Chinese missile could shift Pacific power balance

[below_freezing]

Just finished watching these videos, you can't be serious.

The ballistic missile that they intercepted was a 1960's era SCUD. No modern day ballistic missile follows on a predetermined path. They have mechanisms that randomly generate pitch and yaw. The interceptor missiles cannot adjust fast enough so they miss.

an unsecured internal weight or a tiny bump on the warhead is enough to cause the missile to spin and move randomly.

it is so simple. if the interceptor misses by 1 cm the missile wins. the missile won't miss the carrier if it uses cluster munitions though.

 

[chauism]

an unsecured internal weight or a tiny bump on the warhead is enough to cause the missile to spin and move randomly.

it is so simple. if the interceptor misses by 1 cm the missile wins. the missile won't miss the carrier if it uses cluster munitions though.

Guess what? Someone brilliantly conclude that those cluster munitions could not make enough damage to the aircraft carrier runway, and if the runway is to be damaged, it can be repaired in no time during a war on the high sea. It seems to me that repairing AC's runway is easier than a fixed concrete land runway according to his statement. US aircrafts seem to be able to take off on a rough dented runway with many debris lying around. Pre-flight scanning for debris on the flight deck is just a useless exercise for AC personnels.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

an unsecured internal weight or a tiny bump on the warhead is enough to cause the missile to spin and move randomly.

it is so simple. if the interceptor misses by 1 cm the missile wins. the missile won't miss the carrier if it uses cluster munitions though.

No the system will calculate for the bump when it reads during the boost phase since the bump will be there.

But any ballistic missile made 1990's+ you will see that they do not simply fall straight to the ground they spin and turn erratically. SCUD are the only type of ballistic missile that falls straight down

 

[Super Falcon]

Chinese are better than american if they get ahead in power from America

 

[below_freezing]

No the system will calculate for the bump when it reads during the boost phase since the bump will be there.

But any ballistic missile made 1990's+ you will see that they do not simply fall straight to the ground they spin and turn erratically. SCUD are the only type of ballistic missile that falls straight down

then an unsecured interior weight would be even better, as it'll be undetectable through radar.

i also think boost phase detection is done with IR which would not reveal a bump.

 

[gambit]

Just finished watching these videos, you can't be serious.

The ballistic missile that they intercepted was a 1960's era SCUD. No modern day ballistic missile follows on a predetermined path. They have mechanisms that randomly generate pitch and yaw. The interceptor missiles cannot adjust fast enough so they miss.

You are talking out of your behind. Ballistic missiles DO travel in a predetermined trajectory, and you are just throwing out the words 'pitch' and 'yaw' with not a clue of what you are talking bout.

 

[gambit]

an unsecured internal weight or a tiny bump on the warhead is enough to cause the missile to spin and move randomly.

And it will miss the target randomly.

it is so simple. if the interceptor misses by 1 cm the missile wins. the missile won't miss the carrier if it uses cluster munitions though.

Depends on the warhead container size. We have gone through this before. This is what a ballistic missile warhead look like...

Too small of the cluster munition and it will not do enough damage, if a cluster submunition even hit the target at all. Too large of a submunition and there will not be sufficient area coverage. It is not that difficult to debunk Chinese physics.

 

[gambit]

Guess what? Someone brilliantly conclude that those cluster munitions could not make enough damage to the aircraft carrier runway, and if the runway is to be damaged, it can be repaired in no time during a war on the high sea. It seems to me that repairing AC's runway is easier than a fixed concrete land runway according to his statement. US aircrafts seem to be able to take off on a rough dented runway with many debris lying around. Pre-flight scanning for debris on the flight deck is just a useless exercise for AC personnels.

When China has an operational aircraft carrier, then we can talk...

 

[Brotherhood]

When China has an operational aircraft carrier, then we can talk...

Aww, when did Vietnam operating an aircraft carrier? are you kidding me or may be in your commie dream?
Btw, how is the progress regarding your application of US citizenship from John mccain?

 

[Chinaownseverything]

You are talking out of your behind. Ballistic missiles DO travel in a predetermined trajectory, and you are just throwing out the words 'pitch' and 'yaw' with not a clue of what you are talking bout.

No they don't, installing deceptive tactics into a ballistic missile is elementary, just simply put a random number generator to send to the controls of the ballistic missile (like the gyroscope, tuned mass dumper, piezoelectric accelerometer etc...) by knowing the changes reversing them so that the target still hits the target is elementary.

The USA has not shot down a single test ballistic missile that utilized deceptive maneuvers.

