Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

[Equation]

Be skeptical all you want.

The ground based system you refer to here is not the AEGIS system. The ground based system is meant to hit RVs from ICBMs, not from intermediate range missiles like the DF-21D. The ground based system does have a 50% hit record...so they build and shoot twice as many interceptors until they prove they can sustain higher rates.

Hitting with the 2nd or even 3rd or 4th shot is one hell of a lot cheaper than taking a hit from an incoming nuclear warhead. But that ground based system is a completely different system than AEGIS...and I believe you know that.

The AEGIS system does have the hit record I indicated against ballistic missiles.

The DF-21D has a zero percent hit record against what it is supposed to hit.

Sorry, but those are the simple facts. Sure the AEGIS system can be improved, that is the whole purpose of the tests. After such tests you know what you have, and can work on making the improvements. If it never had a full up, live fire test at all (like a certain other system) against what it is actually meant to work against in real life...then it can never be truly improved against increasing sophistication and capable defenses.

But...hehehe...we have said all of this before, ad-nausium. So I will just step aside again.

I don't know, not according to this guy's confidence.

A Lockheed official today gave a predictably cryptic answer to questions regarding the the ability of the defense giant’s Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system to protect against China’s DF-21D carrier killer missiles.
“We’re constantly looking at the evolution of our Aegis BMD capability to keep pace with threats,” said Lisa Callahan Lockheed’s vice president in charge of the Aegis program during a Jan. 5 phone call with reporters. “While I can’t talk specifically about the capabilities we have against specific threats…we are definitely working to evolve our system to keep pace with the threats as they evolve.”

Callahan refused to comment when pressed on whether the current Aegis BMD system can protect against the DF-21D.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Equation]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

The Americans show the Chinese, who wears the pants

And the Chinese shows who is pooping in their pants with their DF-21D ASBM.

 

[jacksprat]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

And the Chinese shows who is pooping in their pants with their DF-21D ASBM.

Has the DF-21 ever hit or been tested on a moving target?

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

Has the DF-21 ever hit or been tested on a moving target?

Thankfully (for China), no it hasn't. At least I hope it hasn't. Last thing 2nd Arty wants is for US radar to spot a DF-21D's flight profile.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

Thankfully (for China), no it hasn't. At least I hope it hasn't. Last thing 2nd Arty wants is for US radar to spot a DF-21D's flight profile.

You think that the US doesnt monitor all chinese ballistic launches ? surveillance satellites have radars.

 

[Blackstone]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

And the Chinese shows who is pooping in their pants with their DF-21D ASBM.

Has the DF-21D hit a moving ship at sea yet?

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme..News & Views

You think that the US doesnt monitor all chinese ballistic launches ? surveillance satellites have radars.

Of course they do.

But there's a difference between conducting a few vital flight tests to validate particular sequences in an AShBM's flight profile and revealing that to a competitor, and another thing entirely to conduct a full scale flight test against a moving target at sea at full range.

Further, the message that a full test sends is very different. Such a test will probably make world headlines and make the US seriously consider more advanced counter AShBM technologies than what they have, in turn making the AShBM a potentially less effective weapon and reducing its deterrence potential.


The PLA are playing it right at the moment, keeping their cards close.

 

[Preux]

Could we stop this tit-for-tat phallus-waving about who has the baddest toys and get back to the carrier?

It was just one remark about a trust-building gesture, there is no need to go to the rails on it.

 

[Equation]

Has the DF-21D hit a moving ship at sea yet?

Has the DF-21 ever hit or been tested on a moving target?

That's because NO ONE would want to volunteer to become the first victim. And the Pentagon are smart enough to know that. If the DF-21D wasn't a success it wouldn't be deployed in the first place.

 

[Jeff Head]

That's because NO ONE would want to volunteer to become the first victim. And the Pentagon are smart enough to know that. If the DF-21D wasn't a success it wouldn't be deployed in the first place.

Hehehe...come on my friend. A live fire test is not against a ship full of people, not even against us Americans.

It is against a target at sea, that is underway. Just like the US does when it tests its missiles, lasers, etc.

Think of Sun Tsu. What better way to give an enemy pause, and deny access to a critical area by not having to fire a shot, than to get your adversary to think you have something that you have never tested, but which they cannot afford to ignore.

Of course they would deploy it if they felt that could reap such a reward. The Soviets did it all the time.

But, if it has never been tested, there is a huge chance it will not work, and can be defeated. It's just that unless something extremely critical hangs in the balance, you will think twice before committing a 8-10 billion dollar carrier, it's air wing, and 5,000 people on it.

And that, my friend, is the point.