Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

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



    The commander of U.S. military forces in the Pacific said Thursday that the buildup of Chinese armed forces is continuing "unabated" and Beijing's goal appears to be power projection beyond Asia.

    "China's rapid and comprehensive transformation of its armed forces is affecting regional military balances and holds implications beyond the Asia-Pacific region," said Adm. Robert F. Willard, the Pacific Command leader. "Of particular concern is that elements of China's military modernization appear designed to challenge our freedom of action in the region."

    The comments in testimony to the House Armed Services Committee are likely to fuel an ongoing debate inside the U.S. government among military, policy and intelligence officials over whether China's military buildup is limited to a future conflict with Taiwan or whether China harbors global military ambitions.

    Some U.S. officials insist China's buildup of both conventional and nuclear forces is aimed solely at a Taiwan conflict, in which U.S. forces likely would intervene in support of the island.

    Other officials have said China is seeking global hegemony through a combination of military, economic, political and intelligence power projection that seeks to diminish U.S. influence around the world.

    "The United States remains the pre-eminent power in the Asia-Pacific, though China's rising influence is changing regional power dynamics in ways that create both challenges and, I think, opportunities," Adm. Willard said.

    He also disclosed for the first time in the testimony that China is moving ahead with a new anti-ship ballistic missile capable of attacking aircraft carriers hundreds of miles from China's coasts.

    China also will deploy its own aircraft carrier by 2012 and currently has more than 60 submarines, he said.

    China is "developing and testing a conventional anti-ship ballistic missile based on the DF-21/CSS-5 medium-range ballistic missile designed specifically to target aircraft carriers," Adm. Willard said in his prepared statement.

    It was the first time a U.S. official had disclosed that the unique precision guided missile was being tested.

    Rep. Howard McKeon, California Republican and ranking member of the committee, questioned the admiral about the new space-transiting anti-ship missile and other weapons designed to attack U.S. forces in the Western Pacific.

    "The China military capacity has been growing by and large unabated for the past 10 to 20 years," Adm. Willard said. "The past 10 years have been pretty dramatic, and as you suggest, this has included investments in what has broadly been termed anti-access capabilities. Area-denial capability is another way to think about it."

    The new missile is designed to hit targets at extended ranges from the Chinese mainland, and other anti-access weapons include a large number of submarines, new integrated air- and missile-defense capabilities and cyberwarfare and anti-space weapons, Adm. Willard said, noting "all of which we have been monitoring very closely for some years."

    Adm. Willard said he is confident that U.S. forces would be able to penetrate the new Chinese forces in a conflict and noted that the Pacific Command is working to identify and address shortcomings in countering China's area-denial weapons.

    China cut off military relations with the Pentagon in October 2008 and again earlier this year to protest U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.

    Adm. Willard recently formed a special task force to address China's military buildup. Last year, he told reporters that China's military buildup exceeded U.S. intelligence estimates every year for more than a decade, an indirect criticism of what other defense officials have called weak intelligence reports on Beijing's military buildup.

  • #2
    Its articles like this that make me doubt the authors. The USN already knows how to kill a CV from tests performed over many years and actually sinking them. China has absolutely no idea of what it takes to kill an active carrier. China's (former Soviets) carriers are not built anything like the USN's and cannot percieveably take the percentage of damage a USN carrier can. Look at it this way, they can theorize all they want what can kill a carrier but the USN already knows how to kill a carrier. Including a Soviet/Chinese carrier.

    Welcome to the pond little fish!;):))
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

    Comment


    • #3
      If the Chinese can shoot down satellite and do space walk, I doubt that they don't have the brain to sink a USN carrier.

      China is undoubtedly a rising superpower with a tremendous manpower in science and engineering, they will eventually achieve everything that they want that the West do not want to see them achieve. I predict China will surpass the West in term of technologies in a couple of decades at most. Most of the technological inventions in the world are invented by the Chinese anyway so it's not a surprised to see that one day they would return to where they were, leading the planet in tech

      The world hegemony is going to shift from the West to the East again, let's hope that the future is not going to be bloodbath struggle between the West and the East like it was between Christianity and Islam for almost a thousand years

      Comment


      • #4
        The PLA would disagree with you.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by stealthh View Post

          I predict China will surpass the West in term of technologies in a couple of decades at most. Most of the technological inventions in the world are invented by the Chinese anyway
          You learn something every day [/sarcasm]

          Regards

          Arty
          "Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations".- Motto of the Gun Crew who have just done something incredibly stupid!!!!

          Comment


          • #6
            The PLA needs reconnaissance sats to complete the outfit, I doubt they are up there yet. Can the PLA hit a moving object thousand of miles away in the sea minus them?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by stealthh View Post
              If the Chinese can shoot down satellite and do space walk, I doubt that they don't have the brain to sink a USN carrier.
              Shooting down a satellite isn't hard, been done way back in 1980s. What is harder is to destroy a satellite without leaving a giant orbit full of space junk.

              Space Walking also isn't as hard as one would imagine, soviets did it in 1965, while Americans did it in 1969.

              rest of what you said can't be called anything but hopeful dreams.
              While its entirely possible for China to out pace the west in technology, but at the current pace, they will never reach that.

              To the rest of you experienced lot, How hard would it be to modify AEGIS to counter this?

              Comment


              • #8
                Two pics here from IMINT & Analysis: Dragon's Fire: The PLA's 2nd Artillery Corps

                2AMISSILEIMPACTRANGE.jpg (image)

                2AIMPACTDETAIL.jpg (image)

                Fantastic CEP ... for fixed targets. Not good enough for moving targets.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think what is more fascinating, at least to me, is how much we know about where their secret bases are... or are they not a secret?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The 2nd Artillery Corps missile units are organized into what the PLA refers to as "bases". There are six bases, each located in a different geographical area. Described in the terms used by the Russian military, these bases are analogous to Russia's Missile Armies. Each base has numerous subordinate missile brigades, with each brigade maintaining one or more garrisons, various underground facilities (UGFs), rail transfer points, and field launch positions.

                    Missile garrisons are not difficult to identify once their location can be narrowed to a certain geographical area. These facilities will typically contain administrative and support infrastructure for assigned personnel, and various garages for housing missile TELs and support equipment. Garrisons supporting field deployable systems such as the DF-21 or DF-31 will typically possess high-bay garages or other similar structures used for checkout of system components.

                    Rail transfer points are not typically able to be identified with any certainty unless missile equipment is visible at the railyard. However, the likely rail transfer points are those railyards in closest proximity via roadway or connecting railspur to the missile garrisons. Ergo, these facilities have been marked as the likely rail transfer points.

                    Identifying field launch sites for the 2nd AC's missile force can be a difficult proposition, and there are likely hundreds of such locations as yet unlocated. Careful analysis can be used to identify likely locations, however. The majority of these positions will contain a hardened concrete pad where the associated missile will be erected for launch. Certain missile systems will typically have very similar or even identical launch positions. Usually, it appears that most units within a given base will adopt a similar launch site design for a given missile type, although this is not uniform.

                    Typical launch site dimensions for common systems are as follows:

                    -DF-11: 15 meters in length
                    -DF-15: 26 meters in length
                    -DF-21: 45 meters in length

                    As a comparison, consider the following image. DF-21 launch positions from the 51st and 56th Bases are depicted. Note the similarity to the Datong and Delingha sites. The Huanglong and Liuqingkao examples depict identical dimensions but different, more concealed configurations. Such concealment efforts can make launch sites difficult to identify without considerable examination and are often employed by units in areas which are more likely to be potentially engaged.
                    Knowing the dimensions or configuration of a given launch site for a specific missile type allows analysts to determine which sites in a mixed garrison are employed by which missile systems. Shangrao's 815th Brigade, for example, employs both the DF-11 and DF-15. Given that both missiles utilize dimensionally different launch positions due to the different size of the launch vehicles, an examination of the launch sites near Shangrao will provide an indication of which sites will be used by which missile system. Once this is determined, a more accurate assessment of the strength of the unit may also be made. (source imint : by Sean O'Connor )
                    Attached Files
                    Last edited by NJS21; 31 Mar 10,, 09:01.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by stealthh View Post
                      If the Chinese can shoot down satellite and do space walk, I doubt that they don't have the brain to sink a USN carrier.

