055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
now noticed the tweet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

·
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Le compte Weibo 人民海军 de la marine chinoise confirme l’existence du missile de croisière d’attaque au sol sur le destroyer Type 055. Ce missile devrait être une variante de YJ-18.
Translated from French by
The Chinese navy's Weibo 人民 海军 account confirms the existence of the ground attack cruise missile on the destroyer Type 055. This missile should be a variant of YJ-18.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
S

SpicySichuan

Senior Member
Registered Member
Jura said:
now noticed the tweet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

·
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Le compte Weibo 人民海军 de la marine chinoise confirme l’existence du missile de croisière d’attaque au sol sur le destroyer Type 055. Ce missile devrait être une variante de YJ-18.
Translated from French by
The Chinese navy's Weibo 人民 海军 account confirms the existence of the ground attack cruise missile on the destroyer Type 055. This missile should be a variant of YJ-18.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Well 052Ds could also carry LACMs.
 
R

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
kurutoga said:
SSN yes. But China's goals do not ask for more than 4-6 SSBNs. More than that would be a waste of resources. It's no longer an ideology war. China has no ambition to attack the US.
Click to expand...

If China and the US were to fully decouple and become rivals, the side that has the ability to deliver a killing blow will have a sustained advantage in future dealings compared to the side that lack the ability to deal a killing blow.
 
R

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Dante80 said:
Irregardless of type, Chinas' NFU as well as its overall strategic posture (see the minimum deterrent posture in their own white papers) strongly suggests a modest nuclear arsenal. Now, and in the future. You are not going to see the thousands of weapons the US or/and USSR/Russia maintained.You are going to see though a very modern, diverse and high capability nuclear triad from them.

In accordance to the above, this also hints towards a modest - yet both efficient and powerful - SSBN fleet. You don't need more, since your actual posture is a deterrent retaliatory force for
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
targets (as per PRC doctrine).

Sorry for going off-topic.
Click to expand...


Minimum deterrence works when you are a second rate player and the two superpowers have their hands full staring down eachother’s maximum deterrence. Minimum deterrence is of no security assurance when you are the other superpower, and the first superpower has a maximum deterrence and can conceivably accept the damage of a limited retaliation in order to deliver a killing blow that would leave it the only one standing.
 
N

no_name

Colonel
You only need about 10% civilian casualties to effect a governmental collapse, and 20% for societal collapse.

What's the difference with completely wiping out a city vs destroying 70% of it. That city is not going to be functioning, period.

If you mean wiping out everyone, there is no such thing as a killing blow to a country like China even for the stockpile number that the US has.

 
Last edited:
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
I was writing
"The thousands of nuclear warheads in Russia and US is more than enough to destroy lives on Earth more than hundreds time over, even if more than 50% of missiles are intercepted, the dirty airborne radiation will cover the atmosphere of our planet......."

then I realised this is off topic!!!
 
by78

by78

General
Dalian update.

49276766351_d07d102386_k.jpg

49276769411_0db91a4ad7_k.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top