The DF-21D exists. I grant that. But the PRC has made a decision to deploy it as is, and IMHO that is a political decision with a motivation to accomplish certain things with it...which they are succeeding with to a certain extent.its indeed getting old, i could say US has railgun and laser weapon deployed to counter the missile, since we all know US research on it, and has these capability.
sure lack of evidence does not mean it doesn't exist, but any professional know, to prove something you need sufficient evidence. heck ill say alien exist too, and my evidence is new mexico 1947, the government just cover up and mathmatically the probability of intelligent life within milkway is pretty highs. There, there is my evidence.
I am sure they are still testing it and developing it, no doubt. But until it performs a live-fire, full-up test and starts hitting moving ships at sea, it will remain an unproven theory. No need for folks to get upset over this. It's just common sense. Easy to understand without complicated and protratced explanations why it has not been done. Also no need at this point to get into advanced testing with multiple missiles, or multiple rentry vehciles. A single warhead would suffice. It will show that they can acquire, shoot, re-acquire, and hit a vessel manuevering at sea. It will also show that their C4ISTAR is in place, working, and capable of managing all of that.
You worry about all of the ECM, all of the defenses rising to meet the weapon after that...in short, all of the more complicated issues...in follow on tests after you prove numerous times that you can actually do what you are proposing. This is not a complicated principle...it is very standard procedure for any complicated system, and particularly for complicated, very expensive military systems.
At this point, it is clear to me, that the PRC feels the need to not only continue developing their proposed system, but to take political action to try and use a very common Sun Tsu technique to gain ground against the potential adversary by convincing them not to employ what the weapon is designed to attack. Nothing uncommon or complicated about that either.
BTW, for the sake of comparison. the US Navy perfomed another open successful intercept of an incoming ballistic missile with the AEGIS BMD system last week, May 15, 2013. Out in the open, full-up, live-fire test which any nation with the capability could see, measure, and understand...and I am sure that every nation that could, both ally and potential adversary, did.
US Navy said:May 15th, 2013. An SM-3 Block 1B misisle successfully intercepted a incoming ballistic missile that had been launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands in Kauai, Hawaii. The AEGIS cruiser, the USS Lake Erie, CG-70, detected and tracked the target with its on board AN/SPY-1 radar and successfully inctercepted and destroyed the incoming missile.
Those successful tests keep piling up, and no white paper, no early test to hit a target on the ground, no amount of ratioanlization will substitutie for that type of testing, whatever else may be said of it. In effect the US has proven the theory numerous times, and itself is continuing to improve the system against more and more difficult systems by continuing to test it in this way.
One day, as soon as they are ready to perform such a test, we will see the same from the PRC for the DF-21D.
Anyhow, for my part, enough said.
With all of this said about the ballistic missile/anti-air threat, I still firmly believe that the most vulnerable area that a Carrier Strike Group has, for any nation, is the sub-surface threat. Either from very fast, long range heavy torpedoes, or from mulitple smaller ones launched from inside the defensive zone by a sub that was able to get past the DDG/FFG escorts, helos, and defending nuclear attack subs. Particulalry if a heavy, supercavitating system is developed and successfully deployed.
The best defense against any of that...after finding and sinking the sub before it can shoot...is to emply systems designed to disrupt the oncoming torpedoe/weapon, either electronically, acoustically, or with physical intercepts using explosive devices detonated in close proximity in front of the oncoming weapon.
Last edited: