BF2S Forums China has a "carrier killer"? Now this could get interesting.

Reciprocity wrote:

the weapon has a known trajectory and a known target, can't be impossible to develop a countermeasure.

Not impossible, just technically challenging.

Mach 10 is about 11000 feet per second, or roughly 2 miles per second.

Doing the detection, trajectory and intercept calculation is not technically difficult.
Given modern electronics speeds and electronically scanned phased array radar, can probably do that near-instantaneously after launch.
Not a whole lot of objects in a carrier battle group's radar sphere that's moving at Mach 10 - that missile is going to stand out.

The difficulty is getting the mechanical systems to respond quickly enough.
Takes a relatively long time for the servos on a phalanx to get it into position, spin up the barrels, and start hurling lead.
(Relative to a missile that's going to traverse the firing range of the phalanx in about 1.5 seconds, with 0.5 seconds being taken up by the lead getting to target)

The SeaRAM might be able to counter it. Essentially a Phalanx system, with a RIM-116 missile launcher in place.

The RIM-161 on the Aegis cruisers might be able to counter it, out to 500 miles. (This system apparently is designed to intercept as high up as low orbit ballistic missiles before they MIRV)

The AIM-120 surface mounted package, developed by Raytheon and called the SLAMRAAM-EX, might be able to counter it out to 30 miles too.

All existing systems, most of which are already onboard a current carrier task force.

rdx-fx wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

the weapon has a known trajectory and a known target, can't be impossible to develop a countermeasure.

Not impossible, just technically challenging.

Mach 10 is about 11000 feet per second, or roughly 2 miles per second.

Doing the detection, trajectory and intercept calculation is not technically difficult.
Given modern electronics speeds and electronically scanned phased array radar, can probably do that near-instantaneously after launch.
Not a whole lot of objects in a carrier battle group's radar sphere that's moving at Mach 10 - that missile is going to stand out.

The difficulty is getting the mechanical systems to respond quickly enough.
Takes a relatively long time for the servos on a phalanx to get it into position, spin up the barrels, and start hurling lead.
(Relative to a missile that's going to traverse the firing range of the phalanx in about 1.5 seconds, with 0.5 seconds being taken up by the lead getting to target)

The SeaRAM might be able to counter it. Essentially a Phalanx system, with a RIM-116 missile launcher in place.

The RIM-161 on the Aegis cruisers might be able to counter it, out to 500 miles. (This system apparently is designed to intercept as high up as low orbit ballistic missiles before they MIRV)

The AIM-120 surface mounted package, developed by Raytheon and called the SLAMRAAM-EX, might be able to counter it out to 30 miles too.

All existing systems, most of which are already onboard a current carrier task force.

So your saying that, on paper, the missile might not prove to be threat, but at the same way, there's no way of knowing if the missile will be effective or not. TheUSA should probably build missiles like the chinese ones, and then test them to see the best way to trump them.

Last edited by pace51 (2010-08-07 13:46:40)

eleven bravo wrote:

in theory

pace51 wrote:

So your saying that, on paper, the missile might not prove to be threat, but at the same way, there's no way of knowing if the missile will be effective or not.

In theory, yes.

My speculation is purely armchair theory.
Not a naval weapons expert.
Only been on a carrier while wearing a uniform once.
And that was an Army uniform even.
(The way the Navy acts regarding Army helicopters on their carriers, it's like they think Army gear is made of antimatter and any contact between Navy and Army vehicles will result in the annihilation of the known universe)

Last edited by rdx-fx (2010-08-07 13:52:23)

FloppY_ wrote:

What exactly keeps the on-ship Phalanx CIWS from blasting it to oblivion before it ever reaches the ship?

I mean, 10x the speed of sound vs the CIWS systems

I still have doubts that this missile can accurately and independently track a carrier maneuvering at 30-something knots within a battle group.  Maybe the escorts just need to tow decoys.

FloppY_ wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

What exactly keeps the on-ship Phalanx CIWS from blasting it to oblivion before it ever reaches the ship?

I mean, 10x the speed of sound vs the CIWS systems

The Phalanx might very well be enough to eliminate the incoming missile. 

Though, at Mach 10, the Phalanx has about 1.5 seconds from the time the missile crosses the Phalanx's max range until it hits the ship.
About 0.5 seconds of that time is for the outgoing bullets to impact their target.
So, call it 1.0 seconds to see if it all worked, or if the carrier goes BOOM. 

