NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Strategic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Carrier Killer Warhead

July 13, 2008: Rumors continue to come out of China that the DF-21 ballistic missile is being equipped with a high-explosive warhead and a guidance system that can find and hit a aircraft carrier at sea. The DF-21 has a range of 1800 kilometers and normally hauls a 300 kiloton nuclear warhead. It's a two stage, 15 ton, solid fuel rocket that could carry a half ton penetrating, high-explosive warhead, along with the special guidance system (a radar and image recognition system).

As the story goes, the Chinese have reverse engineered, reinvented or stolen the 1970s technology that went into the U.S. Pershing ballistic missile. This 7.5 ton U.S. Army missile also had an 1,800 kilometers range, and could put its nuclear warhead within 30 meters of its aim point. This was possible because the guidance system had its own radar. This kind of accuracy made the Russians very uncomfortable, as it made their command bunkers vulnerable. The Russians eventually agreed to a lot of nuclear and missile disarmament deals in order to get the Pershings decommissioned in the 1980s. 

The Chinese have long been rumored to have a system like this, but there have been no tests. If the Chinese do succeed in creating a "carrier killer" version of the DF-21, the U.S. Navy can modify its Aegis anti-missile system to protect carriers against such attacks. There are also electronic warfare options, to blind the DF-21 radar. Another problem the Chinese will have is getting a general idea of where the target carrier is before they launch the DF-21. This is not impossible, but can be difficult.

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article MORALE: Mine Is Bigger Than Yours


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2
s,dog7    s,dog7   7/13/2008 8:55:06 AM

china needs to lose its market, they are 100% up to no good, we need to do some think now before its to late,, what china is doing reminds me of what Hitler did just before war. every one new what was going to happen but every one is in like a dream world, as if, no, that could not happen to me, its like when people get cancer, they all say as if, i never through i would get it,,, people need to wake up and open there eyes and have a good think about what could happen if we did not do any think now, they are building EMP bombs, but every one thinks that they are building them to turn of all the power in America,, wrong, this is why china is building EMP bombs.,, America has nuclear weapons so china knows that they can not attack them, and get into there country,, so what do you do,, you make a EMP bomb and when America fires a nuclear bomb at china, they will let a EMP bomb off, and the nuclear bomb will not go off,, so how do you take out America, keep fire ring EMP bombs to fuck up there nuclear bombs. All nuclear bombs need electronic components in them. every one is so dum, I bet non of you that read this even thought of that,, a EMP bomb is not to take out a cities power, its to stop nuclear bombs from going off, it?s the only way you can invade or fight a country with nuclear bombs and win..

So if china is making EMP bombs, what do you think they are trying to do??????????

 
Quote    Reply

B1165    Must be High   7/13/2008 1:46:13 PM
Can I have some of what you are smoking cause you must be high
 
Quote    Reply

00_Chem_AJB       7/13/2008 2:26:11 PM
The decision to deploy ground launched anti-ship ballistic missiles seems to send the message that they have little confidence in their AS cruise missiles and their navy itself. Why bother with this sort of technology which can be countered by ABMSs when it makes more sense to strenghen and update their navy to a more credible threat. Aegis will have a field day....
 
Quote    Reply

sjdoc    Who says they're after aircraft carriers exclusively?   7/13/2008 4:55:05 PM

 Why bother with this sort of technology which can be countered by ABMSs when it makes more sense to strenghen and update their navy to a more credible threat. 

Might it not be possible that this "accurization" of the DF-21 and modification so that it can "...carry a half ton penetrating, high-explosive warhead, along with the special guidance system (a radar and image recognition system)" might have a purpose besides killing supercarriers?
Are there not both fixed and mobile potential targets in Taiwan (most particularly) worth the expenditure of such missiles - but not the escalation into nuclear warfare - such that a "bunker buster" version of the DF-21 with a conventional warhead is worth developing and deploying?
 
--
 
Quote    Reply

s,dog7    dont get high just drink, sprised you could read it   7/14/2008 1:27:04 AM
you will wish you where hi when they drop a nuclear bomb on your ass, lol now, but you will not when it happens...
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       7/14/2008 3:39:18 AM

you will wish you where hi when they drop a nuclear bomb on your ass, lol now, but you will not when it happens...
 you are either ignorant or you're a troll, probably both. Stop wasting bandwidth here.
 
-DA

 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Aegis Rules the Waves   7/14/2008 10:40:19 AM
The DF-21 "carrier killer" warhead is one reason the SM-3 was created.  We can load more SM-3s than the 2nd Artillery can deploy DF-21s - with or without conventinal warheads.
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       7/14/2008 12:06:29 PM
With all the rampant corruption in the Chinese army, don't you think that the US intelligence would know about such weapons?
 
 
 

 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       7/14/2008 4:11:31 PM

With all the rampant corruption in the Chinese army, don't you think that the US intelligence would know about such weapons?

 
With all the rampant corruption in the US govenment - we do know about these weapons because for the most part we are responsible for sending the technology to China in the first place.

