Strategic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Chinas Heavenly Thunderbolts
   Next Article → AIR TRANSPORTATION: The Il-76 Comes Home
May 27, 2007: The Chinese military press has published numerous articles on how to defeat U.S. Navy carrier task forces. For example, China is known to be developing terminal guidance systems for its ballistic missiles. This would enable a Chinese ballistic missile to be fired to an area, about a hundred kilometers in diameter, believed to contains an American carrier. If the carrier was there, the conventional warhead would come right down on the carrier. For this kind of job, the ballistic missile could use an armor piercing (non-explosive) warhead. At the high speed of an ballistic missile warhead (several times faster than a rifle bullet) plunging back to earth, the damage to the carrier would be enormous. At the very least, flight operations would be halted.  This tactic is not new, both the United States, and the defunct Soviet Union worked on the technical aspects of this.

 

Chinese officers also discuss the use of high-altitude nuclear explosions to produce an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) that would damage communications on U.S. warships below. By using EMP at sea, there would be less damage to civilian infrastructure. China also appears to be continuing work on anti-satellite satellites. China is already a major player in the Internet warfare area, and is believed to be actively attacking American military networks.

 

China also discusses using their ballistic missiles, with conventional warheads,  against headquarters and communications facilities, both on Taiwan, and American bases in the region. Less often discussed is how China would cope with similar attacks on its own headquarters and infrastructure. China is also still at a major disadvantage when it comes to ICBMs. It cannot reach the United States with any of these, while the U.S. has enough ICBM warheads to obliterate China. But the bet here is that a vigorous grab for Taiwan would not bring down an American ICBM attack. So if China can defeat the U.S. Navy in a battle for Taiwan, a war is won without risking the destruction of China itself.

 

 

Next Article → AIR TRANSPORTATION: The Il-76 Comes Home
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT
Mountaintroll    Yeah, that'll work   5/27/2007 4:03:17 PM
The plan:

1.  Defeat the US Navy with a surprise attack

2. Seize and hold territorial objectives

3.  Wait for the US to accept the new status quo

The Japanese tried this a while back.  Anyone remember how well that turned out?  Apparently the Chinese don't.

 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       5/27/2007 5:41:32 PM
I agree with you, MT, that some sort of surprise attack on the USN would only guarantee heavy retribution.  The strategy being suggested here isn't quite like that, however.  One postulated strategy for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a relatively no-notice attack that seeks to get ashore before America can show up in force.  If the PLA can gain the upper hand on Taiwan before America decides to join in in any significant way, they hope that perhaps we would back off and accept the fait accompli.  In this strategy, the anti-carrier SRBMs and MRBMs are only used once America starts fighting, and not as a preemptatory surprise attack that would only be sure to guarantee a full-on American retaliation.  If America moves to reinforce Taiwan and starts launching carrier air strikes, only to lose a carrier or two, the PLA hopes this might be a situation where we loose nerve and write Taiwan off.  Naturally I think that just means we need to sink the PLAN and shoot down the PLAAF and PLANAF, thereby isolating the PLA forces on Taiwan, but hey, that's just me.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       5/27/2007 6:04:09 PM
Dropping marbles on scared mice.
 
The PRC bandits fail to consider what the infrared signature of  ballistic missile launches showing up in the cameras of American satellites would imply?
 
Even if the missile launches were headed for Japan and South Korea scrupulously avoiding US territory or assets, the Seventh Fleet and Guam, what makes the PRCs assume that a panicked American command wouldn't have birds in the air on the way to such interesting places as Beijing, Shanghai and other geographic points? A confirmed nuclear power launching ballistic missiles of any kind is almost a guarantee for central strategic war.
 
Not smart at sea either where the frightened mice get five minutes warning and can put up the countermeasures that make a noisy helicopter look like an aircraft carrier to a plunging warhead. What worked against the Russians will work against the Chinese. Want to see what the mice do after they  dodge? The PLAN wouldn'tr be the only thing sunk. Wonder how China would like having her merchant fleet seized and her overseas treade embargoed. Besides we need to teach our submariners that enemy merchant ships are legitimate prey.
 
BANZAI!
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates    Correction   5/27/2007 7:34:06 PM
China has two deployed types of ICBMs capable of hitting the CONUS.

