Is the DF-21 really a silver bullet against American CBGs or is it a meme missile?
i'm more interested in the white wall tires, and i believe wholeheartedly that they present the biggest threat
Meme
You would have to be a retarded can't to be a nuclear power and fire long range conventional ballistic missiles as a first strike.especially when most your nuclear missiles are still liquid fueled, and your enemy could glass your country 5 times Ober before you can fuel those missiles.
>>29730211
Meme missiles.
>>29730211
Meme
>>29730211
To quote planefag
>Of all the horrible works of destruction wrought by the sinning hands of Man, nothing has made the world shittier than the Dong-Feng 21 and all its bastard progeny. Most weapons do their worst work in wartime, and their best in peacetime - the Dong-Feng 21 inverts this dynamic to the detriment of all mankind. Its existence is a feeding trough for every knuckle-dragging shit-flinging simian of an armchair 'expert,' a mighty dildo-shaped obelisk for them to dance around while smacking the ground with bone clubs (because BVR is for pussies.) Its Mike Spark's wet dream made manifest on the materiel plane. It is hands-down the worst thing ever.
>Do not take this statement lightly, for I have trod /k/, the weapons board on 4chan. For all its recent pretensions, the board originated as a place for anime dweebs to argue over katanas versus kunai in Naruto. These are people who would equip the Air Force with Extra 300s, using open cockpits so the pilots could fire 1911s. There's an F-35 argument bingo chart in circulation. Unironically quoting Pierre Sprey is the fucking free space. I've listened to them wank over diesel subs, over supercavitating torpedoes, over Russian Aquaman - and nothing, but nothing has fed these retards more than the god-damned Ding Dong.
All it does is prove how worthless hardkill defenses are and how valuable softkill countermeasures are. Considering how long and vulnerable the kill chain for these ballistic AShMs is, I'm inclined to say that in an actual combat scenario standard sea-skimming AShMs are realistically a bigger threat.
So yeah, meme.
meme, the CEPs are high and even if they killed a CBG, they would get glassed to shit.
nuclear weapons thread?
>>29730280
Not saying I disagree, but is there a more detailed slap-down of the DF-21?
>>29730294
Can we summon Oppenheimer?
>>29730302
probably not this late but it's worth a try.
>>29730296
Can't help you there anon
>Nevermind that there's no damned targeting network for it - and anything they do have will be so much debris in LEO five minutes after the war begins. Nevermind that early-warning systems can't tell the difference between a ballistic missile with a conventional warhead and one with a nuclear one, making their employment tantamount to a game of nuclear chicken with the USA. Nevermind how Tomahawks have a longer range by half. It's still used as fodder by every half-baked moron still trying to opine that the most complete form of power projection ever devised short of the ICBM is “obsolete.” When I see the message log recording Tomahawks impacting those hateful pillars of jingoism and Communist aggression, bald eagles explode from my pants in a fountain of patriotism as I weep a single tear of joy.
>>29730249
>You would have to be a retarded can't to be a nuclear power
>>29730280
That guy can be a fucking retard though.
>>29730318
That all makes sense, but I don't see how the TLAMs are relevant. If we can't find the TELs we can't hit them with missiles.
>>29730325
Sure, but doesn't make him less right in this particular case. Also post his retardation.
>>29730332
This is true but I think he was just comparing capabilities.
>>29730345
Well yes because to pick one thing he's talking about how bad its targeting system is when he has no idea what it involves.
Because it's a long rant doesn't mean it's correct.
>>29730345
well, the dude is known to argue for the sake of arguing even after hes been BTFO, so there's that.
>>29730361
Are you thinking of that 50cent "muh scenario stands" faggot?
>>29730211
Meme. It has a 6/10 of 1% chance of hitting a carrier moving at 30 knots. That's before you factor for countermeasures and evasive maneuvering.
It looks like China has capacity to build 10-12 DF-21s per year.
An Australian think tank calculated that an inert DF-21 delivers about the same amount of energy as a Harpoon plus warhead. Factoring for additional warhead energy is easy enough.
With this information, we can roughly calculate that it would take 8-12 hits to seriously endanger a supercarrier. In other words, China would have to build DF-21s for a decade before they have enough to guarantee a kill on a single carrier.
It's a lot like a Tiger tank- interesting idea, looks neat, probably fun to play with. But there will never be enough available to affect the outcome of a war.
>>29730928
Not only that,
But if any of these were fired. It will be a nuclear war.
Simply because we honestly don't know if they are conventional warheads or nuclear.
China is wasting money and resources on something that will never be fully used to it's potential.
They will be glassed if they shot one.
>>29730221
Fucken white walls man, they know how to rock them.
>>29730280
Man I wished I got to argue katana over kunai on /k/
Why would the chinks use DF-21 to sink ship? They have plenty of subs that can launch cruise missiles and torpedoes.
West coast US, that's where it's useful
>>29730211
Meme.
China can't really make anything that is a threat.
>>29730351
It has no direct means of targeting though.
Go ahead and say MUH NOSS motherfucker. Go ahead.
>>29730928
source plz
>>29731416
>They have plenty of subs that can launch cruise missiles and torpedoes.
The sea is still USA's yard and the Chinese know this.
Its harder to assault a land based missile than something from one of their subs.
Also do Chink subs even have VLS?
>>29730211
It exists, and it could work, but probably pretty poorly. Probably not at all when you add defences and moving targets into the equation.
>>29730296
Essentially.
You need to find the target first, spotting something the size of an aircraft carrier is harder than you'd think. You might think "Just use a satellite" but that's not as great an idea as you think. A satellite will only pass over the target area for a small portion of its orbit, which means you have shitloads of satellites or major coverage gaps, satellites can't hide and can shoot down as well.
Let's say you have some Global Hawk knock-off doing it. You then need to relay that targeting data back to the missile, and you need to KEEP relaying it, because the target manoeuvrers. If this link is broken or if the spotter gets shot, the game is up.
Then you launch, a BM has limited ability to manoeuvrer, and most of your manoeuvring has to be done at the beginning of the launch. Because that's the launch profile of a BM, your burn your engines at the start and from then on out you're mostly just coasting. This makes moving targets a problem.
Next comes re-entry. This is a problem, because of your speed you've got re-entry heat problems, which makes communicating hard, which makes tracking your target hard. It also makes you shine like the sun on every IR sensor in range.
You've got to track your target during this terminal phase, which means you have a radar seeker on the missile nose, problem is you're looking straight down, which is the worst possible scenario for radar tracking because you've got clutter from the ground/sea to deal with. If you can track your target you have to hit it, which means manoeuvring, which is hard because you're probably going at like mach 6 by this point. You might think slowing down might make that easier, but you need that speed because...
Now they're trying to shoot you down and dazzle your sensors. This is more of a problem than it is for a sea skimmer because you can't hide behind the horizon, actually, you can't hide at all, they'll see you coming from hundreds of miles off.
>>29730211
Until the killchain improves significantly, it's a meme.
But it's very good for the USN to use as a means of gettin mo money fer dem programs
>>29731848
>Also do Chink subs even have VLS?
The new 093B has VLS for YJ-18 terminal supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles.
>>29731968
>killchain is shit meme
China's civilian Jilin-1 observation satellite streaming 4k live footages from space, tracking a flying passenger plane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8H00lAboMs
US carriers are nothing.
USN cannot hide. USN cannot run.
They will be swarmed and wont even have time to expend a third of their SM-3s until they are holed like cheese by hypersonic warheads.
>>29732040
I'm certain the US can do this too. We just don't advertise that capability. Don't forget that during the Cold War the US had satellites capable of reading a newspaper from orbit.
>>29732040
Call me back when they're tracking targets that don't follow publicly available schedules
>>29732068
This guy knows what's up. Tracking carriers is way harder than you think.
>>29732068
Pretty simple, then.
The only vessels and planes not moving by schedule are the US and allied military assets.
And radar stealth or cloud cover cannot hide you from multispectral optronics. And a hundred meters long wake in the water equally will betray you.
>>29732079
You are neglecting the fact that any and all LEO satellites will be BTFO during the opening moments of any Sino-US conflict.
>>29732076
It's not though.
Not with redundant satellite systems:
Yaogan series LEO satellites will simply pass the area and identify any targets of interest that have been detected by the permanent stare of the Geosynchronous orbiting Gaofen satellites.
You might try to evade the low-earth orbiting satellite passes, but you cannot hide from the staring eyes of the GSO satellites that monitor the whole West Pac 24/7.
>>29732079
a carrier, or even a CBG is a fucking blip on a satellite space image.
sure, it's there.
but it looks more like a smudge than anything else.
>>29732088
also this
>>29732088
China has enough GSO satellites with very good resolution that can detect and track medium oil tankers. And GSO is outside the engagement range of ANY US ASAT system, even the X-37B.
Also, China has the KT-1 and Long March-6 ORSS on military grade TELs to quickly replace losses in orbit with emergency responsive launches.
>>29732091
The Russkies had the comparable systems during the Cold War and that only barely helped them. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're overestimating the capabilities of those systems.
>>29732099
>implying they would be wasting time and resources on satellites when mushroom clouds are rising over 3 gorges and beijing
>>29732097
>blip
Satellite can track an airliner, which is pretty much the smallest blip in the realm of observation satellites after individual soldiers.
A carrier will radiate through all spectrums of optical and electromagnetic waves. Even the SAR-equipped Yaogan series will be able to track them under all weather conditions and at night.
>>29732099
Known ASATs, that is. I'm certain both nations have classified capabilities, and I wouldn't be surprised if the US has an ASAT system capable of touching targets in geosynch.
Deal with it, America.
You lost the Pacific.
You could have prevented it by acknowledging China's rise and negotiate a treaty with them. But you didnt, because you were accustomed because you have had your cocks sucked by almost the entire world for decades and couldnt even imagine that there was someone who outright refuses to. Now, you'll have no choice but to accept the end of your Pacific Empire.
>>29732101
No, the Soviets had a FAR more capable and robust system with their rorsats than China is even close to.
That's the thing with these 50 centers, they're seriously trying to act as though old Soviet tech is the greatest thing ever now that they are doing it half assed
>>29732111
All you need to do that though is just point your sensors at established flight plans and wait. Same with tracking an oil tanker. The CBGs know that they are under satellites and will operate accordingly.
