• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Anti Ship Missile from Japan - For PRC Ships, Carrier.

Japan was a country that had less than a 80 years to modernize after it opened up to the rest of the world. Less than 80 years and still was able to compete with world powers. Japan was a tiny island that fought nations with millions more people. Yes, they lost, after the Chinese and British got their asses kicked so hard that only US could save them. Nobody can compete with the Japanese person. Not opium addict Chinese. At least japanese didn't kill millions of their own people , like china .
 
Aiyo! So tiny can hope to sink carrier?

Can not fit nuke warhead for this size. Conventional explosive in this case can not exceed 100kg. Can only sink some SAF RSN boats. :D

Will make only a small hole in 50000 tons ships.

Japanese really have tiny dicks! :D:D

how you know their dick is small ? your mother kena rape by them during WW2 ? :confused:;):D
 
japs don't need missiles, they are the masters for osama bin laden's al qaeda!

Japs against chinese? They will be killed on the ground before even have a chance to take to the air.:d

<object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kj-xkobarue?fs=1&amp;hl=en_us"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kj-xkobarue?fs=1&amp;hl=en_us" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/o5slctlrfhi?fs=1&amp;hl=en_us"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/o5slctlrfhi?fs=1&amp;hl=en_us" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<div style="background:#000000;width:440px;height:272px"><embed flashvars="playervars=showstats=yes|autoplay=no|videotitle=rare wwii kamikaze footage - in color" src="http://www.metacafe.com/fplayer/2054740/rare_wwii_kamikaze_footage_in_color.swf" width="440" height="272" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" name="metacafe_2054740" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></div><div style="font-size:12px;"><a href="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2054740/rare_wwii_kamikaze_footage_in_color/">rare wwii kamikaze footage - in color</a> - <a href="http://www.metacafe.com/">the best home videos are here</a></div>

dont forget your country kena jialit jialit by the japanese ...your prataman even work for them ....;):d
 
Japan was a country that had less than a 80 years to modernize after it opened up to the rest of the world. Less than 80 years and still was able to compete with world powers. Japan was a tiny island that fought nations with millions more people. Yes, they lost, after the Chinese and British got their asses kicked so hard that only US could save them. Nobody can compete with the Japanese person. Not opium addict Chinese. At least japanese didn't kill millions of their own people , like china .

Japan is not a tiny island. It's empire-sized by population and by land, about twice the size of Britain (England, Scotland and Wales combined) or Korea (North and South) combined.

That said, it was two remarkable feats that it achieved by converting from feudal to modern world power so quickly and after defeat, rising back to modern economic power so quickly.
 
hahaha...with conventional war heads, the missiles are unlikely to cause much harm to an aircraft carrier......unless they got hit by a large numbers....
the most effective weapon to sink a ship is still the goot old TORPEDO....

hahaha, you guys are wrong!!! The best weapon is the not the most advance technology but the most basic weapon that is.... sneak attack!!!
Raid the Communist navy camp like this...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eX1g_px4dkA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eX1g_px4dkA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


who say to destory a carrier we need all the stupid advance weapon???
:oIo: :oIo: :oIo:

A carrier is useless if no one is manning them!!! Kill all their navy personels in their navy camp when they are sleeping like a pig before they can even drive their carriers.
So do we need any more advance weapon??? :D :D :D
 
Last edited:
Japanese have been sucking American dick for more than 50 years
 
hahaha...aircraft carriers as a huge ammo and fuel dump have been around since WW2....
If you think a direct hit from a anti-ship missile can blow the carrier to pieces then I seriously suggest that you are misguided and out of depth with naval warfare becuase such things only exist in fantasy.



The day that someone invents the guided cruise torpedo (range in excess of maybe 500 hundred km) will be the real end of the aircraft carriers......

I suggest that you read up on Shaped charge explosives...and their intended design objectives as ordnance payloads on guided missiles., especially Anti ship missiles.

Perhaps you may also like to know about depleted uranium payloads fitted on artillery and tank ammunition shells, which have no explosive properties, but will destroy a heavily armored tank by sheer kinetic energy kill.
 
I suggest that you read up on Shaped charge explosives...and their intended design objectives as ordnance payloads on guided missiles., especially Anti ship missiles.

Perhaps you may also like to know about depleted uranium payloads fitted on artillery and tank ammunition shells, which have no explosive properties, but will destroy a heavily armored tank by sheer kinetic energy kill.

Thks...Reading increases general knowledge but you need to know the fundamentals otherwise a little knowledge is dangerous....

Of course there are advances in ammo technology....but to compare aircraft carrier with tank is totally out of place...

I can tell you that for once I am not talking cock here because I have itimate knowledge and experience in ships design.
 
Regardless of the warhead (could even be tactical nuke) you must first be able to detect and track the carrier battlegroup. That is extremely difficult with sophisticated radar jamming. So this anit ship missile is nothing more than just another regular anti ship weapon.

Why do you think the Chinese have been busy with their space program, with building their own GPS system. They have been launching numerous satellites probably to build up redundant network of Sats to track movement near Taiwan Straits.

I think in 5 years, US carrier groups would no dare to operate within a 1000 mile radius of Taiwan Straits. That in effect renders the firepower of a carrier - its fighters - toothless. However this is only a defensive capability.

Read Dec 29 2010 VOA report.



Here is latest from VOA:

China Seen Moving Closer to Deployment of 'Carrier Killer' Missile
William Ide29 December 2010

A senior U.S. commander has recently revealed that China's development of an anti-ship ballistic missile that is designed to target aircraft carriers is now operational. Defense analysts say that while China has a way to go to perfect the weapon system, the development and deployment of the missile will have a major impact on security in Asia.

In a recent interview with Japan's Asahi Shimbun newspaper, Admiral Robert Willard, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, said that information China has released in the open press and continued testing show it has reached the equivalent of what the U.S. military calls initial operational capability for the weapons system.

Listen to the extended Q&A with Andrew Erickson




Andrew Erickson, the co-founder of China SignPost, a website that focuses on China analysis and research, explains.

"What's very significant here is for the first time ever, someone in a position of authority and information access, has stated that the missile is roughly equivalent to a U.S. military development benchmark," said Erickson.

Admiral Willard says reaching initial operational capability means China has a workable design for the missile and that it is being further developed.

The land-based missile, which is called the Dongfeng 21 D, is designed to attack aircraft carrier groups with the help of satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs.

Listen to the extended Q&A with Dean Cheng




Dean Cheng, a research fellow at Washington D.C.'s Heritage Foundation says that with the help of satellites and UAVs the fast-moving missile is designed to target an aircraft carrier in the sea and come at them from high altitudes.

"The idea is to damage an aircraft carrier, destroy the planes on the deck, not necessarily sinking it, but keeping it from basically being able to fly aircraft for the next several days, weeks or even month," said Cheng.

Admiral Willard says that while the U.S. military has yet to see an over-water test of the system, the advanced ballistic missile system - along with other so called anti-access area denial capabilities China is deploying such as air defense systems, advanced naval systems such as submarines- are a concerning development for countries in the region.

Dean Cheng says Admiral Willard's comments show that China is increasing the pace of its military development. China's development of anti-access area denial capabilities, he says, sends a clear message about security in the region.

"This weapons system [China's anti-ship ballistic missile], in combination with Chinese submarines, Chinese long range anti-ship cruise missiles, Chinese anti-ship aircraft, all of these in combination are clearly aimed at saying to the United States: 'back off, your role here in the Western Pacific is going to be limited'," he said.

In additon to the U.S., there is already growing concern among China's neighbors about the speed at which China is developing and expanding its naval power. Japan recently decided to shift the focus of its national defense toward China.

