China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[siegecrossbow]

$20M USD for an interceptor? I just saw an estimate that says US analysis places DF-21D at $15M USD each. That's a bad trade.

If it protects the ships then it really isn’t.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

All MRBM are hypersonic, so that's not an issue here. What you mean is probably MARV capability, but that only works within the atmosphere. The same applies for hypersonic gliders. Or maybe you are thinking of a hypersonic cruise missile? But that's not a ballistic missile, and afaik no country has one operational yet.


Where are you getting this from? SM-3 is not a terminal defense weapon. It has enough range to kill most MRBM right after they've entered space, long before they are in position to release MIRVs.

No I mean Hypersonic missile flight path that is not predictable because it never entered the space except shortly as soon as it is launch it reach space then it dip back to atmosphere eliminating midcourse completely another thing since it use depress or flat trajectory by the time radar find it it just too late


I am not making comment on SM3 I am commenting on your Lockheed promotional video showing KKN hitting a missile or warhead. Another thing Sm3 is not panacea that Lockheed touted To begin with it is desing for MRBM and not ICBM Plust the test sofar is highly choreograph and GAO criticize it as immature out of 45 try only 27 is susccesful giving it 60% success rate

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So far the Navy's hit-to-kill interceptor record stands at 27 kills out of 35 attempts since the program began back in 2000. This number is largely misleading though because many of these intercepts occurred under tight, laboratory like conditions, not ones that representative of an operational use.

 

[AssassinsMace]

SSKs with AIP are great for laying ambushes in choke points, but they cannot hope to intercept a carrier strike group in the vast stretches of ocean 2000+ km from the mainland. They just don’t have the speed and endurance. They would need to know perhaps days in advance where the enemy will be to position themselves, and even then they might only get within missile launch range. Given the small number of tubes per SSK, you would need a very large number of subs in range to pose a credible threat (20+?) against AEGIS. That makes the prospect of such an attack even less plausible.

But as I said before, if you are able to track a carrier strike group then you have already defeated it.

Ask the USS Kitty Hawk.

 

[antiterror13]

SSKs with AIP are great for laying ambushes in choke points, but they cannot hope to intercept a carrier strike group in the vast stretches of ocean 2000+ km from the mainland. They just don’t have the speed and endurance. They would need to know perhaps days in advance where the enemy will be to position themselves, and even then they might only get within missile launch range. Given the small number of tubes per SSK, you would need a very large number of subs in range to pose a credible threat (20+?) against AEGIS. That makes the prospect of such an attack even less plausible.

But as I said before, if you are able to track a carrier strike group then you have already defeated it.

True ... but I think China is very close or already able to detect a CSG ... anyway it is just a matter of time for China

 

[vincent]

They've employed and refined their network-centric warfare doctrine in actual wars on a large scale: Iraq 1.0, Iraq 2.0, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, plus a bunch of minor skirmishes some of which revealed critical engineering bugs. For example, the tragic shooting of an Airbus airliner by USS Vincennes was the result of a design oversight in the early AEGIS system. There is no replacement for experience gained from actual combat.

Granted, the US Navy has no combat experience advantage over PLAN when it comes to ASuW and ASW, other than having a larger SINKEX "budget"

When was the last time someone attacked or jammed the American combat network?

 

[supercat]

Has this been mentioned before - China will at least double the size of its nuclear stockpile, according to the U.S. Secretary of Defense?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299718348956147712

 

[nugroho]

Of course, we are not really talking about a single carrier either. In a full war scenario, there will be 6+ carrier strike groups, dozens of submarines, hundreds of UAVs probing China's defenses for a weakness, with thousands of aircraft and missiles in reserve waiting to pounce. This will be first and foremost a clash of networks. The network which is able to gather more information, of better quality, process and act upon it quicker will have the initiative. I fear that China is not ready yet for such an uber fast-paced multi-theater conflict. The US has been developing and debugging its network-centric operations since the early 90s through actual wars, while China was only running simulations throughout that period.

Again, a LockMart illustration of network-centric warfare against BM saturation attacks:

The SM-3 missile sure is a marvel of engineering. 4 stage rocket, 2500km range, pin-point accuracy. No wonder it costs almost $20M per unit:

US Navy never face another one since WW2. Korea , Vietnam , iraq don't have anything to play with US Navy. So, has network centric operations ever face any formidable enemy? All are sitting ducks waiting US to launch Tomahawk.