 
Want to know where the PRC got a SAR radar and guidance system for such missiles?  Just ask Bernie Schwartz of LORAL.  Of course, he had plenty of help from the Clintons.  BTW - the Chinese National Center for Remote Sensing is run and operated by the PLA.
 
link
 

LORAL


Defense Systems-Arizona
P.O. Box 85 Jerald A. Lindfelt
Litchfield Park, AZ 85340-0085 President
(602) 925-6380


March 15, 1996

Ron Brown, Secretary of Commerce
United States Department of Commerce
14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20230

Dear Secretary Brown:

Your recent keynote speech at the Arizona Association of Industries' luncheon in Phoenix was interesting and informative. I was particularly pleased with your offer to have the Commerce Department assist us with work issues in foreign countries. We have a problem in our Division regarding dealings with the Peoples Republic of China and I would appreciate your assistance in resolving these complex issues.

Several years ago our division sold two radar systems to the Peoples Republic of China for use in geological surveys. Since that time the U.S. trade relations with the Peoples Republic of China have been such that we have not been allowed to pursue additional business in that country. The systems we sold them are in need of an upgrade. Since we are not eligible to perform the work, a foreign company simply modifies our equipment. This results not only in lost follow-on business, but also the loss of numerous new opportunities emerging in China that we would like to pursue.

Attached is a copy of a letter from the National Remote Sensing Center in Beijing that outlines a few of the problems we have encountered. We've worked hard trying to resolve these problems with the Department of State, the Department of Commerce and the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA), but someone in these organizations always manage to block our participation.

The Synthetic Aperture Radar System is dated technology and can be offered to China by a number of countries. It seems foolish to allow other countries to market their similar products while our efforts are blocked. Over the years we have found that this type of obstacle often comes from lower levels of management rather than by people willing to look at the bigger picture. Could you help us by identifying someone in the Commerce Department high enough in the organization to help us resolve these issues and open this marketplace to our participation.

We have representatives scheduled to travel to Beijing in April and it would be very helpful if we had a contact identified who could assist us in making this visit a success.

Respectfully yours,

J.A. Lindfelt,
President

Attachment
jvb



 
Quote    Reply

flyingarty    Post    7/17/2008 7:48:05 AM
Could we all go back to standard type please? Flyingarty
 
Quote    Reply

CSTARRITT       7/17/2008 11:36:22 PM

The DF-21 "carrier killer" warhead is one reason the SM-3 was created.  We can load more SM-3s than the 2nd Artillery can deploy DF-21s - with or without conventinal warheads.

 
I wonder how many SM-3s the fleet can shoot in the timeframe between the DF-21s entering their range and the incomming warheads getting too close to engage?
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       7/18/2008 2:58:18 AM
Rough wag:
 
Incoming RVs speed = 6000mph = 100miles per minute.
Engagement altitude band is from 50 to 100 miles altitude.
RV penetrates the band in 30 seconds.
Each SM-3 Aegis ship can fire one SM-3 every 2 seconds.
Therefore if all CSS-5 RVs arrive simultaneously, each SM-3 ship can fire up to 15 SM-3s at the incoming RVs.
There are 9 Aegis DDs and CAs configured for SM-3 in the Pacific.
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       7/18/2008 4:46:03 PM

Rough wag:

 

Incoming RVs speed = 6000mph = 100miles per minute.

Engagement altitude band is from 50 to 100 miles altitude.

RV penetrates the band in 30 seconds.

Each SM-3 Aegis ship can fire one SM-3 every 2 seconds.

Therefore if all CSS-5 RVs arrive simultaneously, each SM-3 ship can fire up to 15 SM-3s at the incoming RVs.

There are 9 Aegis DDs and CAs configured for SM-3 in the Pacific.

 

 
Doing the math above, factoring in electronic warfare and the kind of ISR capability the PRC would need to make it effective this just a different 21st Century version of the Soviet Naval Bomber doctrine. In that case, it is indeed a threat to be taken seriously, but not an ultimate weapon of any kind. Like all in era's, the leadership on both sides will have to apply strategies to make their respective offenses and defenses successful.
 
Eventually though the BMD capability will grow far beyond what it does now. And both Carriers and BMD are already out there operational and improving while the PRC has yet to field this capability.
 
-DA

 
Quote    Reply

nyetneinnon       7/20/2008 5:38:09 PM
Is it just me or should the Army and Air Force buy ground based SM-3 variants?  That thing is a kill-killer.  Lights out.
 
Quote    Reply

doggone       11/30/2008 9:28:52 PM
The DF-21 is not just a carrier killer. The 300KT warhead makes it a 'carrier fleet' killer, and there's a big difference. Just owning such a thing changes the strategic and tactical planning. In a Taiwan conflict you won't keep your assets tightly together, you'll space them out, and that will leave you vulnerable. Plus you will keep your carrier out far enough away that it can have a wide horizon to watch and cover.
 
You can't put your carrier in close to such a theater of operation if that leaves you with mere seconds to analyze and react, with 100% precision, to an attack. The Aegis can't see a missile and know if it's carrying a nuke or a penetrating warhead, and either way the Aegis needs time to discriminate, lock on, and compute a solution for intercepting such a missile. You'll keep your carrier far, far, away.
 
A DF is worth millions, but a carrier is worth billions. Even without a nuke the Chinese could, theoretically, target several DFs against a single carrier. The Chinese are the only other country on the planet to bulls-eye a target in space with a kinetic energy warhead. The DF will definitely be a concern for the Navy planners.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy