What happened to Chinese Navy Frigate 514, ASBM Test?

[gambit]

The US knows DF-21 is the silver bullet and it works.

Hardly that 'silver bullet'.

But they keep mute about it including the success of the test. They do not want the US public to panic.

How about American anti-ballistic missile program works, but the Chinese government kept mute about the DF-21D's failure because the Chinese government do not want the Chinese public to panic ?

 

[Beast]

Hardly that 'silver bullet'.


How about American anti-ballistic missile program works, but the Chinese government kept mute about the DF-21D's failure because the Chinese government do not want the Chinese public to panic ?

You think PLA is Iran armed forces? Putting up old drum as S-300 missile tube to fake operational?

The Chinese confidently shown 2 type of operational ASBM to the world during victory day parade. And Chinese are well know not to brag about it success. When China successfully shoot down a satelite in 2007. It was Uncle Sam who broke the news of our success to the whole world. And we never brag a word of our success.

Clearly, we known US is monitoring every of our visible military test. There is no way China can fool US with a fake military hardware. US know those ASBM works very well and they are dreadful to let the public know more of the success. Your defense network cannot handle multi attack. Chinese are not stupid to throw one missile at an important target. We will throw so many that you can no way handle. USN knows their CVN is vulnerable to our ASBM especially it is a saturated attack.

 

[sicsheep]

Actually, it is not.

Yes, it can. I have said it before here -- that there are no technical barriers that will prevent a ballistic descent against a moving target.

The problem is on the warhead's side. On the descent half of the ballistic arc, the warhead must begin to assess target position as a variable. Target position as a variable is not new. Air-air missile does it. But the advantage is that the air-air missile have much greater control over its flight than a descending ballistic warhead. The air-air missile have propulsion and means of controls to change its course at will. The target is predicted to be at a spatial coordinates and the missile fly to that point.

The ballistic warhead have no means of propulsion. Its forward momentum is gravity driven. It has limited means to affect its descent course. The 'maneuverable' aspect does not mean the ballistic warhead can make 'Top Gun' movie style maneuvers. It means the warhead can make minor course changes to compensate for anything that would make it deviate from its original predictive course.

Against a fixed target, position as a variable is still a mathematical factor, but because the target is fixed, that variable remains a zero, so the ballistic warhead have to compensate only for factors that can affect its flight. But against the moving target, target position as a variable is never a constant zero. Essentially, the warhead now have its workload doubled. This is assuming that the warhead have a sensor package that will give it real time target information.

Science is one thing, tactic is another.

Detecting the target is science. What the target does in defense is tactic. If the warhead uses radar as sensor, how does it compensate for EM jammers ? If the warhead uses infrared as sensor, how does it compensate for flares ? Both EM and IR defensive measures can deploy shields that are literally hundreds and even thousands of km in area coverage. We do not know the extent of testing against defensive tactics in the DF-21D program.

The comment that the US was 'astonished' is hyperbolic intended to boost the morale of the Chinese members here. The US does not have a similar weapon because of arms limitation treaties with the Soviet Union, which Russia is inheritor of them. We know the math and the mechanics of the idea. The US was not 'astonished' in anyway.

It doesnt have to have propulsion to have guidance, , Chinese have had SADARM munition for decades, it is an artillery munition (which also follows a trajectory) that can seek out a moving tank /armor in a desert by using a combination millimeter-wave radar, Infrared, and magnetometer, an aircraft carrier is not hard to target as it is 100000 tons of steel in middle of a ocean.

the so called Magnetic anomaly guidance is so effective it can be used to seek out small subs underwater, and there is no effective countermeasure, otherwise all subs would be invisible and water mines will be useless. US maybe not Astonished because it has no use for such weapon, there are like what, 2 potential hostile aircraft carrier in the world now lol?

 

[gambit]

It doesnt have to have propulsion to have guidance,...

What make you think I even implied so ?

You are confused between propulsion, guidance/navigation, and maneuverability. Have I not taught you guys enough about avionics on this forum over these yrs ?

 

[oproh]

Awesome this will definitely be a devastating weapon. Anyway, a lone american troll in this forum is currently in panic mode.

 

[Dungeness]

Detecting the target is science. What the target does in defense is tactic. If the warhead uses radar as sensor, how does it compensate for EM jammers ? If the warhead uses infrared as sensor, how does it compensate for flares ? Both EM and IR defensive measures can deploy shields that are literally hundreds and even thousands of km in area coverage. We do not know the extent of testing against defensive tactics in the DF-21D program.

The comment that the US was 'astonished' is hyperbolic intended to boost the morale of the Chinese members here. The US does not have a similar weapon because of arms limitation treaties with the Soviet Union, which Russia is inheritor of them. We know the math and the mechanics of the idea. The US was not 'astonished' in anyway.

Thanks for the detailed writing, and it is very informative. Just curious, what will be the counter measure when China uses their Ocean Surveillance Satellite Constellation to constantly feed carrier's position to the warhead?

 

[rahi2357]

There is no any sign of explosion, which indicates a dummy warhead might have been used.

You are right . This is what really happens to the ship :

Iran's Persian gulf anti ship ballistic missile test ( 2011 ) . Equipped with a 650 kg explosive warhead .

 

[gambit]

Thanks for the detailed writing, and it is very informative. Just curious, what will be the counter measure when China uses their Ocean Surveillance Satellite Constellation to constantly feed carrier's position to the warhead?

You are talking about indirect guidance. I will use the 'blind man' example when I taught basic avionics many many yrs ago.

When you use your own eyes, that would be 'direct guidance'. Your eyes are under your control. You direct their direction and rate of change. As such, you would have the greatest flexibility on decision making.

When you are blindfolded and someone is assigned to feed you information about the environment, that is 'indirect guidance'. This is not to be confused with a blind man using a cane. A cane is a substitute for eyes, but a cane is still under the blind man's possession and control. Indirect guidance is when environmental information belongs to someone else and you are completely dependent upon that person. You have no control over its rate of transfer and timing of transfer. As such, you have far less flexibility in decision making.

The communication link is the potential point of failure. The countermeasure would be to disrupt that link.