DF-31and DF-5

 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       5/27/2007 7:54:30 PM

China has two deployed types of ICBMs capable of hitting the CONUS.

DF-31and DF-5


We mean more than just the West Coast, Alaska or Hawaii and also with more than a prayers chance of surviving NMD and then functioning properly.

-Darth
 
Quote    Reply

hybrid       5/27/2007 8:05:32 PM
Good thing the USN is field ABM capable Aegis warships then eh? If I remember right there will be something like 16 ships that will be equiped with ABM capability or planned that way. As far as ballistic missile launches go however, outside of the SRBMs which have quite a different launch signature from MRBMs and ICBMs, China would have to rely on cruise missiles to do the job. Now as I've stated before lets say China gets some advance notice of where a CBG is going to be in say a rough 10 km radius. Now unless those ballistic RVs really slow down their descent to allow something like radar pinging all the way in you end up with nearly a 314 sq kilometer area to have that missile come down in. All of that is not counting any countermeasures that may be deployed or movement by the CBG itself. So in otherwords, great idea in theory, bad idea in practice unless you got terminal level data.
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates    DS   5/27/2007 8:09:11 PM
"China is also still at a major disadvantage when it comes to ICBMs. It cannot reach the United States with any of these"

If the article means, the eastern part of the U.S, it should state so.  The above statement is ambiguous at best, and an outright lie at worst.

 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       5/27/2007 9:09:17 PM
As far as ballistic missile launches go however, outside of the SRBMs which have quite a different launch signature from MRBMs and ICBMs, China would have to rely on cruise missiles to do the job.  
 So in otherwords, great idea in theory, bad idea in practice unless you got terminal level data.

They also are reported to be working on a terminally guided conventional MRBM derivative of the CSS-5 with a range of 2000km+.
 
I am honestly not trying to be patronizing, but did you miss the part about them being terminally guided?
 
This is not an inconsequential threat.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

hybrid       5/27/2007 10:30:40 PM

As far as ballistic missile launches go however, outside of the SRBMs which have quite a different launch signature from MRBMs and ICBMs, China would have to rely on cruise missiles to do the job.  

 So in otherwords, great idea in theory, bad idea in practice unless you got terminal level data.


They also are reported to be working on a terminally guided conventional MRBM derivative of the CSS-5 with a range of 2000km+.

 

I am honestly not trying to be patronizing, but did you miss the part about them being terminally guided?

 

This is not an inconsequential threat.

 

 

 

 

 


No I did not DJ however there are different ways to do terminal guidance, especially on non-moving static objects. Moving objects require a different method (hell overcoming the plasma sheath upon re-entry is just one of the factors if you don't have something like a transmitter/receiver to receive GPS updates). The Pershing II missile used radar imaging for terminal guidance in conjunction with a MaRV type warhead but it was particularly most useful against static targets. The usual method of such guidance tends to involve a lot of braking before re-entry and some braking while in re-entry (with a pre-reentry image and then another couple of shots right after re-entry before resumption of normal descent). On a nuke warhead the slowdown isn't going to usually make much of a difference.

My issue is not much of questioning whether a MaRV type warhead can use terminal guidance to hit a non moving target or grid but whether theres been enough advance in the field of it hitting a mobile target.
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    The Real Problem - Winks and Nods   5/29/2007 11:47:15 AM
 
The US military is capable of stopping a PRC attack on Taiwan. Our assetts in the region would choke it off before it got going. In addition to that no one should discount the Taiwanese. They have spent a couple of genereations preparing for this fight and I am pretty confident that they would be absolutely no walk-over.
 
The Real Problem is what would a Obama, or Edwards, or Clinton do if they were in the White House? Bill Clinton made cooperation with the communists a center piece of his adminstration's foriegn policy. He gave them the launch technologies enabling them to hit our continental states, he also gave them our vast library of our Legacy Codes. Data collected over hundreds of nuclear tests. He went so far with this insanity as to engineer ways for the PLA to give him cash for his 1996 re-election bid. To put it mildly, he is in their pocket. I remain convinced that Hillary will continue his policies to the detriment of Taiwan and the Pacific Rim in general. With Hillary a wink and a nod could damn Taiwan to a vicious war.
 
Elections Matter.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT