Jura The idiot
General
using google, I found what you probably referred to:
A Flawed and Dangerous U.S. Missile Defense Plan
PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
you got 2 big problems to solve with ASBM.
1) locating aircraft carrier group in a huge ocean when you have limited number of satellites to work with which has the requisite resolution.
2) ASBM at its really fast speed can identify carrier upon re-entry, home in onto the target and do enough damage. Remember, carrier moves extremely fast and can move a lot from launch to re-entry.
All this time, satellite communication, network communication could be tricked. Carrier group can easily create multiple decoys around itself. 2) is probably even harder to accomplish than 1) considering the decoys, jamming and other soft kill options.
1) locating aircraft carrier group in a huge ocean when you have limited number of satellites to work with which has the requisite resolution.
2) ASBM at its really fast speed can identify carrier upon re-entry, home in onto the target and do enough damage. Remember, carrier moves extremely fast and can move a lot from launch to re-entry.
All this time, satellite communication, network communication could be tricked. Carrier group can easily create multiple decoys around itself. 2) is probably even harder to accomplish than 1) considering the decoys, jamming and other soft kill options.
The question is whether ASBM's vulnerability to SM-3 is greater or lesser than a submarine's vulnerability to ASW system and its much shorter killing range and many mature counter measures.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
It's been reported that the ASBM warhead does maneuver to evade missiles defense. Also I remember reading an article where a Western expert said given the range and hypersonic speeds US Navy ships will not have enough time to react. The questions if an ASBM can actually work can be said of missile defense also.
If the warhead depends on off-board guidance, point 2 is moot.
Blackstone
Brigadier
So far, the mighty DF-21D and its big brother DF-26 are just shinny new toys with no record of success against moving targets in the sea. Hypersound or no hypersound, maneuver warhead or no maneuver warhead, yada, yada. They all add up to one thing: unproven. Unless and until the two systems are proven to reliably hit mocked up carriers in the sea, they are no more than ghost stories around campfires on moonless nights.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
They have never tested it on a moving carrier. That's true. Let's say someone built a carrier-sized empty hull and put an engine on it so it moves. But they need a person to sail it for the test as they launched 10 DF-21 at it simultaneously. Would you volunteer to be the skipper? If not, then the DF-21D has already achieved 90% of its purpose.
vesicles
Colonel
Good point. Like nukes, these ASBM's are more of a deterrent than actual weapons meant to be deployed and used on a regular basis.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Remote control drone targeting ships...
Blackstone
Brigadier
Deterrence is only as good as the other side's believe in the effectiveness of the measures and the willingness to use them. Both must be affirmative.