>>29732088
You are neglecting the fact that most countries that singlehandedly launch satellites (i.e. US, RU and CN) ALL have okay-ish ASAT capability, and the most likely scenario is that all the satellites keep flying so no one has an incentive "to kill our sats in revenge for us killing theirs" or vice versa.
>>29732112
China, at least, has demonstrated it in 2013 with the DN-2 series of GSO ASAT, reaching targets at 22.000 miles above earth.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/china-conducts-test-of-new-anti-satellite-missile/
>>29732091
>Tracking targets from orbit
Top kek senpai.
You take the pictures, covering the entire south China sea, now you have petabytes of data to drift through.
You can't fit a supercomputer on a satellite, so you need to beam it back to earth, from GEO that will mean kbit/seconds in speed. Mbits from LEO.
So you wait for the data to download to earth, run it though your supercomputer. And now, congratulations! you know where carrier was a week ago when you took the picture.
>>29732120
And as such, the carrier will be detected even faster. You canot hide the hundreds of yards long wake and you cannot hide the radar returns of the deck from a Synthetic Aperture Radar equipped Yaogan satellite.
You'd better hide amongs the crowd of civilian shipping. This would actually be a better strategy.
>>29732123
>Most likely scenario
>No proof
Can you direct me to anything in which a notional war has that happening?
>>29732111
>look up flight plan on wolfram alpha
>set satellite around that area to track something
not hard.
>>29732117
what?
just the pacific fleet is a formidable threat to the chinks and we can summon much more shit to fuck china up.
your little concrete airstrip islands will be fucking steamrolled.
the pacific is and always will be under american control.
>>29732130
See:
>>29732040
Livestream is a thing in the 21st century.
Go back to bed, dad. The 80s were yesterday.
I bet you still thing that satellite pictures have to be retrieved with return-pods with film-rolls in them.
>>29732137
common sense?
>>29732143
That doesn't count.
>>29732040
I bet it took all 3 of the routers in china to handle that
>>29732025
Cool, thanks.
I always assume their sub-fleet only has those tiny diesel subs that are torpedo-only.
>>29732142
Congrats, your satellites do what ours have for decades.
>>29732111
I can track an airliner from my fucking browser window. That is not impressive.
>>29732150
kek
>>29732145
>common sense does not count to justify your actions
ggwp
>>29732140
All US pacific assets that are in a 5000km radius around China will be sunk in port by accurate missile strikes.
The Pacific is a prison and your smugness of having a fleet there is unwarranted.
China isnt locked in there with you, You are locked in there with China.
>>29732163
>accurate missile strikes
>china
also, the fucking minute we even detect those launches, china will cease to fucking exist within the hour.
go ahead, kill our pacific fleet.
we'll turn you into glass.
>>29732163
It's not like those missles can be shot down
>>29732163
>All US pacific assets that are in a 5000km radius around China will be sunk in port by accurate missile strikes.
Hmm, what ports (that the US uses) are within 5k km of China?
Philippines, Japan, maybe some Aussie ports?
Guam?
Hawaii probably not, is it?
So, not a lot of ports to sink US assets in port in, are there?
>>29732182
It's not that China has more missiles than you.
A DF-21 and DF-26 missile is cheaper than a single SM-3.
>>29732194
>A DF-21 and DF-26 missile is cheaper than a single SM-3.
But its also a lot more shit.
>>29732181
>china will cease to fucking exist within the hour.
When will the fucking "US will nuke CN" meme stop?
No US president is EVER going to order a 3rd world country nuked. Thats just not happening unless they lob in a couple ICBMs on DC and actually manage to hit it, and even then its questionable.
Bunch of B2 with stealth ALCM onto the chinks ICBM launch sites, yes.
Nukes, no way.
>>29732208
>waiting for ICBMs to hit before retaliating
>>29732163
Badass.
>>29732208
>Bunch of B2 with stealth ALCM onto the chinks ICBM launch sites, yes.
With conventional warheads, of course. Shoulda mentioned that.
Conventional as in non-ABC. Who knows what kinda fancy gadgets they got though - homing death lazer cluster munitons anyone?
>>29732216
Thats actual US doctrine if I am not mistaken. Weather the first strike, regroup, then (decide whether to) retaliate.
>>29732194
quality/tracking ability/PK >>>>>> number of missiles
are you fucking retarded?
also, you don't just strike the US and then just go "oh okay we're fine, nothing could come of this"
because I guarn-goddamn-tee that within the hour mushroom clouds will be rising all over china.
and before you bring up chinas nukes, they're old ruskishit and liquid fueled so they take forever to prepare for launch.
US nukes can be in the air within 10 minutes of the president being notified if hes indecisive, shorter if not.
>>29732208
yeah but the sinking of a carrier or a pearl harbor part 2 kinda thing WILL start WW3.
nukes will be launched, you don't just fuck with the second biggest nuclear power on the planet and not expect to get royally fucked.
>>29732194
what the other 2 said and it seems you underestimate the sheer stupid amount of funding put into the US military
>>29732216
(same guy as >>29732227)
>launch on alert is a good idea
>>29732232
>inking of a carrier or a pearl harbor part 2 kinda thing WILL start WW3.
yes
>nukes will be launched,
no
>you don't just fuck with the second biggest nuclear power on the planet and not expect to get royally fucked.
thats why we all agree the chinks are stupid.
