Hypersonic missile threat ('Carrier killers' could destroy U.S. Navy's supremacy at sea)

Winnipeg Free Press ^ | 01/8/2011 | Tom Simko

[Last Dakotan]

I can’t think of a faster way for China to be destroyed than to take out one of our carriers.

One word - Cheonan.

[jim macomber]

Dragon’s Fury redux, Jeff?

[central_va]

You are way behind the times. DADT is out, the new anachronism is GIMP - Gays In the Military Program.

[mkmensinger]

” It can fly at an altitude of 15 kilometres, or just meters above the waves.”

Those are some mighty big waves.

[AnalogReigns]

As I recall the warship USS Cole was hit by Yemen with a hole big enough to sink it (had it been a bit lower)with a number of sailors killed too, yet President Clinton didn’t have the guts to respond.

I certainly wouldn’t expect more guts from Obama even over a hit on a carrier.

[B4Ranch]

I too use to have these over energized feelings about the US Navy. Then I started to accept reality. Remember last June when our Fleet was out on some War Games and a damn Chinese diesel boat pops up a couple of thousand feet off to the side of a carrier?

Here everyone on this ship is at top level readiness and the Chinks slide right in and hand the skipper a note that says, “Boss, You suck at protecting your men.”

Never underestimate your enemy!

[B4Ranch]

Got the date wrong. It was 10 November, 2007 when they came to our party uninvited.

[AnalogReigns]

Japan surrendered when they knew we could blow them off the map—AND they could do nothing to stop us.

Russia/the Soviets never surrendered because they knew we could blow them off the map, BUT they could do something about it, namely blow US off the map. Hence MADD (Mutually Assured Destruction Deterrence) was born. We have now, and under any foreseeable arms treaty, will continue to have, over 10 times the nuclear weaponry and launch systems China has.

China’s leadership is not crazy or stupid.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

It’s always possible Obama would do nothing after China takes out our carrier, but then again, if China thinks they can take out our carriers with no repercussions whatsoever, why don’t they do so? Anything is possible. What is likely, however, is Obama and the Democrats would get slaughtered in ‘12. The military and other institutions would turn on him. Sane Democrats probably know this. So there’s no guarantees Obama would do nothing.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

“Directed-energy beams such as lasers can be countered with reflective materials and, for a slowly spinning ballistic missile, there would be little effect on any one spot.

That idea has been debunked so many times it’s pathetic. “

No kidding. They said this 10 years ago. Truth is, anything you do to laser-proof a missile only makes it easier to kill some other way, and makes it even harder to make the missile work in the first place. Make it reflective so radar gets a nice, early and long look at it...our military would like that, actually. Make the missile spin, as if it’s not hard enough to make a supersonic missile work. Make it reinforced, because heavier helps, right? Jeez, do some thinking.

The forces at work on a supersonic missile actually help you to destroy it - the stresses on the missile are already very high so it’s like popping a balloon. Directed energy works and has been proven in the field now, and I know the navy is keen on this because high power lasers are getting smaller and cheaper these days.

[Ronin]

No kidding. They said this 10 years ago.

More than 20 years ago, actually. I liked the description that Clancey used in "The Cardinal of the Kremlin" when he had Major Gregory snicker at the idea saying "a ballet dancer can pirouette in front of a shotgun and it will do just about the same amount of good".

It's not the "burn" per-se that kills, it's the energy transfer. You smack a missile with 100 kW of energy, that energy has to go somewhere. Even if it doesn't kill the bird outright, it's going to screw up sensors and guidance systems.

Oh well...

[Flag_This]

"Despite the new missile technology, anyone stupid enough to take a shot at one of our Aircraft Carriers would meet their own end pretty quickly. Firing on a Capital warship is a overt act of war, and is equivalent to firing on US soil..."

So is over-running an embassy and holding the embassy staff hostage for over a year - yet nothing happened to Iran because of the "leadership" of Carter. If we lost a carrier under this current administration, they would find a way to do nothing meaningful about it. Even worse, the MSM would portray the loss as the result of U.S. "aggression."

[dusttoyou]

Not knowing if a fat quiet sub packed with ICBMs and CMs, is a great deal more potent than anyone’s ram or scram missile. The Chink “falling from space” missile would only work when they have spy sat superiority and because it can be seen for a long period of time makes it very vulnerable to countermeasures.

Would imagine the Navy has contingents which would probably not put a big Carrier in harms way. Carriers have proved most usable in situations like Iraq where you need a base for attach aircraft.

[dusttoyou]

Respectfully.... and definitely not defending nobama.... I get so tired of all the doom and gloom about him letting us get attached and doing nothing.

First of all, historically the dems have been much quicker to pull the trigger (for reasons which are baffling) in spite of their “Peacenik” facade.

Second, if nobama let us lose a Carrier and does nothing, the next thing we'll hear is the Joint Chiefs will have taken custody “for his safety” of the slurpy-dude and will have proceeded per long standing plan.

[Jeff Head]

This DF-21D weapon has never had one single operational test...not one.

it is a lot of talk...and IMHO, it is a red herring in hopes we will "think" they have it and thereby limit our operations out of fear of it. Pure Sun Tsu.

As it is, the us has developed, tested, and fielded a successful anti-ballistic missile defense on our AEGIS vessels already. So even if they do ultimately make one of these...or several...it will be charging into the teeth of our most effective defense.

And that defense is getting better. In April of this year (2011) we successfully tested an anti-missile laser weapon system. Not deplyed yet...but the new Ford Class carriers, the new Zumwalt Destroyers, and the new Burke Flight III destroyers (should we develop them) will all ultimately have these weapons on them as well.

Here's how that would work (in addition to the AEGIS BMD missiles already deployed: