Chinese ASAT vs US ASAT

[gambit]

If the US has this technology, you can bet that the PLA has it too. China has a full range of methods to take out US satellites. Shooting down satellites is just one of our methods.

The US has not proven it is ahead of China in ASAT.

Sure...

Going by your 'logic', since the US have the Space Shuttle, would you be willing to bet China has one as well?

Buddy, the US have been in space far longer than China has and accomplished far more for space exploration as well. We have satellites whose missions have been long and secret when your fathers were still trying to figure out the TV remotes. We got telemetry intelligence (TELINT) and mappings of just about every space capable country that managed to put something in orbit. We got them from continuous satellite stations, from short duration Shuttle missions, as well as from atmospheric flights by EM recon aircrafts.

So yah...Bet your country's future away...

 

[That Guy]

Their 'reasoning' works this way: If an American car have a 10 gal fuel tank and travels 200 miles, then all China have to do is build a car with 11 gal fuel tank to go a little bit further and voila, the Chinese car is technologically superior.

To be fair, it would be considered a superior product.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

lol, but it's impractical to just shoot down "Some" of the satellite......

As I said, you only need 5 satellite to complete a "Bounce" from Non-LOS signal. Unless China can perform a strike package and destroy all the satellite in the world, the satellite network will be undisputed. According to NASA, there are currently around 3000 satellite in earth orbit, and we are adding them by days, you only need 5 to cover all 5 different blind spot of earth, that mean you have to shoot down 2994 satellite in one single strike to be able to disrupt the satellite service.

How Many Satellites Are Orbiting the Earth? (with picture)

In a Nuclear war scenario. The US can perform a total Strike package and destroy up to 88% of a single enemy defence. Nobody in this world can perform a strike that eliminate more than that amount. And to have an ASAT effective, you need a 99.83% eradication rate, which is a near perfect no miss strike. Anyone who served any form of military will tell you you must be dreaming......

It is a waste of time because you put money in, and it does NOTHING. What it does is, you probably can kill 10 or maybe hundred of satellite, still 2900 to go, you probably may make some MLB fans annoyed by destroying their major league satellite and have them miss a live game, but that all it would do. As long as we realise this, we stop researching for ASAT weaponry. You can keep on spending your money of course, it's yours

This is the same as saying, you are R&Ding a bullet that shoot down other bullet. Yeah it make sense when you talking about small number, like 1 on 1 or 10 on 10, but when you realise the world have more than 4 trillions rounds of bullet ready to fire, you will see why this invention is a waste of money.

Same as what U.S said about Chinese aircraft carrier, it has portrayed it as a sitting duck and vunerable to subs attack, and to discourage China further American said China need a battle group and not only that China need several carriers battle groups to be effectively cover china coastal, such undertaking will bankrup China's economy...after exhaustive persuasion via internet and military articles...then realized that China didn't take the bait, the humiliated Americans than start to sell the China threat in Asia and around the world.

As for you, don't take Chinese as so naive, we don't buy your theory such as Asat needs to shoot down 2994 sats and need to have a strike package to be effective. or such as why China need few atomic bomb when U.S has enought to wipe out entire earth several times...your attempt to discourage others to do what ever U.S has done just epic fail, not only we will do but do better than US.

 

[jhungary]

Same as what U.S said about Chinese aircraft carrier, it has portrayed it as a sitting duck and vunerable to subs attack, and to discourage China further American said China need a battle group and not only that China need several carriers battle groups to be effectively cover china coastal, such undertaking will bankrup China's economy...after exhaustive persuasion via internet and military articles...then realized that China didn't take the bait, the humiliated Americans than start to sell the China threat in Asia and around the world.

As for you, don't take Chinese as so naive, we don't buy your theory such as Asat needs to shoot down 2994 sats and need to have a strike package to be effective. or such as why China need few atomic bomb when U.S has enought to wipe out entire earth several times...your attempt to discourage others to do what ever U.S has done just epic fail, not only we will do but do better than US.

lol it is not 2994 anymore, 3 more just launch last months. it's now standing at 2997......

Anyway, it is just common sense, I am not trying to discourage anyone, in fact, I don't really mind, actually more than encourage Chinese to denote money into a field that there are absolutely NO USE in actual warfare. This way, it will be good on our defence when yours are going on the wrong way.

I am merely telling you the truth why US dropped ASAT as any major development. It's just common sense and how satellite uplink works, believe it or not is up to you, but hey, it's Chinese money, and you can spend on whatever the heck you wanted. Go for it, stave more women and children by doing it, I am all ok with this

 

[Snowden]

Sure...

Going by your 'logic', since the US have the Space Shuttle, would you be willing to bet China has one as well?

Buddy, the US have been in space far longer than China has and accomplished far more for space exploration as well. We have satellites whose missions have been long and secret when your fathers were still trying to figure out the TV remotes. We got telemetry intelligence (TELINT) and mappings of just about every space capable country that managed to put something in orbit. We got them from continuous satellite stations, from short duration Shuttle missions, as well as from atmospheric flights by EM recon aircrafts.

