China tests new land-attack cruise missile
- Thread starter The Watcher
- Start date
berrry wrote
i dont think china would do anything silly until 2008 beijing olympics.thats their showcase event.they wouldnt want to ruin it with sanctions and boycotts.they are still reeling from 1989 tianenmen square sanctions and possibly wouldnt risk another one in near future.olympics is a prestige event as far as china is concerned,which is specifically aimed to showcase china as a normal acceptable nation in the international stage.its part of the chinese ambitions....
You got admit though guys
parts of that scenario could be possible. LETS HOPE NOT.
( well the falklands brings no money to the uk mainland, instead it costs us more in taxes, the Argentinians can have it).
Regarding China.... well congrats to our chinese friends for building the worlds most expensive and best race track. Formula one Beijing. l dont think the chinese and formula one followers wanna see the americans bomb the hell out of it assuming it to be a missile launch pad or runnaway so the taiwan invasion must be put on a hold.
Now regarding the original topic my cruise missile loving friends, the new chinese missiles have somewhat equivalent stats to the tomahawk, 10m accuracy and its range.
l have a sneaky susspicion that the 20 or so unexploded tomahawks that landed in pakistan while uncle sam attacked afghanistan were put to good use by the chinese and pakistanis. At the same time russia may have also helped. Only time will tell.
parts of that scenario could be possible. LETS HOPE NOT.
( well the falklands brings no money to the uk mainland, instead it costs us more in taxes, the Argentinians can have it).
Regarding China.... well congrats to our chinese friends for building the worlds most expensive and best race track. Formula one Beijing. l dont think the chinese and formula one followers wanna see the americans bomb the hell out of it assuming it to be a missile launch pad or runnaway so the taiwan invasion must be put on a hold.
Now regarding the original topic my cruise missile loving friends, the new chinese missiles have somewhat equivalent stats to the tomahawk, 10m accuracy and its range.
l have a sneaky susspicion that the 20 or so unexploded tomahawks that landed in pakistan while uncle sam attacked afghanistan were put to good use by the chinese and pakistanis. At the same time russia may have also helped. Only time will tell.
The Americans know this, but that'll alter nothing.adsH said:
In my opinion, if the PRC was serious (i.e Start attacking ROC military targets), then it mean an invasion will be on its way, and PLAN submarines would probably already be in the Pacific waiting for the US battle group. The Americans knows it and I'll doubt they would sent troops to help defend Taiwan, as that'll automatically mean a broken economy for a start, and also thousands of American lives at risk (US troops in Korea and Japan IF they're seemed to be mobilised, and also the crew in the carrier battle group as the ambushing subarmines would start to attack as soon as they track the target.).
As for muslim282, you're story sounds logical, but the possibility in my opinon is quite low.
Even it true, I'm alright with it, as that'll let me know my motherland's truth military strength (satisfy my enthusiasm) while I won't be in any of the battlefields anyway!
: Of course they won't do it unless its absolutely imminent.
Really then, how about those Britsh troops F--K OFF?! You thieves.
I guess that's probably the case.
Btw, good use? You mean by the chicks? At night? Ain't your "Tomahawk" big enough to satisfy her? :? LOL
Well My Friend blue berry,
Sorry Berry280
You would like to see the strength of your mother country. What country may that be. You said you won,t take part yourself. Well that seems the norm, the people who claim to be great patriots and advocate war are never found on the battlefields. lnstead the true patriots....the commoners from all walks of life are usually their to defend their nations. Wether they may be pakistanis, indians or chinese. The "talkers" usually live out their fantasies on video games and rambo films.
Regarding the Falklands, well you ever heard the meaning of pride. The falklands is pride and has no other value. Just ask india and pakistan about kashmir. l,m not an arden supporter of the uk, my origins lie some where else, but l do like my home though l don,t like their policies, well my friend thats democracy.
Right.....lets talk about this cruise missile.
Are we soon looking at a time when we just sit either sides of the borders and launch missiles at each other with pin point accuracy or will we still need air forces to carry out key target bombings. The future looks well....."all cruise missiley".
p.s berry l,m not trying to offend you but talk from experience.
Sorry Berry280
You would like to see the strength of your mother country. What country may that be. You said you won,t take part yourself. Well that seems the norm, the people who claim to be great patriots and advocate war are never found on the battlefields. lnstead the true patriots....the commoners from all walks of life are usually their to defend their nations. Wether they may be pakistanis, indians or chinese. The "talkers" usually live out their fantasies on video games and rambo films.
Regarding the Falklands, well you ever heard the meaning of pride. The falklands is pride and has no other value. Just ask india and pakistan about kashmir. l,m not an arden supporter of the uk, my origins lie some where else, but l do like my home though l don,t like their policies, well my friend thats democracy.
Right.....lets talk about this cruise missile.
