Skip to comments.China Deploys Carrier Killer Missile Near Taiwan
Posted on 04/23/2013 6:14:32 AM PDT by raptor22
Asian Security: As Korea festers, our friends in Beijing have deployed near Taiwan a powerful missile designed to take out U.S. aircraft carriers as Beijing strengthens its ability to prevent U.S. forces from aiding Taiwan.
When North Korea announced the 1953 Armistice was considered null and void and threatened renewed missile tests, the U.S. rushed naval assets to the region, including two destroyers equipped with the Aegis anti-missile defense system. We presumably would do so if things heated up between Beijing and its claimed "lost province," Taiwan.
That option became increasingly problematical when news of China's deployment of an anti-ship ballistic missile near Taiwan came in written testimony by the Pentagon's head of intelligence, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, delivered to a Senate committee on Thursday.
The missile, designated the DF-21D, is one of a "growing number of conventionally armed" new weapons China is deploying to the region, adding to more than 1,200 short-range missiles opposite the island democracy, Flynn, the Defense Intelligence Agency director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
The Dong Feng-21D is intended to give China "the capability to attack large ships, particularly aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific," the Pentagon's 2012 China report said. The report cites estimates that the missile's range exceeds 930 miles (1,500 kilometers).
The land-based missile is designed to target and track aircraft carrier groups with the help of satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles and over-the-horizon radar. Launched into space, the DF21D re-enters the atmosphere, maneuvering at 10 times the speed of sound towards its target.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Sink an aircraft carrier. It becomes a hot war. Obama has no say. Field commanders annihilate China. Are they that stupid?
I know the Keyan idiot is, but is China? Then again they are commies which means they’re stupid.
Well, why not? American has elected a weak, apologetic appeaser twice now. Why shouldn’t our enemies get in our face and start pushing the boundaries? Obama and his administration are far more concerned with social engineering in the Armed Forces than national defense anyway. And I think he actually prefers a weakened America, because after all, it’s not fair to the rest of the world that we’re so powerful and prosperous.
1) It's extremely unlikely these missiles (or anything) could sink a Nimitz-class carrier. Disable it enough so it can't do flight ops and it's a worthless hunk of metal, however.
2) You can't annihilate China without nuclear weapons, and the nuclear chain of command is securely in the hands of the President. "Field Commanders" can't nuke anybody.
3) I can't conceive of any circumstance where China disabling a carrier with conventional weapons draws a nuclear response.
IBD EDITORIAL PING
This is the problem.
Currently China is running an accounts surplus. A large accounts surplus. Full employment, so a growing military budget.
We are running an accounts deficit. A shrinking accounts (deficit). Not near full employment, and a shrinking military budget.
One of us, is doing “trade” wrong.
Has there ever been a president that is pro-taiwan and anti-china since I’ve been alive? and I’m over 40.
maybe it is too late for taiwan to declare independent. the window of opportunity has passed. which taiwan also share part of the blame. i really favor a one china - one taiwan policy as opposed to just one china.
.......I’m no Admiral but I don’t think I would take a 5-10 billion dollar asset with 5,000 personnel on board within range of this missile while hoping and praying that our anti-missile missile would protect me. And, this is to say nothing of all the ships that accompany a carrier.
And, if BB ordered me to, I think I would resign right then and there.
This does beg the question of whether or not these hugely expensive carriers are still viable in 21st Century warfare.
More worried about shore to ship batteries the Chinese developed, sold to Iran and now threaten our big blue water ships operating in the narrow Persian Gulf.
IBD EDITORIAL PING
I agree with your sentiment but Taiwan makes it in china’s face.
I don’t know what the Office of Naval Research (ONR) is doing right now, but if they can just come up with a slap-dash design for a *simple* ship, that only needs to do *one* thing well, they need to do so right now.
That ship needs to have a nuclear reactor, which requires significant design elements, and two independent energy “guns” that can take down missiles. It doesn’t have to do *anything* else. No bells and whistles. No missiles or other weapons of its own.
And it never strays from the aircraft carrier task group.
IBD EDITORIAL PING
That would also be one of the world’s best AA Cruisers, except during inclement weather. Still, putting a bunch of THELs on a ship might work.
Ship might end up being more like a tanker though since these are chemical lasers. And the greens would really, really hate all that hot, toxic lasing chemical being dumped at sea...
The navy really, really, really, really, really hates chemical lasers. With a passion. They haven’t touched them for years and years.
The Navy ships treat gasoline like it is plutonium, for example; when small UAVs or outboard motors need it it’s stored with extreme care.
The Navy is rightfully obsessed with fire prevention (the true ship killer) and avoiding toxic chemicals as much as possible. Imagine the USS Cole if it was storing tons of the toxic soup needed for a chemical laser.
They are only looking at solid-state lasers, and at the high end, the Free Electron laser (which requires a 100 foot particle accelerator, but at least no toxic chemicals.)
Well, a 400 ft. ship dedicated solely to lasers and fire control would have plenty of room for particle accelerators. Maybe it is time for the navy to resurrect the Anti-Aircraft Cruiser. Too bad there is already sub named Atlanta.
China’s been our designated manufacturing producer for decades, while American working class men (the real American men) have been falsely accused and robbed. There are consequences for the wrongs committed by the socially pathological political/regulator class: default, weaknesses against foreign enemies and others.
During the next few years, remember how you treated fathers and men.
“extremely unlikely these missiles (or anything) could sink a Nimitz-class carrier”
Man o man, I wish you hadn’t said that.
But, we owe them too much money and their economy depends on us buying their crap. So, I assess a kinetic option as “minimal.”