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

Skip to comments.

Chinese develop anti aircraft carrier ballistic missile.
U. S. Naval Institute ^ | 3-31-2009 | U. S. Naval Institute

Posted on 04/06/2009 7:58:46 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998

With tensions already rising due to the Chinese navy becoming more aggressive in asserting its territorial claims in the South China Sea, the U.S. Navy seems to have yet another reason to be deeply concerned.

After years of conjecture, details have begun to emerge of a "kill weapon" developed by the Chinese to target and destroy U.S. aircraft carriers.

First posted on a Chinese blog viewed as credible by military analysts and then translated by the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination, a recent report provides a description of an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that can strike carriers and other U.S. vessels at a range of 2000km.

The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.

ASBM is said to be a modified DF-21 The ASBM is said to be a modified DF-21

While the ASBM has been a topic of discussion within national defense circles for quite some time, the fact that information is now coming from Chinese sources indicates that the weapon system is operational. The Chinese rarely mention weapons projects unless they are well beyond the test stages.

If operational as is believed, the system marks the first time a ballistic missile has been successfully developed to attack vessels at sea. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

Along with the Chinese naval build-up, U.S. Navy officials appear to view the development of the anti-ship ballistic missile as a tangible threat.

After spending the last decade placing an emphasis on building a fleet that could operate in shallow waters near coastlines, the U.S. Navy seems to have quickly changed its strategy over the past several months to focus on improving the capabilities of its deep sea fleet and developing anti-ballistic defenses.

As analyst Raymond Pritchett notes in a post on the U.S. Naval Institute blog:

"The Navy's reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren't many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy…the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat."

In recent years, China has been expanding its navy to presumably better exert itself in disputed maritime regions. A recent show of strength in early March led to a confrontation with an unarmed U.S. ship in international waters.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aircraftcarrier; armsbuildup; china; chinesemilitary; missle; navy; redchina; usnavy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

1 posted on 04/06/2009 7:58:46 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998

Cruise missile capabilities are well-known, but can someone tell me how a (conventionally-armed) ballistic missile could possibly hit a rapidly moving aircraft carrier?


2 posted on 04/06/2009 8:00:42 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Of interest ping!


3 posted on 04/06/2009 8:01:20 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998; Evil Slayer
Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers
4 posted on 04/06/2009 8:01:25 AM PDT by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

A fleet carrier can do what? 40 plus knots at flank speed?

But could a carrier group outrun or evade a missile traveling at ballistic speed?

Do not answer, please, if answer requires classified info.


5 posted on 04/06/2009 8:04:49 AM PDT by RexBeach ("Do your duty in all things." Robert E. Lee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998

6 posted on 04/06/2009 8:05:19 AM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998
Great news, particularly coming on the day that Gates, the defense secretary, is about to tell us all the weapons systems programs he wants to end or cut back, in line with the blind belief that “asymmetric”wars like Afghanistan are all we need worry about.
7 posted on 04/06/2009 8:06:25 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

“Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.”

ASBM are bad news for the US Navy. The loss of even one carrier would be devestating. This is something we need to deal with.


8 posted on 04/06/2009 8:08:48 AM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RexBeach

time for a missle defense shield, got to stop them red chinese. we gave tehm the money and technology to build this stuff, stupid us.

yes a carreir might make 50 mph, not sure if all teh support ships that sail with it can do that speed, and a carrier must have them support ships for defence. Our carriers are not well armored, they are soft targets, scarey stuff. a missle at mach 10, even lacking a war head is a big deal.

now if we had them airplane based laser guns, to kill missles in flight, we might have a good chance at defence.

maybe teh ship based missle defences can help agisnt this kind of attack.

rotten commie chinese


9 posted on 04/06/2009 8:09:58 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

I hate Gates. He thinks the Raptor is unnecessary too. If that program gets cut because of his inability to see beyond Iraq and Afghanistan I will be absolutely furious. I have already written my senator and informed him of this.


10 posted on 04/06/2009 8:10:53 AM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: freedomwarrior998

Okay, so, is this a ballistic missile or a cruise missile variant?

If this thing is nothing more than some sort of ballistic JDAM, I would think that once it reaches apogee, there is a limit to the radius of the kill zone it can be guided into.

Something moving at Mach 10 doesn’t change direction very well.


12 posted on 04/06/2009 8:12:19 AM PDT by stylin_geek (Senators and Representatives : They govern like Calvin Ball is played, making it up as they go along)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dhm914

Go back to DU troll.


13 posted on 04/06/2009 8:13:40 AM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998

Here is the answer. One downed carrier and one downed China.


14 posted on 04/06/2009 8:15:32 AM PDT by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dhm914
This is nothing new or even more dangerous. Terminal stage ballistic weapons are normal targets for Aegis, Patriot, and Hawk missile systems currently in use.

This Chinese PR threat is nothing to worry about.

The North Korean ballistic missile they just launched probably hit mach 10 during re-entry.

15 posted on 04/06/2009 8:28:04 AM PDT by SENTINEL (SGT USMC GWI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SENTINEL
This Chinese PR threat is nothing to worry about.

