DF-41 is back on the road!!

[qwerrty]

you're right. that's about twice the speed of an ICBM.

 

[rcrmj]

Whatever it is, its the only (besides American) operational ABM system with capability to shoot down ICBM.
BTW your ABM capabilities is not even close to our 40 years old capabilities. You still never managed to shoot down a real ICBM in any single test, all your "midcourse interception" tests were against medium range ballistic missiles, that are easily shot down by operational S-400.
So current Chinese ABM capabilities:
- against ICBM - no operational systems, not even tests.
- against medium range ballistic missiles - only tests, not operational.

Did Russia ever shoot down a ballistic missile without a nuke head?

Kid study the difference between mid course and terminal interception, and level of technological requirement form them first then come to talk..

 

[gambit]

did you know how to shoot down something like 40 times faster than speed of sound ?

This hint that you do not know what you are talking about.

In interception schemes, the speed of the target has different relevance even when the interception is a tail chase situation. And yes, technically speaking, a chase is an intercept because the word 'intercept' mean to interrupt a journey and the interceptor is the actor that performs that interruption.

Anyway...In a tail chase scenario, the target speed require the interceptor to have a greater speed in order to effect that interception. This is called 'pure pursuit' and is the simplest of all interception schemes.

However...If the interception scenario is head on, then the target's speed is used differently.

The target's speed is used by the interceptor to calculate the collision point, which is about predicting or guessing where the target is going to be and the interceptor just need to be at that point. If you ever done any hunting with a projectile weapon like the bow and arrow or a rifle, you will know what I am talking about: leading the target. Exactly the illustration above.

So to answer your question: Yes, we do know how to intercept a target whether it is traveling at 1 km/hr or 1,000 km/hr or 10,000 km/hr. The problem lies in hardware accuracy and precision at calculating that collision point.

Did Russia ever shoot down a ballistic missile without a nuke head?

Kid study the difference between mid course and terminal interception, and level of technological requirement form them first then come to talk..

Take your own advice: study.

In interception schemes, it does not matter if the warhead is nuclear or non. What matter are target traveling characteristics: speed and heading.

 

[Pandora]

Is it a truck ?

 

[qwerrty]

The target's speed is used by the interceptor to calculate the collision point, which is about predicting or guessing where the target is going to be and the interceptor just need to be at that point. If you ever done any hunting with a projectile weapon like the bow and arrow or a rifle, you will know what I am talking about: leading the target. Exactly the illustration above.

that doesn't sound good at all for russian interceptor. it was reported they fired a few at the rock, but failed to stop it.

 

[gambit]

that doesn't sound good at all for russian interceptor. it was reported they fired a few at the rock, but failed to stop it.

Knowing the 'how' of things mean a sound understanding of the theory. But execution is a different issue. Execution is where hardware limitation begins to degrade the goal. Take the tail chase or 'pure pursuit' scheme for example. A less powerful engine than the target's is a hardware limitation. In this case, you would not want to use your interceptor in pursuit but in head on collision. Same interceptor but in different scheme. Then there are other factors like sensors and computing power for maneuvering targets but those are different issues.

 

[zzzz]

Did Russia ever shoot down a ballistic missile without a nuke head?

No wonder you dont have any clue about that.

Kid study the difference between mid course and terminal interception, and level of technological requirement form them first then come to talk..

You need to start your study from much simpler things before going to the area that is completly beyond your knowledge.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I believe only S-500 will be the Russian THAAD, but S-400 is only for air defense.

 

[Akasa]

Where's the world shattering DF-41? I don't see it? Yeah! The darn chassis is back on the road, not the fake DF-41 which is in the museum or being used as a metal tunnel in the children's play area!

It's in a place within your leaders' minds called denial

 

[rcrmj]

No wonder you dont have any clue about that.



You need to start your study from much simpler things before going to the area that is completly beyond your knowledge.

please elaborate, or you are just being clueless

 

[ptldM3]

Did Russia ever shoot down a ballistic missile without a nuke head?

Kid study the difference between mid course and terminal interception, and level of technological requirement form them first then come to talk..

Yes, more than 50 years ago with a V-1000. But please continue the Chinese chest thumping contests of 'we are superior'.

 

[Chengduman]

i like this name dong feng and especially it's meaning.
wind from east

Yes,that's right.

 

[Chengduman]

S-400 shoots down ballistic missile in terminal phase, it doesnt need to "midcourse incertept" anything. And S-400 can hit targets at altitude up to 185km. Please stop polluting military threads with your rubbish, you actually dont have any clue about weapon technology.



No one cares about that. Shoot down actual ICBM then we talk.
And here is a bit education for you. Russia performed first ASAT test in 1968. 40 years ago.
List of Kosmos satellites (251

Russia did it? No, USSR did it.

 

[shuttler]

Yes, more than 50 years ago with a V-1000. But please continue the Chinese chest thumping contests of 'we are superior'.

that was a nuke strike not a kinetic kill, wasnt it? also please affirm with links that Russia has indeed successfully tested a mid-course interception

@gambit

there are 3 types of interception: head-on; side-on and tail-chase.

The degree of difficulty to deploy ranges in descending order from head-on to tail-chase while the power of the intercepting booster ranges in opposite order. Get it?!

 

[shuttler]

To shoot down an ICMB you need to have an operational ABM system, not just conducticting some dubious "tests". There are only two countries that have operational ABM systems - US and Russia. Therefore Chinese capability to shoot down advanced ICBM in real life is currently zero.

The conditions of making that happening in full operations are there for us!