New Chinese "Kill Weapon": US Carriers the target

Have a story, topic or report on what's really happening in the world's militaries? Talk about it here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jumpshot724
Major
Major
Posts: 767
Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
Version: FS9
Location: New York, USA

New Chinese "Kill Weapon": US Carriers the target

Post by Jumpshot724 »

Now THIS is scary, my dad was telling me about this last night, all I'll say is he works for a major defense company.




Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers

Advanced missile poses substantial new threat for U.S. Navy


U. S. Naval Institute
March 31, 2009


With tensions already rising due to the Chinese navy becoming more aggressive in asserting its territorial claims in the South China Sea, the U.S. Navy seems to have yet another reason to be deeply concerned.

After years of conjecture, details have begun to emerge of a "kill weapon" developed by the Chinese to target and destroy U.S. aircraft carriers.

First posted on a Chinese blog viewed as credible by military analysts and then translated by the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination, a recent report provides a description of an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that can strike carriers and other U.S. vessels at a range of 2000km.

The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.

The ASBM is said to be a modified DF-21
While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.

After spending the last decade placing an emphasis on building a fleet that could operate in shallow waters near coastlines, the U.S. Navy seems to have quickly changed its strategy over the past several months to focus on improving the capabilities of its deep sea fleet and developing anti-ballistic defenses.

As analyst Raymond Pritchett notes in a post on the U.S. Naval Institute blog:

"The Navy's reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren't many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy…the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat."

In recent years, China has been expanding its navy to presumably better exert itself in disputed maritime regions. A recent show of strength in early March led to a confrontation with an unarmed U.S. ship in international waters.







The fact that the Navy has changed it's tactics shows that this thing is an extremely credible threat. Scary stuff :?
-Joe W.

"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"

Image
User avatar
davidbernard
Captain
Captain
Posts: 245
Joined: 26 May 2008, 14:35
Version: FS9
Location: The Netherlands

Post by davidbernard »

Well, that's life in the military. There will always be thread in any form. Thread also prevents countries to use force without thinking twice.

The former Soviet Union had (and still has) a vast arsenal of very capable nuclear and conventional anti-ship missiles that can be launched from aircraft, ships and subs. Believe me: any battlegroup commander would get very, very nervous when a number of these weapons would be deployed.
Dave 'D-Rex' Bernard

Image
User avatar
Jumpshot724
Major
Major
Posts: 767
Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
Version: FS9
Location: New York, USA

Post by Jumpshot724 »

Well, that's life in the military. There will always be thread in any form. Thread also prevents countries to use force without thinking twice.

The former Soviet Union had (and still has) a vast arsenal of very capable nuclear and conventional anti-ship missiles that can be launched from aircraft, ships and subs. Believe me: any battlegroup commander would get very, very nervous when a number of these weapons would be deployed.


Very true, but those current anti-ship missiles can be fended off to some extent with PHALANX etc, and even so a carrier could take maybe 3-5 of them before sinking (depending on what kind and where it's hit). This new thing is designed to take down a carrier with ONE shot. Not to mention it's nearly impossible to fight it off given it's stealthiness, speed, and most importantly it has an erratic flight path, and thus would be impossible to track and thus shoot back at.
-Joe W.

"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"

Image
maddog65
MAIW Veteran
MAIW Veteran
Posts: 1067
Joined: 23 Aug 2006, 10:15
Version: FS9
Location: In between KNTU and KNGU

Post by maddog65 »

Wouldn't hold my breath too much on a MK15 taking out a SS-N- whatever from the old soviet union. Some of the flight profiles on those suckers would defeat the MK15 and you may not even be able to get a SM-2 shot off.
MIKE JG
MAIW Veteran
MAIW Veteran
Posts: 10976
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 02:25
Version: MSFS

Post by MIKE JG »

But it needs help from satellite and SIGNET sources. Take those away and it's useless. If there ever is a next World War, it will start several hundred miles above the ground in space as well as through billions of miles of internet connections in cyberspace. Just more of the same in the weapons race.
-Mike G.

Recovering flight sim addict, constant lurker.

Check out my real life RV-8 build here: RV-8 Builder Log
Ford Friendly
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 823
Joined: 08 Jul 2007, 22:15
Version: FS9

Re: New Chinese "Kill Weapon": US Carriers the tar

Post by Ford Friendly »

Jumpshot724 wrote:After spending the last decade placing an emphasis on building a fleet that could operate in shallow waters near coastlines, the U.S. Navy seems to have quickly changed its strategy over the past several months to focus on improving the capabilities of its deep sea fleet and developing anti-ballistic defenses.
...snip...
The fact that the Navy has changed it's tactics shows that this thing is an extremely credible threat.
Seems to me an overreaction possibly due to forgetting that weapons develpment and strategy/tactics tend to follow somewhat erratc cycles. First a weapon or a new tactic is conceived and becomes "the in thing" for a while. Massive attention and money is trhown at "making or solving the new threat" for an indeterminant period. Then something new comes along and takes its place as the new "be all/end all". Simply put, as new weapons are developed or threats perceived (real or imagined - think the Missile Gap of the 1950/60s), counter-measures are sought. It would be silly not to do so. Remember, I did say "real or imagined".

Propaganda feeds the "imagined" part and the Chinese would be stupid not to use the 'net as part of their propaganda machine - whether the missile performs as believed or not.

