Anti-ship Ballistic Missile

[zoolander]

Most of what China has accomplished in the development of its anti-ship missile -capabilities parallels that of Europe, the US and elsewhere. But one element of China's ship-killing strategy stands out as a remarkable application of technology, and an unprecedented threat.

In Chinese terms, this is a Shashaojian - the assassin's mace - a 'silver bullet' weapon that would, literally, drop from the clear blue sky.

A 2004 report by the US Office of Naval Intelligence made it plain that China was developing the capability to use its DF-21 tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs) against tar¬gets at sea. The DF-21 carries a single warhead of about 500/600 kg over a distance of 1,500 km to 2,000 km, or more.

Designed as a nuclear delivery system, the DF-21 can also be fitted with a conventional payload. If made to work, such a weapon would be a 'carrier killer' without equal.

how the hell would this work?

 

[Big-E]

how the hell would this work?

The TBM must have good telemetry before launch... you can't just throw one of these low orbit craft in a general direction and expect to get even close to a re-adjusted target. The problem is the CSG is moving. The rentry must be right over the top of the expected course of the fleet. A payload coming in at Mach 10 has little manuever room. I imagine it wil see the deck of the carrier and aim for it. That much KE with a large warhead will blow a CVN to pieces. We better hurry up and deploy those ABM lasers or we're toast.

 

[zoolander]

I got this article from jane's

does anyone have the whole article.

please post it

 

[adroth]

Didn't the Soviets have something similar?

 

[Big-E]

I got this article from jane's

does anyone have the whole article.

please post it

I'm not going to lose my $1100 subscription to post the rest of that article ... you crazy. :lam

 

[adroth]

I'm not going to lose my $1100 subscription to post the rest of that article ... you crazy. :lam

How about a summary?

 

[JBodnar39]

Most of what China has accomplished in the development of its anti-ship missile -capabilities parallels that of Europe, the US and elsewhere. But one element of China's ship-killing strategy stands out as a remarkable application of technology, and an unprecedented threat.

In Chinese terms, this is a Shashaojian - the assassin's mace - a 'silver bullet' weapon that would, literally, drop from the clear blue sky.

A 2004 report by the US Office of Naval Intelligence made it plain that China was developing the capability to use its DF-21 tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs) against tar¬gets at sea. The DF-21 carries a single warhead of about 500/600 kg over a distance of 1,500 km to 2,000 km, or more.

Designed as a nuclear delivery system, the DF-21 can also be fitted with a conventional payload. If made to work, such a weapon would be a 'carrier killer' without equal.

how the hell would this work?

China's development in antiship missle capabilty is NOT parallel to that of the west. China's own indigenous SSM's are crude copies of earlier French an dSoviet models. That said, China does not have the technology (nor will it for many many years to come) to give its DF-21 a CEP of better than a few hundred meters. "How the hell would this work" you ask - it wouldn't work.

 

[Schumacher]

China's development in antiship missle capabilty is NOT parallel to that of the west. China's own indigenous SSM's are crude copies of earlier French an dSoviet models. That said, China does not have the technology (nor will it for many many years to come) to give its DF-21 a CEP of better than a few hundred meters. "How the hell would this work" you ask - it wouldn't work.

How feasible would it be to fill the BM warhead with bomblets like cluster bombs ?

 

[zoolander]

This is what i would think up. You know how ballistic missiles can carry multiple reentry vericles. Replace those with tv-guided or infra-red guilded anti-ship missiles and u have a super long range detergence against ships.

Is it really 1100 dollars a year! That seems a bit much....

 

[Big-E]

Is it really 1100 dollars a year! That seems a bit much....

Jane's isn't geared towards the hobbyist... it is valuable industry information that is used to make real business decisions. They go to alot of work to acquire their information.

 

[tphuang]

China's development in antiship missle capabilty is NOT parallel to that of the west. China's own indigenous SSM's are crude copies of earlier French an dSoviet models. That said, China does not have the technology (nor will it for many many years to come) to give its DF-21 a CEP of better than a few hundred meters. "How the hell would this work" you ask - it wouldn't work.

I would beg to differ with YJ-83 and YJ-62. They both use some kind of frequency hopping seeker that seem to be more advanced than what's on the Russian missiles that China got. Notice how China never bought any Russian AshM to equip on its indigenous battleships? And C-802 series is also probably one of China's major success stories in the export market.

 

[Big-E]

I would submit that the lack of supersonic cruise missiles means the US is lagging behind in development.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I would submit that the lack of supersonic cruise missiles means the US is lagging behind in development.

Thats valid only if supersonics are seen as a critical "own" requirement.

FWIW, IMHO supersonic cruise missiles have been seriously overhyped. The russians were the masters at supersonic anti-shipping (mach 3 to mach 6), and at no stage did their capability encourage US or NATO to change their own development models.

Current development is not even remotely considering supersonics - they've been bypassed already.

 

[Big-E]

Thats valid only if supersonics are seen as a critical "own" requirement.

FWIW, IMHO supersonic cruise missiles have been seriously overhyped. The russians were the masters at supersonic anti-shipping (mach 3 to mach 6), and at no stage did their capability encourage US or NATO to change their own development models.

Current development is not even remotely considering supersonics - they've been bypassed already.

They have been bypassed due to the adversaries inability to stop current systems. Russian SAMs have been making leaps and bounds over the last decade and these technologies are migrating their way to our adversaries. The need to lessen ToT for LACMs is critical in GWOT. The plan to make SLBMs conventional should be evidence enough for this.

I'm not generally one to argue with dogma but I see a need for it... there is no reason not to have it if it increases capabilty, which it does. Leave the nuclear arsenal out of it and give the surface fleet on station the tools it needs.

 

[swerve]

This is what i would think up. You know how ballistic missiles can carry multiple reentry vericles. Replace those with tv-guided or infra-red guilded anti-ship missiles and u have a super long range detergence against ships.

IR-guided might have a problem with the heating of the re-entry vehicle.

 

[Big-E]

IR-guided might have a problem with the heating of the re-entry vehicle.

IR MRV... nfloorl:

 

[dioditto]

He probably didn't meant "IR" as in "Infrared Recognition", but instead, "Image Recognition". IMHO, the advent of advanced image processing technologies, image recognition couple with autonomous laser targeting *could* work. The israelis are already utilising this technology on their latest AA missile. I think this tech is also used in the Javelin Anti-Armour Missile.


Ofcourse, for image-recognition missile to work, it has to SEE THE TARGET FIRST. If it's put on a ballistic missile flying from 2000km away, I don't know... how do you see the target from that far?

 

[Das Kardinal]

I see it like this : just as with a conventional AshM, a platform has to transmit the location/speed/heading of the target. Initial guidance for the missile is inertial, to plot reentry over the spot where the target should be. Terminal guidance would be imaging radar. Shouldn't be very hard to spot a big flattop in the middle of the ocean... And I wonder how stealth designs would fare with that aspect. As long as the initial targeting was accurate, it should make for a very nice and big boom.
Of course, theory's easy !

 

[Big-E]

I see it like this : just as with a conventional AshM, a platform has to transmit the location/speed/heading of the target. Initial guidance for the missile is inertial, to plot reentry over the spot where the target should be. Terminal guidance would be imaging radar. Shouldn't be very hard to spot a big flattop in the middle of the ocean... And I wonder how stealth designs would fare with that aspect. As long as the initial targeting was accurate, it should make for a very nice and big boom.
Of course, theory's easy !

Is it so easy? What kind of sensors is this warhead going to have that it can see out of? You can't install optics thru the heat shield and expect them to survive. Rentry will make the warhead so hot she would be blind. Unless the targeting system knows EXACTLY where the target will be via GPS coordinates how will it know where to go?

 

[Totoro]

Shooting at a target without tracking it is an act of desperation anyway. It shouldn't be done. That being said, if the target is tracked, precise enough coordinates could be sent to the missile so little terminal guidance is needed. After slowing down due to thicker air, tip of the heat shield could detach itself and then missile's own seeker could help from the altitude of 10 km or so. Seeing how it is a moving target, bomblets seem like a better idea, spreading small scale destruction over a wide area, especially with multiple missiles launched. Damaging sensors on the ship would be quite enough.