It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


China has "Kill Weapon" to destroy US Carriers

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 11:40 AM
China is reported to have developed a missle that is large enough destroy a US supercarrier with a range of 2000 KM and a speed exceeding MACH 10. It has a very unpredicatable flight pattern and is directed by satelite and unmaned planes.

See Link Below:

This could seriously limit US ability to project power in the west Pacific. I wonder if this is why North Korea is acting so boldly with the missle launch. Perhaps China wants to run a test of this new missle to see what our counter measures maybe. This is very disturbing, I hope we are working on significant counter measures.

[edit on 3/31/09 by mel1962]

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:00 PM
EMP's enabled by HAARP like weapons, that would be my guess if we were working on some kind of defense. Who really knows you know, after hearing about some of the experiments they have done in the name of warfare, nothing would surprise me. lol

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:18 PM
MaRV`s arn`t new - the Pershing II had one , as do alot of similar russian kit ,

as for EMP waepons - great so you make the 1/2 ton lump of metal inert - still if t hits thats gonna hurt alot.

and the emp needed to hard kill it is rather alot -

thats the entire complex that housed the only operational ABM system the USA had - and they closed it soon after it opened thanks to the russian FOBS .

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:21 PM
Yipes- that's scary. Any system that could take down a supercarrier would be a game changer. Most of the US military strategy is based on our carriers. Take them out of the equation, and we're in trouble.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:25 PM
That wold have to be a very powerful weapon.

The mil tested nuclear weapons at Bikini atoll against the Japenese Navy fleet captured and some US mil ships that had no other use.

The first air burst did minor damage. They decided to do a underwater test in the midst of the fleet. The nuke damaged most of the ships, but didn't do anywhere near the damage you'd think.

China would have to have a nuclear weapon on that missile to take out a carrier.

If they did use a nuke against a carrier, then they had better have developed soem sort of umbrella for their cities as the Ohio class subs would launch.

[edit on 31-3-2009 by Jmurman]

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:40 PM
Good points all!

I went to the link in the article that originated this story and it was a discussion on blogging on It is interesting article and gives further insite into the source and why's of this development. I believe has material has been sited and used on ATS by various authors.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:49 PM
reply to post by Jmurman

A conventional warhead would be more than enough to destroy an aircraft carrier. Plenty of carriers were sunk in WWII with conventional explosives. The trick is getting past the carrier's layered defensive systems and actually hitting the thing. You have to get past the aircraft onboard, past the anti-missile systems, past the CWS point-defense systems. An anti-ship ballistic missile is too fast to be countered with existing ship defense systems. That's what makes this so scary. Carrier battle groups are organized to counter any existing threats- mines, torpedoes, surface vessels, aircraft etc. But they have no existing counter to ballistic missiles. They are open to that kind of attack- a very fast missile coming in from a high trajectory. Even a kinetic strike- no warhead at all- at that speed is going to do some serious damage. If you get through the decks and into the aviation fuel tanks below the waterline- it's bye-bye supercarrier. A single delayed-fuse, penetrating warhead ("bunker buster") would do the trick.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:54 PM
The most dangerous threat against a carrier group is the ultra high speed ASCM , `Sunburn` is over 20 years old the air launched version was shown in 1992 and it was based on the older sea launched version.

the indian Brahmos is based on the P-800 Oniks , and will be Mach 5 capable soon , that leaves a response time of under 20 seconds from detection to impact.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:55 PM
If the missle is using mutiple dummy warheads in addition to the programmed irregular flight path it would be dern near impossible to stop it. An interesting idea though, would it be possible to have "dummy" inflatable carriers, like big BIG bath toys in tow to confuse missle targeting?

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 12:55 PM
reply to post by moonwilson

against a supersobic missile, gun CIWS is still a hit

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 01:32 PM
What concerns me is the US Navy seems a bit taken back by the news and in fact even a bit alarmed. I don't know if that is disinfo or real, but it is concerning, we are in trouble if we can't project our military power across the globe!

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by Harlequin

Against a mach 10 missile, coming in from straight overhead, I wouldn't put much faith in the CIWS. Mach 10 is almost 8000mph! That's way, way faster than what CIWS was designed to counter. Also, even the newer, improved mount can't elevate above 70 degrees- which means it's useless against very high-trajectory missiles.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by mel1962

It's false alarm. Anyone with a nuke has the power to knock out a carrier or carrier group within the range of the delivery system. This is rather old news.

