PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles

SamuraiBlue said:

Again ignorance talks. The Space shuttle being able to communicate was due to it's sheer size and shape where the vertical tail was long enough and the re-entry surface was large enough so that the top of the vertical tail would be far enough away where the ionized air was able to dissipate providing a pocket for the antenna.

That can't happen for a re-entry module of a missile since it is coned shape with the pointy side facing down making the entire cone as the re-entry surface in where the ionized air would engulf the entire module.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

Which nobody was able to come up with an compelling argument based on science to actually prove it is possible ending to the usual childish logic of "It is so because I say so", something like what you are doing right now.

Click to expand...

Iron Man said:

This is just you talking. Do you actually have ANY evidence to show that the DF-21D warhead cannot use the same strategy to communicate with a satellite network other than your own personal opinion??? Yeah I didn't think so.

Click to expand...

Hendrik_2000 said:

The idea is not mine It come from the 2006 Conference on "piercing the plasma"
Defeating blackout is not simple for sure But it is not impossible . Various scheme has been considered and they even have conference in 2006.

Sofar they can live with it but as the hypersonic vehicle come into being. They will solve the problem. The Chinese has no alternative but to solve the blackout Or their system will not function.

Here is the quote from Scientific America a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A variation of electrophilic injection might be a strong contender, however, using a heat shield made of an ablative material that vaporizes parts of itself and deionizes the plasma. “In terms of an engineering solution, that seems like the simplest,” Jones says. Meanwhile Lewis considers himself “a stone agnostic. We’ve got a number of avenues to explore, and I think we’re still at the point where all those avenues should be on the table.” Jones has noted that a combination of techniques most likely will be required to meet all anticipated applications.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

Although upside down, if the Apollo and other capsule type re-entry module experiences communication black outs then all missile re-entry module will as well.

Click to expand...

Iron Man said:

Again, you're just talking. Show me some simulation of a missile body with an impenetrable plasma shield on the back end and I'll believe you. Until then, thanks for your opinion; we've all got one.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

I believe it's the other way around where you show us scientific evidence or technological mechanism that can beat ionization from happening. Until then you are just mumbling childish fantasy claiming "It works because I say so".
Sorry but nature disagrees with you.

Click to expand...

Iron Man said:

I demonstrated a known, working system for communicating with spacecraft reentering the atmosphere through an ionizing plasma shield. YOU were the one who said this would not work because of shape or size or whatever, so it is up to YOU to demonstrate why this is so.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

And I provided the mechanism why it worked on the space shuttle and also the reason why it doesn't work on other capsule type re-entry module. I haven't heard of a single capsule type re-entry module that had not experienced communication black out, have you if so tell us which one.

Click to expand...

Iron Man said:

You didn't provide any "mechanism" other than what came out of your own mouth. Actually providing a mechanism would be a link to an article where they specifically tested a MARV and showed that the plasma shield covered the entire warhead, or at least enough of it to render communication with it impossible. Your mouth does not equal authority. Please provide a link with actual authority.

Click to expand...