What's new

China's Blitzkrieg on U.S. Carrier

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no current deployed system that can intercept a re-entry warhead. There is a a reason for that. Velocity.

Velocity however is only an enemy if the warhead is nuclear. If it is not, it is the missile's enemy as well. Can you even begin to fathom how accurate you must be to hit a moving ship at those speeds?

I posted before, the Carrier might as well be as small as a fishing boat in those speeds..

Can you even begin to fathom how fast a modern gigahertz microprocessor (1,000,000,000 operations per second) can process information? To the microprocessor, the ballistic missile is moving in slow motion and the aircraft carrier isn't moving at all.

Intel Unveils 1.5 Gigahertz Microprocessor - eNotes.com

"Article abstract: Intel introduced its Pentium 4 microprocessor, with processing speeds of 1.5 gigahertz, a far cry from the Intel 8088, which it released in 1979 for ..."
 
Here is an idea, we take out the launch sites with conventionaly armed ICBM's, of course after reassuring the Chinese they aren't nuclear.
 
Can you even begin to fathom how fast a modern gigahertz microprocessor (1,000,000,000 operations per second) can process information? To the microprocessor, the ballistic missile is moving in slow motion and the aircraft carrier isn't moving at all.

Intel Unveils 1.5 Gigahertz Microprocessor - eNotes.com

"Article abstract: Intel introduced its Pentium 4 microprocessor, with processing speeds of 1.5 gigahertz, a far cry from the Intel 8088, which it released in 1979 for ..."

I am afraid I have to tell you this is irrelevant. We have had this processing power for some time now, missiles still miss. There isn't a single missile system on this planet right now that offers 100% hit rate. And that is at significant lower velocities. I hope you will not argue this.
What makes you so confident that problems that haven't been solved with "lesser" weapon systems have been resolved with this one?
 
I am afraid I have to tell you this is irrelevant. We have had this processing power for some time now, missiles still miss. There isn't a single missile system on this planet right now that offers 100% hit rate. And that is at significant lower velocities. I hope you will not argue this.
What makes you so confident that problems that haven't been solved with "lesser" weapon systems have been resolved with this one?

Let's say China shoots 100 DF-21D ASBMs at an aircraft carrier within five minutes. For whatever reason, let's say 15% fail. That means 85 MARV warheads are bearing down on the aircraft carrier. Do you want to bet on the survivability of the carrier?

China does not need an 100% hit rate or effective system. The attacker only needs a couple of hits and the carrier is down.

xYAxL.jpg

Simulated ASBM strikes on aircraft carrier deck mock-up on land. I know the "carrier" isn't moving. However, to a gigahertz microprocessor on the DF-21D ASBM, a real aircraft carrier (with a speed of 30 knots per hour) isn't really moving either.
 
F 18s with ASEA Equipped can take out the Launching Sites. Nimitz has upto 90. I think upto 6 can be Launched at a time. So they can make upto 15 Vs.

Can any American tell me What are the escorts in a Typical Nimitz CBG?
 
Let's say China shoots 100 DF-21D ASBMs at an aircraft carrier within five minutes. For whatever reason, let's say 15% fail. That means 85 MARV warheads are bearing down on the aircraft carrier. Do you want to bet on the survivability of the carrier?

China does not need a 100% hit rate or effective system. The attacker only needs a couple of hits and the carrier is down.

OK, for argument's sake I will go along. You mean to tell me, someone in their sane frame of mind will order the launch of 100, (or even 10) ballistic missiles ?

Even if I am to believe that the carrier will be hit, do you want to bet on the reaction of the early warning systems of both NATO and the US/Russia ?

Still, even if 85% of the tips are falling down on the carrier, I still doubt any will hit it. I am not convinced by feasibility of that system. It only makes sense if the system is nuclear.

You are talking about a CEP of I would say sub-meter, since even missing the Carrier by a meter, well you haven't hit it ,have you? And aiming is not measured from the center of the carrier, but from whatever the guidance sees as a target, right?

I don't think anything can be that accurate with the current level of technology.
 
F 18s with ASEA Equipped can take out the Launching Sites. Nimitz has upto 90. I think upto 6 can be Launched at a time. So they can make upto 15 Vs.

Can any American tell me What are the escorts in a Typical Nimitz CBG?

F-18 has a combat radius of 460 miles. The carrier will be long dead before the F-18 takes off. Furthermore, American admirals have stated that no fourth-generation aircraft can penetrate China's overlapping air defenses, which they have characterized as the most formidable in the world.

A few Aegis destroyers won't do any good. They'll be too busy trying to save themselves. They are also unlikely to be successful in defending themselves against a massive simultaneous bombardment of DF-21D ASBMs.

The fundamental problem for the U.S. is that ASBMs are cheap. China can fire hundreds of them cost-effectively at a billion-dollar destroyer or five-billion-dollar aircraft carrier.
 
Here is an idea, we take out the launch sites with conventionaly armed ICBM's, of course after reassuring the Chinese they aren't nuclear.