If the Carrier Group can detect the incoming missile at longer range, it makes sense to throw some other systems at before that (literally) last second.
Y'know, perhaps that Aegis cruiser over there, with the missile system that can knock nukes out of orbit might have a little somethin'-somethin'...
How about that SLAMRAAM with the 30nm range, or that other 'missile Phalanx' with the 6nm range?

Waiting until the literal last second to see if 5700 sailors, $13 Billion of Ship and Aircraft, and 2 nuclear reactors are going to get destroyed ?
Yeah, a little too high on the Pucker Factor Scale

Just because I couldn't remember what the long range anti missile systems were called doesn't mean I didn't know about them,,, way to talk down to me...

When you say "Phalanx CIWS" I would think it would be reasonable to assume you are actually talking about the Phalanx CIWS and not about something completely different.

pace51 wrote:

I guess we'll have to wait until either china test their missile or the US builds mock-ups and tests them. Is China trying to make up for their lack of carrier force projection by devising ways to cut down on America's force projection? I don't know a lot about wither Navy, but I've heard people tell me the top two navy's in the world belong to the us and russia. Where does china rank, so I can get a better idea of the situation?h

US is still way ahead in aerotech than China. Chinese R and D right now is just simply receive and duplicate.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

If China sunk a carrier they would get skull fucked by US B2 bombers.

More like nuclear apocalypse.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

The U.S. doesn't need to nuke China.

There are so many counters to this "Carrier-killer". You guys do realize the U.S. military intelligence has known this for a much longer time than we have? America can knock out the systems that guide these missiles anyway. A carrier-killer isn't very useful when it doesn't have a target or guidance system.

These need to be launched from silos from what I gather, maybe subs can launch them. Satellites can monitor them and when one is fired the closest carriers can get information needed to shoot them down with the Phalanx and several other anti-ballistic missile systems. Not much a missile can do when it gets hit by tons of 20mm fire or a missile in close proximity to it.

The nuke is more of a political thing than anything else. I'm sure the USN has the tech to take it down sooner or later, but it'd be an all out war if China pulls this sort of shit.

Cybargs wrote:

Chinese R and D right now is just simply receive and duplicate.

Hilarious!

pace51 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Chinese R and D right now is just simply receive and duplicate.

Hilarious!

But true. Very, very, very true. Many of their aircraft are either licensed build aircraft, like the J-11, copied, like the q-5 and J-6, or imported, like the su-30, though I can't remember if China got permission to license su-30's or not. Actually sh1fty, probably longer ranged bombers than the b-2's (although the b-2's range can be extended by in air refueling) would probably be attacking china first. I'd think B-2's would be used for more strategic targets.

Jesus christ if you and shifty get in a discussion about pseudo-internet-wikipedia-tom clancy novel style air warfare tactics i'm going to rage quit life.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

The U.S. doesn't need to nuke China.

There are so many counters to this "Carrier-killer". You guys do realize the U.S. military intelligence has known this for a much longer time than we have? America can knock out the systems that guide these missiles anyway. A carrier-killer isn't very useful when it doesn't have a target or guidance system.

These need to be launched from silos from what I gather, maybe subs can launch them. Satellites can monitor them and when one is fired the closest carriers can get information needed to shoot them down with the Phalanx and several other anti-ballistic missile systems. Not much a missile can do when it gets hit by tons of 20mm fire or a missile in close proximity to it.

The Phanlax is a spam weapon system. It shoots a large volume of rounds, in hopes, to disable or destroy inbound missiles or aircrafts.
1st, problem is most U.S. Navy ships only have two of these system (port and starboard side).
2nd, The phanlax shoots more rounds that it carries.
3rd, It has two seconds to take out a high, hypersonic missile once it is in the effective range.

Granted, the Navy do fly AWACS and hope they have a better long range, better accurate defense system.

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

pace51 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Hilarious!

But true. Very, very, very true. Many of their aircraft are either licensed build aircraft, like the J-11, copied, like the q-5 and J-6, or imported, like the su-30, though I can't remember if China got permission to license su-30's or not. Actually sh1fty, probably longer ranged bombers than the b-2's (although the b-2's range can be extended by in air refueling) would probably be attacking china first. I'd think B-2's would be used for more strategic targets.

Jesus christ if you and shifty get in a discussion about pseudo-internet-wikipedia-tom clancy novel style air warfare tactics i'm going to rage quit life.

Please do. And what sh1fty said. It's not  like we go out of our way to agree with eachother and piss everyone off.