>>29732227
You're very wrong.
Launch on warning has always been doctrine. You cannot take the risk of a hit compromising your deterrent. It's why the US and Russia have been telling each other for decades when they schedule any kind of missile test that will set off sensors and where the test firing will be and its target location.
>>29732232
>and before you bring up chinas nukes, they're old ruskishit and liquid fueled so they take forever to prepare for launch.
confirmed of not knowing shit.
The DF-5A/B are the only ones that are liquid fueled, and since they are in a silo and a Sino-US war wont happen immediately and escalate into nuclear war in seconds, they will have ample time to fuel them and put on hair-trigger. In fact, this is what China's is now doing in response to US aggression:
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/03/china-military-nuclear-obama-ICBM/127139/
Secondly, the DF-31/A and DF-41, as well as all SRBM/MRBM and IRBMs are all solid fueled and mobile. They transit through a 3000 miles long network called "The Underground Great Wall" and are also on hair trigger alert the moment a Sino-US war starts. Conveniently, their preparation is also hidden from US spy sats.
Currently, China is undergoing a rapid nuclear expansion by adding MIRVs and new missile systems into the newly reformed PLA Rocket Force (formerly known as the 2nd Artillery Corps), so the relatively low number of nukes will rise rapidly in the coming years.
You have noone to blame but yourself. America wants to dominate the world and destabilize regimes not firendly with them, while expecting everyone to bend over. CHina will not bend over.
China will show you your borders.
>>29732258
But then why does Best Korea still exist?
They (say that they) have the capability to hit CONUS. Do they schedule their missile tests with the rest of the world? I think not. Does that add up to them getting nuked? No.
>>29731956
Only a matter of time before satellites in GTO can spot a carrier & track it real time
Of course then you are saying, "we'll kill every chi-com satellite at the start of a war"
But seriously, the US needs to start producing cheaper carriers for more decentralized firepower
Go eat a dog, Mao, and masturbate to the idea that one day, maybe, if a mega-plague were to utterly kill every civilian in the United States, your spit-and-polished pathetic nation of show-off paper tigers MIGHT last long enough to be relevant if whatever remained of the US Pacific Fleet and whatever interested parties would like a turkey leg of your crisp corpse, didn't decide to glass your ass with SLBM's, just to prevent you from pissing on everyone's Wheaties fifty years down the line.
Because that's what it would take for you to get the Pacific out of our hands. Our utter eradication without you firing a shot.
>>29732276
>They transit through a 3000 miles long network called "The Underground Great Wall"
You WHAT?
3k miles of tunnels?
Seems legit...
>>29732285
You are aware that you can track trajectory within the first few minutes, right?
Are you really this ignorant?
>>29732285
Best Korea still exists for two reasons
1. Refugees
2. China test ground
>>29732302
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Great_Wall_of_China
And they have sections of them in Tibet as well. Deep in the mountain ranges.
China really is reenacting the Fallout series by building vaults.
>>29732276
ahahhaahaha
go back to eating dogs you fucking faggot.
if anyone is bullying and trying to expand borders, its you retards.
fuck, US aircraft have been threatened with being shot down for conducting ops in open air space NEAR the chinese SCS
you guys are showing up at the big kids table with this big nuclear bargaining chip and acting like king big dick of atom splitting mountain, and the US are Russia are just like "okay, and?we've done this for 50 years.)
sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, chang.
>>29732320
>>29732339
how many countries has china invaded recently? i'll wait
fucking retard
>>29732302
It really ain't so hard to dig underground m8
Chinese are completely insufferable. Their mentality is that of a 15 year old who's just gotten his first beater car and thinks he's Mario Andretti in a Ferrari. Can't even work in STEM without Chang telling you how great China is. China Rising roundeye! We rule word soon! Then why are you fucking here photocopying our IP?
China a shit. Can't wait for them to fuck up and be glassed.
>China fires conventional missile at US CSG
>'Oh shit they launched a missile, is it a nuke? Should we fire back a nuke? Call the President'
>Obama: 'Do not escalate, we will be in trouble if we fire a nuke'
And then the CSG was died.
>>29732371
at which point the JCOS loses their shit and overrides the president and goes to the SIOP to fuck shit up
>>29732382
which would be illegal and also supposedly impossible
>>29732392
I'm pretty sure the JCOS can enact something where the SECDEF acts as president and can launch the nukes if the pres ever refuses to act in a time where action is needed, but I'm not sure.
>>29732392
No. If it were then the US would be vulnerable to a nuclear strike where the CIC was taken out.
Use your head.
>>29731416
>ching chong chong chong ching ping chong ping pong ding dong ching chong
learn english please
>>29732371
One missle wont give you a sunk carrier
>>29732412
>if the pres ever refuses to act in a time where action is needed
nope.
(Supposedly) Potus decides whether and when nuclear forces are used. If he says no, they don't go. Potus is cinc of all US forces, remember? So doing something like that (in that case most likely against the direct orders) is quite literally the opposite of what every member of the military (including jcs) has sworn to do.