 

[totenchan]

Has this been mentioned before - China will at least double the size of its nuclear stockpile, according to the U.S. Secretary of Defense?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1299718348956147712

Sounds like fearmongering, considering I've seen nothing to indicate this. Even if true, still hilariously few compared to the US stockpile. This statement is targeted towards people who don't know anything about nukes.

 

[Temstar]

If it protects the ships then it really isn’t.

Under normal circumstances yes. But if interceptor costs more than the attacking missile then economics dictate it's just a simple matter of building more AShBM than interceptors, given same resources for each side. And I'm not really sure if resources for each side is equal given RMB's PPP.

Nevermind the fact that there's a limit to how many inteceptors you can place on a ship while there's no limit to number of AShBM that can fit in China's vast strategic depth. Plus the fact that inteception is far from 100% guaranteed missile to missile.

 

[tupolevtu144]

Most news outlets here in Taiwan are saying that the PLA in fact test-fired 4 missiles back on August 16. Two of the missiles failed and crashed into villages in Southern China, causing an unknown number of casualties while the other two missed their targets at sea. Wanna take a look guys? I'll quote one of the biggest news outlets here in Taiwan:

中國飛彈數被美軍方打臉才改口？ 網友懷疑有2枚落在境內

〔即時新聞／綜合報導〕

中國人民解放軍26日朝南海發射彈道飛彈，中資港媒起初報導為 2枚，之後被美軍指出總共是4枚；對此，有不少中國網民發現，其中2枚飛彈疑似發射失 敗，落在中國廣西地區，引起不少人留言嘲諷訕笑。 綜合媒體報導，《南華早報》在26日引述消息人士指出，中國解放軍當天上午朝南海發射 2枚飛彈，東風-26B飛彈從青海發射，東風-21D飛彈則是從浙江發射，兩枚飛彈都是朝海 南省與西沙群島之間的海域發射。 美媒《彭博》及日媒《NHK》27日皆引述美國軍方消息報導，中國本週軍演一共試射4枚中 程飛彈，彈著點位於中國海南島與南海西沙群島間的海上，距離美國航空母艦近幾週操演 的海域不遠，警告意味濃厚。 美軍U-2偵察機25日疑似闖入中國發布的演習禁航區，引起中國軍方與外交部跳腳痛批； 美國民用衛星公司「行星實驗室 （Planet Labs）」也公布中國海軍軍艦25日在黃海發射 飛彈的衛星照片，並指U-2偵察機應該全程掌握想要蒐集的情報。 針對中國被美軍揭露在26日總共發射4枚中程飛彈，有中國網民指出，未擊中靶艦的另外2 枚飛彈可能在中途爆炸，落到廣西壯族自治區，引起網友們熱議，許多人留言笑說：「一 天射了四次，其中兩次没忍住内射了，不算數的，只有射到外面，被你們看到的才算」、 「當然是感謝黨、感謝政府了。你不說就是尋釁滋事走起，最差也是被嫖娼」、「這是有 黨性的導彈，堅持內循環的思想不能動搖」。

Translation:

Chinese Communist regime only admits the truth after being exposed by the US military, meanwhile Chinese netizens suspect two missiles have failed and dropped in Southern China

The PLA fired two ballistic missiles towards the South China Sea back in August 26. While Communist Regime-funded HK media initially claimed that that only 2 missiles were fired, the US military have pointed out that in fact 4 were launched. Many Chinese netizens have discovered that two of the missiles may have failed and crashed into villages in Southern China, causing many to doubt and laugh at the supposed "advanced capabilities" of the PLA. According to media, back in August 26, SCMP quoted PLA insiders claiming that the PLA fired two ballistic missiles towards the SCS. Meanwhile Bloomberg News and NHK both quoted US military intel which stated that in fact 4 missiles were launched. A U-2 spy plane supposedly entered a no-fly zone set up by the Communist Regime in the Yellow Sea back in August 25, causing criticisms from both the Chinese military and the foreign ministry. As a response, US-based company Planet Labs said that the U-2 spy plane was able to gather the intel needed. After learning the fact that the PLA have been exposed by the US military to have fired 4 missiles instead, Chinese netizens speculated that the remaining two of the missiles have crashed in Southern China (廣西壯族自治區 -> I don't know how to translate this). There was a heated discussion on the internet, with many Chinese netizens laughing at the true capabilities of the PLA. "So only the successful ones count", one jeered. "Thanks to the communist party and communist government, (你不說就是尋釁滋事走起，最差也是被嫖娼 -> I don't know how to translate this)", another scoffed. "Isn't this the so-called 'missile with Chinese characteristics'?, another netizen wrote, "It truly shows the true colors of the communist party"

Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!