Taken from Harvard university physics

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...ps-zP5Tfw&sig2=a9QEYKkQwx1bZmAOmOBWpQ&cad=rja

The technical performance of the American ABM system is dubious. None of the few tests has been realistic operational exercises. Moreover, a very substantial fraction of these tests have resulted in failures, not because of fundamental design flaws but because of insufficient quality control needed by complex systems. The items which failed in these tests had functioned previously. The test missile trajectories were known beforehand, and the target missiles did not employ any decoys or other means of deceptive tactics to defeat the ABM system. Technically such decoys are considerably easier to produce than the missile itself; therefore, any nation capable of ballistic missile delivery against the United States could also employ countermeasures adequate to render the United States ABM system useless.

 

[gambit]

Patriot missile moves at MACH 5, Ballistic missile moves at mach 10

The issue with the ICBM is that it moves too fast, by the time that it is detected (after reentry) there is around 1.5 seconds before it hits.

ICBM launches are detected by orbital IR sensors that not only look for an IR contrast against the Earth's horizon but if the satellite just happened to be overhead of the launch site, it will detect that IR contrast against the ground as well.

early warning satellites

...enabled the satellite sensors to view a missile above the horizon of the Earth against the cold background of space, which is easier than viewing it against the warm Earth background.

That mean we can have minutes of early warning from launch to reentry detection.

Not only that...A reentry vehicle does not always appear directly over head. Been watching too many B-rated PLA propaganda flicks? Rather, an RV may reenter the atmosphere from the horizon, depends on the distance between launch and target. That mean the ground radar station is actually looking at the horizon, not pointing straight up. Forward travel results in longer flight time than literally vertical descent.

 

[gambit]

Aww, when did Vietnam operating an aircraft carrier?

Never had any. So how does Viet Nam applied to this discussion? Problem with reading comprehension?

are you kidding me or may be in your commie dream?

Am not a commie so the laugh is on YOU, commie.

Btw, how is the progress regarding your application of US citizenship from John mccain?

Am already a US citizen. Would you like to join US? You will have to leave 'Chinese physics' behind, though.

 

[gambit]

No they don't, installing deceptive tactics into a ballistic missile is elementary, just simply put a random number generator to send to the controls of the ballistic missile (like the gyroscope, tuned mass dumper, piezoelectric accelerometer etc...) by knowing the changes reversing them so that the target still hits the target is elementary.

More words you know nothing about. Sources please.

The USA has not shot down a single test ballistic missile that utilized deceptive maneuvers.

Taken from Harvard university physics

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...ps-zP5Tfw&sig2=a9QEYKkQwx1bZmAOmOBWpQ&cad=rja

The technical performance of the American ABM system is dubious. None of the few tests has been realistic operational exercises. Moreover, a very substantial fraction of these tests have resulted in failures, not because of fundamental design flaws but because of insufficient quality control needed by complex systems. The items which failed in these tests had functioned previously. The test missile trajectories were known beforehand, and the target missiles did not employ any decoys or other means of deceptive tactics to defeat the ABM system. Technically such decoys are considerably easier to produce than the missile itself; therefore, any nation capable of ballistic missile delivery against the United States could also employ countermeasures adequate to render the United States ABM system useless.

That is how testing goes. This shows you have no experience in R/D and manufacturing. In any testing regime, you control as many variables as possible and incrementally release these variables. If your project, whatever it is, fail at any point, you have data points that you can regress to replicate the successful tests and see where and why the current testing point fail. So you are grasping at straws here.

 

[Chinaownseverything]

ICBM launches are detected by orbital IR sensors that not only look for an IR contrast against the Earth's horizon but if the satellite just happened to be overhead of the launch site, it will detect that IR contrast against the ground as well.

early warning satellites

Looking at IR contrasts will not give you the location of the ballistic missile. The early warning satellites just tell you that there is a ballistic missile in the atmosphere, however it DOES NOT provide the information needed to SHOOT IT DOWN.

That mean we can have minutes of early warning from launch to reentry detection.

Not only that...A reentry vehicle does not always appear directly over head. Been watching too many B-rated PLA propaganda flicks? Rather, an RV may reenter the atmosphere from the horizon, depends on the distance between launch and target. That mean the ground radar station is actually looking at the horizon, not pointing straight up. Forward travel results in longer flight time than literally vertical descent.

My point is that the patriot system cannot get the information it needs UNTIL the ballistic missile has ended reentered the atmosphere and is close enough to the ship. Only then can the ship gather the information needed for interception, which at the point it is already too late to intercept since the ballistic missile is going to hit home in 2-3 seconds

 

[Chinaownseverything]

More words you know nothing about. Sources please.


That is how testing goes. This shows you have no experience in R/D and manufacturing. In any testing regime, you control as many variables as possible and incrementally release these variables. If your project, whatever it is, fail at any point, you have data points that you can regress to replicate the successful tests and see where and why the current testing point fail. So you are grasping at straws here.

That is not the point, the USA has only tested the patriot on SCUDS that don't implement deceptive maneuvers when even countries like North korea use deceptive maneuvers in their missiles.