Once the basic technology for intercepting a ship at sea has been developed, however, it would be a relatively simple matter to install it on a longer-range missile. The DF-31A is also a road-mobile, solid-fuel missile, and has a range of 11,200+ kilometers, so China clearly has the capability to produce a road-mobile, solid-fuel missile of any range up to at least 11,200 kilometers. Three thousand kilometers might be a nice choice, as that would reach all the way out of Guam. Some modifications to the ASBM version’s maneuvering warhead might be required because of the higher reentry speed of a longer-range missile, but such adjustments would probably be relatively minor.
In the current U.S. arsenal of countermeasures, do you feel the U.S. has something that would be able to defend against such a missile? Would the SM-3 aboard Aegis vessels in the Pacific be able to provide a defense without their ever being a full test that U.S. officials could observe or study?
The U.S. arsenal has a variety of potential countermeasures, some of which I probably don’t even know about. The thing to keep in mind is that, in order for China to successfully attack a U.S. navy ship with a ballistic missile, it must first detect the ship, identify it as a U.S. warship of a type that it wishes to attack (e.g., an aircraft carrier), acquire a precise enough measurement of its location that a missile can be launched at it (i.e., a one-hour old satellite photograph is probably useless, as the ship could be 25 miles away from where it was when the picture was taken), and then provide mid-course updates to the missile. Finally, the warhead must lock onto and home in on the ship.
This complicated “kill chain” provides a number of opportunities to defeat the attack. For example, over-the-horizon radars used to detect ships can be jammed, spoofed, or destroyed; smoke and other obscurants can be deployed when an imagery satellite, which follows a predictable orbit, is passing over a formation of ships; the mid-course updates can be jammed; and when the missile locks on to the target its seeker can be jammed or spoofed. Actually intercepting the missile is probably the most difficult thing to do. The SM-3 has an exoatmospheric kill vehicle, meaning that it can only intercept the missile during mid-course, when it’s traveling through space, so an Aegis ship escorting the target would have to fire its SM-3 almost immediately in order to intercept the missile before it reentered the atmosphere, or else there would have to be an Aegis ship positioned right under the flight path of the missile. The DF-21D may be equipped with decoys that are deployed in mid-course, making the SM-3’s job harder. U.S. Aegis ships are also equipped with the SM-2 Block 4 missile, which is capable of intercepting missiles within the atmosphere, but the DF-21D warhead will be performing some high-G maneuvers, which may make it impossible for the SM-2 Block 4 to successfully intercept it.
How all this would work in reality is impossible to know in advance. Even after China has tested its missile against an actual ship, it won’t have tested it against one employing the full range of countermeasures that a U.S. ship would throw at it and, as you say, the U.S. Navy will never have tested its defenses against such an attack. Somebody is likely to be surprised and disappointed, but there is no way of knowing who.
Do you feel at any point China could or would attempt to sell versions of the DF-21D to other nations such as Pakistan or export such a system with less of a range?
The missile by itself would be pretty useless. As implied by my response to the previous question, an entire “system of systems” is needed to make it work. Some countries might buy them just to impress their neighbors, but their combat effectiveness would be negligible unless the country also invested in the needed detection, data processing, and communications systems. In any case, I doubt if China would sell it in the near-term, as that could result in knowledge of its technical details (e.g., radar frequencies and waveforms, etc.) getting out, making it easier for countries like the United States to figure out ways to defeat it.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
cheap nike
thanks for share
Ken G
The Chinese can evict the American presence in west Pacific without firing a shot.
Just simply stop funding the stupid American trillion dollar deficits.
Andy
@Ken
You should know the answer why.
China is just the ONLY THIRD owner of US Debts, big deal.
John Powers
It is hard to imagine the warhead decelerating sufficiently for the reaction motor or aerodynamically induced vector changes needed to assure a direct intercept of a a fast, multi-screw ship conducting extreme evasive maneuvers. Looks like a nuke to me!
James
The only way to keep Asia in peace and prosperity is to have BOTH USA and China to change their mentalities and behaviors. Right now they are both arrogant and hostile to each other. They are both in an action-and-reaction mode, which are good for neither of them. They (and their people) could otherwise have a much better life.
By the way, all of us here are wasting our time here. Those weapons will never get used. The arm race will be a total waste of time and money, like Soviet Union did in the cold war. And, whatever we say here will make no difference whatsoever to our life or to the world at all. It would be better for us to spend the time to do something more meaningful, such as making some friends (or money) elsewhere.
Andy
@James, Just like British and Germany at 19th century.
Mike China
The US by its very actions is making a mockery of it welcoming China's rise. China aint taking over Asia or South China Sea.These are statments made by the western media with links to the US govt.The US is building a chain of missile shield all over the world to defend against NK or Iran missile launch.Only the most naive and utterly stupid or numbskull will believe so. The Pentagon is investing billions if not trillions for such a project designed to give the US absolute or 100% immunity from Russian or Chinese missile retaliation after a US preemptive strike on these t wo countries.
Only the most blinkered and missile shield proponent will think its 100% possible.Since the neo cons involved the US in the ME wars,Russia and China have surely taken steps to ensure that at least ten to fifty nm will be able to hit back.There could be surprises in store for US war planners should the war not go according to plan.
If the US initiates such a war, I hope the court of international justice will arrest the perpetrators of such a war where millions will be killeBlai r was harangued as a war criminal and is lucky still to be around.
Mike China
The carrier missiles will only be launched if China comes under attack from,who else,but the US.The media is portraying China as the bad guy.Like all bad guys,China must be destroyed so that the good guy,the US, will live.I am afraid the true picture is the US is the public enemy of the world.It has threatened to attack for possession of nuclear weapons. The US has 20000 nm and is the greatest security threat to China,Russia,Korea,iran and others.
Like it or not the PLA will modernise and increase the number and lethality of its nm . The US better know though it can eliminate the majority of China's nm, five to ten will get through to cause massive damage on the CONUS.Oh,btw,the PLA,aint keeping still.They will add on to the number and who knows may have one thousand to two thousand nm.Surely the US president aint that naive to attack China without risk. If such a president starts a war ,the American public better better impeach him and hang the congressmen and seantors.
Dan
But…Red China IS the bad guy. Hell, they roll over their own people with tanks and have forced abortions. Doesn't get much more evil than that.
Oliver Mochizuki
The missile tech that China has is in part linked to Russia's decision in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union to focus on one area (missile tech) as opposed to trying to match the US on all fronts – partly what helped bankrupt the country.
Missile technology is the one field where Russia has superceded the US and subsequently China benefits from the same tech as they work closely with Russia on R&D.
I hope we never have to find out whether the missiles work as I would consider a diplomatic solution over warfare as being of far more interest to both sides.
Chest thumping USA USA style posts are from people living in the past. China is a massive power and will only grow in stature on the world stage. I for one welcome it, it's a great country and I love the people, culture, history etc. Let's hope we can get past outdated warmongering and all get along. I know, I know idealistic to a fault!
We can all learn from each other and perhaps not blow eachother up in the future. That would be nice.
Prestwick
Surely, *surely*, the only effective counter-measure America needs is a statement asserting that any ballistic missile launch without prior warning will be assumed to be a hostile nuclear strike on the American mainland and will thus be require full retaliation as per MAD.
I would have thought other than calculating the trajectory of the launch it would be hard to differentiate a DF-31A launch from that of a conventional ICBM aimed at an American city.
So basically if America loses a carrier China faces losing half of its Eastern coast with all the cities that sit there. Simples.
bullet
that is wishfull thinking man remember that china also has nuclear weapons to devastate the us mainland and that is why the us govt initiate dialoguews with the
chinese