Not right now. But in 10-15-20 years...The US is going to be awash in red ink and entitlement programs from here on out and our military programs I feel will be curtailed.

China is floating in foreign currency and has lot's of money to spend on military R&D.

16 posted on 04/06/2009 8:33:18 AM PDT by tc45a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RC one
Go back to DU troll.

Why is he a troll? What is say's is a fact.

17 posted on 04/06/2009 8:34:45 AM PDT by tc45a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

At Mach 10, there is no such thing as a small targeting adjustment.


18 posted on 04/06/2009 8:36:55 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

When you can control flight and direction at 10,000 MPH, hitting a 5 acre target traveling at 60 MPH is child’s play.

The days of the carrier group are rapidly coming to an end. They were predicated on complete air superiority (needed to protect the ships). As new ways to make air superiority irrelevant are developed, the carrier group becomes more and more vulnerable, and eventually becomes as useless as a battleship - vulnerable to attack by everyone, slow, and actually a hindrance to battle.


19 posted on 04/06/2009 8:40:36 AM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

At mach 10, a 60 MPH target is essentially standing still!


20 posted on 04/06/2009 8:41:47 AM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Theoretically this could be a devastating weapon. The big problem that I see in using Ballistic Missiles of this class for tactial strikes is that it makes nuclear escalation more likely. How is the US supposed to know that a particular DF-21 is carrying a non-nuclear payload? I suppose you could wait till the thing goes off, but that's not how nuclear deterrence is supposed to work.
21 posted on 04/06/2009 8:44:04 AM PDT by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RC one

If that’s a DU troll post, we need more like him/her.


22 posted on 04/06/2009 8:53:37 AM PDT by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Cruise missile capabilities are well-known, but can someone tell me how a (conventionally-armed) ballistic missile could possibly hit a rapidly moving aircraft carrier?

The carrier can only manuever a certain amount in a given period of time.

I suspect the intent is to fire the missles in salvos and bracket the ship.

23 posted on 04/06/2009 8:56:25 AM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freedomwarrior998

Thank the Clinton administration for giving the Chinese sophisticated missile tracking technology.


24 posted on 04/06/2009 8:56:54 AM PDT by The Great RJ (chain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GBA

If you say so.


25 posted on 04/06/2009 9:02:36 AM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dhm914; Admin Moderator

Possible ChiCom Troll sighting at #9


26 posted on 04/06/2009 9:05:20 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RC one
Ok, I'm confused. What is it about that post or what is said in in that classifies the poster as a troll? Other than maybe spelling and grammar, what do you disagree with?
27 posted on 04/06/2009 9:13:45 AM PDT by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: Virginia Ridgerunner; Jeff Head

I have always thought ballistic missiles would be the Achilles heel of the supercarrier.

In a real war, they would be attacked with nukes delivered by suborbital projectiles.


29 posted on 04/06/2009 9:19:12 AM PDT by Jim Noble (They are willing to kill for socialism...but not to die for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
To wtc911:

please dont use such name calling on this site. I dont like being called an idiot, troll, child nor weasel.

You have been reported to the site managers.

I think you owe me and the other fine posters here an apology. your use of name calling and personnel attacks is not acceptable here.
If you dont apologize, i’ll ask the managers here to ban you from posting, you have clearly broken the rules here

try to stay on subject, if you object to what I or other post, come up with a good counter argument,your name calling is childish, and does nothing to help your cause, what ever that may be.

again I state that the US needs a strong missile defensive system. Be it airborne laser defense, ship borne anti-missile missiles or other technologies.
because we have been lacking in developing these defenses we are in danger. because we sold out to the chicoms with granting them free trade, and given them high tech knowledge, we have caused them to be a big threat. That threat needs to be neutralized.

China is not to be trusted.

Name calling posters are not post.

I am awaiting the apology from wtc911.

30 posted on 04/06/2009 9:52:19 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RC one

whats your probelm RC one???? I advocate a strong defense and you call me a DU troll? what the heck is that??? I dont like the way it sounds. I think you owe an apolgy. In fact why do you even post on this pro-America site if you dont like my post that states we need to better secure our carriers aginst commie ballistic missles?

care to explain that DU troll thing to me, or will your remain a rabid anti-strong defense nut job???


31 posted on 04/06/2009 9:56:38 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

ok virgina ridge runner, what in my post makes me a chicom troll? I am not even sure what that term means, but I dont like the context of it.

So what specifically in my Pro_American defense post was so upsetting to you to have me be labled as a chicom troll?????

you got a brain dont you, so post it, what is wrong with my post????

here we got three posters that have called me names, and/or reported me for my por-american post.

I am thinking we got a bunch or anti-defense liberal posters here today.


32 posted on 04/06/2009 10:01:42 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

Not if it takes 12 minutes to get there


33 posted on 04/06/2009 10:02:25 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GBA

Thank you. maybe now the likes of wtc911 and virgina runner will go away back to liberal land.


34 posted on 04/06/2009 10:04:44 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dhm914
I am thinking we got a bunch or anti-defense liberal posters here today.

Kiss off, newbie...

dhm914
Since Mar 17, 2009

35 posted on 04/06/2009 10:05:32 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GBA

thanks!!!!


36 posted on 04/06/2009 10:08:14 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

SOOOO BUSTED, he is.


37 posted on 04/06/2009 10:08:56 AM PDT by halfright (My presidents picture is in the dictionary, next to the word, "rectum".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dhm914; indcons; TigerLikesRooster; Army Air Corps
Thank you. maybe now the likes of wtc911 and virgina runner will go away back to liberal land.

Hey, noob...

Virginia Ridgerunner
You've posted a total of 222 threads and 10,592 replies.

You're protesting way too much. Makes me think even more that you're a new ChiCom troll, based on your sign-up date and iffy English in your posts.

38 posted on 04/06/2009 10:10:09 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Quite a welcome for newbies. Make them into trolls by insinuation, and ridicule their poor typing. That really makes new folk want to participate, NOT!

Give a break. When he (they) promotes China, be alarmed!

39 posted on 04/06/2009 10:16:34 AM PDT by WVKayaker ( Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Arthur C. Clarke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

To virgina ridge runner: you are posting name calling (noob????) and you just cant articulate what you object to in my original post.

now for you it is coming down to how many posts I have or my date of sign up?? what is with that?

does my date of sign up have any signicance??? please explain that??? are you a numeralogist?

You rather large number of posts, is no doubt made of onliner insults and name calling.

so stop the name calling, and please state what you find bad in my post???? where do you disagree with my post??

we need quality logical posts here, not this name calling that you and two others have started doing in responce to my post. i took the time and answered a posters question about carrier speed (about 50 mph) and gave my opinion that we need to beef up our missle defense. The airborne laser defense is neat technology, as is our antimissle missle system. we need more of that stuff.

so what do you not agree with virgina ridge runner????? (and try to keep the name calling out of your reply, please)

a await a civil discussion on the missle defense systems for our navy.


40 posted on 04/06/2009 10:22:28 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: WVKayaker

Thank You wvkayaker!!! (ps I love kayaking!!)


41 posted on 04/06/2009 10:23:49 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: WVKayaker

I have been down the Gulley river a few times but it’s been 25+ years. W.Va has some really nice recreation spots. The wife and I did some serious hikes near Blackwater Falls last year.


42 posted on 04/06/2009 10:42:45 AM PDT by tc45a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: tc45a

west coaster here, like the waves on the coast (yes Mavricks!!) and the bays and laggons.

funny how there is now dead silance now from the name callers. maybe the site monitors took care of them.


43 posted on 04/06/2009 10:46:54 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dhm914
I refer you back to my post #35.
44 posted on 04/06/2009 11:19:52 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Typical rube liberal reply . thank you virgina ridge runner.
You really ought to be banned. no arguing with you. you are just full of insults, and no logical discussion.

However with your pre-occupation with the saying "kiss off" I think you are refering to your dear leader, Premier Kissoff!!! (with apologies to Dr. Strangelove) I suppose the likes of you will tell the US Navy to "kiss off" when they request more missle defense systems.

45 posted on 04/06/2009 11:28:27 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Typical rude liberal reply . thank you virgina ridge runner.
You really ought to be banned. no arguing with you. you are just full of insults, and no logical discussion.

However with your pre-occupation with the saying "kiss off" I think you are refering to your dear leader, Premier Kissoff!!! (with apologies to Dr. Strangelove) I suppose the likes of you will tell the US Navy to "kiss off" when they request more missle defense systems.

46 posted on 04/06/2009 11:28:54 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: WVKayaker
China’s Guerrilla War for the Web
47 posted on 04/06/2009 11:29:01 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin is a smart missile aimed at the heart of the left!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: dhm914

ha ha ha... you actually think our ACCs are ‘soft targets’.. ever cross your mind that we let the ChiComs believe this missile could effect us, giving them a false sense of power? Remember the old rule, technology in the military is generally two decades ahead of where you think it is. Don’t think for a moment there aren’t defense contingencies built up for this.


48 posted on 04/06/2009 11:34:22 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dhm914
You really ought to be banned.

That will be for us to decide. If 'Kiss Off' offends you, you may want to grow a thicker skin. I would suggest starting here to boost your credibility and thicken your skin.

49 posted on 04/06/2009 11:36:45 AM PDT by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

dont mind it so much if the poster could articulate some thought into teh post other than name calling. maybe it is too much to ask for a logical discussion. Three posters with name calling, nothing more, no discussion, and they reported my post as “abuse” which I can no figure how in anyway that is abuse. you have any comments to them on their false report of abuse generated in reply to my first post???

I still dont knwo whyu they reported my post as abuse. do you agree with them?? (I guess all they stated was name calling, do you agree with that???)

I was hoping for a logical discussion, not name calling and false abuse charges. You need to address there behavior. They seem to be anti-US Navy and very Pro chicom.

you going to address their abuse charges of me publically, or you on their side also???


50 posted on 04/06/2009 11:44:46 AM PDT by dhm914
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

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