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

Naval Supremacy Without Ships

July 1, 2009: For the last six years, Chinese military planners have been openly discussing the development of an ASBM (an anti-ship ballistic missile.) The way this weapon works is pretty simple. First you have to detect, and track, an American carrier at sea. This can be done with space or ground based radar, or electronic monitoring equipment. One could also do it with submarines (which would stalk the carriers, at a distance, and use satellite comm to send location updates back to China). Once you know where the carrier is, and where it is heading, you put that data into the navigation system of one or more ASBMs and launch. Less than half an hour later, the warhead is plunging earthward, and using its targeting sensors to detect the carrier below. Unless the carrier turned around and hauled ass at full speed about the time the ASBM was launched, the warhead will detect the carrier and hit it, while travelling at several times faster than a rifle bullet. If that doesn't sink the carrier, it certainly puts it out of action for months.

China's principal weapon would be their DF-21 ballistic missile, equipped with a high-explosive warhead and a guidance system that can home in 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).

It is believed that 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. Before deploying these ASBMs, one or more would have to be tested. They could do this by using a large container ship or tanker (older ones, headed for the breakers) and move it to a likely location from which an American carrier would approach. This target ship would be rigged to be operated by remote control. The Chinese might want to send a few smaller freighters, similarly equipped, to represent the carrier escorts. This would test the ASBMs ability to pick out the carrier (the largest ship in the task force.) As part of the test, the Chinese could see if more than one form of tracking works. Then, the ASBM would be given the latest coordinates for the carrier, and launched. Half an hour later, the Chinese would know if they have a real ASBM.

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.

Meanwhile, China appears to be developing an over-the-horizon (OTH) radar that can spot large ships (like American aircraft carriers) as far as 3,000 kilometers away, and use this information to guide ballistic missiles to the area,. Such radars have long been used to detect ballistic missile launches, and approaching heavy bombers. Some OTH radars have been modified to take advantage of the flat surface of an ocean, to pick up large objects, like ships. Cheaper and more powerful computers enable such OTH radars to more accurately identify ships thousands of kilometers away.

China is developing the technologies, and it's only a matter of time, and willingness to devote several billion dollars to the project, before they can actually do it, or at least try to. If the Chinese ASBM works, naval warfare will be changed forever.

 

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article SUBMARINES: New Russian Boomer Is Ready, Again


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

Gerry       7/1/2009 9:39:36 PM
Any use of the DF-21 against US ships would be a major escalation during a war with Taiwan. (or other scenerio). It would immediately open all Chinese launch sites to retaliatory strikes. If they weren't before. So the question becomes one of how many sites and missles, can the Chinese spare (presuming some nukes are held in reserve), and how well is the US able to defend its carriers, while launching retaliatory strikes against mainland China. (Tomahawk, cruise missles, etc)
 
I suspect, at the current time, the US has the upper hand and would defeat most if not all DF-21 launches against US carriers. The response would be devastating for the Chinese military, if the US were to use its submarine, guided missle ships, and airpower, to hit strategic targets.
 
No land troops ever need be involved.
 
Quote    Reply

JJ       7/2/2009 8:58:02 AM
There is nothing worrying in regards of China acquiring her ASBM. After all, China is a responsible Big 5. She has a lots head-ache - how to feed her billions, the widen gap between the have and not, rich and poor, how to lift her millions out of poverty, desertification, lack of safe-drinking water to her millions, her dwindling exports, lost of jobs, problem with oil, food, North Korea and of course Taiwan.
 
One has to understand that China is an ancient superpower and a rising one. Up to 1850 her economy (GNP) is one third (1/3) of the world's GNP (higher than even the US at her heydays in the 1950's to 1960's). Decades after1850 or someime then, she was defeated by the British navy, 10 - foreign nations armies sacked Beijing and even defeated by newly rise Japan? Why?
 
Because she thought reasons (for one) are better than going for wars. (She was wrong!!!). She was also thrift to spent or reseach on her military armament. She cannot and must not make this mistake again.
 
Experts are projecting that within the next 18 years, China economy shall surpasses America. Yet currently she does not even possesses a single carrier to safeguard her trade and territory.he
 
China meant well when she uses DF-31 with a range between 1, 800 to 2, 500 km as her ASBM rather than an ICBM with a range of 12, 000 km. She also knew that any strike on an American carrier means full-war and that is the last in the Chinese mind. After all America is China largest debtor. Surely.
she did not want to kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.
 
However, the same cannot be said in regards to any intervention on Taiwan as it will left China with no choice because she had to safeguard her "territorial integrity". The ASBM is just basically a polite reminder to anyone that "don't mess with me in regards to Taiwan". That was all.
 
Quote    Reply

Paul_In    "Experts are...    7/2/2009 11:45:02 AM
"... projecting that within the next 18 years, China economy shall surpasses America."
 
How about some cites on this?  WHAT experts? WHAT articles?
 
I grew up on this crap during the Cold War, from Kruschev's "We will bury you",
to projections (based on early growth rates) that India would surpass us before the end of the century.
 
When you start from a low enough base, you can get astounding growth rates, for a little while.
The real trick is maintaining them.
 
As for China, well, we shall see...
 
-
 
Quote    Reply

Sty0pa       7/2/2009 1:58:49 PM
While it's a clever technical solution to the current 'problem' of overwhelming US dominance, I'd ask one question:
 
Upon launch of a Chinese ASBM, precisely what will distinguish this in the boost phase from the launch of an ICBM?
Considering that this is unlikely to be a 'bolt from the blue' scenario, and will likely only occur during a scenario of extremely heightened tensions between China and the US...well, I'd respectfully submit that would be a very, very bad moment to mistakenly telegraph the wrong intention to your (nuclear-armed) opponent.
 
On the other hand, any effort to say "hey, these missiles here are not nukes" with enough timing in advance to avert misidentification reliably - even if believed, would kind of ruin the element of surprise and allow a target surface group to disperse or deploy countermeasures.
 
Quote    Reply

Photon       7/2/2009 3:09:18 PM
Turn the entire Chinese coastal zones into radioactive car parks:  Problem solved.
 
Quote    Reply

dowding    Valid but won't happen   7/2/2009 6:27:08 PM
Decades ago,  Senator Gary Hart ( Democratic presidential candidate, did not work out) co-authored a book, the idea of which was that the development of submarine technology had already made the surface fleet obsolete.  I only skimmed through the book, but it was pretty convincing.  He claimed that US war games had to hobble the submarines to hide this fact.
 
  Over time, the vulnerability of carriers to attack by relatively inexpensive means has only grown.
 
 Yet, they continue to play a vital role.
 
  The reality is, carriers help the US project power in the world.   I believe they would be wiped out were we to become involved in a World War II type conflict with another nation.  However, it is very difficult to envision such a conflict occurring.  First of all, there is no one to fight it with.   The problem of nuclear weapons is also a factor.    As one person pointed out, we would no doubt make expensive retaliations on China where they to knock out a carrrier.
 
  Really, it is very hard to imagine conflict China or any other nation in the world today on this level.  The US is too far ahead of all other nations for anyone to really want to challenge us.  Really, at this point  we need to worry that it could become so easy that terrorists might do it.  This of course is always plausible.
 
In addition, the Taiwan scenario is really slipping in plausibility at this time, due to rapprochement between China and Taiwan.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

arodrig6       7/2/2009 7:45:16 PM

"... projecting that within the next 18 years, China economy shall surpasses America."

 

How about some cites on this?  WHAT experts? WHAT articles?

I grew up on this crap during the Cold War, from Kruschev's "We will bury you",

to projections (based on early growth rates) that India would surpass us before the end of the century.

When you start from a low enough base, you can get astounding growth rates, for a little while.

The real trick is maintaining them.

As for China, well, we shall see...

-

Here is a recent citation:
h**p://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=20282&prog=zch
 
 
I agree that predictions of economic trends are often wrong (e.g. the 80s predictions that Japan would overtake the US, before their decade long recession in the 90s), and you are quite right that it is impossible to tell for certain.
 
However, I think the possibility of the Chinese  economy surpassing the US has more going for it than most predictions. With a population over 4x that of the US they only need to make their per-capita productivity 25% that of the US to surpass. They are currently about halfway there (at about 13% per capita GDP). Also, the examples 
of Taiwan and South Korea show that it is possible for a large Asian nation to dramatically increase the productivity of a large portion of its population in a short time.
 
Of course, the PRC's population growth is slowing, and the US still has a fairly high internal growth and strong immigration. Also, there are debates over how to value the PRC's GDP. So the the PRC will surpass in 20,30, or 50 years is much more debatable. However, the trends seem to be in line. 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Architect       7/4/2009 7:46:58 PM
Today, carriers are useful only to scare 3th world countries. China don't need to send balistic misiles to them, just 20 SU-27 at the same time, fliyng very low, that's enough. 
 
Quote    Reply

Headlock       7/6/2009 11:14:16 AM

Turn the entire Chinese coastal zones into radioactive car parks:  Problem solved.

wait- all those carparks.. what a golden opportunity!

The US could invade via Walmarts, Bets Buys, 7-Eleven, McDs, ect with a British beachhead composed of Tescos and Marks & Spencers! Throw ina some Canadian Tire for good measure and Bingo!

:D 
 
Quote    Reply

Headlock       7/6/2009 11:30:28 AM


of Taiwan and South Korea show that it is possible for a large Asian nation to dramatically increase the productivity of a large portion of its population in a short time.

 


Ah, but those are interesting examples- because they are true democracies. Take a looka t the worl adn you cna quickly see that the most prosperous, developed states are ALL democracies. Russia is a democracy in name, but an autocracy in point of fact. Thence its stifled, hobbled economy. 

The PRC has great potential, and has come a long way. But numbers tell only part of the story.

A good example here is the different investment 'cultures" bewteen the US and the UK- both are pretty advanced nations, but the US culture of "try try try until success" is totally different to the UK one of "careful careful careful maybe invest". To be fair these are generalizations, but they have a strong element of truth. US corporate development is a century ahead of the PRC. While you can re-equip your forces with shiney new weapons, if your economy isnt able to exploit your [populations true potential then your national strenght will ablwasy be more limited.

The true danger to the US is a democratic, xenophobic China, Just look at the stupidity of WW1 to see several developed  democracies make some terrible, devasting mistakes - if they let emotions dominate their politics. At the moment the fact that the top leaders in the PRC are not very beholden to public opinion is a very good thing, strategically, for the US. It means the government is stable and can thus think long term. But overt, intolerant nationalism is on the rise and a democratic, unstable China, dominated by internal conflict between emotional, nationalistic parties would be a strategic nightmare.

Militarily the US can take on China no problem for the net 50 years- remmebr, the US is not a stagnant nation, its economy is deepening with each year (yes in recession now, but so is China) and the tech gap, despite Chinese espionage, is simply gigantic. 

HDK 

 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Tonytitan       7/8/2009 3:37:18 PM

Today, carriers are useful only to scare 3th world countries. China don't need to send balistic misiles to them, just 20 SU-27 at the same time, fliyng very low, that's enough. 


SU-27's have a sea-level range of 800 miles. They will be slowly-sinking single-occupant life rafts long before they get anywhere near a carrier strike group if they can even locate one. And if they fly with a war load, rapidly-sinking rafts.
 
Quote    Reply

Headlock       7/8/2009 4:21:05 PM
i doubt even the raft analogy holds..

more like- precipitously descending and probably disintegrating on impact 30 tonne 35 million fighter jet.

Just to be specific :)
 
HDK 


 
 
Quote    Reply





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