If however the pres dies in a nuclear fireball or something, then (and ONLY then) the next in command (VP, etc) can take over. US command structure is iirc explicitly designed in such a way that civilian and military administration must be in agreement for this, is it not?
>>29732417
Thats what the flying command posts (NEOC? forgot the acronym) are for. The whole "evacuate the leadership out of DC in 10 minutes"? yeah, thats because 10 min is the approx time a depressed-angle shot from a sub off the US coast takes to hit. All those procedures are there because the figurative "cut off the snake's head" run true for the US government, because positive control of nuclear weapons MUST remain in civilian hands. According to US law, anyway. Personally I think thats a bad idea for the very reason you stated, but things are the way they are.
>>29732474
You are really silly if you think a 2nd strike cannot be carried out by JSOC.
If so the soviets could have suitcase nuked DC and keked heartily.
>>29732474
You are forgetting about all the individual boomer commanders.
It doesn't matter whether it works or not right now, because they're gonna get it to work eventually and then we'll have problems.
>>29732500
Not really, DF-21D can be engaged at every one of its flight profiles, including terminal.
It gives them reach, but its not unkillable by a longshot.
>>29732474
what I remember from Command & Control (great audio/physical book, read that shit) is that the JCOS can cease control of the nuclear weapons if;
>president/vp/secdef are dead or somehow unable to be contacted
>president/vp/secdef are not of sound mind
>pres/vp/secdef are not doing what is best for the nation and refusing to strike when a strike is needed.
>>29732500
>they get this shitpile working
>harharhar americarns row rhat
>oh hey china check this out, it's our X37 and it kills satellites
>rut ro
>>29732474
>hillary* is elected
>chinks nuke everything but DC
>we must not retaliate because something something diversity and gun control
>final nuke lands on DC
>america ded
*replace hillary with a generic chinese plant of your choice
>>29732474
No. None of what you say is true chinkboy. The military's allegiance is to the U.S. constitution first. If a president fails to defend the nation he will be replaced, quickly, by someone who will.
Also, the authentication codes exist purely to verify legitimate launch orders and do nothing to control the launch beyond that. That's why the two-man rule applies. To avoid launches by an individual.
>>29732509
Oh, and to add, The USN has a range advantage over the DF-21D, not including aircraft.
>>29732474
>(Supposedly) Potus decides whether and when nuclear forces are used.
NCA gets really complicated the moment either the President or SecDef disagrees with the decision as the President can fire the SecDef and move down the chain of command as needed to get approval, it takes some convoluted mix of circumstances to effectively relieve the president of command in such a situation (basically the VP and a majority of the cabinet needs to say that the Pres has gone off his rocker).
>>29732491
US boomer commanders only ever get discretion to launch if for some reason a SIOP is selected where they go into dead-hand mode.
>>29732484
>>29732514
>>29732517
yall need to listen to this guy >>29732534
>>29732517
>If a president fails to defend the nation he will be replaced, quickly, by someone who will.
>this is what rednecks really believe
Imma stop arguing here and fuck off to >>>/s/ to chill out.
I'm done here.
>>29732516
kek
>>29732550
>hurr durr muh rednecks
Whatever. Taking out the CIC won't prevent retaliation by the US. Get over it chink.
>>29732550
Ok, bye. Dont let the door hit you on the way out.
>>29732543
There is no dead hand like system in the USN. Commanders of boomers have full discretion to unleash hell. Thats their entire point. If the US dissappears into a black hole its not as if the boomers are now toothless.
>Mfw the only argument Chinks have of using DF-21 is hoping that they won't be annihilated via nukes
KEK. American nuclear arsenals matches Russia. China has no hope of winning any trade.
>>29732574
Excuse me, I didn't mean dead-hand, I meant Fail Deadly. Either way, it's extremely unlikely to ever be used outside of rather specific circumstances due to the chance of an uncontrolled (from the NCA point of view) launch increasing to unacceptable levels extremely quickly that ends up being detrimental to deescalation efforts. The only known country that falls back on a fail deadly policy and gives commanders actual control over whether or not to fire at all and on whom is the UK.
>>29732574
don't boomers radio to the modern equivalent of SAC and get the "hey we're still alive" code, and then if for any reason they don't get that code the next time they try, launch?
fuck, even the minuteman silos have a sort of dead hand system.
it works like so;
>ewo gets sent
>auth, all of that shit, turn keys
now every missile needs two sets of launch auths to launch, so two LCCs must act.
however, if it only gets one code, there is a delay until launch.
if that delay expires, it will launch regardless.
so a EWO still has to be issued and everything, but there is a kind of dead hand.
>>29732608
This is false.
The NCA is to be in constant contact with boomers in the event of nuclear event sending an alive signal. The commanders still have discretion in launch, there is nothing (beyond legal) that locks them out of the nukes.
>>29732630
You are correct about the delay, and order of operations, but nothing physically stops the commander (other than morals, crew, legal) from instituteing strike at will. The sub sends no signals due to EMCON, its all receiving.
>>29732666
ah, okay.
I figured it was like the old chrome dome failsafe procedure where you assume command is dead until they tell you otherwise.
>>29732651
The SIOP first given to them must have a fail deadly policy in order for boomers to have any independent authority to fire. Otherwise they stay as a second strike deterrent.
>>29732683
Ok, first thats dead wrong, but lets approch it logically to show how dumb it is.
How are you a second strike deterrent if you are submerged for over a month?
Say you submerge, and the happening happens, and you rise 45 days later after everything is thoroughly fucked to death?
>>29730372
That's an American.
>>29730928
A harpoon to the top of the deck would mission kill the carrier in most cases.
>>29732745
oh man, how much would that suck?
>patrol ends
>pull into pearl
>sir, radiation indicators show a massive spike
>get on your protective suits and surface, I'm going to the bridge
>pearl no longer exists
>uhhh, sorry guys, we got nuked so there's nothing to do and nowhere to go
>>29731848
For a long time now.
>>29732750
How do you know?
The orginal guy was pro chicom, i was there. Others after might have been copy cats, but the first guy was definitely 100% chicom.
>>29731416
trucks are easier to hide than boats, if only because a missile truck can be hidden on a civilian boat
>>29732772
Well yeah, if that guys wonka world is true.
In reality the skipper would tell his boys leave is cancelled, submerge, and go hunting.
>>29732088
The US would have far more to lose in satellites than the Chinese.
>>29732793
Pretty much everything weapon wise, sans early jdams, would work.
Coms would be much more spotty, but LOS systems are still very much a thing.
>>29732298
>But seriously, the US needs to start producing cheaper carriers for more decentralized firepower
the US has always done this, it's also the logic behind the V-22 and F-35 programs. More firepower in a smaller package.
>>29732101
>>29732119
Except that was 50 years ago. Unironically 50 years ago.
Not saying the Chinese system is more capable, but it's been 50 years. Tracking systems, satellite technology, energy storage, everything has gotten MUCH better.
>>29732130
Nah. It's 2015!
We can track from orbit on GSO satellites.
>>29732516
HRC of all people WOULD retaliate. She wrote the TPP (a bill designed to get China under control) with Ted Cruz.
>>29732517
>If a president fails to defend the nation he will be replaced, quickly, by someone who will.
Wrong, the military would just accept the loss and then bitch to Congress and their friends in the media, who would then unload on the President instead.
That said if the President gives a no-go, that probably means there's not enough political capital for a war anyway. See the Syria conflict, Obama was cockblocked by Congress back in 2011. Now all he can do is send special forces, but only because he only needs authorization (in terms of funding) for that from the Senate.
>>29732216
>ICBMs
Off yourself
>>29732232
Only a few Chinese ICBM's are liquid.
>>29732868
yeah but they're a pretty decent amount of chinas nukes (like 80 of their 260 iirc) and have the biggest warheads.
>>29732339
China hasn't invaded anyone or even been at war since 1979. It's one of their flaws. Not much experience.
>>29732802
v-22 is a piece of shit
The logic behind it is "I'm a crooked marine officer and I'm paid to push it"
America class ships aren't cheap either, and they'll be going out with maybe 4 F-35's in normal operation.
>>29732448
A nuke will mission kill it.
>>29730928
The difference between the Tiger tank and this missile is that one was actually effective in combat, and extremely feared.
>>29732890
You are a piece of shit.
I bet you think its unsafe, like the ignorant fuccboi you are. Go ahead, say it you fucking faggot. Make my day.
>Inb4 pics of crashed V-22s, as if such anecdotes are worth a bag of dicks.
Kill yourself, shitposter.
>>29732894
You gotta get that nuke to the flight deck of a ship protected by many other ships with significant missle and ballistic missle defense.
Good luck.
>>29732904
Stfu chicom
>>29732509
We haven't even attempted to intercept Mach 10 missiles from orbit.
Oppenheimer himself said our BDM capability can take down 10-20 ICBMs max.
>>29732911
How is it logical in any way to call me a chicom, when im defending an american piece of equipment?
>>29732890
the logic behind it is to get more range
>>29730211
>ICBMs
>hitting moving targets
>>29732894
>Implying China does nuclear first strikes
They would really be asking to lose against USA. This whole DF-21 missile is a dumb bet by China that USA will back down and won't go nuclear.
>>29732928
>DF21
>IC
lol
>>29732933
>USA
>backing down ever
if they think this, they are truly retarded.
they're gonna start an arms race they can't fucking win.
china just needs to sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and go back to eating dogs, making iphones, and building cargo ships.
>>29732607
Who are you quoting?
>>29732924
DF-21s dont go into space, and we have mach 15 interceptors.
There is a big difference from catching a missle that may happen to fly over you, and catching one that is aimed at you.
One is a right time right place prospect, the other is not.
>>29732904
every time something goes wrong with the V-22, they blame everything other than the aircraft
Also the V-22 is not used in anything approaching combat conditions, its a fair weather bird for looking cool in peacetime.
>>29732927
>compares it to some 40 year old chopper
every fucking time
V-22 can't carry anything close to those payloads either
>I will never ever be paid by someone to post propaganda on the internet
Why live
>>29732933
>>29732945
As with everything China does, their bet is that the US won't intervene in the first place, as has been policy with them since the end of the US-Vietnam war. Notice how Ford and Carter had no problem letting the Sino-Vietnamese war occur.
The core problem with China's military, and the Chinese Communist Party in general, is that they cannot think outside the box. Which, in terms of strategy, means they base everything they do on the notion of a noninterventionist US pacific policy. The missiles, tanks, etc are built to be good enough to attack rice farmers, not American warships (even though the official story might say otherwise).
>>29732776
CMANO fag is not pro-Chinese. He just believes whatever CMANO with undying faith.
>>29732958
>every time something goes wrong with the V-22, they blame everything other than the aircraft
No, no they dont. Thats your dumbass bullshit excuse to weasel out of cognitively admitting you were wrong.
>Also the V-22 is not used in anything approaching combat conditions,
The V-22 saw extensive use in Afghanistan and iraq you worthless faggot.
>>compares it to some 40 year old chopper
Thats the helicopter it is replaceing you waste of oxygen.
Go ahead and kill yourself at any time.
>>29732904
Your ass pain is showing American.
>>29732975
>CMANO fag is not pro-Chinese.
He is, he got caught in his screencap. Had moonrunes all over the taskbar and desktop.
>>29732980
Your hunger for food which is driving you to shitpost this much for 50 cents is showing chicom
>>29732980
Fuck off lesser.
Bring Legitmate arguments, or keep being worthless.
>>29732800
Then why do we keep putting more and more satellites in orbit?
Losing our GPS guidance, a lot of our comms, and surveillance capability hurts us a lot more than the Chinese.
Simply because we have 10,000 satellites to their 500. The Chinese have the advantage in that area considering very few of their weapons or communications are satellite-dependent.
>>29732976
>The V-22 saw extensive use in Afghanistan and iraq you worthless faggot.
And the F-35 is "operational" despite being used exclusively for photoshoots for the Mainstream Media.
Flying out of Kabul and Baghdad's airports aren't exactly 'combat operations'.
>>29733001
>The Chinese have the advantage in that area considering very few of their weapons or communications are satellite-dependent.
a howitzer is not satellite dependent at all yet is still ineffective against a modern navy
>>29732976
V-22 is not replacing the CH-46, its over triple the weight, much larger, and doesn't even lift as much vertically.
The marines stressed this point often.
It's also not a chopper so it can't do things like SAR at sea, or boarding operations against other ships, can't really do sling loading, etc
In regards to afghanistan, the V-22 was used little as its high altitude performance is non-existant.
>>29732834
>she wrote
Haha no
She left office January 17th 2013. TPP was mostly negotiated 2013-2015.
She has nothing to do with it also. State department doesn't handle writing trade treaties.
>>29733001
>Then why do we keep putting more and more satellites in orbit?
Because GPS is awesome.
>Losing our GPS guidance, a lot of our comms, and surveillance capability hurts us a lot more than the Chinese.
Of course, but it does not hurt us as bad as implied. Great backup systems are in place.
>>29733015
Eh, a lot of US strike capabilities is around GPS, inertial guidance systems have no where near the accuracy.
>>29732883
The Chinese explicitly state they will do no first strikes. They prefer for a billion to die conventionally to a billion dying in nuclear war.
They put their money where their mouth is by having about half of their anti-US ICBMs being liquid fueled.
But since 2014 that has changed signficantly and we've seem knew MIRV solid-fueled ICBM's and and increase in nuclear warheads.
>>29732910
ICBM's going mach 10 are not the same thing as subsonic harpoons.
Can someone TLDR me on this missile?
What's so special about it
>>29733060
basically, truck mounted, solid fueled, high yield/mirv.
not an anywhere-in-the-world missile but with the truck it can hit america.
well, thats what the chinks say anyway.
at best, its old ruskishit with a new paintjob.
>>29732910
ICBM's going mach 10 are not the same thing as subsonic harpoons.
Oppenheimer himself has said America's (and everyone's) BDM system would only take down a limited amount of ICBM's.
>>29733060
China made missile.
Claims can sink CBG
CHICOMS masterbsting furiously
Hard-line US supporters steaming from head because world believes China
China most likely quietly laughing because of all attention
Missile is actually just very irrelevant in grand scheme
People on internet have keyboard battles over it.
>>29733002
>Flying out of Kabul and Baghdad's airports aren't exactly 'combat operations'.
They have the range to do this, how exactly is this a bad thing?
They were used extensively for air scout and were used in direct combat operations.
Again, the noose is waiting.
>>29733012
>V-22 is not replacing the CH-46
It is for troop movements and cargo resupply.
>It's also not a chopper so it can't do things like SAR at sea,
It has done SAR you asshat
>and doesn't even lift as much vertically.
It lifts 2 times as much vertically, dumbass, you lose only 5k pounds between vertical and STOL. Its 3 times as much STOL.
It also slings shit just fine, you faggot.
>In regards to afghanistan, the V-22 was used little as its high altitude performance is non-existant.
It saw extensive use in anbar and hemland.
Good job being unable to even read a fucking wiki.
>>29732951
Wait, what ICBM's go into space? Wouldn't that be fucking retarded?
Mach 15? What? Which interceptor? Sm-2a doesn't exist yet.
>>29733022
TERCOM is very good, TERCOM/GPS is actually more accurate than just GPS for the tomahawk.