Erickson says China's neighbors are likely to react to the development of the weapon system.

"It still remains to be seen exactly what some of the reactions will be, but I suspect that there may well be some very significant concerns in Japan, in South Korea and in Taiwan for instance," he said.

He adds that concerns are likely because China has been releasing information or technical "data points" about the anti-ship ballistic missile or other systems that speak more to experts and foreign militaries, but not citizens in the region.

"What they do not do well [the data points], I believe, is speak to the citizen in other nations and socieities in East Asia as to what China is actually doing here? How far it intends to go? What China envisions as being the consequences," asked Erickson.

When a Chinese foreign ministry official was asked about the ballistic missile system earlier this week she did not respond directly, but stressed China was purusing a defensive military policy and seeks peaceful development.

Still, China's steps toward deploying the anti-ship ballistic missile and other military trends are having an impact on the ongoing debate in Washington over whether China is a friend or foe.

Dean Cheng says the news will certainly add "amunition" to the argument that China is an unfriendly power and rising threat.

"The flip side to this is that we have the [Defense Secretary Robert] Gates visit to China, we have the [Chinese President] Hu [Jintao] - [President Barack] Obama summit here in Washington will provide an opportunity for China to clarify itself," he said.

Erickson says China's military trends and agressive behavior over the past few years is having a broad impact in Washington.

"I think even a lot of people who were previously quite optimistic about U.S. - China relations have become more pessimistic and more concerned, frankly," he said.

Those who were already pessimistic, Erickson adds, see these latest developments as a sign that there never really were grounds to be optimistic about China and that those who were optimistic were just naive.






I suggest that you read up on Shaped charge explosives...and their intended design objectives as ordnance payloads on guided missiles., especially Anti ship missiles.

Perhaps you may also like to know about depleted uranium payloads fitted on artillery and tank ammunition shells, which have no explosive properties, but will destroy a heavily armored tank by sheer kinetic energy kill.
 
.

Dean Cheng, a research fellow at Washington D.C.'s Heritage Foundation says that with the help of satellites and UAVs the fast-moving missile is designed to target an aircraft carrier in the sea and come at them from high altitudes.

"The idea is to damage an aircraft carrier, destroy the planes on the deck, not necessarily sinking it, but keeping it from basically being able to fly aircraft for the next several days, weeks or even month," said Cheng.

longbow said:
Yes this is more realistic expectation from pple who knows ...
 
Flight deck of carrier is filled with munitions and fuel. A well place 500 lbs bomb could pretty much render the carrier useless. So the whole idea is to prevent enemy from detecting location of carrier.

However, the Chinese have the ability and probably has sats parked permanently over Taiwan Straits and other strategic coastal areas looking down. They could easily detect movement of carrier battle group. Once uncloaked, carriers are sitting ducks.


.

Dean Cheng, a research fellow at Washington D.C.'s Heritage Foundation says that with the help of satellites and UAVs the fast-moving missile is designed to target an aircraft carrier in the sea and come at them from high altitudes.

"The idea is to damage an aircraft carrier, destroy the planes on the deck, not necessarily sinking it, but keeping it from basically being able to fly aircraft for the next several days, weeks or even month," said Cheng.

longbow said:
Yes this is more realistic expectation from pple who knows ...
 
Flight deck of carrier is filled with munitions and fuel. A well place 500 lbs bomb could pretty much render the carrier useless. So the whole idea is to prevent enemy from detecting location of carrier.

However, the Chinese have the ability and probably has sats parked permanently over Taiwan Straits and other strategic coastal areas looking down. They could easily detect movement of carrier battle group. Once uncloaked, carriers are sitting ducks.

bro...the fundamental principle is correct in all form of warfare.
what happened during era of WW2 where scout planes are sent out to detect enemy carriers at seas....
when u are detected first, u uasually get whacked first...

But with today's satellite technology...how are you going to hide a carrier group out at sea and remained undetected??
 
Back
Top