China unveiled the specs of their next wunderwaffe, an anti-air ballistic missile for targeting AWACS, tankers and bombers:

China unveiled the specs of their next wunderwaffe, an anti-air ballistic missile for targeting AWACS, tankers and bombers:
>Range > 2000km
>Length < 10m
>Diameter < 0.8m
>Mass < 4 tons
>Two stages
>Vertical launch
>Active radar homing
Why are they so obsessed with those types of support aircraft?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    implessive

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fippity bippity

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because of their doctrine of systems confrontation warfare and systems destruction
    Tl;dr destroy and disrupt command and control, insulate and disperse your own command and control

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how are they going to guide it? large diameter gives you the option to mount a decent radar but at those ranges it's still marginally better than shooting blind

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I remember seeing some diagrams in sinodefenceforum years ago about a Ballistic missile carrying several AAM (PL-12/15) in a MIRV configuration for anti-air. Most people didn't take that seriously back then, but now It all starting to make some sense.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Surface to air ballistic MIRVs for strategic air defence
        Weird. Is the idea that they use saturation to prevent interception? I don’t see how this would be successfully in practice unless they’ve already seriously crippled US intel assets like satellites

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I guess that'd be part of the plan but with the proposed Starshield stuff you'd pretty much have to set up a nuclear weapon in orbit (like the russians are planning) to degrade it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A nuke in orbit is an own goal, the only reason to do it is to wipe the board clean. Everything you have up there is exactly as likely to get fricked because the destruction is caused by weird interactions with the atmosphere and Van Allen belts. The only reason you’d do it is you either A have no assets in space B believe you can replenish your lost assets faster than the other guy. There’s a reason the only test in space lead to an almost immediate and unanimous ban on testing in space.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You're right actually and a big part of China's strats is those sats as well. They'd have nothing to actually cue said stupid anti-air BM (and their anti-shipping BMs) if they lost their observation sats.

              LEO satellites can be shoot down with lasers in the current year.

              They can be blinded, and that'd again also apply to the limited amount of chinese recon sats needed to cue BMs on ships and long range A-A assets.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >and that'd again also apply to the limited amount of chinese recon sats needed to cue BMs on ships and long range A-A assets.
                Yeah but this ups escalation level. Do you want go there? That is uncertain.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/grg5mDJ.jpg

              You're right actually and a big part of China's strats is those sats as well. They'd have nothing to actually cue said stupid anti-air BM (and their anti-shipping BMs) if they lost their observation sats.

              [...]
              They can be blinded, and that'd again also apply to the limited amount of chinese recon sats needed to cue BMs on ships and long range A-A assets.

              >The only reason you’d do it is you either A have no assets in space B believe you can replenish your lost assets faster than the other guy.
              Or more likely C: you see yourself as more likely to prevail in a war with NO space assets, against an adversary who you deem (perhaps inaccurately) overly-dependent on such assets.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            LEO satellites can be shoot down with lasers in the current year.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          My guess is that its a workaround for the physics behind long range strikes
          Big missiles go further, but are much less maneuverable, a big missile carrying multiple smaller, more agile missiles neatly sidesteps this problem
          A similar idea is being explored in Europe in the form of a long range missile that deploys wingman drones, to be fired into the AO as your planes close on enemy air defences

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        those missiles are pretty heavy so to carry a few you would need an IRBM sized missile while OP specs fit something like a modernized Pershing II

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Satellites.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's not going to work, it's just there to please the higher ups.
      As we have seen in Ukraine, even ships are almost impossible to hit even at a few 100 kms. The only reason they were hit is intelligence, not detection.

      Weapons like this are designed for two reasons.
      1. A wargame has shows this and that, and after analyzing it they think shooting down an awacs could have had an impact, so they design sich systems so that in the next wargame, they can say they shot it down.
      2. Even if the system is unlikely to work, the enemy is theoretically no longer safe within it's range. And that's a massive change, this changes the way the enemy acts.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Name / designation? Sauce?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OP didn't reply to this because it's just a sourceless screenshot from weibo, claiming to be from an unidentified "academic paper"

      homosexual

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically it is what Ukraine needs

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do they ship to Yemen?

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >They made Ballistic Missiles for attacking land targets
    >They made Ballistic Missiles for engaging ships
    >They made Ballistic Missiles for targeting aircraft
    When will they make an anti-submarine ballistic missile?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Soon
      https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-04/chinese-scientists-are-developing-lasers-to-find-submarines/11570886

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        <<It's the Arkbird! We've got the Arkbird!>>

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Actually thinking about Chinese spaceflight made me realize why they’ve done this as did
      it’s because China has a lot of ballistic missiles and has solid production lines for ballistic missiles, so developing this is trivial for them, relatively. They saw a problem (western strategic air assets) and a tool (piles of ballistic missiles) and decided they had a nail and some hammers. Probably hoping for economical saturation attacks or at least another deterrent that pushes the comfortable operation space of air assets just a bit farther out from Chinese shores. They also lack blue water projection so they tend to look for ground based solutions to the problems of the blue blue bathtub the US currently owns. Like the J-20 having long range for its class.

      Put that way it’s not a terrible idea. Distribute them in hardened or hidden places inland in China and you make it just that much harder for US carrier based forces to bomb you into the Stone Age. And they know how to make ballistic missiles! But in a kinetic engagement I’m not convinced they would reliably shoot down birds

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Doesn’t have to be reliable. AWACS are expensive and vulnerable and the US doesn’t like losing men and equipment in its wars of “what the frick are we actually doing” aggression.
        A war with China would be one of attempted containment so the US can continue to invade other third world nations with impunity. If China makes containment expensive, there is a fallback to the Cold War paradigm. We didn’t go to war with the Soviet Union every time they sailed a ship more than 13 miles from their shores — we fought proxy wars instead.
        China is making itself a very prickly pear from which they can expand their global influence. They want to make sure that they have a chance to win in the marketplace of ideas, not lose simply because the US has the bigger Navy and can shell them until they become good serfs.
        I don’t think they’d need to destroy all that much for the US to give up.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I don’t think they’d need to destroy all that much for the US to give up.
          That sounds a lot like "after an attack on Pearl Harbor the US will pull its forces out of the pacific."

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          China is already contained and is facing a plethora of structural issues. They will keep growing and improving but the exponential growth is reaching an end.
          >tfw you're now aware that China has to keep up current ship production until 2040 if it wants to reach global parity with the USN

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >all that just to fill it with water

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sounds very promising, there's just one problem - I have it on good authority that China is going to collapse in little less than half a month.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Don't hold your breath. The experts spent about 20 years saying that Japan is finally finished for real this time before they gave up in the 2010s

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I wonder when they'll stop saying it about the US.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I wonder when they'll stop saying it about the US.

        Black person in 1995 the Japanese economy was 73% of the size of America's and 755% (!) of the size of China's

        Today Japan's economy is 21% of the size of America's and 27% of the size of China's

        They literally fell out of the superpower race in one generation

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Rather everyone else got richer than they got significantly poorer.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And the UK and France also dropped precipitously in power too last century. They're still around, and still holding some of the strongest militaries. They could be a problem if they wanted to be.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And Japan still has one of the largest armies and navies in Asia despite all of that

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            and one of the largest foreign exchange reserves in the world

            Their rainy day fund.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >bombers
    That's nice, dear. Shame they wont be able to fricking find them.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Most of the US bomber fleet is still composed of B-52s and B-1Bs. The B-2 is a glorified hangar queen and the B-21 is still a prototype

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the B-21 is still a prototype
        Technically not.

        Late Jan 2024 they awarded the LRIP contract, it's officially in production.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They were producing like 6-8 simultaneously before the first flight even occurred. They're pretty confident in B-21

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's stopping your adversary from shooting down a missile that big with something smaller like an sidewinder? Is it a stealth missile?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Thinks It's possible to do ABM work with regular fragmentation AAMs

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >anti-air ballistic missile

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why are they so obsessed with those types of support aircraft?
    Because for the US navy operating in asia AWACS are what determines either victory or no chance of doing anything at all.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >anti-air ballistic missile
    >ballistic
    how the frick is it going to work? hoping the plane will fly into its trajectory?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >how the frick is it going to work? hoping the plane will fly into its trajectory?

      Flight time to 2000 km should be about 10 minutes. I guess they will fire several and hope that the awacs flies into their kill zones. Spending 10-20 missiles to get 1 awacs is a good trade.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The MIRV concept but with AAMs seems pretty viable at this rate actually. Add in some data link and there be able to guide them in with AWACS and ground radars too.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The MIRV concept but with AAMs seems pretty viable at this rate actually. Add in some data link and there be able to guide them in with AWACS and ground radars too.

          Yeah. I think the US forces will be shocked at the level of missile spam from the chinks if there is a pacific rim war. Spamming missiles is all the chinks need to do to chase out USN surface forces from the area of operations as they have to withdraw once their VLS magazines start to go empty. Then, its going to be down to a missile production race between China and USA.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I don't know why nobody has made something similar before

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The US did in the 70s during the SDI push. It was a proposed counter to the Soviet bomber fleet attacking CSGs or CONUS. They called it the Ballistic Intercept Missile (BIM). It was to use the Sandia SWERVE HGV, with a conformal X-band radar array for terminal guidance named LORAINE, that Raytheon got the contract for. They tested this part in the late 80s, but never went any further after the threat died. Though, SWERVE is what the Navy's and Army's HBGV is based off of.
            https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1149290

            Once again, all the chinsects know how to do is copy.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              They even thought about using it to bomb Mars for "scientific purposes".
              https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2297&context=smallsat

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Long-range anti-air missiles already follow a ballistic flight path: boosted into high atmosphere and then glide downward towards the target doing adjustments as necessary. So a "ballistic anti air missile" is just a long-range anti-air missile. Only very large targets will be caught by those which is still valuable if you’re China trying to protect yourself from US force projection.

    And finding a target isn’t that big of a challenge China. Besides satellites they have large, high-power radars that’ll spot something like an AWACS from a very long distance away.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Satellites cannot aid you in fire control against ships much less aircraft

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Starshield might

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >anti-air
    >ballistic missile
    AHAHAHAHAHA

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ballistic missile solves all! A weapon without counter!
    Next up is the anti-tank ballistic missile. Then, the weapon that secures the PLA as the dominant force, without peer: the standard-infantry shoulder-fired ballistic missile!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Next up is the anti-tank ballistic missile
      Saw this concept from GA.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Next up is the anti-tank ballistic missile.
      Isn't that what HIMARS is?

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >anti air
    >ball-istic missile
    fricking brainlet

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Would they fit into Type 055's 850mm VLS cells?

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    IMPLESSIVE

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    INVENTIVE FEATURE INCLUDED?!?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >China unveiled the specs of their next wunderwaffe, an

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *