Talk:DF-21: Difference between revisions
→Doubts over China's 'wonder weapon': new section |
|||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
With the release of pictures of the Iranian Khalij Fars(''Persian Gulf'') ASBM based on the Fateh-110, I've removed the claim that the DF-21D is the only ASBM in existence. Here's a link to the new ASBM: http://defense-update.com/wp/20110208_fateh110_eo.html [[User:Demon Lord Razgriz|Demon Lord Razgriz]] ([[User talk:Demon Lord Razgriz|talk]]) 00:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC) |
With the release of pictures of the Iranian Khalij Fars(''Persian Gulf'') ASBM based on the Fateh-110, I've removed the claim that the DF-21D is the only ASBM in existence. Here's a link to the new ASBM: http://defense-update.com/wp/20110208_fateh110_eo.html [[User:Demon Lord Razgriz|Demon Lord Razgriz]] ([[User talk:Demon Lord Razgriz|talk]]) 00:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Doubts over China's 'wonder weapon' == |
|||
The Asia Times's [http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LI08Ad01.html article] with the same title contains this response by Arthur Ding (professor at the Political Warfare Cadres Academy in Taipei): |
|||
:''Asia Times Online'': The DF-21D can strike US aircraft carriers and sink them in a very short time. Will this development have an impact on the naval balance in the East China Sea? |
|||
:''Arthur Ding'': This is the ultimate goal China aims to achieve. But technically speaking, it's not feasible. That is because when the missile re-enters the atmosphere, its speed would be somewhere around Mach 7 [2,382.03 meters/second]. That is so fast that there would not be sufficient time to re-direct the warhead to hit an US aircraft carrier precisely. A carrier could only be hit indirectly by a special warhead, such as a fuel-air explosive. |
|||
Maybe that's worth incorporating? |
Revision as of 22:00, 1 May 2011
Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Chinese Start‑class | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rocketry Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
Controversy: All the news media reporting on this is such nonsense. The SS-N-22 missile was known to be effective against carrier groups for a long time, the P-270 Moskit especially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.200.140.62 (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Drive up to border and launch
The article I just posted shows exactly why units do not drive up to the border to launch their missiles so the maps given are bogus and should be replaced with maps showing maximum ranges from actual launch facilities. Hcobb (talk) 15:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- But given time they could drive to a border and get it set up. 173.164.86.190 (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- Assuming nobody responds while the concrete is setting. Hcobb (talk) 21:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- Bunch of crap. You could create a concrete launch pad in a few days at a pre-surveyed site near the border - in the direction of a developing threat. The article outlines that two peacetime deployment locations have been identified in central China, and would presumably be where the missiles are stationed during periods of low-threat. Why on earth would you build _mobile_ short-range ICBMs with the intent of stationing them in fixed positions which puts no meaningful strategic targets under their footprint? It's like noticing that US aircraft carriers spend a lot of time in San Diego, and then drawing aircraft strike radii centered on Point Loma . Megapixie (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- The current location holds at risk the primary threat to the Chinese government, which is the Chinese population. Hcobb (talk) 23:02, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- Bunch of crap. You could create a concrete launch pad in a few days at a pre-surveyed site near the border - in the direction of a developing threat. The article outlines that two peacetime deployment locations have been identified in central China, and would presumably be where the missiles are stationed during periods of low-threat. Why on earth would you build _mobile_ short-range ICBMs with the intent of stationing them in fixed positions which puts no meaningful strategic targets under their footprint? It's like noticing that US aircraft carriers spend a lot of time in San Diego, and then drawing aircraft strike radii centered on Point Loma . Megapixie (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- Assuming nobody responds while the concrete is setting. Hcobb (talk) 21:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- These units can be monitored by satellite and taken out by space. That is the kind of technology China would have to deal with if they wanted to go nuts. Ipunchouthorses (talk) 03:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Claim of only ASBM exist removed
With the release of pictures of the Iranian Khalij Fars(Persian Gulf) ASBM based on the Fateh-110, I've removed the claim that the DF-21D is the only ASBM in existence. Here's a link to the new ASBM: http://defense-update.com/wp/20110208_fateh110_eo.html Demon Lord Razgriz (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Doubts over China's 'wonder weapon'
The Asia Times's article with the same title contains this response by Arthur Ding (professor at the Political Warfare Cadres Academy in Taipei):
- Asia Times Online: The DF-21D can strike US aircraft carriers and sink them in a very short time. Will this development have an impact on the naval balance in the East China Sea?
- Arthur Ding: This is the ultimate goal China aims to achieve. But technically speaking, it's not feasible. That is because when the missile re-enters the atmosphere, its speed would be somewhere around Mach 7 [2,382.03 meters/second]. That is so fast that there would not be sufficient time to re-direct the warhead to hit an US aircraft carrier precisely. A carrier could only be hit indirectly by a special warhead, such as a fuel-air explosive.
Maybe that's worth incorporating?
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
- Start-Class weaponry articles
- Weaponry task force articles
- Start-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class Chinese military history articles
- Chinese military history task force articles
- Start-Class Rocketry articles
- Unknown-importance Rocketry articles
- WikiProject Rocketry articles