still arguing huh. personally i think the Overall system has few weakness and vulnerability that can be exploit by US force, which make the missile almost useless if done right. there are too many layer of defense that china has to penetrate(not just SM3), and too many DF21 system that can be disable/jammed, which make DF21 inaccurate. of course if china play correctly, it can be a very good weapon against US.
also DF21 is not operational yet, who know how long before the things actually working. terminal guidance toward a moving object is not an easy task, especially under US Ewarfare, multiple defense layer condition.
Isn't that true for
ANY system? The anti ballistic missile systems are dependent on the early detection satellites, early warning aircraft, UAVs, tracking ships, aegis ships etc. <- all of which can be back-uped by redundant systems but destruction/jamming of any can severely weaken the ABM system -> which makes the CVBG vurnable to saturated attacks.
Not to say the spear and the shield; that one will work and the other will not - they are facing similar hurdles. Both sensors can be destroyed/jammed, both can be decoyed, both can have submunition/multiple approach....
In a shooting war, I highly doubt the USA will send her carriers within China's striking range without believing that they are relatively safe, while China will not strike at CVBGs without being fairly confident of sinking/mission killing the CVN.
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.
Likewise, you can ask, how many test did ABM system do with real ICBM or IRBM warheads and non scripted pre-tracked missile? How can you believe that ABM will work flawlessly in real war situation?
You may think that a moving ship a 30+ knots under evasive maneuvers is really hard to hit; but, to put it into perspective, a missile from ~400 km up with a ~2 minute descend, a 30 knot CVN would have moved ~ 2 km, -> that is an adjustment of a maximum of 0.3 degrees. the turning radius of a CVN at full speed is over a mile. the surface of the earth moves when it rotates at around 464 m/s (1669 km/hr) in relationship to a object in free space (which you can view any ballistic missile as). If a ballistic missile can hit a concrete slab moving with a ground speed of 464 m/s in relationship to itself, what makes you think that it cannot hit a ship possibly moving with a speed of 464 m/s +- 16 m/s (or 3%)?-> effectively, the CVN is stationary
What if the Russians can't do it? how does this mean that the Chinese can't do it? You seem to not know that the Song dynasty of China were already using multistage unguided ballistic missiles and unguided sea skimming cruise missiles for naval warfare. Effectiveness of these ancient systems aside, china had a long tradition of being innovators; untill being invaded by the mongols and the manchus.
And you want the world to believe that the Chinese have deployed a workable system? You really must be joking. Try again.
Let China demonstrate the package. Give us something besides threats and talk
Workable system, yes, working system no. Why are we joking?
Where and when did China threaten with the DF21? can you provide some official Chinese threat talk?
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
What stops the DF21D from carrying a nuke? does that answer your doubt?
So today with less than ten years of development the Chinese want the world to believe that they have solved the ASBM problem?
How with less than 10 years of development? the chinese missile program which the DF21 is a part of Tsien Hsue-Shen program. Tsien Hsue-Shen was the first director of the jet propulsion laboratory of Caltech -> who interrogated Von Braun as a US army Colonel and deported by the US in 1955. The DF21 is a product of a missile program with more than 60 years behind it.
And present NO EVIDENCE or proof? DF-21D is joke that China is playing on the world!
how did China play the world? China didn't say much...
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
Doubting if the DF21 works, is fair. To claim it to be a technological dead end is baseless. For all intent an purpose, we know that the DF21D can deliver munition to a stationary target with a CEP of maybe 30 meters. We know it can be nuclear armed. We know that a nuclear detonation of a 500 KT warhead anywhere within 2 KM will sink/seriously damage the CVN -> which is not hard to do with a CEP of 30 meters.
The question of sensors and weapon package is a different question. just like a SM3 by itself cannot do jack.
@Bltizo
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?
That is not true, the sprint missile you so love, creates a plasma shield too; but the US engineers designed a strong enough microwave to communicate with it. And it is a basic physics, given sufficient strength, electromagnetic radiation will penetrate electromagnetic shielding -> which plasma is.
"......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
[/QUOTE]
