SinoDefence Forum

adeptitus

I'm not sure what the unit cost of an air-launched AGM-84 Harpoon is, but Wikipedia lists a generic unit cost at $720,000 USD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_missile

Argentina paid about $250,000 each for their Exocet missiles from France. The unit cost of a Type 42 Destroyer in the British Navy was well in excess of $100 million in 1980's.

Assuming inflation and other factors bumping the unit price per missile to $1 million, a typical Frigate or Destroyer today will cost you several hundred million dollars. Using million dollar missiles to sink a $200 million (i.e. F-22P unit price) frigate is very cost effective.

sino52C

An Arleigh costs about 700 million ( that maybe a bit dated). However, not all million dollar missiles will get through.

It's like using a 30,000 ATGM to kill a million dollar tank.

Totoro

You can't logic like that. It's worth to use ten $1 million missile cause it will sink a $500 ship. Or it's not worth to use 300 million dollars to sink the same ship. If you don't sink a ship think of the potential damage that ship can do to you. It's very hypothetical but also very very high. Sinking a carrier for example isn't just making 5 billion dollars go to waste, just imagine what that one carrier could do if left roam unchecked. Also, it's a huge difference if the enemy has 10 carriers and you sink one and if it has two carriers and you managed to sink one.

Basically, if a battle is worth fighting, in that battle you do anything to win. So if you have the capabilites and have for example hundreds of missiles, of course you will use them if using them can bring you victory. Victory has no clear dollar price. And in today's aegis defended navies it's ludicrous to think you can win without commiting large forces to overwhelm the enemy. Just think of italian navy in ww2, a rather powerful force, which was kept in harbours most of the time because it was deemed to pricy to lose. So what happened? instead of losing it at sea while taking british ships alongside it, some years passed and italy lost its ships while basically parked and not doing anything. Conserving forces without any concrete plan what you're conserving them for, while at the same time you have the opportunity to throw a blow to your enemy is just flawed logic.

MIGleader

cost is a major issue in war now. Us is stupid, sending $500,000 tomahawks to destroy a $50 iraqi com station. china needs ways to make cheap weapons that are effective and can take down more powerful and expensive US equipment. the Us wouldnt stand such losses and would pull out.

bd popeye

Despite what totoro thinks ..cost is a factor. I know . I've talked to some US Naval officers about this. Of course you want to win the battle with minimum losses & cost. That is why the US has develpoed such great defenses. Virtually unbeatable.

There are few if any "cheap effective" weapons[for any country] because your enemey is always in R&D on new ones to counter your cheap ones.

The US is not stupid. That's very insulting. I as an American would never post such dribble about any nation...And cruise missiles are not used against radar sites or com sites. The USN uses AGM-88 HARM Missile against radar. The cost is $284,000 apiece. Not cheap. But they work. Com sites? Just about any missile or guided weapon will do.

As for the US not standing losses and pulling out of a war..What makes you say that??? .

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

tphuang

if US is involved in a war where it doesn't care about, it will be less interested in a prolonged war. Honestly, does US really care about Taiwan? It has to be a lot more preoccupied by Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

bd popeye

I agree. The only thing that really binds the US to Taiwain is a treay signed many years ago. And of course $....

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

FriedRiceNSpice

Couldn't the PRC offer the US a helluva more cash than Taiwan could ever hope to?

bd popeye

I'm sure. But the US see's the PRC as a potiental enemy. Sad but true. And the US would never sell the PRC any arms.

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

Totoro

Of course cost is A factor, i most definitely didn't say it isn't. It all needs to be weighed out, that was the point of my post. To use the example with the harm. so it costs almost 300 000 bucks.

And lets say, for the sake of the argument, that it destroys a radar which somehow costs just 100 000 bucks. It's still a worthy kill cause who knows how many millions of dollars were spared (not to mention human lives) by denying the enemy of info that the said radar could have supplied them with.

Sure, you could've tried to save money and you could've used a 50 000 missile. What if it failed? What if the enemy's defense system is good enough that such a cheap missile just doesn't posses the systems required for overcoming the radar defence? And even if you launch 20 such cheaper missiles not one will get through and destroy it. Then you've wasted a million dollars and still you didnt destroy the radar.

swimmerXC

here's a question that kind of been pondering my mind... if PRC become a democracy (and untie with taiwan) would the US sell arms to them????
or will they still view them as an enemy....?
if they do still view them as an enemy, woundn't that just contradict everything the US did during the Cold War to fight off the commies?

MIGleader

scuds and excocets can get through british and U.s defences, im not saying all ways, but if enough are fired, some will get through. if the Us lost a burke, a dozen planes, and got the carriers badly damaged, what else can you do but pull out.

no offense to popeye, but this is possible. it will be hard to accomplish, but nothing is invincible.

to hell with US and their attitude towards china. The Us knows china is good nation and has alot of democracy, but it see's it as a rival. so it uses the fact china is communist nation and is modernizing as an excuse. it's not working too well though. at least the Us didn't put china in the axis of evil.

vincelee

you think the US is paranoid based on idealogical grounds? It's about POTENTIAL. If the US wants to fvcking spread democracy over the world, it would have invaded Saudi Arabia a long time ago.

IDonT

Ballistic missiles are useless against moving targets.

tphuang

I think you have to realize that scuds have some funny movements and the patriot missiles can't track them properly. That's why so many of them got through the defenses and hit Israel in Gulf War I. I loved how you watch the American general say on tv "see, it destroyed a scud here and here and here". In the mean time, the same scud is still travelling and landed in Tel Aviv.

Being in the software industry that programs these defense system, I personally think missile defense system can only be effective to a certain degree.