Martian2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 5,809
- Reaction score
- -37
Range of China's DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM)
[Note: Thank you to EastWind for the picture.]
----------
US Naval War College: China's DF-21D ASBM costs $5 to $10.5 million per missile
A Chinese DF-21D ASBM costs only $5 to $10.5 million. China can afford to build hundreds of them.
Out of the 100 DF-21D ASBMs fired at a single aircraft carrier, China only needs one or two hits to achieve a "soft kill" (e.g. knocked out of combat). If there are more impacts, the carrier might sink.
I have suggested China may fire 100 DF-21D ASBMs to arrive near-simultaneously and attack an aircraft carrier. However, is this economically feasible? As shown in the citation below, each DF-21D ASBM costs between $5 to $10.5 million per missile.
We'll pick the upper range and say each DF-21D ASBM costs $10 million. A bombardment of 100 DF-21D ASBMs will cost a total of $1 billion. This is a cost-effective way to attack a $5 billion aircraft carrier.
Anyway, in a war, costs don't really matter. China will attempt to sink the aircraft carrier with sufficient numbers of DF-21D ASBMs regardless of cost.
----------
From the third page at the following link from the US Naval War College:
http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/...9d27/The-Strategic-Implications-of-Obscurants
"While it is problematic to estimate accurately the cost of the DF-21, sources place the unit price, in U.S. currency, between $5,000,000 and $10,500,000 per missile.[7] This seems a reasonable estimate in light of the cost of a similar weapon, the U.S. Pershing II, which adjusted for inflation would be roughly twelve million dollars per missile. In comparison, the ballistic-missile-defense-capable SM-3 costs roughly ten million dollars per missile. At first blush, the nearly equal prices of interceptor (SM-3) and ASBM (DF-21) suggest near parity in cost ratio, but a “shoot two to kill one” doctrine means a differential of nearly ten million dollars per exchange. However, even this is misleading, as the launch platform—essentially a big truck—of the DF-21 is far less expensive than that of the SM-3, a warship. This estimate also ignores the operational and developmental challenges of intercepting an ASBM; nor does it fold in the things like purchasing power disparity, labor costs, and government controls, which all favor China. Nonetheless, this simple cost comparison is striking."
[Note: Thank you to EastWind for the picture.]
----------
US Naval War College: China's DF-21D ASBM costs $5 to $10.5 million per missile
A Chinese DF-21D ASBM costs only $5 to $10.5 million. China can afford to build hundreds of them.
Out of the 100 DF-21D ASBMs fired at a single aircraft carrier, China only needs one or two hits to achieve a "soft kill" (e.g. knocked out of combat). If there are more impacts, the carrier might sink.
I have suggested China may fire 100 DF-21D ASBMs to arrive near-simultaneously and attack an aircraft carrier. However, is this economically feasible? As shown in the citation below, each DF-21D ASBM costs between $5 to $10.5 million per missile.
We'll pick the upper range and say each DF-21D ASBM costs $10 million. A bombardment of 100 DF-21D ASBMs will cost a total of $1 billion. This is a cost-effective way to attack a $5 billion aircraft carrier.
Anyway, in a war, costs don't really matter. China will attempt to sink the aircraft carrier with sufficient numbers of DF-21D ASBMs regardless of cost.
----------
From the third page at the following link from the US Naval War College:
http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/...9d27/The-Strategic-Implications-of-Obscurants
"While it is problematic to estimate accurately the cost of the DF-21, sources place the unit price, in U.S. currency, between $5,000,000 and $10,500,000 per missile.[7] This seems a reasonable estimate in light of the cost of a similar weapon, the U.S. Pershing II, which adjusted for inflation would be roughly twelve million dollars per missile. In comparison, the ballistic-missile-defense-capable SM-3 costs roughly ten million dollars per missile. At first blush, the nearly equal prices of interceptor (SM-3) and ASBM (DF-21) suggest near parity in cost ratio, but a “shoot two to kill one” doctrine means a differential of nearly ten million dollars per exchange. However, even this is misleading, as the launch platform—essentially a big truck—of the DF-21 is far less expensive than that of the SM-3, a warship. This estimate also ignores the operational and developmental challenges of intercepting an ASBM; nor does it fold in the things like purchasing power disparity, labor costs, and government controls, which all favor China. Nonetheless, this simple cost comparison is striking."