The "sunburn" has had this capability for 15-20 years and is improved with every revision.

As for the spies/leaks etc from the US, there's no doubt most of this data is controlled leakage. "Sure, let them have and aspire to design wayyyy outdated technology." What they have in this anti carrier missile is nothing more than a stick or a stone compared to our "REAL" platforms.

Look at the US military black budgets over the past couple decades.
Putting a US carrier group out is a joke compared to the real hardware. If anything it's pure appeasement. If there is WW3, it'll be over as quick as it begins.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 02:33 PM
Couple of thoughts here:

Both the Soviets and the Chicoms like to release tidbits of seemingly invinceable weapons systems all thime if real then yes it does present challanges

1) If real such a weapon would not nessecarily even need a warhead. The kinetic energy carried by even a sabot round would do plenty of damage if it hits. Its throw weight is about 600kg depending on what source you look at. Recent tests had decoys which would reduce the weightn fo the main warhead but it still would do some damage

2) It has a CEP with the MOD 2 version of 300-400 meters which when equipped with a nuclear warhead would do the trick but may not be accurate to hit an manuvering ship with a kinetic or conventional warhead. A Nimitz class vessel at flank speed and doing emergency manuvers is pretty impressive

3) The above Mod 2 variant of which im sure the carrier killer is based uses GPS guidence. Im betting that the US will take those signals away. Leaving them dependant on satelite targeting which leaves it with radar and satelite guidence which again is going against a highly mobile force

4) All this assumed that the SM-3's are inneffective agains tthis threat.

5) CIWS and the newer RAM would be useless againt a mach 10 ballistic threat as would the ESSM and SM-2's

All the more reason to counter any potient threats by developing more sophisticated ballistic missile defences

Arm Taiwan to the teeth to counter ChiCom agression

Develop laser based ship defence systems

Get the ABL operation

[edit on 3/31/09 by FredT]

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 02:58 PM
I was looking at a thread on North Korea threatening war and just had a weird and sick feeling that some of these things are connected.

March 8, 2009 - 5 Chinese Ships clash with 1 US Ship in the South China Sea

March 19, 2009 - China urges North Korea back to Negotiation table. It is reported that Russian aircraft twice overflew the US aircraft carriers patroling off the coast of S. Korea.

March 20, 2009 - China increases naval forces by posting presence in the South China Sea. N. Korean leader will visit China after April 15 and missile launch will happen between April 4 - 8.

March 24, 2009 - N. Korea warns US & Japan over shooting down missile test launch.

March 25, 2009 - S. Korea protest to China about the N. Korea missle test next month. A report indicates a new Chinese Submarine base has gone operational on Hainan Island.

March 26, 2009 - China and US clash over an American Report on growing Chinese military threat angered Chinese Officials.

March 27, 2009 - N. Korea moves missile to launch pad. Japan orders battleships and missile interceptors to its north coast to defend against errant missile launch.

March 30, 2009 - US, Japan and S. Korea missile destroying task force sets out to sail.

March 31, 2009 - N. Korea threatens war with Japan if missile is shot down. US warns of "consequences" if N. Korea launches missile. Report that Russia is building 6 new nuclear submarines. China reportedly has developed a "Kill Weapon" missile to destroy US carriers.

It appears that China is trying to deflect attention away from their sub base and new weapons development by having N. Korea act up or could they be luring the US & Japan into a ambush???

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 03:06 PM
reply to post by Atlantican

Unless they give the weapons system, say to Iran or N. Korea to use against our carrier. Both of those countries would be more likely to start a conventional war than and nuclear one.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by FredT

GPS doesn`t allways mean `USA` - GLASNOST is the russian version whilst Beidou is the chinese version

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 03:28 PM
the most rliable and significant counter measure would be to mind your own business and no one would have a reason to have to use it.

It really beginning to show that the US is no longer the super power it once was, hold your heads up high and march right back home.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 03:35 PM
Carriers are incredibly vulnerable as it is, especially to submarine attack.

The British showed the way in the Falklands conflict, the best thing you can do is hide them from the enemy, but that's easier said than done.

In the event of a real conflict with a well equipped opponent such as China, I would expect our carriers to be more of a liability than an asset.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 03:37 PM

^^ The USA has threatened to directly attack EU assests.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in