Are we soon looking at a time when we just sit either sides of the borders and launch missiles at each other with pin point accuracy or will we still need air forces to carry out key target bombings. The future looks well....."all cruise missiley".
p.s berry l,m not trying to offend you but talk from experience.
China.muslim282 said:
Well I'm not really a patriot, as I've really not done much for my motherland at all (besides buying "made in china" stuff).
Invaders is all I see.
Whatever.
In case you don't know, from American's experience, their Tomahawk has a very high unsuccess rate. Ranging from systems failure to human error.
In the Gulf War I, criuse missile has made up only about 10% of the total successful strategic strikes.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Where are you getting your info from Berry? Unqualified statements mean very little. Though the Tomahawk has an excellent record in combat, It does only make up a very small ratio of all the airstrikes actually conducted during Desert Storm.
For example on the FAS website, they go into great detail of the effectiveness of most weapon types during Desert Storm. There were 307 Tomahawk's fired during that campaign of which 282 were fired successfully. 232 were recorded as "successful" having inflicted some form of damage on their targets, which is about 82% effective. Since the Block 111 version of the Tomahawk was released success rates have exceeded 90%...
For example on the FAS website, they go into great detail of the effectiveness of most weapon types during Desert Storm. There were 307 Tomahawk's fired during that campaign of which 282 were fired successfully. 232 were recorded as "successful" having inflicted some form of damage on their targets, which is about 82% effective. Since the Block 111 version of the Tomahawk was released success rates have exceeded 90%...
BLUE BERRY... Sorry berry280
The Stats you give are accurate in respect that the total tomahawks used in the gulf war were only about 10% of the attack. But take in to consideration that accurate bombings that were needed and damage recorded was done by stealth fighters and bombers. These stealth planes could bring back damage assessment and hence the yanks could decide what had been destroyed and what remained behind. The cruise missile however gave no indication of damage assessment and also wether they had hit successfully.
For this reason they were used in the initial attack with stealth fighters to take out "KEY" installations.
The other reson why they were used in lower numbers was their very high price per unit.
Neo24Neo.. it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack. But not quite the rate at which blueberry thinks. l,m sure the current model of tomahawks would have overcome that.
The Stats you give are accurate in respect that the total tomahawks used in the gulf war were only about 10% of the attack. But take in to consideration that accurate bombings that were needed and damage recorded was done by stealth fighters and bombers. These stealth planes could bring back damage assessment and hence the yanks could decide what had been destroyed and what remained behind. The cruise missile however gave no indication of damage assessment and also wether they had hit successfully.
For this reason they were used in the initial attack with stealth fighters to take out "KEY" installations.
The other reson why they were used in lower numbers was their very high price per unit.
Neo24Neo.. it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack. But not quite the rate at which blueberry thinks. l,m sure the current model of tomahawks would have overcome that.
when they fire 300 or 400 missiles at once,a success rate of close to 90% is brilliant.as aussie digger stated of the 307 missiles fired during desert storm only 20 of them didnt fire.of the 20 most had minor glitches which were easily repaired.how many other weapon systems can equal that kind of operational reliability?
"could you provide some stats on this.if they are really that poor why would the americans use them?remember tomahawk strikes at osama bin laden,during the time of clinton administration.they missed osama with respect to time,not by space."
It has its advantages. Its faster than bombers and has no risk in human lives, has a better CEP and longer range than artilleries.
"For example on the FAS website, they go into great detail of the effectiveness of most weapon types during Desert Storm. There were 307 Tomahawk's fired during that campaign of which 282 were fired successfully. 232 were recorded as "successful" having inflicted some form of damage on their targets, which is about 82% effective. Since the Block 111 version of the Tomahawk was released success rates have exceeded 90%..."
What I read was something like what muslim282 said- "it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack."
"BLUE BERRY... Sorry berry280"
Now I now know that not only "THIS" muslim 282 can't read properly, looks like "THIS" muslim 282 can't count as well.
I have recieve high level of education, so instead of being racist like how others might, I'll only say the truth. Looks like this guy's mind simply can get out of his pre-puberty stage and continues his name calling like primary students.
"The Stats you give are accurate in respect that the total tomahawks used in the gulf war were only about 10% of the attack. But take in to consideration that accurate bombings that were needed and damage recorded was done by stealth fighters and bombers. These stealth planes could bring back damage assessment and hence the yanks could decide what had been destroyed and what remained behind. The cruise missile however gave no indication of damage assessment and also wether they had hit successfully.
For this reason they were used in the initial attack with stealth fighters to take out "KEY" installations.
The other reson why they were used in lower numbers was their very high price per unit.
Neo24Neo.. it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack. But not quite the rate at which blueberry thinks. l,m sure the current model of tomahawks would have overcome that."
Something like that.
