PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security Navy Carriers Rendered Irrelevant as China puts American Consumers' Money to Use...


T-post Tom
04-03-2009, 01:40 AM
China's new super missile targets U.S. carriers in deep ocean By MARTIN SIEFF, UPI Senior News AnalystPublished: April 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM

WASHINGTON, April 1 (UPI) -- China is developing a new, nasty surprise for the U.S Navy's aircraft carrier battle groups -- a super-long-range anti-ship ballistic missile with a range of 1,200 miles.

The U.S. Naval Institute reported on its Web site Tuesday that the new weapon has already been under secret development for years. It is a modified version of the Dong Feng 21 missile that, in addition to its range, can carry a warhead capable of doing serious, and possibly lethal, damage to an 80,000-ton nuclear-powered U.S. supercarrier.

The Naval Institute report said details of the new anti-ship ballistic missile were first revealed on a Chinese blog that U.S. military analysts regard as a credible source for information about the People's Liberation Army and Navy. The report was translated into English and can be viewed at the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination: informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2009/03/plan-asbm-development.html.

"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 Naval Institute noted.

The report also describes the new missile as being difficult to locate and track on radar because of its combination of "a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable."

The report said the new missile can fly at speeds of up to Mach 10 -- 10 times the speed of sound. That is about 7,500 miles per hour at sea level. It can fly more than 1,200 miles in less than 12 minutes.

The weapon was not developed in isolation. The Naval Institute report said it can be guided on to its giant aircraft carrier targets by a combination of low-Earth-orbit satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles.

U.S. naval analysts believe that the Chinese allowed details of the new ASBM to be published unofficially because the weapon is already operational, the report said. "The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages," it said.

The new Chinese weapon, if it is operational or likely to be so soon, marks a huge advance in naval warfare and heralds a shift in the balance of power at sea that could prove strategic in its scale. It would be, as the Naval Institute report pointed out, "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."

China has slowly but relentlessly and steadily built up already an overwhelming concentration of short-range anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles to dominate the Taiwan Strait. Already, they have made the strait a death trap for U.S. carrier battle groups in any time of war. However, the U.S. carrier force has retained its great capability to project power hundreds of miles against land-based targets while remaining out of range of land-based and light warship-based ASBMs.

The new anti-ship Chinese ballistic missile, however, if it proves successful and reliable, could have the capability to threaten U.S. warships operating more than a thousand miles away from Chinese land bases, effectively driving U.S. naval power in the event of any conflict with China back into the Central Pacific. It will also spur urgent U.S. efforts to adapt and advance existing ballistic missile defense technology to provide defenses against the new threat.

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

Respected analyst Raymond Pritchett writes on the U.S. Naval Institute blog at blog.usni.org/?p=1964 that senior U.S. Navy officers appear to be taking the new threat very seriously indeed.

"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," he wrote. "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."

China's naval commanders are certainly riding high and feeling confident these days. On March 8 they harassed a U.S. survey ship, the USNS Impeccable, which appears to have been on an intelligence-gathering voyage in international waters near the major Chinese strategic submarine and bomber bases on the island of Hainan.

The new weapon also confirms reports from United Press International's Andrei Chang that the Chinese navy is no longer satisfied with simply being able to prevent the U.S. Navy and its carrier battle groups from operating in China's home waters. Beijing appears determined to create the weapons systems that will allow it to assert command of the seas at least 1,000 miles out into the ocean beyond its shores.

HC_Chief
04-03-2009, 08:02 AM
Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack

Absurd. Carrier groups have multi-layered defensive capabilities. There are aircraft, AA/AASM missile systems, and automated cannons amongst other integrated systems.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-15.htm

Chief Faithful
04-03-2009, 08:05 AM
I think North Korea is trying to develop this same capability, which is why its important they get a satelite launched. I believe it is also the reason so many countries are trying to stop them.

BucEyedPea
04-03-2009, 08:26 AM
I'm not really worried about NK since they're just flexing their muscles out of fear due to the Iraq invasion, our complicity in Georgia etc. They just don't want to be invaded.

I'm more concerned with China, especially with our money enabling them.

PhillyChiefFan
04-03-2009, 08:33 AM
Absurd. Carrier groups have multi-layered defensive capabilities. There are aircraft, AA/AASM missile systems, and automated cannons amongst other integrated systems.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-15.htm

This confused me too. CIWS has been around for decades, I work in Foreign Military Sales for the Navy, and we have countries that have operated it since the 80's.

Though CIWS isn't designed to defend against Mach 12 surface skimming missiles, I wouldn't assume, even with FLIR and angle tracking systems.

Coyote
04-03-2009, 09:07 AM
This is a serious threat. It may be hyped in this article but CIWS is effective against most last century threats, and is a last line of defense that is being used in many shore based and it's original ship based applications. CIWS or BPDMS (Basic point defense missile system) is not a match for a hypersonic missile-particulary a swarm of them from multiple angles.
Speed kills. It always has and probably always will. The rate and Delta T just increase expenentially with hypersonic kinematics. Hypersonic flight has many applications and in the case of missiles really simplify attack profiles and warheads. No explosive warhead is typically required due to the speed and trajectory impact of the missile.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/18663 from 2003 in a previous life for me involved in such matters.

We have been working on similar technology for awhile (below) and the best counter for hypersonics is hypersonics. A hypersonic inbound missile simply gets inside our OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop in all regards whether a man's in the loop or not.

By NPS staff. As the technology in the study of electromagnetic rail guns and free electron lasers has evolved, NPS's Electric Weapons Center has adapted vigorously to stay abreast of these developments and to incorporate new technologies with potential weapon system applications into research benefiting the Navy and the Department of Defense.

A free electron laser directed energy weapon system holds the promise of satisfying shipboard self-defense requirements on Navy vessels because of the potential for high-power operation and the accessibility according to Colson.

"One megawatt of focused laser power can burn through a liter of a missile's material in about two seconds," said Professor William B. Colson, Director of the NPS Electric Weapons Center, explaining the effectiveness of a free electron laser in a presentation to Vice Adm. John B. Nathman, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Warfare Requirements and Programs.

"I believe this type of laser can be compact enough to fit aboard Navy ships and still be powerful and accurate enough to kill a missile homing-in to destroy its target," Colson adds.

As an example of the efficiency of an electric weapon, a free electron laser would use about three gallons of the ship's fuel to destroy an incoming missile - the cost is about $3 per gallon of the ship's fuel used to destroy the target.

Colson emphasized to Nathman the ability of electric weapons to fit the Navy's perceived need to be able to identify, pinpoint, and take out targets far enough away from the ship to prevent damage to the ship's assets.

Example: an electric weapon that destroys an incoming missile.

"The question remains, can this be scaled to the size of a total missile defense system? Can this weapon system be evolved to a much larger defense scenario outside of shipboard incoming missile defense?"

Brock
04-03-2009, 09:42 AM
Thanks, Wal Mart.

vailpass
04-03-2009, 10:03 AM
It will nvever be published or acknowledged but the US submarine fleet has a few surprises for China if they ever decide to aggress against the US.
Our advanced satcom capabilities combined with our undetectable fast movers would knock out missile bases as well as enemy guidance systems and satellites quick fast in a hurry.
9/10 of US capability is kept under wraps.

Otter
04-03-2009, 10:44 AM
I'm not really worried about NK since they're just flexing their muscles out of fear due to the Iraq invasion, our complicity in Georgia etc. They just don't want to be invaded.

I'm more concerned with China, especially with our money enabling them.

China could probably cripple the US without firing a shot. All they would have to do is call us on our debt and cash in their share of US Treasury bonds at the same time.

It's just not in their best interest right now.

vailpass
04-03-2009, 10:48 AM
China could probably cripple the US without firing a shot. All they would have to do is call us on our debt and cash in their share of US Treasury bonds at the same time.

It's just not in their best interest right now.

True. The only way America falls is from within.

FishingRod
04-03-2009, 12:13 PM
If they were to use Nuclear warheads then this may work but, that of course is an entirely different issue. The united States has better ballistic missile technology than anyone else but, to hit a moving target with one would take quite a stoke of luck. Additionally as has been mentioned we have multi layered defenses that are better than anyone else on the planet. One of their Diesel submarines that managed to guess the path of our talk force so they were sitting on the bottom waiting for the opportunity to fire off a salvo of torpedoes would be far more likely to succeed. I will tell you I really won't want to be in that sub after the torpedoes were fired because it would be reduced to a crumpled pile of metal at the bottom of the ocean in very short order.

Bowser
04-03-2009, 03:58 PM
So is this the new Cold War?

mikey23545
04-03-2009, 04:48 PM
Thanks, liberals, for fighting against and holding back anti-missile technology for 2 decades.

petegz28
04-03-2009, 04:49 PM
Thanks, liberals, for fighting against and holding back anti-missile technology for 2 decades.

I would say more like, thank corporate America for exporting all of our jobs to China and thereby providing them with the funds to develop such weapons.

Hog Farmer
04-03-2009, 06:46 PM
Me Chinese

Me play joke

Me go pee pee in your coke.

T-post Tom
04-04-2009, 01:56 AM
I would say more like, thank corporate America for exporting all of our jobs to China and thereby providing them with the funds to develop such weapons.


:thumb:

T-post Tom
04-04-2009, 02:00 AM
If they were to use Nuclear warheads then this may work but, that of course is an entirely different issue. The united States has better ballistic missile technology than anyone else but, to hit a moving target with one would take quite a stoke of luck. Additionally as has been mentioned we have multi layered defenses that are better than anyone else on the planet. One of their Diesel submarines that managed to guess the path of our talk force so they were sitting on the bottom waiting for the opportunity to fire off a salvo of torpedoes would be far more likely to succeed. I will tell you I really won't want to be in that sub after the torpedoes were fired because it would be reduced to a crumpled pile of metal at the bottom of the ocean in very short order.

Maybe I misread the article, but it appears that the author is saying that we do NOT have the capability to stop a ballistic missle coming in at MACH 10.

tiptap
04-04-2009, 06:50 AM
let's hit the "way back" machine to the confrontation between the British and the Argentinians for the Faulklin islands. During that war the rather unsophistcated Argentines put a missile from shore through the hull of the British war ship.

The offense in missile technology is always going to be ahead of defensive measures. That is the reasoning behind overwhelming retaliation in Nuclear discussions. Therefore attempting to invest in ABMs instead of settling differences in poor money use.

Brock
04-04-2009, 08:13 AM
Therefore attempting to invest in ABMs instead of settling differences in poor money use.

If only we go over to China and kiss their ass some more they'll like us better and stop barking at us through their little dog North Korea.