China is Testing DF-21 Anti-ship Ballistic Missile to Target US Aircraft Carriers:USA

**Officer of Engineers** · 06 Aug 10,, 13:29

TRIDENT and other such systems are talking about course corrections, NOT target tracking. That's a whole different animal. At 35 knots, you're talking about miles away from the original point. So, unless you know approximately where that carrier is going to be, you will not have that kind of drastic changes real time.

2ndly, I know of no OTH radar that can spot a surface target at 1500 kms, especially with Taiwan in the way.

3rd, there are over US 500 cruises missile in the area. The Chinese can't be that stupid to count on asset they know would be destroyed within hours of start of hostilities.

Lastly, there has been no test of this system on live targets, even a land test, ie a big truck. Thus far, this has been all speculation by Western intel.

**Juramentado** · 06 Aug 10,, 15:17

A pseudonymous article posted on Xinhuanet, website of China's official news agency, imagines the U.S. dispatching the George Washington to aid Taiwan against a Chinese attack.

The Chinese would respond with three salvos of DF 21D, the first of which would pierce the hull, start fires and shut down flight operations, the article says. The second would knock out its engines and be accompanied by air attacks. The third wave, the article says, would "send the George Washington to the bottom of the ocean."

As I stated earlier in this thread, the salvos (assuming a truthful statement) answers one of the questions - that the payload or warhead itself is not sufficient for a one-shot/one-kill. Granted, a near or non-fatal hit can invoke a mission kill. The other implication is that they have enough confidence in their sensor capability to track for multiple firing attempts. Again, if true, that's pretty significant. The question mark remains about OTH targeting, this isn't an LOS weapon, and not only finding and fixing, but tracking via OTH is a complex technical capability that not many nations have.

**zraver** · 06 Aug 10,, 16:31

Originally Posted by Stitch

Isn't this what the RIM-161B and Goalkeeper are for?

No, assuming the DF-21 is real, neither of the weapons you mentioned is fast enough to hit a ballistic target. The SM-3 would be the best bet as it can get high enough and hit targets moving at ballistic speeds. That warhead can only make so many course corrections to jink past missiles until it can't hit the carrier.

Ultimately with the rumored appearance of AsBM and soon to be hypersonic missiles air defense will shift to a dews based outlook. You can't dodge speed of light weapons and the carriers nuke plants provide plenty of electricity for even megawatt class lasers. The new Gerald Ford will have something like 20 megawatts of electricity on tap. US aegis vessels have proven they have the power generation for 100kw systems. As laser technology and sensor fusion mature anything that can be seen will be a target.

**diablo49** · 06 Aug 10,, 16:45

With regards to directed energy systems, they are essentially line of sight weapons correct?

I struggle to see how a ship based laser could defeat a hypersonic missile when its limited by the horizon

The targeting and tracking systems, let alone power up time would mean it would be difficult to destroy a hypersonic missile from visual range right?

**Officer of Engineers** · 06 Aug 10,, 18:07

Same thing as a torpedo launch. You use the OTH systems to generate a solution for the energy systems to direct the hit once it comes into LOS,

**zraver** · 06 Aug 10,, 18:32

Originally Posted by diablo49

With regards to directed energy systems, they are essentially line of sight weapons correct?

I struggle to see how a ship based laser could defeat a hypersonic missile when its limited by the horizon

The targeting and tracking systems, let alone power up time would mean it would be difficult to destroy a hypersonic missile from visual range right?

it depends on 2 things 1. how good the radar and sensors are. The Aegis is a big system, and most battle groups will also have AWACS coverage. 2. how good the laser is. If the laser if powerful enough to act like a bug zapper then as long as the system can get a lock it wins. If however there is an extended period of time for the laser to burn through....

As for power up time, sailing into harms way with un-powered weapons seems foolish.

**gunnut** · 06 Aug 10,, 20:13

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Thus far, this has been all speculation by Western intel.

Is this like the so called "bomber gap" in the early days of the Cold War so SAC could get more funding?

**biteasaur** · 06 Aug 10,, 21:00

isn"t the latest sm2er whatever is loaded on our ships, cappibillity of a head on hit of a ballistic projectile or is that later sm3/6,or am i in another world.

**Xiaohaha** · 06 Aug 10,, 21:04

Would a mirror work in deflecting the laser?

**gunnut** · 06 Aug 10,, 21:15

Originally Posted by biteasaur

isn"t the latest sm2er whatever is loaded on our ships, cappibillity of a head on hit of a ballistic projectile or is that later sm3/6,or am i in another world.

SM3, you got it right.

**Officer of Engineers** · 06 Aug 10,, 23:06

Only if the mirror is extremely clean. Not going to happen on a re-entry vehicle.

**kyli** · 06 Aug 10,, 23:36

Laser has a limited range on board of ships. If you painted the re-entry vehicle in light color, the laser would be less effective. The laser would require more energy or shorter distance in order to remain as efficacious. However, it is impossible to escape laser if it has already locked on the missiles. As for mirror, there are not anything that could be 100% deflecting. They would have tough time to make it practical.

**Zinja** · 06 Aug 10,, 23:43

Originally Posted by biteasaur

isn"t the latest sm2er whatever is loaded on our ships, cappibillity of a head on hit of a ballistic projectile or is that later sm3/6,or am i in another world.

I think the issue is not whether ballistic projectiles can be intercepted or not, we know Arleigh Burkes and Ticonderagas can do that. I think the issue is whether they can intercept a maneuvering one such as the DF-21 since it does not follow classic parabola of a balistic missile . I must confess, i find it difficult as well to think that 5 or so Arleigh Burkes and Ticoderagas each with 41 and 61 pairs of vertical launchers respectively, can fail to intercept an incoming ballistic missile.

**Officer of Engineers** · 07 Aug 10,, 00:01

The DF-21 is not to supposed to outmaneuver an incoming interceptor. It is rumoured to maneuver to catch a moving carrier. There is ZERO avoidance in these missiles. In fact, there is zero evidence of these missiles being able to hit a relatively slow moving carrier (but still way faster than a fixed target), the evidence that it can avoid a fast incoming interceptor ... well, it is not even in the rumours.

**StevoJH** · 07 Aug 10,, 01:51

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

2ndly, I know of no OTH radar that can spot a surface target at 1500 kms,

JORN can apparrently.

Defence Materiel Organisation

Or at least the DMO claims it can.

Thread: China is Testing DF-21 Anti-ship Ballistic Missile to Target US Aircraft Carriers:USA

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Rate This Thread

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Sino-US Relations, General Discussion.

Fighter Radar Ranges

Remembering 1962 China war heros.

Most needed in US NAVY

Carrier killers (an article from JED online)

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions