Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Posted on 07/11/2008 6:27:15 PM PDT by Kaslin
>font size=4>Military Superiority: China has embarked on an ambitious anti-ship missile program designed to sink American carriers. Unfortunately, due to underspending on defense, we have an anti-ship program all our own.
Fisher, vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center, says two of the missiles are based on the CSS-5, also known as the DF-21, and photos reveal what looks like a maneuverable warhead similar to warheads deployed on our Pershing-2 missiles during the Cold War.
A third missile is believe to be a longer range variant of the CSS-5, one that can deliver multiple warheads.
"It is bad enough that these missiles are being developed and can soon target U.S. naval forces from China," Fisher said. "But we should also expect that China will eventually place these missiles on ships and submarines and sell them to its rogue allies."
Fisher also notes that "the Ahmadinejads, Castros and Chavezes of the world would love to have these missiles to hold the U.S. Navy at bay." Imagine Ahmadinejad having these missiles pointed at our ships guarding the Strait of Hormuz.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
I think anytime you see a big increase in immigration, things can’t be looking so hot back home.
It has been suggested that to avoid a fight with China, or even an arms race with them, the US could do one thing now that would totally change the game.
Selling, or even giving, the soon to be mothballed USS Kitty Hawk to India.
China’s massive naval build-up has not gone unnoticed by the Indians, who are very competent engineers, ship-builders, and reverse engineers. Who now feel they must create their own naval build-up to match China.
Nobody in the world except the US has ever discovered how to stabilize a carrier the size of the Kitty Hawk. Russia couldn’t and China couldn’t. By giving India the Kitty Hawk, their shipbuilding technology would leapfrog the Chinese. Instead of China becoming the #2 navy in the world, it would have to spend two or three times as much to catch up to India.
For their part, the Indians would soon be producing Kitty Hawk style aircraft carriers in their shipyards, and unlike the far off threat of the US, the Indian navy is in China’s backyard.
But while this arms race between those two nations continued, the US would still keep a two or three generational naval edge, which is right where we would want to be.
I agree that would be a smart move.
I agree. Getting more allies on our side who can competently operate aircraft carriers would make China’s job immensely harder.
It’s not clear to me that we can defend Taiwan forever. We should have some sort of a backup plan to pull the population of Taiwan along with as much of their technological infrastructure as can be moved back to either one or more of our own island possessions or that North-West corner of Australia which is basically inhabited by poisonous snakes and crocodiles, and let the chicoms have a deserted island if they want it. In other words, force them to answer the question, are they claiming an island, or are they claiming 30,000,000 souls who moved to that island specifically to avoid living under their fubar government.
Hmm, ok, old Navy hands, what do we have on our side to counter these anti-ship missiles? If I’m not mistaken, our anti-missile ships are designed to shoot down ICBM’s not these types.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Not Navy here, but as I figure, air launched interceptor missiles from Hornets, then ship launched interceptor missiles and lastly the Phalanx close-in weapon system or CWIS.
A massed bombardment might overwhelm these, but it’s going to require the chicoms to get within range to launch without being turned into sunken scrap.
Not impossible to score a hit on a carrier battle group, but they will pay for every launch in blood and sunk ships. We might(G_d forbid)lose a carrier, but they would risk losing MUCH more.
That’s why I expect the chicoms to launch a preemptive nuclear attack before any attempt to make a massive military move.
Yes. Arm them to the teeth.
3 Gorges Dam,China’s Achilles “Hill”.
btt
A rogue EMP strike would do us in.
The SM-3 Standard/Aegis combo could have success, but the anti-ballistic version is not deployed other than experimentally.
There is no defense against this other than taking out the launchers.......
So take out their spy satellites and they lose their ability to target those ballistic missiles. Maybe fry their optics with a laser pulse, much quicker then actually shooting the thing down and it would leave the Chinese guessing as to what caused the failure(s).
Regards,
GtG
Under those circumstances, no. There’s nothing we could do but destroy the launch sites preemptively.
When they threaten us in a direct and credible way we will have to beat them to the punch quickly and profoundly. That is to say a rational nation would, not the schizophrenic one we have become.
I don't see this as a blue water threat, but it could well be. Then, the idea of blinding satellites is valid.
Of course, they have that capability too. Gets ugly real fast. I do not like it, as I work in one of their prime targets: Pearl Harbor. Great to go to work each day knowing the crosshair is on you!
You’re 10 miles from Honolulu?
Great job, thanks for following up. Keep me posted.
There is no defense against this other than taking out the launchers.......
That was the whole point of the spy sattelite shoot down six months ago. Hey China, look what we can do. This is exactly what the SM-3 is designed for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.