@AssassinsMace: Look at your own arguments against the ASBM and the hurdles it faces at going mach 10. Now all of the sudden it works with an ABM trying to hit a vastly smaller target than an aircraft carrier at a combined speed of mach 20?
There are several decades of research and deployment of successful ABM interceptions supporting my arguments. How many successful hits of ANY ships at sea support the concept of the DF-21D? Any? Of course the answer is a big fat no.
Even the Russians couldn't pull it off.
And you want the world to believe that the Chinese have deployed a workable system? You really must be joking. Try again.
---------- Post added at 12:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 PM ----------
Oh God not this again.
----
DF21 wou;dnbn't be used on its own to penetrate the defenses.
its a part of package including AshCMs launched by subs ships and air assets.
Let China demonstrate the package. Give us something besides threats and talk
---------- Post added at 12:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 PM ----------
NikeX,
It seems like you find everything "simple" to do for the Americans and not simple for the Chinese.
But lets agree to disagree, you can believe that NOTHING can harm a CVBG; While I will still clamor that a ASBM presents new creditable threats to a CVBG to deal with.
You keep forgetting that geo politics are not just limited to the USA/China. The DF21 have its uses against... Indian CVBGs, Australian CVBG or any south east asian claimants - who have limited defence against cruise missiles and more or less non-existent defence against ballistic missiles.
All you must do is look at the record. There have been successful ballistic missile interceptions since the late 1960s. This was by the Americans and Russians
And only the Russians have ATTEMPTED to deploy a ASBM. And they understood that you had to use a
nuclear warhead to make sure you destroyed the CVN
So today with less than ten years of development the Chinese want the world to believe that they have solved the ASBM problem?
And present NO EVIDENCE or proof? DF-21D is joke that China is playing on the world!
---------- Post added at 12:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 PM ----------
@Bltizo
I swear we've been through this. The whole point of AShBM is that it's supported by midcourse guidance, to lead it until it's right on the CVBG until terminal guidance and the maneuvering warhead lands it onto the carrier.
The thing is you can't argue "DF-21D has limited search capabilities on its own" -- because it's not supposed to find targets on its own when its exoatmospheric. AShBM and the C4ISR system are inseparable if we're talking about how the AShBM will work.
I agree that we have been all through this before. And no new evidence has been presented that DF-21D is any closer to achieving its mission objectives than it was several years ago
I am looking for
solid evidence that DF-21D has made some sort of breakthrough that has advanced it towards becoming a viable weapons system capable of hitting a CVN at sea.
Until
solid evidence is presented I will file the DF-21D under proposed weapon systems that reached a technological dead end and are still seeking a solution.
That is all folks
---------- Post added at 12:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 PM ----------
@Bltizo
Like hyperwarp said, existing, older IRBMs and ICBMs have already demonstrated terminal guidance. the point of DF-21D's terminal sensors isn't to find the carrier, but to guide it onto the carrier once it's right on top of it.
However there are major questions that you or noone else seem to be able to answer and that is how will the DF-21D warhead see the CVN with its OWN terminal sensors when it is traveling at Mach 10 and surrounded by this intense plasma sheath that NO electronmagnetic radiation can penetrate?
This means that DF-21D is blind at the time when it should be searching for the CVN.
And what external guidance signal from its control base would be able to penetrate this plasma to update DF-21D to correct its course during its terminal dive towards the CVN?
Can any of you DF-21D supporters answer these questions?
"......Reentry blackout occurs when the high speed of the spacecraft obliterates atmospheric molecules, developing a plasma envelope that absorbs electromagnetic waves that are close to a certain frequency called the plasma frequency. That plasma frequency in turn depends on the plasma itself, which can range in density. The resulting breakdown of radio communications is an annoyance for space mission crews and mission personnel, but
for military space planes and ICBMs, it can block out navigation signals or even an abort command.."
Here is research on the problem but no solutions are available
