15 Chinese DF-21D ASBM launchers vs. Arleigh Burke

[Martian]

15 Chinese DF-21D ASBM launchers with 3 MIRVs and 2 reloads would overwhelm an Arleigh Burke.

China's DF-21D ASBM is an MRBM. The Russians dismantled their SS-20 3-MIRV IRBM under the INF treaty with the United States.

Russian SS-20 MIRVed warhead.

By replacing the 600kg DF-21D warhead with three 200kg MIRV warheads, each DF-21D requires three SM-3 anti-missile missiles.

A Russian TEL requires 20 minutes to reload.
Source: Tochka (SS-21 Scarab) Short-Range Ballistic Missile | Military-Today.com
"The TEL vehicle is supported by a reloading vehicle, based on a similar BAZ-5922 6x6 amphibious wheeled chassis. It carries two reload missiles and is fitted with a crane. The TEL vehicle is reloaded within 20 minutes."

15 Chinese DF-21D ASBMs x 3 MIRVs per ASBM x 3 missiles (which included 2 reloads) = 135 warheads

An Arleigh Burke Flight II only has 96 VLS. Usually there is a 50/50 split between offensive and defensive missiles. Assuming 100% defensive missiles, an Arleigh Burke would be overwhelmed with 135 incoming warheads.

16 Chinese DF-21D ASBM launchers with missiles.

 

[Sylex21]

So let me get this straight, you want to brag that it would take FIFTEEN! launchers plus double the number of missiles shown in that picture on another fleet of FIFTEEN reloading vehicles and at least FORTY minutes to take out just 1 American Arleigh Burke destroyer?

Not to mention you've forgotten that they usually travel in packs, that they also carry Phalanx cannons that would shoot down many missiles alone, will be constantly moving, need more that one hit to sink them, will shoot many missiles before the mirv warhead's separate from the missile and the biggest problem:

-by the time 40 minutes have passed, the launchers will be bombed back to the stone-age

 

[Martian]

Phalanx CIWS cannot be used to stop a Mach 10 DF-21D ASBM (anti-ship ballistic missile).
Phalanx CIWS can only be used against an ASCM (anti-ship cruise missile).
The reasons include lack of range, too steep an angle, and too little time to target and shoot.

A moving naval target is not an impediment. An infrared sensor has a 60-mile range.

1. Shoot first salvo of 15 DF-21D ASBMs with 3 MIRVs each. That's 45 incoming warheads.
2. Scoot the launchers to a new location a few miles away.
3. Reload and shoot.

This is a typical shoot and scoot strategy. However, I don't think the US has a missile with a 2,000-mile range. It's banned under the INF Treaty with Russia. Thus, there is no need to scoot.

I haven't forgotten that there is more than one Arleigh Burke. However, you should have realized that China can deploy groups of 15-clustered DF-21D ASBM launchers.

 

[bengalraider]

Any future sino American conflict will not be decided by surface weapons. The deciding factors will be aircraft and submarines.No DF-21 or DF-26 will be safe once the Americans manage air superiority and no Arleigh Burke is safe if 50 yuans are in the seas.

 

[blueblood]

Any future sino American conflict will not be decided by surface weapons. The deciding factors will be aircraft and submarines.No DF-21 or DF-26 will be safe once the Americans manage air superiority and no Arleigh Burke is safe if 50 yuans are in the seas.

Here's a fun accessment for you. Yuan class and it's capabilities or lack there of.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/yuan-submarine-low-frequency-passive-flank-array.69962/

As for ASBM Vs Arleigh burke class. This comparison as useful as 100 J-7 Vs 5 F-22. The dumbfucks who think warfare is platform vs platform and who have no clue about the first strike capabilities of US be it nuclear or conventional are the ones making such threads.

Any navy is only good till it has its ports. Massive cruise missile strikes by US submarines will sure that China has none. Not counting the bomber force of US, Ohio class alone carries 154 tomahawks each. How many do you think US requires for overwhelming the air defence?