"when they fire 300 or 400 missiles at once,a success rate of close to 90% is brilliant.as aussie digger stated of the 307 missiles fired during desert storm only 20 of them didnt fire.of the 20 most had minor glitches which were easily repaired.how many other weapon systems can equal that kind of operational reliability?"
Not much that we know of, as America is the only country to invade like going shopping in the past decades who also possess cruise missiles.
It has its advantages. Its faster than bombers and has no risk in human lives, has a better CEP and longer range than artilleries.
"For example on the FAS website, they go into great detail of the effectiveness of most weapon types during Desert Storm. There were 307 Tomahawk's fired during that campaign of which 282 were fired successfully. 232 were recorded as "successful" having inflicted some form of damage on their targets, which is about 82% effective. Since the Block 111 version of the Tomahawk was released success rates have exceeded 90%..."
What I read was something like what muslim282 said- "it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack."
"BLUE BERRY... Sorry berry280"
Now I now know that not only "THIS" muslim 282 can't read properly, looks like "THIS" muslim 282 can't count as well.
I have recieve high level of education, so instead of being racist like how others might, I'll only say the truth. Looks like this guy's mind simply can get out of his pre-puberty stage and continues his name calling like primary students.
"The Stats you give are accurate in respect that the total tomahawks used in the gulf war were only about 10% of the attack. But take in to consideration that accurate bombings that were needed and damage recorded was done by stealth fighters and bombers. These stealth planes could bring back damage assessment and hence the yanks could decide what had been destroyed and what remained behind. The cruise missile however gave no indication of damage assessment and also wether they had hit successfully.
For this reason they were used in the initial attack with stealth fighters to take out "KEY" installations.
The other reson why they were used in lower numbers was their very high price per unit.
Neo24Neo.. it is known that the tomahawk, though highly accurate did have electronic problems and hence 1 in 10 would usually fail in the attack. But not quite the rate at which blueberry thinks. l,m sure the current model of tomahawks would have overcome that."
Something like that.
"when they fire 300 or 400 missiles at once,a success rate of close to 90% is brilliant.as aussie digger stated of the 307 missiles fired during desert storm only 20 of them didnt fire.of the 20 most had minor glitches which were easily repaired.how many other weapon systems can equal that kind of operational reliability?"
Not much that we know of, as America is the only country to invade like going shopping in the past decades who also possess cruise missiles.
lets get back to china's cruise missiles rather than all this dumb argument over tomahawks and their accuracy and efficiency.
So! i think that the chinese developed from the technology of tomahawk cruise missiles. Remember, when the US fired them at OBL and some fell in Pakistan. Well, many people in this thread probably have concluded that already. So it is obvious that Pakistan will also have a share of the cake....YUM!
Seriously, this will definitely bring about balance in the south east asia, since India, China, and Pakistan (I have a BIG hunch they have it so i'll include them as well) posses these missiles. Damn! makes travelling to these countries all the more dangerous.
So Taiwan better start look up at Big Brother for help to have some form of deterrence against these missiles.
There you go guys... here a recap of what's being discussed so lets continue this discussion and shake each other on this topic only. Those of you that want to discuss tomahawk, look for an existing thread or start a new one! :mad
geez!
So! i think that the chinese developed from the technology of tomahawk cruise missiles. Remember, when the US fired them at OBL and some fell in Pakistan. Well, many people in this thread probably have concluded that already. So it is obvious that Pakistan will also have a share of the cake....YUM!
Seriously, this will definitely bring about balance in the south east asia, since India, China, and Pakistan (I have a BIG hunch they have it so i'll include them as well) posses these missiles. Damn! makes travelling to these countries all the more dangerous.
So Taiwan better start look up at Big Brother for help to have some form of deterrence against these missiles.
There you go guys... here a recap of what's being discussed so lets continue this discussion and shake each other on this topic only. Those of you that want to discuss tomahawk, look for an existing thread or start a new one! :mad
geez!
Berry580
Please my friend don,t get upset, l didn,t mean to upset or insult you and no way am l a racist. My sincere appology.
Now regarding the tomahawk.... Well it had a certain aura and fear factor around it as it was one of the first to be used and appeared in conflicts and on news headlines.
l wander how it will size up compared to all the latest stuff appearing, both air launched and ground launched missiles.
Bramos, Black Shaheen, Scalp, Penertrator, and many others.
We might not need armies soon, just launch 20,000 missiles down your enemies street.
Please my friend don,t get upset, l didn,t mean to upset or insult you and no way am l a racist. My sincere appology.
Now regarding the tomahawk.... Well it had a certain aura and fear factor around it as it was one of the first to be used and appeared in conflicts and on news headlines.
l wander how it will size up compared to all the latest stuff appearing, both air launched and ground launched missiles.
Bramos, Black Shaheen, Scalp, Penertrator, and many others.
