Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Taiwan develops own “carrier-killer” missile
AFPC China Reform Monitor ^ | 11/29/2012 | Joshua Eisenman, ed.

Posted on 12/03/2012 5:40:49 PM PST by bruinbirdman

Taiwan’s Chung Shan Institute of Science and Technology has completed a series of tests of its Hsiung Feng III (HF-3) ‘carrier killer’ anti-ship missile. The missile, first showcased at the Taipei Aerospace and Defense Technology Exhibition in August 2011, is a ramjet-powered, 120kg payload supersonic anti-ship missile with an estimated range of 130km to 150km and a maximum speed of Mach 2 – about twice the speed of sound. The Taipei Times reports that the HF-3 could be deployed on the west coast across from the mainland. That positioning would use mountains for cover against mainland missiles while bringing targets in the Strait within range. The HF-3 could also extend the attack range of land-based launchers in the Western Pacific.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 12/03/2012 5:40:52 PM PST by bruinbirdman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

CSIST has had some interesting projects in the past.


2 posted on 12/03/2012 5:50:44 PM PST by NY Attitude (Make love not war but be prepared for either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

It’d be funny if after spending decades and tens of millions developing naval air capability the chicoms lost their pride & joy in the opening minutes of a conflict with Taiwan.


3 posted on 12/03/2012 5:51:15 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Ping.


4 posted on 12/03/2012 6:00:27 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

Yeah but it’s “Made in Taiwan.”


5 posted on 12/03/2012 6:09:12 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

A real slap in the face for Beijing.


6 posted on 12/03/2012 6:17:35 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

The USSR had a massive amount of ‘carrier killer’ missiles. Mach 2 would be slow for one of them.

Why are these now a big deal?


7 posted on 12/03/2012 6:19:24 PM PST by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

The big deal is that ANY country, not just a super power like the USSR - as you cited- can develop and deploy carrier killers.


8 posted on 12/03/2012 6:28:27 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman
... speed of Mach 2 – about twice the speed of sound.

"About?"

9 posted on 12/03/2012 6:33:11 PM PST by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

They aren’t really killers without nuclear warheads. Maybe 10 100-500kt per carrier would ensure 0 chance of survival. A bunch of conventials aren’t that big of a deal.

Stuff is never very defended or secure when it comes down to it, I’m just not sure why anyone would be even awakened at this news.


10 posted on 12/03/2012 6:34:09 PM PST by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

lolz

“about”...

more like precisely


11 posted on 12/03/2012 6:34:13 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Well, I didn’t want to come off all pedantic and all....

:^)


12 posted on 12/03/2012 6:38:33 PM PST by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

It was worth a Snicker bar..


13 posted on 12/03/2012 6:41:18 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

“A bunch of conventials aren’t that big of a deal.”

It depends how big the bunch is. I would suspect that 100 missiles coming at a carrier at M2 would be hard to track and defend against.


14 posted on 12/03/2012 7:20:58 PM PST by BobL (You can live each day only once. You can waste a few, but don't waste too many.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002
They aren’t really killers without nuclear warheads. Maybe 10 100-500kt per carrier would ensure 0 chance of survival. A bunch of conventials aren’t that big of a deal.

The whole term "carrier killer" is a misnomer.

You don't need to kill a carrier, just make it incapable of flight operations, which is much, much easier. A carrier that can't launch and land aircraft is worthless. One big hole in the deck, or a significant reduction in top speed so loaded aircraft can't get off the deck, is enough.

Though you can effectively completely destroy a carrier with a single missile hit (might not sink it, but you can burn it out completely). All you need is to set off a couple of aircraft loaded with fuel and weapons and presto, you have an out of control fire that could consume the ship (and I'll hazard a guess the Chinese don't have the damage control proficiency we do.)

15 posted on 12/03/2012 8:01:24 PM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

They aren’t really killers without nuclear warheads. Maybe 10 100-500kt per carrier would ensure 0 chance of survival. A bunch of conventials aren’t that big of a deal.

Stuff is never very defended or secure when it comes down to it, I’m just not sure why anyone would be even awakened at this news.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

In fact modern torpedo and missile technology is pretty capable in sinking ships using conventional means.

As for a Taiwan-Chinese issue I don’t think Red China need any carriers to deal with it.

Taiwan airspace is pretty within a range of their land-based weapons.

They need carrier fleet to send a message to India, Russia and Japan (Not so much USA since Chicoms are in bed with DC establishment for 40+ years).


16 posted on 12/03/2012 8:08:34 PM PST by cunning_fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002
The USSR had a massive amount of ‘carrier killer’ missiles. Mach 2 would be slow for one of them.

Really. Twenty years ago. What became of them all?

17 posted on 12/03/2012 9:18:51 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

It appears that most of the delivery vehicles and missiles themselves weren’t well maintained and are trash at this point. They were top of the line stuff, but it’s like like what happened to our F14 Tomcat/Phoenix missiles. Things moved on. Cheaper, maybe better, maybe not!


18 posted on 12/03/2012 9:24:52 PM PST by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
Though you can effectively completely destroy a carrier with a single missile hit (might not sink it, but you can burn it out completely). All you need is to set off a couple of aircraft loaded with fuel and weapons and presto, you have an out of control fire that could consume the ship (and I'll hazard a guess the Chinese don't have the damage control proficiency we do.)

Enterprise and Forrestal both had debilitating fires and explosions set off by flight-deck "oopsies" with live ordinance. Both ships suffered the rough equivalent of nine heavy cruise missile hits. Forrestal was almost lost (fire came within a few bulkheads of her O2 plant, which would have severed the aft 1/3 of the hull) and while Enterprise didn't come as close as Forrestal did, she very well could have been as well.

What saved both of them were hull design (specifically armor and compartmentalization) and ingrained damage control doctrine and tactics that were driven by the still very recent institutional memory of lessons-learned during WWII with Lexington, Yorktown, Hornet, Bunker Hill and Franklin. While I think it's reasonable to assume that USN damage control proficiency (still probably the best in the world, or maybe second best after the RN) has been somewhat degraded as the experiences of WWII have left living memory, there's no way that the ChiComs come anywhere near close. Especially with a Soviet-designed and built ship.

For the ChiComs the Varyag is a white elephant status symbol and reasonable first step in a long duration plan to develop credible naval airpower. For the USN ... it's a Navy Cross waiting to happen.
19 posted on 12/03/2012 9:33:49 PM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002
"A bunch of conventials aren’t that big of a deal. "

For a snub nose ChiCom cruiser wannabe carrier, it probably is.

yitbos

20 posted on 12/04/2012 12:41:26 AM PST by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Well said BobL, A massive attack to overwhelm an adversary is also how I envision the modern battlefield.
21 posted on 12/04/2012 5:05:04 AM PST by 2001convSVT (Going Galt as fast as I can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson