Aircraft-carriers VS Submarines -- strategy for the next generation warfare
- Thread starter A.V.
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,474
- Likes
- 1,061
Chinese Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) ?Kill Weapon? Flummoxes U.S. Navy » Post » Defense Review
Defense Tech: China Close to Anti-Ship BM
China develops anti-ship missile - Jane's Naval Forces News
China Developing Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles - Defense News
China Air and Naval Power: ASBM - follow up
Defense Tech: China Close to Anti-Ship BM
China develops anti-ship missile - Jane's Naval Forces News
China Developing Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles - Defense News
China Air and Naval Power: ASBM - follow up
- Joined
- May 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,133
- Likes
- 746
still I support to develop subs...
in the coming war, AC would be just sitting duck in the front of saturated missiles rain. while sub would be very good stealth playform for missle launching...
in the coming war, AC would be just sitting duck in the front of saturated missiles rain. while sub would be very good stealth playform for missle launching...
p2prada
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,015
Oh! Please an Anti-Ship Ballistic missile. During re-entry the warhead falls straight down. How on Earth are the Chinese going to come up with a maneuverable warhead in only a few years. Also, shooting down that missile is the easiest, since the target is known.
The trajectory of the missile will be as clear as day to the AEGIS system.
Also, as far as subs are concerned, they are a threat and are deadly as long as they are not detected. Once detected, a sub will be the easiest kill among all naval vessels out there. Stupid thing moves slowly, and that too at limited depths(300m to 400m max) with no ECM suite. There is no way a sub can survive a destroyer or a ASW heli or a Maritime Recce plane. Also no endurance, one hit and it sinks.
The trajectory of the missile will be as clear as day to the AEGIS system.
Also, as far as subs are concerned, they are a threat and are deadly as long as they are not detected. Once detected, a sub will be the easiest kill among all naval vessels out there. Stupid thing moves slowly, and that too at limited depths(300m to 400m max) with no ECM suite. There is no way a sub can survive a destroyer or a ASW heli or a Maritime Recce plane. Also no endurance, one hit and it sinks.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2009
- Messages
- 3,831
- Likes
- 28
We need to have a good mix of both Carriers and Submarine escorts...
India needs to concentrate on the aspect of building SSNs and slowly start phasing out the diesel submarines...
p2, please don't underestimate the newest Nuclear Submarines, they make the least amount of noise and are very difficult to detect... but, once detected I agree with you that they are sitting ducks...
India needs to concentrate on the aspect of building SSNs and slowly start phasing out the diesel submarines...
p2, please don't underestimate the newest Nuclear Submarines, they make the least amount of noise and are very difficult to detect... but, once detected I agree with you that they are sitting ducks...
p2prada
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,015
Submarines were deadly just when WW2 started. But, by the end of WW2, the German Uboats were cornered and sunk in dozens. Depth Chargers would always do the trick.
Metallurgy has not evolved with the evolution of electronics. Modern day submarines can only go to modest depths. The pressure they handle beyond 500m is beyond the scope of human ingenuity, atleast as of today.
Metallurgy has not evolved with the evolution of electronics. Modern day submarines can only go to modest depths. The pressure they handle beyond 500m is beyond the scope of human ingenuity, atleast as of today.
J
John
Guest
true that, this ballistic missile is a piece of cake for the SM-3, the SM-3 will eat it, one shot kill, secondly even if this exists, first u have to find the damn carrier which is even more difficult than finding a needle in a hay stack. Carrier locations are not known even to the war-room people in the Pentagon, only the people in the battle group know its precise location.
however, can't underestimate subs, with SLBMs, subs are the deadliest of all nuke launch vehicles. Those Tridents flying at speeds of around mach 30+ are unstoppable. which is why we need SLBMs quickly, they will pretty much stop China from even coming with 500meters of the LAC in the east.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2009
- Messages
- 3,831
- Likes
- 28
I'm speechless !!! Mach 30 ??? Could I have a link please ???
LETHALFORCE
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,871
- Likes
- 48,530
when AGNI SLBM is ready it will be around the same coming in around MACH 25.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
MACH 25????. That kind of speed will make the missile go out of the atmospheric field. I guess, such speeds are used only in rockets for satellite launches. Correct me if I'm wrong.
LETHALFORCE
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,871
- Likes
- 48,530
http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/bombs-missiles-wmd/1724-agni-missile-get-multiple-warheads.html
It will travel 350 km above the earth, re-enter the atmosphere at a speed of 5 kilometers per second, experiencing temperatures of 3000 degrees centigrade.
5KM per second= 300km per minute or 18000km/hr
MACH 1=760 miles per hour or 1225 km/per hour
18000/1225= close to MACH 15
DD-MACH 15 to be exact
and K-15 SLBM speed would probably be MACH 6-8
It will travel 350 km above the earth, re-enter the atmosphere at a speed of 5 kilometers per second, experiencing temperatures of 3000 degrees centigrade.
5KM per second= 300km per minute or 18000km/hr
MACH 1=760 miles per hour or 1225 km/per hour
18000/1225= close to MACH 15
DD-MACH 15 to be exact
and K-15 SLBM speed would probably be MACH 6-8
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,474
- Likes
- 1,061
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,474
- Likes
- 1,061
Let us here from the gurus about this
Naval Supremacy Without Ships
July 1, 2009: For the last six years, Chinese military planners have been openly discussing the development of an ASBM (an anti-ship ballistic missile.) The way this weapon works is pretty simple. First you have to detect, and track, an American carrier at sea. This can be done with space or ground based radar, or electronic monitoring equipment. One could also do it with submarines (which would stalk the carriers, at a distance, and use satellite comm to send location updates back to China). Once you know where the carrier is, and where it is heading, you put that data into the navigation system of one or more ASBMs and launch. Less than half an hour later, the warhead is plunging earthward, and using its targeting sensors to detect the carrier below. Unless the carrier turned around and hauled ass at full speed about the time the ASBM was launched, the warhead will detect the carrier and hit it, while travelling at several times faster than a rifle bullet. If that doesn't sink the carrier, it certainly puts it out of action for months.
China's principal weapon would be their DF-21 ballistic missile, equipped with a high-explosive warhead and a guidance system that can home in and hit a aircraft carrier at sea. The DF-21 has a range of 1800 kilometers and normally hauls a 300 kiloton nuclear warhead. It's a two stage, 15 ton, solid fuel rocket that could carry a half ton penetrating, high-explosive warhead, along with the special guidance system (a radar and image recognition system).
It is believed that the Chinese have reverse engineered, reinvented or stolen the 1970s technology that went into the U.S. Pershing ballistic missile. This 7.5 ton U.S. Army missile also had an 1,800 kilometers range, and could put its nuclear warhead within 30 meters of its aim point. This was possible because the guidance system had its own radar. This kind of accuracy made the Russians very uncomfortable, as it made their command bunkers vulnerable. The Russians eventually agreed to a lot of nuclear and missile disarmament deals in order to get the Pershings decommissioned in the 1980s.
The Chinese have long been rumored to have a system like this, but there have been no tests. Before deploying these ASBMs, one or more would have to be tested. They could do this by using a large container ship or tanker (older ones, headed for the breakers) and move it to a likely location from which an American carrier would approach. This target ship would be rigged to be operated by remote control. The Chinese might want to send a few smaller freighters, similarly equipped, to represent the carrier escorts. This would test the ASBMs ability to pick out the carrier (the largest ship in the task force.) As part of the test, the Chinese could see if more than one form of tracking works. Then, the ASBM would be given the latest coordinates for the carrier, and launched. Half an hour later, the Chinese would know if they have a real ASBM.
If the Chinese do succeed in creating a "carrier killer" version of the DF-21, the U.S. Navy can modify its Aegis anti-missile system to protect carriers against such attacks. There are also electronic warfare options, to blind the DF-21 radar.
Meanwhile, China appears to be developing an over-the-horizon (OTH) radar that can spot large ships (like American aircraft carriers) as far as 3,000 kilometers away, and use this information to guide ballistic missiles to the area,. Such radars have long been used to detect ballistic missile launches, and approaching heavy bombers. Some OTH radars have been modified to take advantage of the flat surface of an ocean, to pick up large objects, like ships. Cheaper and more powerful computers enable such OTH radars to more accurately identify ships thousands of kilometers away.
China is developing the technologies, and it's only a matter of time, and willingness to devote several billion dollars to the project, before they can actually do it, or at least try to. If the Chinese ASBM works, naval warfare will be changed forever.
Strategic Weapons: Naval Supremacy Without Ships
Naval Supremacy Without Ships
July 1, 2009: For the last six years, Chinese military planners have been openly discussing the development of an ASBM (an anti-ship ballistic missile.) The way this weapon works is pretty simple. First you have to detect, and track, an American carrier at sea. This can be done with space or ground based radar, or electronic monitoring equipment. One could also do it with submarines (which would stalk the carriers, at a distance, and use satellite comm to send location updates back to China). Once you know where the carrier is, and where it is heading, you put that data into the navigation system of one or more ASBMs and launch. Less than half an hour later, the warhead is plunging earthward, and using its targeting sensors to detect the carrier below. Unless the carrier turned around and hauled ass at full speed about the time the ASBM was launched, the warhead will detect the carrier and hit it, while travelling at several times faster than a rifle bullet. If that doesn't sink the carrier, it certainly puts it out of action for months.
China's principal weapon would be their DF-21 ballistic missile, equipped with a high-explosive warhead and a guidance system that can home in and hit a aircraft carrier at sea. The DF-21 has a range of 1800 kilometers and normally hauls a 300 kiloton nuclear warhead. It's a two stage, 15 ton, solid fuel rocket that could carry a half ton penetrating, high-explosive warhead, along with the special guidance system (a radar and image recognition system).
It is believed that the Chinese have reverse engineered, reinvented or stolen the 1970s technology that went into the U.S. Pershing ballistic missile. This 7.5 ton U.S. Army missile also had an 1,800 kilometers range, and could put its nuclear warhead within 30 meters of its aim point. This was possible because the guidance system had its own radar. This kind of accuracy made the Russians very uncomfortable, as it made their command bunkers vulnerable. The Russians eventually agreed to a lot of nuclear and missile disarmament deals in order to get the Pershings decommissioned in the 1980s.
The Chinese have long been rumored to have a system like this, but there have been no tests. Before deploying these ASBMs, one or more would have to be tested. They could do this by using a large container ship or tanker (older ones, headed for the breakers) and move it to a likely location from which an American carrier would approach. This target ship would be rigged to be operated by remote control. The Chinese might want to send a few smaller freighters, similarly equipped, to represent the carrier escorts. This would test the ASBMs ability to pick out the carrier (the largest ship in the task force.) As part of the test, the Chinese could see if more than one form of tracking works. Then, the ASBM would be given the latest coordinates for the carrier, and launched. Half an hour later, the Chinese would know if they have a real ASBM.
If the Chinese do succeed in creating a "carrier killer" version of the DF-21, the U.S. Navy can modify its Aegis anti-missile system to protect carriers against such attacks. There are also electronic warfare options, to blind the DF-21 radar.
Meanwhile, China appears to be developing an over-the-horizon (OTH) radar that can spot large ships (like American aircraft carriers) as far as 3,000 kilometers away, and use this information to guide ballistic missiles to the area,. Such radars have long been used to detect ballistic missile launches, and approaching heavy bombers. Some OTH radars have been modified to take advantage of the flat surface of an ocean, to pick up large objects, like ships. Cheaper and more powerful computers enable such OTH radars to more accurately identify ships thousands of kilometers away.
China is developing the technologies, and it's only a matter of time, and willingness to devote several billion dollars to the project, before they can actually do it, or at least try to. If the Chinese ASBM works, naval warfare will be changed forever.
Strategic Weapons: Naval Supremacy Without Ships
S
SammyCheung
Guest
Song SSK is quiet, but not AIP. Yuan SSK is AIP.
Chinese Navy
China showed that it can ambush carriers if they're not expecting it. In a confrontation situation, the carriers will be much more prepared, and move much more slowly. But subs will have more tactics and more numbers too.
Let's just put it this way... the next generation conventional submarine is expected to have hydromagnetic drive :113:
Chinese Navy
This just shows how different China is from India. China just goes about methodically advancing its economy, industry and technology.
On the other India, India is constantly facing some kind of internal turmoil, so it needs to foster a nationalistic fantasy among its people with Agni-VIII going Mach 50. Or India getting a BMD before USA does.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2009
- Messages
- 510
- Likes
- 10
No one knows anything about it, i hope they stop speculating.
No its the hyperdrive, fanboy
J
John
Guest
Ambush a US carrier while US ambushes all of China is 5 minutes. With today's US threat perception of China, US will always see the Chinese coming thousands of miles away. Besides the Sea based X-band radar just has move a few hundred nautical miles from its base in Hawaii to get a good glimpse of all of china's west coast traffic. Moreover the carrier group USS George Washington stationed in Yokusuka, Japan alone is more than enough to send China back to the stone age.
