China Carrier Killer Threat: Mach 6 Speeds, No Way to Counter

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


You are wrong with your conclusion. I remember the cold war and the proganda that was fed to me. If you have two opposing powers things are kept in check. The yin and yang of the tao...




posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


Thanks dude
But that's what "formations and mutual support" means
And this is where the 45 comes into its own at the moment
It tracking, targeting and onboard weapons are world leading
But also it's ability to acces other ships weapon systems to integrate them with its own
Thus using its advanced tech to 'control' the fleets defensive weapon systems
edit on 21-3-2012 by Neocrusader because: Auto
edit on 21-3-2012 by Neocrusader because: Auto



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Not sure if it was mentioned by the Russians have had the super quick sunburn that is quicker than any defense which I might add Iran has them and China has their own. I really hope nobody get dragged into war, the weapons and carnage facing a real army will pale world war 2 in comparison. Lasers, EM bombs, Active denial, Drones, ronbots. Go buck rogers.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Yeah I too have looked at some pretty seriouse tools that china are producing...
Then I see the whole western world putting billions of pounds into their economy...
Then I dont feel so good when I look at it again,
people of power are not stupid,
They are aware that the arms race will never end ..
until they decide .
you will know when the time is near, they will launch a media campaigne..

Okay I know im a bit doom and gloom but .. come on .. the middle and working classes of the world are just sheep.
We are controlled by whatever ideaology is the favour of the century,money has proven to be all power and fear of love the weapon..
Its a real shame to say it (I have 4 young kids aswell) but the days of the human race are numbered .
The people of the world can change the future but the people of the world will all but die completely doing it.
Then it starts again...Its a funny old place.
Peace Love and Carp Fishing.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThinkingCap
reply to post by travis911
 


The real question is... How will we learn Cantonese in time?


Mandarin - cantonese was the language of Hong Kong. After the Brits gave it back to China then the Chinese Government started phasing out Cantonese and started teaching 'putong hua' (The common tongue) aka Mandarin. This is the official language of China, however there are many, many dialects but all should speak Mandarin



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by slanteye
reply to post by regor77
 

Should focus on terrorist cells and suicide bombers. These are the real threats and all the sophisticated weaponry are of not much use against walking time bombs.


The real threats ... ??

Shall we tot up the casualties? Minimal people in the west killed by suicide bombers and terrorist cells, minimal people in war zones killed by these.

US and allied troops killed in Afghanistan/Iraq = 6,600+ (I dont know what percentage where 'misfires' from US soldiers but me suspects a hgih percentage!)

Afgani and Iraqi troops killed = 38,500+ ... not to mention 850,000+ civilians killed (granted that some could have died through suicide bombers).

By your logic the US are the 'best' at terrorism and suicide bombers as they represent the biggest threat ... although realising the US were the biggest terrorist is no real shock.

What is more deadly a guy with a bomb strapped to himself blowing himself up in a market (20m blast radius?) or a US missile(s) ploughing in to a hospital or a school ... or a group of coalition soldiers ... again!



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jcarpenter
 


Maybe the occupation of Tibet comes to mind and I also hear the Chinese are sneaking over the border in India as well.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
Why are the English contributors here getting off on sending one of their ships to take a missile for the American Navy ? The Americans treat you like DOGS at every opportunity. Do you think they'll send a carrier to les îles Malouines/Mavinas/Falkland Islands Colony ?????

NO !!



But don't let fact get in the way of your English naval tech-wank.



WOW what utter trollop


Literally everything you have said is false, where to start really?

Firstly, yes we would expect a helping hand but we have never required it from the US, but just to squash your first claim, the US offered the UK an aircraft carrier in the 1982 Falklands conflict, to which the UK government refused, as it was not needed, should such a thing happen again and which the Royal Navy at this current time having 0, Aircraft carriers until 2015, the UK has treaty's with the US & france to borrow carriers if needed to retake the islands, however they are not needed with the type45s patrolling and there are also surrounding Islands with RAF bases and aircraft in close proximity, so i don't think they would need one still today,




But you anglos are all content to send your ship to protect theirs from the Chinese ???? Can I ask you, what the hell business is it of yours to send a ship all the way around the world to waters which aren't yours ????


Of course lol, its an alliance... that's the very purpose they serve, i'm not sure why you're struggling to get to grips with this? why does it make you so angry? the seas belong to everyone, we have as much a right to sail them as anybody else, again i really don't understand why this offends you,



And to protect your little crapheap destroyer (destroyer indeed, never has the naval classification "destroyer" been used so badly, for the Type 45 is so poorly armed it couldn't itself attack a rowing boat in bad weather) ... to protect this ship, you're relying on European armaments i.e. French and Italian LOL ... and it's European weapons which aren't even in English Navy inventory because you can't afford them !!!!!


BS what is better then?



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by WarriorOfTheLight
 


There's no treaty with France to use the Charles de Gaulle to retake the Malvinas. No treaty whatever.

There is an agreement from 2010 to help protect each other's vital national interests. But that term .... "vital national interests" ... can't possibly be extended to include a few lumps of sheep shat rocks in sud-atlantique.

Get real.

As you your own spin on the Type 45, you're just prattling crap. The Type 45 is just about the most ineffectual warship in the English fleet right now. It has the potential to be a good ship ... a VERY good ship. But until such time as there's major ££££££ spent on shipborne offensive weaponry, it's a very lovely to ship look at but a bit of a sitting duck, unfortunately.

And no amount of spin can possibly alter that very realistic interpretation.

Better ship right now ? The one you could've had, the smaller French/Italian Horizon frigates. They've got shipborne Exocet and torpedos ... the Type 45 has ZILCH apart from the weapons carried by it's little helicopter. Or even the Arleigh Burkes, it's an older platform but more affordable/effective than anything that's come out of a Scottish shipyard in the last 30 years.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Perhaps you have not heard guys but China would not fare well considering that the U.S. Navy has over 100 underwater remote missile launchers sitting along th eocean bootm within 50 miles of their coastline. Every damn and refinery in China would be destroyed within 20 minutes of the outbreak of war. China does not handle chaos very well as we have seen in the past.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by travis911
Most Chinese doctrine suggests for weapons like this to be effective it would need to offensive....




Jog my memory please, when was the last time that China attacked someone offensively? Perhaps you can refresh me as to the last time they went on an empire building spree of false flags, illegal wars, occupations, murder, rape and theft?

Could it be that US strategy of "containing" of China and Russia are driving defensive political & military doctrines of those countries?


The Chinese were the dominant empire in both economic and military terms for over 3,000 years in South East Asia. It's only a matter of time before they take back this title.


Infact it was and is the US, that has kept now Chinese and before the Russians from expanding their empires and communist ideologies. This is very true in the years after the WWII.

However, historically speaking, both China and Russia have been very gentle in their demeanor regarding attacking other countries. I doubt they have attacked any nation in the recent 200 years.

To attack, conquer, exploit and degrade is an AngloSaxon trait. Worst is they try to make it look as if the attack carried out is done as a favor to the victim nation.
edit on 1-5-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by victor7

Originally posted by babybunnies

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by travis911
Most Chinese doctrine suggests for weapons like this to be effective it would need to offensive....




Jog my memory please, when was the last time that China attacked someone offensively? Perhaps you can refresh me as to the last time they went on an empire building spree of false flags, illegal wars, occupations, murder, rape and theft?

Could it be that US strategy of "containing" of China and Russia are driving defensive political & military doctrines of those countries?


The Chinese were the dominant empire in both economic and military terms for over 3,000 years in South East Asia. It's only a matter of time before they take back this title.


Infact it was and is the US, that has kept now Chinese and before the Russians from expanding their empires and communist ideologies. This is very true in the years after the WWII.

However, historically speaking, both China and Russia have been very gentle in their demeanor regarding attacking other countries. I doubt they have attacked any nation in the recent 200 years.

To attack, conquer, exploit and degrade is an AngloSaxon trait. Worst is they try to make it look as if the attack carried out is done as a favor to the victim nation.
edit on 1-5-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)


Uhm, Tsarist Russia was one of the largest imperialist powers in Europe, and in by the 19th century was constantly eating up parts of the teetering Ottoman Empire as well partitioning Poland between itself and the other empires in Europe. After the Revolution and Civil War, the Soviet Union tried to invade Poland and barely was was driven back, then it attacked Finland in the Winter War, then after World War 2, it basically on the backs of the Red Army installed communists governments in its sphere of influence and kept them as puppets states and would send in the Red Army twice to crush any revolts against their governments.

China attacked UN forces during the Korea War, attacked Vietnam in a war, invaded Tibet, and had some border skirmishes with the Russians.

So no, they attacked others nations.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
i wouldn't be suprised if us intelligence knew about this missile before a lot of the chinese commanders did



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood


post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions





Ha ha - you have got to be kidding me!



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Less of a question of no way to counter, and more of a question of how well something like the SM-3 fired from a VLS on a DD-21 works in actual practice.

Ballistic missiles go up without any horizon to mask them. If radar doesn't see them, they may still light up on IR like an xmas tree. Still enough time to be aware that something is up, and perhaps do something.

Now those low altitude hypersonic missiles DARPA is currently interested in... Those seem like a game changer.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
How is this Chinese missile targeted? Does it rely on satellites? If so it is useless after the opening salvo. The US has long focused on the incapacitation of enemy satellites. While we hear about shooting satellites down that is not how the US plans to eliminate them.

The US did shoot one down not long ago. Some say it was because of toxic fuel onboard, others claim it was to show China that the US can shoot satellites, too. This happened shortly after china succeeded in downing a sat. I doubt the US felt compelled to prove it could shoot down a sat. I think it's a foregone conclusion that the US can.

Since the sat killing F15 program was shut down the US has focused on eliminating sats without destroying them. It is secretive. Nobody really knows what the US capabilities are. I would expect that chinese sats would blink out or be taken over in a matter of hours if need be. I wouldn't be surprised if US sats were attacked in the same way.

This is an area that the US has devoted a lot of resources in and that is held close to the chest. Rapidly deployable mini sats are probably in the inventory. US sat designers have developed plug and play satellites where components can be simply plugged into a core system to create various capabilities, not next year, but over night. They can go from the placement of an order to being deployed in a short time frame. How short? We don't know.

It is a foregone conclusion that the US will own space. If a Chinese missile cannot find its' target without satellite assistance (and I don't how it could considering that the carrier moves at 33+ knots, the distances involved, and the terminal velocity of the warhead) then the missile is not a game changer.

I'd also like to mention that a missile is a narrow spectrum weapon. It is a one hit wonder. No narrow spectrum weapon has ever been effective enough against a broad spectrum weapon (tank, aircraft, ship) to render it useless. Broad spectrum weapons have a lot of operating flexibility and defensive options. Torpedoes, anti tank, air, and ship missiles have never proven effective enough to defeat the broad capabilities of tanks, aircraft, and ships well enough to relegate them to history. I doubt the Chinese have accomplished this.

US missile defense has defeated 95% of threat simulations posed by these advanced Chinese (and Russian sunburns) missiles, which have not even hit a moving target in tests to my knowledge.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
We are deploying Stealth ships.

We have the eye in the sky, and plenty of our own missiles.

The missiles only work within 2 hundred miles from the coast. And, they have to be able to see us to hit us. Can't see a stealth ship!

We're good!



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Techtron
 

I would be interested to hear more of these.I have NEVER heard of any pre placed systems that are currently deployed and neither has China or we would be explaining why we violated an "Open Seas"mandated law.
What is the name of this system by the way?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by travis911
China is developing this insane super missile that can kill US carriers at will. It is called the DF-21D. It can be launched from over 1000 miles away, making US Carriers worthless in a war with China. The missile then comes down from the atmosphere at Mach 6 making use of most defenses worthless. I hope to bring this to light as this is a weapon that could spell doom for US forces in the future. We talk about wars on terror, but something like this is a real threat!

the-diplomat.com...


These missile launchers aren't all people crack them up to be.
edit on 17-6-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
15
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join