if the ship can create effective enough countermeasure to cause that one meter miss, the DF-21 is defeated.
2. I assume that as soon as missile launched Enemy radar/Intelligence can track the launch and even trajectory (this is how scud missile were intercepted, since then Ballistic missile upgraded so do the interceptors)
Yes on all counts.