                      China is undoubtedly a rising superpower with a tremendous manpower in science and engineering, they will eventually achieve everything that they want that the West do not want to see them achieve. I predict China will surpass the West in term of technologies in a couple of decades at most. Most of the technological inventions in the world are invented by the Chinese anyway so it's not a surprised to see that one day they would return to where they were, leading the planet in tech

                      The world hegemony is going to shift from the West to the East again, let's hope that the future is not going to be bloodbath struggle between the West and the East like it was between Christianity and Islam for almost a thousand years

                      *Pipedreams, with a closed society and their reliance on reverse engineering and controlling its population its doubtfull they can out pace the West or even some of her own neighbors in the next few decades.

                      I dont know where you get your information from tech wise but obviously it must come from inside China itself.;)
                      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                        Two pics here from IMINT & Analysis: Dragon's Fire: The PLA's 2nd Artillery Corps

                        2AMISSILEIMPACTRANGE.jpg (image)

                        2AIMPACTDETAIL.jpg (image)

                        Fantastic CEP ... for fixed targets. Not good enough for moving targets.

                        *OOE Sir, Just in asking, how would/could China handle say a two/three pronged attack? Two being military and one being civilian?

                        Circumstances:

                        China does not much care for sanctions against NK's clandestine program. We already know this by past events.

                        China and Russia both eye land disputes.

                        China attacks Tawain in order to regain control of the island.

                        Possibilities:

                        The US intern while on the way to defending Tawain, takes out the North Korean reactors and the capital, since she has been nothing but hostile to both SK and the US as well as others.

                        Refugees from NK flood over the border and into China by the hundreds of thousands fearing a ground war will come in short time or just a chance to escape the NK leadership.

                        US confronts China's main forces at Tawian.

                        *How would China react to these circumstances in theory considering:

                        a) Refugees flooding into China by the hundred thousands possibly more.
                        b) Russia possibly eyeing oppertunity here for a land grab.
                        c) US forces engaged over Tawain invasion at full strength.

                        I know its a very far fetched possibility, but was just wondering how they would react to such a theoretical three fold problem at once?

                        Thanks in advance OOE.
                        Last edited by Dreadnought; 31 Mar 10,, 13:34.
                        Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by cr9527 View Post
                          To the rest of you experienced lot, How hard would it be to modify AEGIS to counter this?
                          The Aegis BMD system already can counter it.

                          U.S. Navy Aegis BMD Vessels

                          A total of three US Navy Ticonderoga class cruisers and 15 Arleigh Burke class destroyers have BMD capability as of March 2009[update].[9] In 2010, all remaining Ticonderoga class cruisers that have SPY 1B systems (CG-59–CG-73) will be refitted with TBMD engagement technology.

                          Ticonderoga class cruisers equipped with anti-ballistic missile capability include the USS Lake Erie, USS Shiloh and USS Port Royal. Arleigh Burke class destroyers so equipped include the USS Wilbur, USS Stout, USS John S. McCain, USS Russell, USS Paul Hamilton, USS Ramage, USS Fitzgerald, USS Stethem, USS Benfold, USS Milius, USS Decatur, USS O'Kane.

                          An additional three ships have been refitted for Long Range Surveillance and Tracking (LRST): USS John Paul Jones, USS Hopper, and USS Higgins, with plans to add engagement capabilities by 2010.

                          On November 12, 2009, the Missile Defense Agency announced that six additional US Navy destroyers would be upgraded to participate in the program. In fiscal 2012, USS Carney, USS Ross, and USS Donald Cook will be upgraded. USS Cole, USS McFaul and USS Porter will be upgraded in fiscal 2013. The goal of the program is to have 21 ships upgraded by the end of 2010; 24 in 2012; and 27 around 2013.[10]

                          9# ^ pamphlet 09-MDA-4298 (4 MAR 09)
                          10# ^ "MDA announces next 6 BMD ships", Navy Times, 12 November 2009.

                          Based on the navy's plans it seems BM defenses are out pacing the BM threat. By the end of 2012 the navy will be able to cover every region under a BM threat and assign more vessels to the carriers to protect them as part of normal operations rather than a surge scenario.

                          These ships also have an ASAT capability as evidenced by the US 193 destruction by the USS Lake Erie using an SM-3. Australia is joining the game with the three Hobart class destroyers, and Japan (4 ships) and Korea (1 with 6 more coming) can add the capability at any time.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by zraver View Post
                            The Aegis BMD system already can counter it.

                            U.S. Navy Aegis BMD Vessels

                            A total of three US Navy Ticonderoga class cruisers and 15 Arleigh Burke class destroyers have BMD capability as of March 2009[update].[9] In 2010, all remaining Ticonderoga class cruisers that have SPY 1B systems (CG-59–CG-73) will be refitted with TBMD engagement technology.

                            Ticonderoga class cruisers equipped with anti-ballistic missile capability include the USS Lake Erie, USS Shiloh and USS Port Royal. Arleigh Burke class destroyers so equipped include the USS Wilbur, USS Stout, USS John S. McCain, USS Russell, USS Paul Hamilton, USS Ramage, USS Fitzgerald, USS Stethem, USS Benfold, USS Milius, USS Decatur, USS O'Kane.

                            An additional three ships have been refitted for Long Range Surveillance and Tracking (LRST): USS John Paul Jones, USS Hopper, and USS Higgins, with plans to add engagement capabilities by 2010.

                            On November 12, 2009, the Missile Defense Agency announced that six additional US Navy destroyers would be upgraded to participate in the program. In fiscal 2012, USS Carney, USS Ross, and USS Donald Cook will be upgraded. USS Cole, USS McFaul and USS Porter will be upgraded in fiscal 2013. The goal of the program is to have 21 ships upgraded by the end of 2010; 24 in 2012; and 27 around 2013.[10]

                            9# ^ pamphlet 09-MDA-4298 (4 MAR 09)
                            10# ^ "MDA announces next 6 BMD ships", Navy Times, 12 November 2009.

                            Based on the navy's plans it seems BM defenses are out pacing the BM threat. By the end of 2012 the navy will be able to cover every region under a BM threat and assign more vessels to the carriers to protect them as part of normal operations rather than a surge scenario.

                            These ships also have an ASAT capability as evidenced by the US 193 destruction by the USS Lake Erie using an SM-3. Australia is joining the game with the three Hobart class destroyers, and Japan (4 ships) and Korea (1 with 6 more coming) can add the capability at any time.
                            But wouldn't the anti-carrier warheads be maneuvering once their seekers start tracking the carrier? I suppose the deviation from a purely ballistic trajectory could be small but I wonder if the Aegis system can reliably intercept something like that.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by citanon View Post
                              But wouldn't the anti-carrier warheads be maneuvering once their seekers start tracking the carrier? I suppose the deviation from a purely ballistic trajectory could be small but I wonder if the Aegis system can reliably intercept something like that.
                              1. To maneuver it needs to way slow way down. From 150 miles up they are at 792,000 feet. At 8300mph miles an hour* that is 233 miles a second. At those speeds the warhead has just over a second to find, aim and move to hit the target. Computers are fast, but not that fast. Is it a carrier, an island, a tanker or amphib?

                              2. US 193 was traveling at 15,000mph almost twice the speed of a DF-21 and the SM-3 hit where it aimed.

                              The slower the warhead, the easier the intercept solution for the proven SM-3.

                              I am not sure the DF-21 would reach reentry speeds which are much faster, so I used the speed of the launch vehicle.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X