So yah...Bet your country's future away...

Who is 'we'? You are a Vietnamese. You will remain that way for the rest of your life.

In ASAT, we are definitely ahead of the US. In other areas, we might be ahead of the US but our military is very secret so it's hard to tell.

Just look at our DF-21D which now makes the aircraft carrier obsolete. Even though we are building our own carriers as we speak, that's because only we have the ASBM capability.

As I said, whatever the US has, you can bet we already have it or are close to having it.

 

[Snowden]

Same as what U.S said about Chinese aircraft carrier, it has portrayed it as a sitting duck and vunerable to subs attack, and to discourage China further American said China need a battle group and not only that China need several carriers battle groups to be effectively cover china coastal, such undertaking will bankrup China's economy...after exhaustive persuasion via internet and military articles...then realized that China didn't take the bait, the humiliated Americans than start to sell the China threat in Asia and around the world.

As for you, don't take Chinese as so naive, we don't buy your theory such as Asat needs to shoot down 2994 sats and need to have a strike package to be effective. or such as why China need few atomic bomb when U.S has enought to wipe out entire earth several times...your attempt to discourage others to do what ever U.S has done just epic fail, not only we will do but do better than US.

Americans know their days at the top are numbered. It's only a matter of time before we match them and surpass them. They know this, this is why they are reacting the way they are. The 21st century will belong to us. Why? Because its our destiny and I will go as far as to say its our birthright!

 

[jhungary]

People are quite ignorant on this topic, they only see yeah Chinese Did a great job in this and jump up and down about it. In the mean time having absolutely NO IDEA how the topic at hand work

The world currently have about 3000 satellite

Satellites have an operating lifespan between five and 20 years. As of 2008, the former Soviet Union and Russia had nearly 1,400 satellites in orbit, the USA about 1,000, Japan more than 100, China about 80, France over 40, India more than 30, Germany almost 30, the UK and Canada 25, and at least ten each from Italy, Australia, Indonesia, Brazil, Sweden, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea. The company Sea Launch — a consortium of four companies from the United States, Russia, Ukraine and Norway — has launched a few satellites into orbit from international waters every year, although the company filed for bankruptcy in 2009

How Many Satellites Are Orbiting the Earth? (with picture)

Well, if we only have 31 satellite, how on earth our civilian GPS system were shared between Americas, EU and part of Asia, over 51 country. And we also share the sate tech with the Military. LOL you have to be stupid to think we only have 31 satellite.

Weapon can switch between GEO/LEO satellite. The only different between a GEO and LEO satellite is GEO have more coverage, simply because they orbit higher, and LEO satellite are closer to earth thus enjoying much less LOS comm.

But them if Chinese member here think if they destroy 31 of our Meddle Orbit satellite and ignore the other 970 we own and it will disrupt our comm, they should go ahead and think like that. It's same as thinking if the Chinese successfully destroy the internet gateway the US military are using and they can shut down our military internet network.

said my piece, no more interest on chest thumping argument

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The MKV is what we need in the near future, since our EVK can only weigh about 6kg, one ICBM can carry a lot of these.

Most of the 3000 satellites are some junk satellites, our valuable targets are much fewer than that. The MKV technology can sort this problem really quickly.

 

[gambit]

Who is 'we'? You are a Vietnamese. You will remain that way for the rest of your life.

In ASAT, we are definitely ahead of the US. In other areas, we might be ahead of the US but our military is very secret so it's hard to tell.

Just look at our DF-21D which now makes the aircraft carrier obsolete. Even though we are building our own carriers as we speak, that's because only we have the ASBM capability.

As I said, whatever the US has, you can bet we already have it or are close to having it.

Doh...!!! Here we go again. As usual when a Chinese cannot debate on topic and must resort to attacking my origin.

 

[gambit]

Their 'reasoning' works this way: If an American car have a 10 gal fuel tank and travels 200 miles, then all China have to do is build a car with 11 gal fuel tank to go a little bit further and voila, the Chinese car is technologically superior.

To be fair, it would be considered a superior product.

No, it would not. The Chinese car have no foundational changes to the original design, which for debate's sake have four wheels, an engine, and a cabin. A foundational change would be something like rear wheel drive versus front wheel drive, or four wheel steering versus two wheel steering, or standard brakes versus anti-lock brakes, carburetor versus fuel injection, leaf spring versus single point shock, and so on...

The Chinese members' argument is very child like. Not childish, but child like, as in ignorance and enthusiastic, instead of thoughtful and deliberate.

The US have ICBM warhead guidance towards a ground target, but because the target is on land instead of sea, somehow that made a point on the sea surface geospatially impossible for the same targeting system to change.

The US have spacecrafts that went from Earth surface to the Moon, but somehow because we did not stopped at X altitude, somehow that made US incompetent at stopping at that X altitude.

The US delivered satellites at X altitude, but because the US did not destroy a satellite at the same altitude, somehow that made US incompetent at reaching the same altitude to destroy something there.

The 'reasoning' is really bewildering to read and try to understand how in the world could someone come up with this nonsense.

 

[That Guy]

No, it would not. The Chinese car have no foundational changes to the original design, which for debate's sake have four wheels, an engine, and a cabin. A foundational change would be something like rear wheel drive versus front wheel drive, or four wheel steering versus two wheel steering, or standard brakes versus anti-lock brakes, carburetor versus fuel injection, leaf spring versus single point shock, and so on...

The Chinese members' argument is very child like. Not childish, but child like, as in ignorance and enthusiastic, instead of thoughtful and deliberate.

The US have ICBM warhead guidance towards a ground target, but because the target is on land instead of sea, somehow that made a point on the sea surface geospatially impossible for the same targeting system to change.

The US have spacecrafts that went from Earth surface to the Moon, but somehow because we did not stopped at X altitude, somehow that made US incompetent at stopping at that X altitude.

The US delivered satellites at X altitude, but because the US did not destroy a satellite at the same altitude, somehow that made US incompetent at reaching the same altitude to destroy something there.

The 'reasoning' is really bewildering to read and try to understand how in the world could someone come up with this nonsense.

Let me ask you this, if you have a pen that can only write 100 words before it runs out of ink, and your friend has a pen that's cheaper, but can write 110 words, which would be considered superior?

I'm simply pointing out that your example doesn't really make sense, even if the rest of what you said is true.

 

[jhungary]

Let me ask you this, if you have a pen that can only write 100 words before it runs out of ink, and your friend has a pen that's cheaper, but can write 110 words, which would be considered superior?

I'm simply pointing out that your example doesn't really make sense, even if the rest of what you said is true.

in a way yes, but it's depending on the "Purpose" of said item and for the person who is using said item.

If you just want to write as much as you can coming from a life of a pen, then of course the one that last longer (110 Words) and cheaper is better "for you"

However, for the pen that wrote 110 words, that said no standard of the ink, they can took a bit longer to dry or the pen could have been harder to write on certain surface.

If you require a quicker dry time, and to write across different surface, and if(We do not mention the standard of that pen) the pen that only last 100 words dry faster and can write smoother , then even it's more expensive and last not as long as the cheaper one, the pen that wrote 100 words is still better.

How is it "Superior" depends on how you want to use it. It's never one dimension...

 

[gambit]

Let me ask you this, if you have a pen that can only write 100 words before it runs out of ink, and your friend has a pen that's cheaper, but can write 110 words, which would be considered superior?

I'm simply pointing out that your example doesn't really make sense, even if the rest of what you said is true.

Let me put it to you this way, and from the space program at that...

Say you have a pen that contain the average of 30 ml but can write only when it is right side up. Then I came along and modify your pen to reduce the ink to 20 ml but also contain pressurized nitrogen so that it can write upside down but also can be used in weightlessness. Whose pen is going to be considered a superior engineered and innovative product? Sure as the Chinese members are wrong about many things technical -- not yours.

Yes, my pen contains less ink and therefore will not last as long thru usage, but I have radically altered its structure to the point where its utility is far greater, opened up to a wider audience, and can be used under far different environment.

Regarding destroying satellites at a higher orbit altitude, reaching that higher altitude is already done, simply because we placed plenty of satellites at that altitude. Here is the reasoning that the Chinese members here lacks: If we can place a satellite at that altitude, we can place another satellite at the same altitude and make it collide with the other one. So just because China may have made an effort to create a satellite for that particular purpose, that does not mean the US cannot do the same. It also does not mean the rocket with the greater amount of fuel to reach that higher orbit is somehow technologically innovative. We went to the Moon. The Chinese have not. So where is it that the US is technologically inferior to China in rocketry? It makes no sense.

 

[j20blackdragon]

31 satellites (plus 3-4 decommissioned satellites) is all it takes to take down GPS.

Click this link if you don't believe me.

GPS.gov: Space Segment

There are approximately 31 or so GPS satellites currently in Medium Earth Orbit.

Here is an incomplete list of American weapons that rely on GPS for guidance.

Tomahawk (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AGM-86C Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile [CALCM] - United States Nuclear Forces

AGM-158 JASSM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Small Diameter Bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joint Direct Attack Munition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think about it.

 

[Chanakyaa]

Amazing...This kind of 'logic' is the reason why the Chinese members continues to be the laughing stock of this forum.

Let us see...

Since China have not built something like the Space Shuttle, that means China CANNOT do it. Since China have not built an aircraft carrier, that mean China CANNOT do it.

Only Day B4 Yesterday.. One of The Chinese Members Accused Indians of "Copying" Stuff .. n You May Imagine...
This was what i immediately uttered.. Its the Joke of Millennium...

I Guess Such Threads will find their True Value in "Funny & Jokes Section"..

31 satellites (plus 3-4 decommissioned satellites) is all it takes to take down GPS.

Click this link if you don't believe me.

GPS.gov: Space Segment

Did You take it for Granted that China would "EXIST" till the Last GPS Sat Goes Down ?
lol

Im Sure your Govt. Doesn't Think That way.