China 'Developing Satellites to Guide Missiles' (guiding carrier-killers)

China has been reportedly developing satellites that would help it attack aircraft carriers with anti-ship ballistic missiles.

Shanghai's Eastday newspaper on Thursday cited a report from the Project 2049 Institute, a defense think tank in the U.S., saying China has been developing high-definition satellites, radar satellites, electronic-reconnaissance satellite and small satellites powered by solid fuel to track and target U.S. carrier strike groups in real time.

By using satellites operating in a low orbit, the Chinese military hopes to improve the precision strike ability of its middle and long-range ballistic missiles by accurately locating targets.

China has stationed so-called "carrier-killer" DF-21D ballistic missiles at military base. They can reportedly travel 3,000 km and are capable of attacking U.S. carriers in the west Pacific, Indian Ocean and South China Sea, though it not entirely clear whether their capacity lives up to initial reports.

One of China's weather satellites, which went into operation in 2008, already has some of these functions, according to the institute. The satellite has 12 all-weather sensors that can provide the exact location and signals of targets in addition to weather information. It is understood that China is also busy developing an early warning satellite for detection and counterattack of enemy ballistic missiles.

Here’s my thoughts on this:

1) The DF-21 anti-carrier missile is a red herring...a classic Sun Tsu misdriection operation where the talk and thought of such a weapon is meant to invoke an over-reaction by the adversary (us) as if though the weapon in fact is in place and ready...when there is not one shred of proof in existance to support its actual existance and operational status. There has not been one operational live fire test of this missile. In order to create this sophistiacted weapon, the Chinese will have to have breakthroughs in their C4, their surveillance and recon, in their target acquisition, in their guidance, their manuevering and in ECM. All of this to find with relatively scanty intelligwnce and target lock, a carrier, launch on it from 2000+ miles away, to reacquire the target on rentry when the vessel may have moved seversal miles (and depneding on where it moved, may make the manuever impossible...and then to guide onto the target in a heavy ECM and anti-ballistic missile environment. Testing for such a system to work out all of the bugs would take years...and there has not been one live test...ergo, the system does not exist.

2) If the Chinese were able to sink/destroy a US carrier by whatever means (and I am not talking a mission kill here) the US response would not be tit for tat. it would be overwhelming and disporportional. it would tagt the C&C (decision makers for the attack) the C4, the ability for the PLAN to wage major war (meaning all of their major combatants including all three LPDs, their new carrier, and their eight very modern DDGs) as well as the shipyards that build them. it may include a large portion of their commerc ial shipping as well to hurt htem economically.

3) If the method of destruction in step 2 were nuclear, it would simply ensure as extreme a version of number 2 as possible, potetnially including tactical nuclear weapons for the military targets away from population centers.

That’s how I see it after over a decade of research.

If an American President and people did not have the will to do that in the face of that level of aggression, then we can kiss off the Western Pacific because the Chinese would obviuosly at that point be willing to risk it, and our allies and other nations in the region would not be able to depend on us to help in their own defense.

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/

See my post 21 the DF-21D anti carrier weapon (and they say it will have a conventional warhead) is a red herring. I do not believe it exists at all for th reasons I cite. We are to believe they have such a weapon, with not a shred of evidence (other than what amounts to chatter in Chinese white papers)...not one operational test...that would require significant and expensives break throughs by the Chinese in multiple areas at once, and would then be attacking into the teeth of our carrier defenses, the AEGIS System which, is designed to defend against just this sort of attack (anti-air, missile attacks) and is now equipped with a system that has been tested and shown to be able to shoot down attacking ballistic missiles? I'm not buying it.

While I agree with you on the feasability of the DF-21’s operational capability, I disagree on warhead selection. Based upon their aquisition of the Sunburn (and the doctrine behind using it), I think that if the Chinese are going to take the time and effort to develop an anti-carrier weapon, they’re going to make it an anti-carrier battle group weapon.

Also, the Three Gorges dam isn’t going to be targeted unless we are planning on nuking or invading the rest of China in a full-scale war scenario. If they lauch on and sink a carrier or carrier battle group, we’re going after their heavy industry, C&C, and naval assets.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.