We might not need armies soon, just launch 20,000 missiles down your enemies street.
Oh yeah
one other thing l,m very happy at the idea of china heading towards being a global power, as the yanks seem to believe that they are invincible.
lts quite evident on how good their foreign policy is around the world. At least with the chinese you have a trustworthy nation that dosen,t believe in imposing its values on the entire world.
So a good round of applause for the chinese scientists, engineers and technicians who developed the cruise missile. And please hand some over ASAP to pakistan.
one other thing l,m very happy at the idea of china heading towards being a global power, as the yanks seem to believe that they are invincible.
lts quite evident on how good their foreign policy is around the world. At least with the chinese you have a trustworthy nation that dosen,t believe in imposing its values on the entire world.
So a good round of applause for the chinese scientists, engineers and technicians who developed the cruise missile. And please hand some over ASAP to pakistan.
muslim282, how can you say that the chinese don't impose their values around the world? Even though they might be pakistan's ally and don't really demand much from them the fact is that they are communists. Communists will always impose their values if they came into power. Of course i'm not defending the US of their policy, they ruined it themselves. I rememer there was a time when people in the middle east used to praise the americans and now the same people hate them. what a shame!!
Now i understand and believe that these missiles will be handed (or might have already been handed over) to pakistan. I also believe that pakistani engineers and scientists may also have contributed to this missile technology.
So how many missiles will china make and how many more tests are to follow?
Now i understand and believe that these missiles will be handed (or might have already been handed over) to pakistan. I also believe that pakistani engineers and scientists may also have contributed to this missile technology.
So how many missiles will china make and how many more tests are to follow?
Have you seen how chinese economy worked in recent years? China is about as much a communist country as Luxembourg. Yeah they are a authoritarian country, no doubt about that, but they left the ideologically communistic way quite some time ago. And China certainly showed no sign of imposing its ideas on the rest of the world or do you got a good example except the simple theory that all communists simply have to do so? The only areas China is looking on are the very same ones where it has done so for the last thousand. years.
Just because chinese economy is booming so did the soviet union's. the USSR became a super power. So this means that communism does work. but unfortunately, the USSR broke up because the way it use to impose its laws on its own citizens as well as those it used to conquer.turin said:
I'm not against china or anything like that but they have a very similar tendency. China also has internal unrest by some people.....can't remember that groups name can some one recall that group's name....Anyway its in every nation this problem. But countries like US can exploit these weaknesses and break china as well. I mean come on everyone wants freedom of some sort.
True that china is prospering and hasn't showed any signs of imposing ideas on the world. I regard that as a smart move because their beomcing and stronger and keeping a low profile while technologically advancing. So when they do come on power (I hope they do 'cause the US needs a rival) there will be another situation of a Cold War and china will try to impose its values to stay on the top...its natural!
l would agree with neel24neo, that having a single global super power should not be the case. lt simply means we have a one sided military view on world situations. Also if we agree and suck up to the only worlds super power we will be considered friends, if we differ then our economies are affected and possibly destroyed. By having a balance of powers is the only solution, militarily and economically. Regarding Chinas communist past, well then we need to seriously look at what the so called freedom loving democracy's have done over the last 50 years and are still doing, it clearly puts the communists to shame.
l,m not advocating communism, but the west seems to belive their way is the divine way.
Quote: by a so called freedom loving cowboy
"your either with us or against us"
This is what will follow when you only have one world super power.
Either their way or no way.
l,m not advocating communism, but the west seems to belive their way is the divine way.
Quote: by a so called freedom loving cowboy
"your either with us or against us"
This is what will follow when you only have one world super power.
Either their way or no way.
Well they should have missiles with enough range to reach mainland China.
And according a creditable source, some ROC official (defence minister, if memory serves me right) claimed that IF China attacks Taiwan, they'll attack Shang Hai, but the ROC president has yet to confirm this.
Either way, I can tell they're pretty dumb. Why the f--- would you attack Shang Hai if you can attack Beijing? :? In fact, attacking civilians are illegal under international law, so all they can do is attack back China's military bases, not some civilian packed city.
Just Berry is also ok.
Its ok, not point to grudge (you can exclude Geoge W. Bush for me).
I believe all of them are comparable to US's Tomahawk (atleast the Tomahawk may marginally be better), but their operator's competence is more of the concern in my opinion.
That can elimate all of your enemy's main military facilities, but what about civilians? They can turn themselves into combatants and start a guerrila war.
China's booming economy was sustainable, was USSR's?
USSR has NEVER been economically successful, if not, WTF made you think it couldn't keep up with America's technology (lack of funds)
?
I'll work initially, but policies will need to be changed to adapt the environment. If you look more closely, communist countries always start up quick than other governing systems, as it has all the lower class people's support. But as time goes, they'll be lazy as there's no incentive to work so polices will need to be changed to adapt.