Then again, I used to live in the "show me" state.
Why waste 'trons for a snappy signature when I can use this?
User avatar
Jumpshot724
Major
Major
Posts: 767
Joined: 16 Feb 2008, 20:20
Version: FS9
Location: New York, USA

Post by Jumpshot724 »

But it needs help from satellite and SIGNET sources. Take those away and it's useless. If there ever is a next World War, it will start several hundred miles above the ground in space as well as through billions of miles of internet connections in cyberspace. Just more of the same in the weapons race.
Very, very true. If you haven't already I suggest you read the book "Space Wars" by Michael J. Coumatos, William B. Scott, & William J. Birnes. It's about the first few days of WWIII and exactly what you just said pretty much.


Seems to me an overreaction possibly due to forgetting that weapons develpment and strategy/tactics tend to follow somewhat erratc cycles. First a weapon or a new tactic is conceived and becomes "the in thing" for a while. Massive attention and money is trhown at "making or solving the new threat" for an indeterminant period. Then something new comes along and takes its place as the new "be all/end all". Simply put, as new weapons are developed or threats perceived (real or imagined - think the Missile Gap of the 1950/60s), counter-measures are sought. It would be silly not to do so. Remember, I did say "real or imagined".

Propaganda feeds the "imagined" part and the Chinese would be stupid not to use the 'net as part of their propaganda machine - whether the missile performs as believed or not.
The thing with the Chinese though is they don't tout their weapons systems (or even talk about them for that matter) unless they've been proven and/or are guaranteed to work. But, you are also correct in that there will eventually be a counter for this weapon system, which has obviously begun as the Navy is changing their tactics (step 1).

I don't see it as an "overreaction" but more of a "caught with our pants down" scenario. This was probably one of those things that was shrugged off when whispers of it's development started spreading, otherwise we would have started to do something about it long before this news broke.
-Joe W.

"I love the smell of jetfuel in the morning....smells like VICTORY!!"

Image
Ford Friendly
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 823
Joined: 08 Jul 2007, 22:15
Version: FS9

Post by Ford Friendly »

Jumpshot724 wrote:The thing with the Chinese though is they don't tout their weapons systems (or even talk about them for that matter) unless they've been proven and/or are guaranteed to work. But, you are also correct in that there will eventually be a counter for this weapon system, which has obviously begun as the Navy is changing their tactics (step 1).

I don't see it as an "overreaction" but more of a "caught with our pants down" scenario. This was probably one of those things that was shrugged off when whispers of it's development started spreading, otherwise we would have started to do something about it long before this news broke.
Obviously we have a distinctly different understanding and knowledge of not only the Chinese, its capabilities and its history, but also propaganda, dissinformation and how propaganda can be used as a means of power projection.

The Chinese military, especially the Navy, has not been anywhere near the technologic, tactical or strategic equal to any Western naval power since at least 1500. The dark years of Chinese history from about 1500 through 1945 attest to that when one considers the ease with which Western nations and the Japanese abused the Chinese dynasties. Only after decades of massive copying and infusion of Western technology, primarily through espionage cupled with reverse-engineering, has China managed to produce anything indigenous that would pose a serious threat - other than ICBM's and even those, in their infancy, were based on Russian and Western designs.

Consequently, for years, centuries even, any non-Sino-aligned power only had to plan to oppose a certain level of technology/weaponry and the probable/associated tactics - unless political decisions made low-tech warfare like human-wave attacks during the Korean War a viable tactic for the Chinese.

The Chinese currently remain capable of pursuing only a limited naval strategy, IMHO. One of the major limits is that they cannot sustain power projection over any significant body of water. They do not have the naval or aviation assets either necessary for or capable of resupplying or otherwise supporting any fleet at distances greater than 500 miles from the Chinese mainland for anything approaching an extended period of time. Them's simple facts.

This restricts the use of the "killer weapon" to one of a defensively oriented navy. THAT allows for any opposition force to limit the development of their own tactics based on the limits of the force majore as opposed to a single super-weapon of questionable existence, capability and number(s) in inventory.

While recent Chinese "saber-rattling propaganda" like this "blog entry" may have a bit of truth in some of its details, looking at their overall situation, I think most objective analysts of the Chinese naval force(s) expected to be war-ready over the next 5-7 years who has no personal-future-employment, personal-financial or political agenda have to conclude that they currently and will continue to pose little real naval threat to any nation other than Taiwan or the Phillipines for the next decade at least and probably 2 decades. In my experience, people with those agendas too often allow those agendas to color their analyses.

Analysts looking at the Chinese Navy that I worked with for 8 years while I was in Subic Bay, Yokosuka, Hanza, and Guam have been saying the very same thing since at least 1980. I didn't hear a single seriously-offered alternate assessment or counter-argument later while I was at HQ Naval Intell or at Ft. Meade either.
Why waste 'trons for a snappy signature when I can use this?
MIKE JG
MAIW Veteran
MAIW Veteran
Posts: 10976
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 02:25
Version: MSFS

Post by MIKE JG »

We should just quit buying all of our crap from China........that'd show em! :D

Just a quick survey on my desk here shows that the keyboard, the mouse, the speakers, the monitor, my coffee mug and the lamp next to me are all made in China! At least the Sharpie marker I have sitting here is made in the USA.
-Mike G.

Recovering flight sim addict, constant lurker.

Check out my real life RV-8 build here: RV-8 Builder Log
User avatar
Firebird
MAIW Admin
MAIW Admin
Posts: 12400
Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 21:04
Version: FS9
Location: EGLL

Post by Firebird »

Hmmm, does anybody else think that the timing of this story and the release of the proposed Defense Budget seems a little too fortuitous?
Steve
_______________________________________________________
Image
Quid Si Coelum Ruat
_______________________________________________________
Post Reply