China IRBM/SRBM (and non-ICBM/SLBM) thread

[Biscuits]

Something funny from this moron lol

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So essentially he is bragging that:

but as propaganda if you pay attention to the details it seems quite unconvincing

Because the rail borne target is much smaller than a real US CV.

But in reality it illustrates well something that most people have long believed, that these missiles aren't only accurate to large ships, but also smaller vessels. If the estimation according to the fireball is correct, the size of the target "carrier" is smaller than a LCS. And in fact the real implication content of the propaganda was that even a corvette size ship can be accurately hit.

 

[ismellcopium]

Nice size comparison of DF-15B, 16, 31A, 21D, 26. I've always seen DF-26 as a 5000km class system from its size.

 

[drowingfish]

wow see the size of 26...I'd believe it if you say it has a range of 5000km.

 

[Iron Man]

wow see the size of 26...I'd believe it if you say it has a range of 5000km.

Whenever I hear "5,000km" I think "Diego Garcia"

 

[Totoro]

With DF-26 the range is mostly about routing. Sure, if it was ballistic missile, it might go like 5000 km. If it was a glider (which it is), it could probably go even farther than that in a straight line. But realistically, even if 6000 km or more is the potential straight line reach, the way DF-26 is gonna be used will involve going way, way around a target, going left and right, and finally approach the target from any direction. For example, I remember some USAF/LM documents had routing factor eating 30% of the total range of a plane, for certain missions. If a similar routing factor is applied, suddenly 6000 km drops to 4200 km. But with the capability of being much less predictable in its trajectory. Possibly even going over locations where the opponent simply doesn't have tracking radars present for much of route. Possibly providing less warning time. Sure, the initial boost will be tracked by satellites but if the glider itself can somehow be hidden from satellite tracking, then there's a chance the opponent might not be able to track the glider all the way. And said routing ability might be what enables that.

 

[ismellcopium]

With DF-26 the range is mostly about routing. Sure, if it was ballistic missile, it might go like 5000 km. If it was a glider (which it is), it could probably go even farther than that in a straight line. But realistically, even if 6000 km or more is the potential straight line reach, the way DF-26 is gonna be used will involve going way, way around a target, going left and right, and finally approach the target from any direction. For example, I remember some USAF/LM documents had routing factor eating 30% of the total range of a plane, for certain missions. If a similar routing factor is applied, suddenly 6000 km drops to 4200 km. But with the capability of being much less predictable in its trajectory. Possibly even going over locations where the opponent simply doesn't have tracking radars present for much of route. Possibly providing less warning time. Sure, the initial boost will be tracked by satellites but if the glider itself can somehow be hidden from satellite tracking, then there's a chance the opponent might not be able to track the glider all the way. And said routing ability might be what enables that.

What are you talking about lol, DF-26 is an MaRV not a glider. It doesn't work like slightly similar appearing "gliders" like LRHW. That's not how it's used at all nor could it fly that way.

 

[Totoro]

I mixed it up with df-27. What i wrote was about df-27.

 

[ismellcopium]

I mixed it up with df-27. What i wrote was about df-27.

Honestly even with DF-27 I think it'll likely be able to achieve close to its max range in practice at least in the near term, large arcing maneuvers would be what bleeds the most range and that would be necessary to do something like avoid the entire coverage area of a GPI battery/ship positioned along the flight path for instance, but it'll take a while for the US to operationalize those. And obviously any exoatmospheric interceptors (GBI, SM-3) are useless against it. For dealing with any shorter range terminal interceptors with anti-HGV capability (PAC-3 MSE for instance), much smaller lateral strafes are likely what would be used which wouldn't affect range nearly as much.

 

[by78]

Specialized missile loading truck for DF-26.

 

[by78]

BP-12A live firing.