a new chinese threat

[Billy the Great Khan]

Exactly, how the fuck do you guide the damned thing?

Ancient Chinese secret.

 

[Schadenfreude]

I doubt that you could get accurate enough info from 23,000 odd miles up.
It would also be very easy to target the satellite and destroy it.

this reminds me of a quote regarding soviet VS usa spy satellites - the soviet spy satellite can tell that it is a girl wearing a bikini, the us spy satellite can read the label

this refers to technology over ten years old, so yes, satellites are that accurate

try going to google and look at how accurate and detailed their maps from space are

 

[cancel2 2022]

this reminds me of a quote regarding soviet VS usa spy satellites - the soviet spy satellite can tell that it is a girl wearing a bikini, the us spy satellite can read the label

this refers to technology over ten years old, so yes, satellites are that accurate

try going to google and look at how accurate and detailed their maps from space are

Spy satellites are typically about 100-200 miles above the Earth's surface in a polar orbit. Geostationary satellites are not used for surveillance as they are too far away.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077885/ns/technology_and_science-space/

 

[Schadenfreude]

Spy satellites are typically about 200-300 miles above the Earth's surface in a polar orbit. Geostationary satellites are not used for surveillance as they are too far away.

once more, technology has advanced

i can only speculate on how advanced the new satellites are as that is very classified, however, why do you think that distance is too big a problem

the atmosphere is the real problem and once a satellite is beyond the atmosphere distance becomes a moot point

perhaps the real question is will the chinese start wwiii by attacking one of our carriers

 

[Lowaicue]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't more accurately Fong Schway?

You cannot be 'wrong', after all the Chinese language has no alphabet so the best we can do is spell phonetically. That, of course only solves part of the problem because, not only ia there Mandarin (Pu tong hua) and Cantonese, but Fufienese, Shanghanese, Hainanese and hundreds more. Many Americans think that 'feng shway' is correct but then, poor souls, it wouldn't be the first time they erred!
In Cantonese it is usually /ˈfʌŋʃuː.i/ FUNG-shoo-ee , but even that varies the 'u' in fung can be the open or RP ʌ or the Mancunian as in 'cup'.
Whatever - it is a load of tosh.

 

[cancel2 2022]

You cannot be 'wrong', after all the Chinese language has no alphabet so the best we can do is spell phonetically. That, of course only solves part of the problem because, not only ia there Mandarin (Pu tong hua) and Cantonese, but Fufienese, Shanghanese, Hainanese and hundreds more. Many Americans think that 'feng shway' is correct but then, poor souls, it wouldn't be the first time they erred!
In Cantonese it is usually /ˈfʌŋʃuː.i/ FUNG-shoo-ee , but even that varies the 'u' in fung can be the open or RP ʌ or the Mancunian as in 'cup'.
Whatever - it is a load of tosh.

The Chinese in Thailand tend to speak Hokkiem.

 

[apple0154]

from our 'friends' in china - does this make wwiii just a little bit closer?


US admiral: Carrier killer won't stop US Navy​

Associated Press/AP Online


By ERIC TALMADGE YOKOSUKA, Japan - A new "carrier killer" missile that has become a symbol of China's rising military might will not force the U.S. Navy to change the way it operates in the Pacific, a senior Navy commander told The Associated Press.

Defense analysts say the Dong Feng 21D missile could upend the balance of power in Asia, where U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups have ruled the waves since the end of World War II.

However, Vice Adm. Scott van Buskirk, commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet, told the AP in an interview that the Navy does not see the much-feared weapon as creating any insurmountable vulnerability for the U.S. carriers - the Navy's crown jewels.

"It's not the Achilles heel of our aircraft carriers or our Navy - it is one weapons system, one technology that is out there," Van Buskirk said in an interview this week on the bridge of the USS George Washington, the only carrier that is home-based in the western Pacific.

The DF 21D is unique in that it is believed capable of hitting a powerfully defended moving target - like the USS George Washington - with pinpoint precision. That objective is so complex that the Soviets gave up on a similar project.

The missile would penetrate defenses because its speed from launch would not allow enough time for carriers or other large ships to complete countermeasures.

That could seriously weaken Washington's ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea, as well as deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China's 11,200-mile (18,000-kilometer) -long coastline.

Van Buskirk, whose fleet is responsible for most of the Pacific and Indian oceans, with 60-70 ships and 40,000 sailors and Marines under its command, said the capabilities of the Chinese missile are as yet unproven.

But he acknowledged it does raise special concerns.

"Any new capability is something that we try to monitor," he said.
"If there wasn't this to point to as a game changer, there would be something else," he said. "That term has been bandied about for many things. I think it really depends in how you define the game, whether it really changes it or not. It's a very specific scenario for a very specific capability - some things can be very impactful."

The development of the missile comes as China is increasingly venturing further out to sea and is becoming more assertive around its coastline and in disputes over territory.

Late last year, China and Japan were locked in a heated diplomatic row over several islands both claim in the East China Sea, an area regularly patrolled by U.S. Navy vessels. A flotilla of 10 Chinese warships, including advanced submarines and destroyers, passed through the Miyako Strait last April in the biggest transit of its kind to date.

Experts saw it as an attempt by China to test Japan and the united States and demonstrate its open water capabilities.

China has also expressed strong displeasure with U.S. carrier operations off the Korean Peninsula, saying that they posed a security risk to its capital.
Still, van Buskirk said the Navy has no intention of altering its mission because of the new threat and will continue to operate in the seas around Japan, Korea, the Philippines and anywhere else it deems necessary.

"We won't change these operations because of this specific technology that might be out there," he told The AP while the USS George Washington was in its home port just south of Tokyo for repairs last week. "But we will carefully monitor and adapt to it."

The faster-than-expected development of the missile has set off alarm bells in Washington. Further, China is developing a stealth fighter jet that could be used to support its navy in a potential conflict and hopes to deploy its first aircraft carriers over the next decade.

Before visiting Beijing last month, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he has been concerned about the anti-ship missile since he took office.

In December, Adm. Robert Willard, the head of the U.S. Pacific Command, told Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper he believed the missile program had achieved "initial operational capability," meaning a workable design had been settled on and was being further developed.

The missile is considered a key component of China's strategy of denying U.S. planes and ships access to waters off its coast. The strategy includes overlapping layers of air defense systems, naval assets such as submarines, and advanced ballistic missile systems - all woven together with a network of satellites.

At its most capable, the DF 21D could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defenses of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 900 miles (1,500 kilometers).
To allay regional security fears, van Buskirk said, China needs to be more forthcoming about its intentions.

"It goes back to transparency," he said. "Using the United States as an example, we are very clear about our intent when conducting routine and normal operations in international waters ... That is what you might expect from other nations that might operate in this region.

A service of YellowBrix, Inc. .

This caught my eye. "The missile would penetrate defenses because its speed from launch would not allow enough time for carriers or other large ships to complete countermeasures."

Speed! Quick delivery system.

Ever been hungry waiting for your General Tao chicken or Won Ton soup? I have!

OK. Sure, some of you will laugh but look at all the inventions that have come out of weapon designs and the space program. Who's to say some Chinese kid won't combine the quickness with a drone type system for home delivery? Imagine a small plane landing on your front steps with piping hot food! Swipe your credit card, a door slides open, grab your goodies.

 

[Schadenfreude]

I still don't understand how they are guided and how they lock onto their targets. What type of trajectory do they have?

low, the us has a weapon that cruises into the target area and then goes to high speed one the final attack all at low altitude

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

low, the us has a weapon that cruises into the target area and then goes to high speed one the final attack all at low altitude

Yes we do. We have tons. They are ship or land launched missiles that are deployed on the battle field. That's not what the Chinese claim to have. At all. Not even close. What they are proposing is pretty much physically impossible.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Yes we do. We have tons. They are ship or land launched missiles that are deployed on the battle field. That's not what the Chinese claim to have. At all. Not even close. What they are proposing is pretty much physically impossible.

Sea skimming missiles have been around for over thirty years, as several ships found out in the Falkland's war. USS Stark was also hit by two Exocets in 1987. The Chinese have had Silkworm missiles since the 1980s as well.



Exocet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Question_book-new.svg" class="image"><img alt="Question book-new.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/99/Question_book-new.svg/50px-Question_book-new.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@en/thumb/9/99/Question_book-new.svg/50px-Question_book-new.svg.png

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Sea skimming missiles have been around for over thirty years, as HMS Sheffield found out in the Falkland's war.

Exocet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah, that's what I figured the Chinese one was in my first post. Basically the Russians made the best one in the form of the SN-22 'Sunburn'. We've recently applied that tech to our land based, man portable, anti tank weapons. The Javelin is one example.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Yes we do. We have tons. They are ship or land launched missiles that are deployed on the battle field. That's not what the Chinese claim to have. At all. Not even close. What they are proposing is pretty much physically impossible.

have you considered that we may have developed such a missile and the chinese stole the plans for it - it may be that we developed a weapon for which we have no defense

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

have you considered that we may have developed such a missile and the chinese stole the plans for it - it may be that we developed a weapon for which we have no defense

No. I haven't considered that in the same vein that I haven't considered the rantings of the local crack head to be absolute fact, and for the same reason. Because it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

 

[Schadenfreude]

No. I haven't considered that in the same vein that I haven't considered the rantings of the local crack head to be absolute fact, and for the same reason. Because it's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

perhaps it depends on the distance from the launcher

but be careful of what you say is impossible

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

perhaps it depends on the distance from the launcher

but be careful of what you say is impossible

If it's a ballistic missile it cannot 'fly by wire' target. It must have a set location and coordinates.

And even IF they some how managed to defy physics in China, we still have Aegis.

 

[cancel2 2022]

perhaps it depends on the distance from the launcher

but be careful of what you say is impossible

He means it is impossible with current technology to guide a sea skimming missile maybe 500 miles or more at a moving target at sea.

 

[Schadenfreude]

He means it is impossible with current technology to guide a sea skimming missile maybe 500 miles or more at a moving target at sea.

so far, if the chinese deploy several of them along their coast or just in the straits of taiwan they can prevent us carrier forces from dominating their coastal waters

also, it is not a ballistic missile, but a high speed missile, it never goes ballistic (not for you tom, but da man)

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

so far, if the chinese deploy several of them along their coast or just in the straits of taiwan they can prevent us carrier forces from dominating their coastal waters

also, it is not a ballistic missile, but a high speed missile, it never goes ballistic (not for you tom, but da man)

If it's a non ballistic missile then it will be of little consequence. Aegis is more than capable.

 

[Lowaicue]

so far, if the chinese deploy several of them along their coast or just in the straits of taiwan they can prevent us carrier forces from dominating their coastal waters

also, it is not a ballistic missile, but a high speed missile, it never goes ballistic (not for you tom, but da man)

...and? they can dominate their OWN waters. WOW! what a bloody cheek!
Let's all boycott chow fan.

 

[cancel2 2022]

...and? they can dominate their OWN waters. WOW! what a bloody cheek!
Let's all boycott chow fan.

I doubt that you would want to see a war in the Taiwan Straits? China has never forgiven Taiwan aka Formosa for providing sanctuary to the Kuomintang and Chang Kai Shek.