ASBM - game changer?

[bsdaddict]

The ASBM (Anti Ship Ballistic Missile) - fast as heck (mach 10) means it can reach out and touch a carrier 2000km distant in 12 minutes.  Low radar signature (stealth?) will complicate detection.  I'm not even sure if detecting it early would help anything, what defense does a carrier have against a ballistic missile strike?  Phalanx? Mebbe a heat-seeking anti-missile missile? 

https://www.usni.org/forthemedia/ChineseKillWeapon.asp
 
"The Navy's reaction is telling, because it essentially equals a radical change in direction based on information that has created a panic inside the bubble. For a major military service to panic due to a new weapon system, clearly a mission kill weapon system, either suggests the threat is legitimate or the leadership of the Navy is legitimately unqualified. There really aren't many gray spaces in evaluating the reaction by the Navy…the data tends to support the legitimacy of the threat."

[Mickey1992]

Scary.  I always wondered what the Chinese were doing with their share of the $400 billion the US pays in interest on the national debt. 

[Cthulhu]

This might be a handful for the current Standard Missile 2. Provided it's trackable, a navalized version of our PAC-3, or maybe MEADS could deal with it, and it would need to be a "Hit To Kill" intercept to guarantee destruction. Heat-seekers are not used for this type of intercept, due to inadequate seeker range, and the heating of the atmosphere around and behind the incoming warhead, which would make target acquisition difficult. Phalanx might get a fleeting shot at it, but the really short engagment time would make that highly unlikely. Even if it did, odds are the rds would not do sufficient damage to the warhead casing to stop it or prevent detonation. Chances are it would just "scratch up the paint" like the Patriots that were fired in Desert Storm did. (<- subtle shot at Ratheon there  )

[Kazaa]

I say we N00K erm all!

[bsdaddict]

Provided it's trackable...

yeah, that's what got me thinking...  The article says is has "a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable."  Sounds like it being trackable isn't a given.

[Cthulhu]

yeah, that's what got me thinking...  The article says is has "a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable."  Sounds like it being trackable isn't a given.

One thing about high-speed low-observables is that the plasma sheath they generate may still be detectable. (all I'm gonna say )

[indy007]

One thing about high-speed low-observables is that the plasma sheath they generate may still be detectable. (all I'm gonna say )

Plus the launch plume from the pad... and the UAVs and satellites giving mid-course guidance... There's a ton of targets to hit.

[Cthulhu]

Plus the launch plume from the pad... and the UAVs and satellites giving mid-course guidance... There's a ton of targets to hit.

We don't have any launch phase defensive systems in place (yet), and it wouldn't be feasible to whack their satellites to prevent guidance updates given the short warning time we'd have (I'd also rule out jamming the satellite signal, since an encrypted focused microwave beam would be nearly impossible to detect, let alone jam). Of course, we could take out their birds proactively, but by that time the shooting war would be in full swing, and I hate to even think about that. 

You do make a good point though. Against a moving target, unless this thing is nuclear-tipped, it must have terminal guidance. This means the seeker must have a protective heat shroud, which has to be jettisoned before it can start scanning for the target. That should increase the radar cross-section enough to allow detection, but your defensive systems would have to respond quickly.

What really sounds daunting would be a low-observable UAV using laser ranging to get precise target position which it then uplinks via satellite for secure tranmission to the weapon. That would make the weapon purely passive and extremely dangerous. In that case, you damn well better make sure your surrounding airspace is clear.

[MORAY37]

Scary.  I always wondered what the Chinese were doing with their share of the $400 billion the US pays in interest on the national debt. 

Of course they're gonna develop it.... we spent the past 8-10 years telling them we were going to do this and that about Taiwan.  They viewed that rhetoric as direct threat, and figured there's one way we'd show up in Taiwan.  Duh.  It's only logical they try to defend whatever interest they have, no matter how we in the US feel about it.

What's scary is the average Joe Blow Ignoramus doesn't realize he payed for it by saving 50 cents on cheap NEEDLESS crap at WalMart, instead of buying from companies that support American production.

[Nilsen]

This might be a handful for the current Standard Missile 2. Provided it's trackable, a navalized version of our PAC-3, or maybe MEADS could deal with it, and it would need to be a "Hit To Kill" intercept to guarantee destruction. Heat-seekers are not used for this type of intercept, due to inadequate seeker range, and the heating of the atmosphere around and behind the incoming warhead, which would make target acquisition difficult. Phalanx might get a fleeting shot at it, but the really short engagment time would make that highly unlikely. Even if it did, odds are the rds would not do sufficient damage to the warhead casing to stop it or prevent detonation. Chances are it would just "scratch up the paint" like the Patriots that were fired in Desert Storm did. (<- subtle shot at Ratheon there  )

What about the sm3? can it only hit BM's at launch?

[Wolfala]

What about the sm3? can it only hit BM's at launch?

http://www.aps.org/about/pressreleases/upload/nmdgraphics.pdf

Unless you park it right next to the launch site, you won't hit it during the boost phase. And your reaction time is essentially zero - so what if our missile was an unplanned manned launch? Wang gets hit in the wang with a KKV. I participated in the APS Boost Phase BMD study back in 2003. I'll see if I can find a PDF copy to post up, b/c its under password from APS at the moment.

But the summary of it is, no, no, and diddly no under the current technology limitations.

[Nilsen]

Rgr that. When i was in the navy i mostly worked with seaskimmers so this is a new field for me.

Im guessing that to hit and destroy one of these missiles a laser would be the best bet but they are a few years away from beeing integrated on ships.

[indy007]

With a 2k range, they can launch it from further inland than your assets can strike during launch/boost.

What about THAAD? Can you mount something equivalent to that on a ship?

[Cthulhu]

With a 2k range, they can launch it from further inland than your assets can strike during launch/boost.

What about THAAD? Can you mount something equivalent to that on a ship?

I believe THAAD will fit within the Mk41 VLS. Like I said earlier, PAC-3 could probably make the intercept.

[Cthulhu]

Rgr that. When i was in the navy i mostly worked with seaskimmers so this is a new field for me.

Im guessing that to hit and destroy one of these missiles a laser would be the best bet but they are a few years away from beeing integrated on ships.

The problem with a laser is that even a really powerful one requires seconds on-target to do the job. And that's if you're targeting a pressurized motor case (during the boost phase). A reentry vehicle/warhead is a much more resilient target, and that's assuming you can even train a laser on it for any length of time.

We've fielded "Hit To Kill" interceptors for some time that can kill a weapon like this. PAC-3 is actually quite impressive.