If there is an enemy ship inside the intercepting range of ascending stage, either that enemy ship or the launching ship would soon be destroyed.
PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
lcloo
Captain
How does "If there is an enemy ship inside the intercepting range of ascending stage" will lead to "either that enemy ship or the launching ship would soon be destroyed" ? What is the deciding factor that will lead to the outcome that your described?
any forward deployment of unit means the same weapon can hit target with quicker resonse or at greater distance, but it could also mean exposure to enemy fire. There is always a balance to strike
The discussion above makes me wonder one important question - Would there be a point in time, perhaps somewhere in the future, where missile technology has advanced so much that missiles that have ICBM range can be made small enough to be launched from platforms such as bombers and universal (perhaps slightly larger) VLS cells on warships, and be made common enough that they can be fielded on a mass scale?
Considering that as China's 055 and 052D DDGs can fire DF-21 with ranges of around 1500 kilometers and that the US would be fielding hypersonic CPS missiles with ranges of a whooping 2700 kilometers on their Zumwalt DDGs and Virginia SSNs, alongside the gradual proliferation of stand-off long range missiles that can fly thousands of kilometers towards their targets, such as the upcoming JASSM-XR with an expected range of at least 1900 kilometers.
In fact, the progression and form of arms race across the Pacific has already been set in motion since the 2010s. It is becoming more evident than ever that China and the US is now squarely engaged in a fierce competition on who can field better missiles that can fly faster, further, more agile and more survivable.
Therefore, I believe there are questions that we would eventually have to come across:
Would we reach a point where missiles could out-range the combat radius of a carrier strike group?
Would we reach a point where the forces located on one edge of the Pacific can attack naval and land targets that are located on the other edge of the Pacific?
Would we reach a point where perhaps countries across the world could just attack anyone on the other side of the world like how we do today, but at far shorter ranges?
Anyone wanna doing some brainstorming?
Considering that as China's 055 and 052D DDGs can fire DF-21 with ranges of around 1500 kilometers and that the US would be fielding hypersonic CPS missiles with ranges of a whooping 2700 kilometers on their Zumwalt DDGs and Virginia SSNs, alongside the gradual proliferation of stand-off long range missiles that can fly thousands of kilometers towards their targets, such as the upcoming JASSM-XR with an expected range of at least 1900 kilometers.
In fact, the progression and form of arms race across the Pacific has already been set in motion since the 2010s. It is becoming more evident than ever that China and the US is now squarely engaged in a fierce competition on who can field better missiles that can fly faster, further, more agile and more survivable.
Therefore, I believe there are questions that we would eventually have to come across:
Would we reach a point where missiles could out-range the combat radius of a carrier strike group?
Would we reach a point where the forces located on one edge of the Pacific can attack naval and land targets that are located on the other edge of the Pacific?
Would we reach a point where perhaps countries across the world could just attack anyone on the other side of the world like how we do today, but at far shorter ranges?
Anyone wanna doing some brainstorming?
Last edited:
There is always physics involved. Plane fly at higher altitude so same munition will always have longer range and carry momentum of the plane.
Because that intercepting range is well within the range of other more conventionally weaponry and highly likely also each other's detection bubble which in modern war means imminent destruction. My words was a bit of oversimplication but firing an ASBM at distant target is hardly a priority when you get enemy ships in such close range.
What scenario will this occur? If the SM-6 launch platform (ie. Arleigh Burke) sneaks that close without somehow being detected they might as well fire the SM-6s at the Type 055.
lcloo
Captain
Yes, that is a very valid point.
Short answer: No
Long answer:
I believe technology gains will Not make ICBM's smaller but instead will make them cheaper, more accurate, and possibly good enough to hit moving targets like ships.
Possible future examples:
1. Anti-ship variant of the DF-31
2. Conventional variant of the DF-41 with improved CEP
3. Building 1,000 DF-26 within the next 10 years
4. A weaponized variant of the Long March 2C
just some ideas...