It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Chinese Missile Can Destroy US Supercarrier in One Go

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   

New Chinese Missile Can Destroy US Supercarrier in One Go


i.gizmodo.com

Hooray for the Chinese, for they have developed a super cool new anti-ship ballistic missile with low radar signature and unpredictable flight path which can destroy US Navy Supercarriers on one go! Oh, wait.

According to the latest intelligence report, the new missile—a modified Dong Feng 21—can strick carriers or any other warship within a 2,000 kilometer range from its launching point. The new super-weapon carries a warhead powerful enough to sink a supercarrier in a single strike, travelling at mach 10 (ten times the speed of sound), which enables it to reach the maximum range target in less than 12 minutes.

Even worse: its combination of a complex guidance system and high maneuverability makes it almost impossible to intercept. Let's hope that the US Navy admirals are good at playing Battleships.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.defensetech.org
www.military.com




posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Well if (when) WWW3 starts the chinese dont only have the people to take on some of the worlds strongest nations, it has the technology too. Havent seen much of chinese defence technology in the MSM, even though they (MSM) are all over this North-Korea thing. I think we are hearing way to little on Chinese and Russian technology contra North Korea etc. Any theories why?

Thought this might go in Breaking Alternative News instead of Weaponry because MSM's lack of will to cover anything other than the "evil" small countries with stupid dictators.
The real threats are ignored.

Deny Ignorance
Zyk

i.gizmodo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
They have to locate the carrier first, and then be sure to protect the missiles before they are launched. Not saying the missile is useless but it is not the end all be all either.


Good deterance value though.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
In the effort to "deny ignorance," one should have realized that for the past several years, the Chinese having been making such claims that they possessed a 'carrier killer' missile. Furthermore, ballistic missiles are inherently unsuitable for anti-ship applications.

This news is no new revelation; it amounts to a /yawn.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 



They have to locate the carrier first,


Do you know how big Aircraft Carrier cross sections are on Low-band warning radars?

You'd have to be blind to miss them.


and then be sure to protect the missiles before they are launched.


Considering the 2,000km range, that would require a very alert Carrier Group escort to be able to detect the launch vessel and have time to destroy it before it released the missile, considering it would be out of range of radar, and even screening air patrols unless they came incredibly close to the vessel.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Seekerof
 



Chinese having been making such claims that they possessed a 'carrier killer' missile.


The Chinese do indeed already have their hands on some very potent, Russian, anti-shipping cruise missiles that can pick apart a Carrier Group:

The Kh-20:
An older, Mach 2, Nuclear cruise missile with a 2,300kg Nuclear warhead and a cruise ceiling of 20,000m. With a range of 600km. Capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
en.wikipedia.org...

The Kh-22:
An anti-shipping and anti-radiation missile that travels at Mach 4, carries a 1,000kg shaped charge Nuclear warhead and a range of 440km which is well beyond the realm of interception by the Navy's AEGIS defence system or any other American SAM. Capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
en.wikipedia.org...

The Kh-55:
A subsonic, air-launched cruise missile powered by a ramjet with a range of over 3,000km, and a 2,000kg warhead. Capable of carrying Nuclear warheads. Can potentially be launched from the ground, although Russia nor any other operators deploy them this way.
en.wikipedia.org...

Or the SS-N-22 Sunburn Missile:
A Ramjet propelled, anti-shipping cruise missile with a top speed of Mach 3, and a 320kg war head. It's referred to as a Sea-skimmer, because it flies above the surface of the water thus avoiding any aerial warning radars.
Apparently one of the world's most advanced anti-ship cruise missiles:
www.globalsecurity.org...
It gives around 30 to 25 seconds interception time due to it's low attack profile making it impossible to intercept without prior warning.

I wouldn't underestimate any of these babies.

American Intelligence Reports classify them as the "greatest threat" to US Naval Assets currently faced:

the Navy's top brass decided to end production of their newest class of destroyers -- in response to 15 classified intelligence reports highlighting their vulnerability to a range of foreign missiles --

www.washingtonpost.com...

[edit on 6/4/09 by The Godfather of Conspira]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Do you know how big Aircraft Carrier cross sections are on Low-band warning radars?

Explain - I don't want to quote someone without completely understanding them.

[edit on 6/4/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 




Here boy, fetch: en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
But, this thread isn't about conventional ASCMs, now is it? It's about the use of tactical ballistic missiles as a viable anti-shipping weapon. Please stick to the subject.

TBMs are inherently unsuitable in an anti-shipping role for a variety of reasons, such as:

1. Limitations on targeting information at long ranges
2. The ability of the target to maneuver evasively during a long weapon flight time
3. The inability of the weapon to maneuver, except during the terminal phase
4. Extreme limitations of weapon terminal phase maneuvering, in general
5. Weapon seeker limitations due to required re-entry hardening/shielding
6. Weapon seeker limitations due to trajectory and target/clutter issues

Not to mention that a launch of a weapon of this type would be anything but stealthy, which is a key factor in the use of any practical ASCM.

Agree with Seekerof. Yawn-worthy.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira
 


Low band radars? Well first what the hell is a 'low band warning radar'. A radar that warns of low bands? When asked to explain - tell me to do the research myself, not give me some smart arse answer.

Would that be the radars that are limited to line of sight, or them massive fixed arrays which are incapable of targetting resolution?


[edit on 6/4/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Wow. I sure am glad we spent hundreds of billions of dollars building these money wasting war machines that can now, apparently, be annihilated by a single missile.

G, that was money well spent.

This is how their game works -- we spend a billion dollars here and there, on planes trains and automobiles -- then we spend another billion on missiles which make the first billion obsolete. Then the cycle repeats itself, as we figure out how to "one up" our previous war invention, and perpetually continue lining the pockets of the defense industry, while making the world a little less safe every day.




posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
That is, if the missile can get past our missile defense system. In my view, these weapons have almost become redundant though, simply because if war ever escalated to the point where we were shooting at each other, so many different missiles with payloads of many kinds would cris-cross the globe so fast no one weapon system would make or break the war. We would literally all be doomed.I just hope that no one "Pulls the trigger", so to speak. What a world.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Zykloner
 

Thanks for the news. We all need a handkerchief to wipe out our teary eye following the N. Korean failure to permanently embed WWIII as a thrilling topic to speculate upon.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
mock 10! JEEBUS, strap me onto that baby and let me ride it!



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Well , Im slightly suprised about the worry here. Lets face it , if the Chinese want to blow something up, they have always had an interesting array of things to hit with. Lets face it, defense against it aside, they have nukes. I dont think Aircraft carriers are properly nuke proof. Yeah theres lazers now can blast em out the air, and theres solid projectile launchers which can blow a nuke out of the sky , but if it got through I think a bunch of guys in a steel cookpot will cook just as good if they get gamma bombed as opposed to building a weapon just for aircraft carriers.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I'm going to have to call BS on this, they have dropped a nuke around a carrier fleet around Alaska back in the 50s I believe, ships retired from WW2, and they could hardly sink the carrier then...it would probably take a direct hit from a tactical nuke to sink a carrier. Carriers are HUGE, and still then, they'd have to actually hit the carrier. China is just flexing muscle they don't have because their navy is nonexistent...China basically has no Navy, and until they do, they won't be a military "super power"

[edit on 6-4-2009 by yellowcard]



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira
 


The anti ship missile sites are probably monitored by spy satellite. They would not need to be destroyed by the carrier battle group. They could be destroyed by land based missiles or an airborne laser. (Yeah we have cool military stuff as well.)



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   
There is already a very long thread about this topic here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Most everything that can be said about this has already been said there.
Cheers!



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Wait... when was the last time the Chinese tested this "new" missiles...? Wait for it..., seriously, I'm waiting for the test. I'll second that yawn from Seekerof and redirect everyone to the Weaponry Forum where this has been discussed for years now.



posted on Apr, 6 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I'm supposed to believe it works because they say so? Just where did the chinese find an american super carrier to test it on? Were's the proof, have they sunk a US carrier lately? Did they build a replica of a US carrier and test this thing, or is this more likely propaganda.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join