PLA missile defense system

Finn McCool said:

All of these billions of dollars spent on missiles made to intercept ballistic missiles have been wasted basically.

Click to expand...

yup, exept for the $$ devoted to early warning, tracking, target acquisition, and data link...

pla101prc said:

it doesnt matter what your intention is, what matters is its gonna derail the discussion.
i am about as political as any human being can get at my age, i had problems staying away from politics when i was a recruit here, got used to it afterwards.

Click to expand...

My mouth is gagged. PLA. you know that.

Finn McCool said:

I think the whole concept of interceptor based BMD is really overblown. It's a highly inefficient and difficult way to intercept missiles compared to lasers, and it's only a matter of a few years before lasers will be completely able to do the job. All of these billions of dollars spent on missiles made to intercept ballistic missiles have been wasted basically.

Click to expand...

i don't think any real and true blooded chinese could find the inspiration in themselves to respond to that. their hands are tied. they are not at liberty to defend the honor of their own country and their own people. that's the story of the average chinese person's life in their very own world now a days i suppose. but ironic isn't it?

Finn McCool said:

I think the whole concept of interceptor based BMD is really overblown. It's a highly inefficient and difficult way to intercept missiles compared to lasers, and it's only a matter of a few years before lasers will be completely able to do the job. All of these billions of dollars spent on missiles made to intercept ballistic missiles have been wasted basically.

Click to expand...

I tends to agree with you technically. However sometime it is not always the technicality of a system that matters here. Sometime it is the publicity or the showing off of someone's capability... and its R&D effort and fruits.

Of course in future, laser might be the answer to many defence criteria... but that is in the future. At present moment, China could tell the world that she did possess this capability of shooting down ballistic missiles in mid-air (irregardless of the efficiency of the weapon).

Of course in real war (as mentioned by someone previously)... when missiles are being fired at unknown location, unknown time, with a different profile, decoys, number of warheads, etc, it would not be as easy to intercept and knock off (I doubt even lasers had this capability too) as during test when all the unknowns are actually accounted for.

But right now, the Chinese could still tell the world, "We have something that actually work, and you do not have. So if you wanted to do something we do not like, you have better take into account that we have nasty fang, and when you attack, you have to take into account that we are not that easily hit."

LOl i was only officially a "real member" not long back, and like pla101rc, i've learned it similar way

some sort of resoc. program this forum has that makes ppl talk military without politics

Finn McCool said:

I think the whole concept of interceptor based BMD is really overblown. It's a highly inefficient and difficult way to intercept missiles compared to lasers, and it's only a matter of a few years before lasers will be completely able to do the job. All of these billions of dollars spent on missiles made to intercept ballistic missiles have been wasted basically.

Click to expand...

That is unrealistic, Finn. There is no laser powerful enough or compact enough that could possibly damage a regular ballistic missile (nevermind a reinforced one) at any distance tactically helpful to the defender.

For the foreseeable future, there will be three tiers of nuclear powers:

Tier Three -- limited numbers of rudimentary rockets, mostly liquid-fueled, no MIRV technology, no thermonuclear devices

Tier Two -- MIRV / decoy technology

Tier One -- ABM

Tier Three powers effectively have no nuclear deterrence against Tier One powers.


China's development of ABM is very important because it means there are only four nuclear powers that have deterrence against China -- US, Russia, France and UK.

Roger604 said:

That is unrealistic, Finn. There is no laser powerful enough or compact enough that could possibly damage a regular ballistic missile (nevermind a reinforced one) at any distance tactically helpful to the defender.

Click to expand...

For now, yes, but who knows what might happen in decades to come? Of course, many of the BMD technologies could be readily transfered to a laser-based ABM.

For the foreseeable future, there will be three tiers of nuclear powers:

Tier Three -- limited numbers of rudimentary rockets, mostly liquid-fueled, no MIRV technology, no thermonuclear devices

Tier Two -- MIRV / decoy technology

Tier One -- ABM

Tier Three powers effectively have no nuclear deterrence against Tier One powers.

China's development of ABM is very important because it means there are only four nuclear powers that have deterrence against China -- US, Russia, France and UK.

Click to expand...

That kind of thinking is dangerous. A nuclear weapon's most powerful effect is the fear it generates, and there are other methods of delivery than ballistic missiles.

I agree with Finn, I wouldn't put too much faith into missile defense.

In my opinion, what significant about the test is the message that China sent. There are some who are delusional about missile defense and believe it will allow them to blackmail China through nuclear weapons without fear of retaliatory strikes. China is now telling these people the following: you have 100% faith in your missile defense? We have an identical system in store for you.

Those who dangerously thought they could somehow win a nuclear exchange must now wake up and smell the roses.

China's anti-missile test should not be taken as a threat. It is defensive, and don't forget that China is the first nation in the world to delacre they will not strike first with nuclear weapon.

Engineer said:

I agree with Finn, I wouldn't put too much faith into missile defense.

In my opinion, what significant about the test is the message that China sent. There are some who are delusional about missile defense and believe it will allow them to blackmail China through nuclear weapons without fear of retaliatory strikes. China is now telling these people the following: you have 100% faith in your missile defense? We have an identical system in store for you.

Those who dangerously thought they could somehow win a nuclear exchange must now wake up and smell the roses.

Click to expand...

No, that's incorrect. If you're focusing purely on US-China competition, you're missing the real point of the ABM.

ABM is a shield against Tier Three nuclear powers and potential nuclear powers, giving the Tier One power greater freedom of action.

By the time the US did its first integrated test flight of ABM in 2002, China was already a Tier Two nuclear power with MIRVs and decoys. Actually, it already achieve these in the late 80's.

So while China might have to be worried about US ABM, even if it only has DF-5A (as some western "experts" believe), it was not actually at risk of losing nuclear deterrence.