DF-21D target acquisition system will be wipe out if there is any potential conflict with the US. So this weapon system is useless. US will not move any carrier with the distance of DF-21D until the missiles are wipe out.

The question now become does China have any way of preventing a missile from destroying the system. Another question that we can ask is would US able to identify the system. Base on the size of the radar and the number of the missiles, it should not be a problem for the US military to make DF-21D nothing more than a technology demonstrator.
 
F 18s with ASEA Equipped can take out the Launching Sites. Nimitz has upto 90. I think upto 6 can be Launched at a time. So they can make upto 15 Vs.

Can any American tell me What are the escorts in a Typical Nimitz CBG?


Wiki ---> "A carrier strike group (CSG) is an operational formation of the United States Navy. It is composed of roughly 7,500 personnel, an aircraft carrier, at least one cruiser, a destroyer squadron of at least two destroyers and/or frigates,[1] and a carrier air wing of 65 to 70 aircraft. A carrier strike group also, on occasion, includes submarines, attached logistics ships and a supply ship. The carrier strike group commander operationally reports to the commander of the numbered fleet who is operationally responsible for the area of waters the carrier strike group is operating in."
 
F-18 has a combat radius of 460 miles. The carrier will be long dead before the F-18 takes off. Furthermore, American admirals have stated that no fourth-generation aircraft can penetrate China's overlapping air defenses, which they have characterized as the most formidable in the world.

a trident II D5 has a longer range than DF-21. Unless China can find and destroy the subs within the range of the DF-21D system, DF-21D is useless against the US carriers.

F 18s with ASEA Equipped can take out the Launching Sites. Nimitz has upto 90. I think upto 6 can be Launched at a time. So they can make upto 15 Vs.

Can any American tell me What are the escorts in a Typical Nimitz CBG?

US won't move any surface ships within the range of DF-21D until the sub launched trident or tomahawk missile destroy the radar use by DF-21D.
 
OK, for argument's sake I will go along. You mean to tell me, someone in their sane frame of mind will order the launch of 100, (or even 10) ballistic missiles ?

Even if I am to believe that the carrier will be hit, do you want to bet on the reaction of the early warning systems of both NATO and the US/Russia ?

Still, even if 85% of the tips are falling down on the carrier, I still doubt any will hit it. I am not convinced by feasibility of that system. It only makes sense if the system is nuclear.

You are talking about a CEP of I would say sub-meter, since even missing the Carrier by a meter, well you haven't hit it ,have you? And aiming is not measured from the center of the carrier, but from whatever the guidance sees as a target, right?

I don't think anything can be that accurate with the current level of technology.

You're a moron. An ASBM does not need a CEP on the order of a sub-meter. An Nimitz aircraft carrier is 333 meters long. Why do you need a CEP of a sub-meter to hit a 333-meter aircraft carrier? Do you know what CEP means? I think you're totally clueless.

----------

Anyway, there are too many trolls and morons in this thread. I'm tired of answering stupid questions. I only like good ones and I haven't seen any. See you guys later.
 
DF-21D is more of a political weapon than a military weapon. It just test the resolve of the US to interfere the Taiwan straite issue. If US has the resolve, than US will win any conventional war with China. So DF-21D would just make US think twice before interfere in any conflict with Taiwan. But if US is committed, US will certain win in any conflict vs China even if DF-21D has 5 times the capability of what it actually have.
 
You're a moron. An ASBM does not need a CEP on the order of a sub-meter. An Nimitz aircraft carrier is 333 meters long. Why do you need a CEP of a sub-meter to hit a 333-meter aircraft carrier? Do you know what CEP means? I think you're totally clueless.

----------

Anyway, there are too many trolls and morons in this thread. I'm tired of answering stupid questions. I only like good ones and I haven't seen any. See you guys later.

i think you don't understand what CEP is, and the size of the carrier has no bearing here.

whatever rocks your boat.

I have used the coordinates of your photo in google, there is nothing indicating a weapon's range.
If someone else can try the same and verify that it is indeed a weapon's range it would be nice.
 
We can't take a word of China's assurance during times of war when firing a ballistic missile which it is in the first place. Its a long range weapon and we don't slowly react to one the moment its launch. All you did was converted to carrying a conventional warhead and we don't know what has what since China tends to be secretive. So if China fires a ballistic missile we can assume that its a nuclear launch weapon so we go nuclear. China gave us the excuse to fire nuclear weapons.

First of all, the DF-21D is not a long range weapon. It is an IRBM and ballistic trajectories can be calculated. Are you saying the US is so backwards it can't even tell the difference between an IRBM and an ICBM?

But let me turn your argument against you.

Nuclear warheads can be delivered by cruise missiles.

W80 (nuclear warhead) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They can also be delivered by aircraft.

B61 nuclear bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So if the US launches a single Tomahawk cruise missile or deploys F-35s, China can assume that it is a nuclear first strike. You just gave China the excuse to launch every single DF-31A. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom