PLAN breaking news, pics, & videos

these "ship killers" are bit over stated like the USSR used to say and in the end they realised only way is to build your own navy

you cannot defeat a navy with missiles you need a navy

right now USN has 38 DDG and CG which posses ballistic missile shield or BMD carrying SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 thats around 300 missiles, of which around 12 are latest most advanced Baseline 9 or 10 software which can defeat short, medium and long range missiles in terminal phase

by 2023 USN will have 57 DDG and CG with BMD carrying over 600 missiles and 31 will be Baseline 9 and 10

and the SM-series of interceptors have done many live tests after tests its no joke

But what do navies use to shoot at other navies? Missiles. China definitely wants a serious Navy and is building towards that. Supplementing with different weapons is great. There is no way to simply reason away the effectiveness of asbm for now. It could be 100% effective and each asbm can sink one carrier or it could be 100% ineffective. Anyone saying they know is simply revealing their arrogance.

ougoah said:

But what do navies use to shoot at other navies? Missiles. China definitely wants a serious Navy and is building towards that. Supplementing with different weapons is great. There is no way to simply reason away the effectiveness of asbm for now. It could be 100% effective and each asbm can sink one carrier or it could be 100% ineffective. Anyone saying they know is simply revealing their arrogance.

Click to expand...

I’m sorry but 46 years of Cold War should tell you enough

asif iqbal said:

I’m sorry but 46 years of Cold War should tell you enough

Click to expand...

Why is the past always 100% indicative of the future? Even when the present and future have new and distinct developments? That's like me saying guns are impossible to be effective. Centuries of sword fighting should tell you enough. This sounds like the argument you made before about engineers not being able to develop new ideas because they haven't gone through the entire step by step process. If the world were run by people like you, we would not have progressed beyond muttering at each other unintelligibly. Millions of years of no language existing should tell you enough... everyone can speak in ambiguous riddles.

Either you can quantify and prove why AShBM are ineffective or you can stop being so sure about it. Opinions are okay but you are just so certain for someone who didn't work on this project. Also someone who isn't in the military. Or indeed even a specialist that has some understanding of how any of this works. So since many of these actual minds have developed such a thing, it stands to reason that the entire project is either 1. a scam designed to make the USN worried and force them into spending money and time on negating this threat or spying on it to find out more. This is unlikely because it does absolutely nothing to help China's cause. Or 2. It actually has some merit of working and all the professionals dedicated to these project (who SURELY know much more than you) are not all doing such a thing in vain... refer to point 1.

asif iqbal said:

these "ship killers" are bit over stated like the USSR used to say and in the end they realised only way is to build your own navy

you cannot defeat a navy with missiles you need a navy

right now USN has 38 DDG and CG which posses ballistic missile shield or BMD carrying SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 thats around 300 missiles, of which around 12 are latest most advanced Baseline 9 or 10 software which can defeat short, medium and long range missiles in terminal phase

by 2023 USN will have 57 DDG and CG with BMD carrying over 600 missiles and 31 will be Baseline 9 and 10

and the SM-series of interceptors have done many live tests after tests its no joke

Click to expand...

Also apart from pointing out the obvious flaw in your reasoning (navies shoot "ship killer" missiles at other navies which is essentially what the DF-26 is albeit not the conventional types), you could easily have said one can defeat a navy with an airforce (which will also mostly be shooting missiles these days).

SM series seem pretty decent but they have also never been tested against any serious adversary. I don't want to begin speculating on how effective they will be in intercepting DF-21 and DF-26 in real life. It could be an easy 100% or an epic fail and anywhere in between for all we truly know. For all anyone knows.

now noticed the tweet





3 nouveaux bâtiments de guerre chinois - Destroyer 118 Ürümqi (Type 052D), frégate 598 Rizhao (Type 054A) et ravitailleur 965 Hulunhu (Type 901) - tous entrés en service entre 2017/2018, ont mené un exercice de tirs réels de 3 jours en mer Jaune avec d'autres navires de la PLAN.

Translated from French by
3 new Chinese warships-destroyer 118 Urumqi (type 052D), frigate 598 Rizhao (type 054A) and tanker 965 Hulunhu (Type 901)-all entered into service between 2017/2018, conducted a 3-day real firing exercise in the Yellow Sea with other The PLAN.

inside Yesterday at 9:36 PM

Jura said:

... China’s ship-killer missiles mobilized to Northwest China plateau

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Published: 2019/1/9 16:37:52

Click to expand...

:
"... the DF-26 has a range far-reaching enough to cover the South China Sea."

It can hit targets 4,500 kilometers away, china.com reported, making it capable of striking targets including US naval bases in Guam in the western Pacific."

and now noticed what would be a rather strange unit conversion LOL inside a related story (dated 10 January 2019)
China responds to US Navy’s freedom of navigation operation in SCS

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
"DF-26 ballistic missiles are capable of hitting targets up to 3,400 miles away, using nuclear or conventional warheads."

The goal of the three-day visit to Beijing and Nanjing is to continue a results-oriented, risk reduction focused dialog between the two militaries.

"I am looking forward to this trip," said Richardson. “A routine exchange of views is essential, especially in times of friction, in order to reduce risk and avoid miscalculation. Honest and frank dialogue can improve the relationship in constructive ways, help explore areas where we share common interests, and reduce risk while we work through our differences."

Richardson and Shen met previously at the 2018 International Seapower Symposium, hosted by Richardson in Newport, R.I. and have held three discussions via video teleconference (VTC) with the most recent occurring in December 2018.

This is Richardson's second visit to China as CNO.

Get more information about the Navy from US Navy or .

For more news from Chief of Naval Operations, visit .

I can't vouch for its credibility, but several Chinese financial news outlets are reporting the following:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

每日经济新闻 2019-01-13 17:18:33

每经编辑 张益铭

光启技术1月13日晚公告，近日，客户A与公司全资子公司光启尖端签订《武器装备配套产品订货合同》。合同约定，光启尖端将向客户A提供某超材料舰艇隐身结构产品一批，合同总金额为2040万元。上述合同是公司签订的超材料舰艇隐身结构产品的首个批产合同，意味着公司具备新一代隐身技术的超材料尖端装备不仅在航空装备应用领域逐步实现批产，还在舰艇应用领域取得了突破性进展。

Click to expand...

A quick Google Translation with some minor corrections by hand:

"Guangqi Technology announced on the evening of January 13: Recently, Customer A and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Guangqi Technology entered into a procurement contract for 'stealth metamaterials for shipboard structure (?)', with a total contract amount of 20.4 million yuan. This is the first maritime-related contract for Guangqi's stealth metamaterial products, which means the company's new generation of cutting-edge stealth metamaterials have not only realized mass production in the field of aviation application, but have also achieved the same for shipboard applications."

Click to expand...

Speaking of metamaterials, here are some images of a new metamaterial production base in the city of Shenzhen:

Continued...

The captioning for the last three images states that this production base has fabricated metamaterials capable of various properties, including stealth, fire resistance, and anti-icing.