>>29733057
The USN is well aware.
>>29732986
Picture?
His english is way too good in my opinion.
>>29733015
>Great backup systems are in place.
Such as?
>>29733076
Again, the USN is well aware.
The DF-21D is not a ICBM. Its not due to capabilitys, its due to limited range and being out of position in regard to a US mainland strike.
You wont be out of position if you are the target.
This is the last time im going to retard it for you.
>>29733098
I don't think any icbm's go into space save for the top of their arc for a minute or two, but even then it's more armstrong line than anything else.
>>29732299
You can smell the destroyed cunt from nanjing with that one.
>>29733098
Depends on your definition of space. Mesosphere/thermosphere if you are being autistic as hell.
>Mach 15? What? Which interceptor?
Too ignorant to continue conversation with. Lurkmore or GTFO.
>>29733115
Maymay is over a year old.
I dont have it anymore, orginal guy was BTFO so hard he never came back.
>he posted his chingchong skype name too, lel
>>29733013
The TPP talks have been going on since the Bush years, both Colin Powell and Hilary Clinton worked on it. Obama, Kerry and Cruz did do the final negotiations on milk and car parts though.
>>29733112
TERCOM?
Why exactly do we waste our time with so many military GPS satellites each year?
>>29733126
Tercom, ins, PPP, etc.
>>29733131
So what has the US navy done to defend from it?
I don't see how US BDM can be so limited according to Oppeheimer, but somehow the US navy is not limited as well.
>>29733168
Because GPS is awesome, and makes our dumb bombs smart for cheap.
JDAM is not the only game in town though.
>>29733183
there's no real need to defend from it.
it's CEP is so retarded high it is so unlikely to hit a CBG, there's just no point.
>>29733183
>I don't see how US BDM can be so limited according to Oppeheimer, but somehow the US navy is not limited as well.
I already explained this. If you dont see it, you never will. We are not talking about ICBMs.
>>29733148
>space
I'd say most people's definition of space is when you start floating. The 100km like is kind of an arbitrary line.
>too ignorant
Educate me. The only BDM missile I know of in the US inventory that can go Mach 15 is the SM-2A and that isn't gonna be operational until 2019.
>>29733206
>Educate me.
I absolutely refuse, educate yourself.
>>29733163
No.
The majority of the trade rounds were 2013-2015.
The State department doesn't even handle trade deals anyway.
It's the USTR under the Executive branch. Ted Cruz didn't even touch the TPP. It was negotiated by the USTR behind closed doors. No one else.
Nice meme
>>29733193
Where exactly is this CEP number you bring up?
>>29733194
Could you kindly point out where? I am doing my best to learn so I can stop having to sift through these endless meme threads.
The DF-21 and DF-26 are simply shorter ICBM's. Just cut half the fuel out. They go the same speed and reach a similar altitude and terminal velocity.
>>29733221
Well enjoy more uneducated opinions on /k/ because you aren't willing to type out one name.
>>29733265
>They go the same speed and reach a similar altitude and terminal velocity.
Absolutely not.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_missile
>>29732360
Vietnam
>you lost btw
Then you Sat around saber rattling at the militarily superior and larger nuclear power India (kek)
How does it feel knowing you have one 10 man APC per 800 peacetime PLA soldiers? The PLA has less mechanization than the Nazis did in 1939. Your communist party military can barely operate domestically, your officer corps, besides having no combat experience, spend 6 hours a day memorizing party propaganda.
>>29733280
You are absolutely unwilling to help yourself, me helping you now will only lead to you asking for more later. This is not arcane knowlege.
If you want to be retarded due to lazyness, thats what you will be.
>>29732117
>implying intensifies
The Pacific is America's lake. You're going to be taught not to forget that when a certain someone makes America great again.
>>29733240
>behind closed doors
which top members of the government, including the SoS and people like Cruz, are a part of. The USTR spearheaded it but they know that whatever they write is worthless if Congress won't pass it or if the President won't sign it. It's a lengthy process that has played out across both Presidencies.
>>29732360
>how many countries has china invaded recently? i'll wait
For starters china is having a major border dispute with South Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, the Philippines, Japan and Indonesia.
>>29732745
>he doesn't know about ELF communication with submarines to tell them to come up for detailed instructions
You're actually fucking retarded, bravo.
>>29733304
>proofsrussiacock.jpg
Funny if true.
>>29730332
>If we can't find the TELs, we can't hit them with missiles
Entirely untrue, given that the US has both satellites in orbit thst can detect thE launches of ICBMS as well as the SPY-1 radar on every Burke and Tico out there, 36 of which are equipped with SM-3 capable of knocking out ballistic missiled or satellites in orbital phase
Furthermore, due to Best Korean fuckery, the Navy has become proficient in this in the Pacific, so don't be too worried m8. If tensions continue to rise, the Navy will get more SM-3 equipped ships in the AO as quick as they can.
>>29732163
>200 yen has been deposited into your account
>>29730211
Stop making these thread you fucking prick..
>>29732276
>3000 miles of tunels
>US agression
>hidden from ebil imperialist dogs SPY satullites
Just for using the word spy this deserves to be a 1000 yuan post, coming from the nation that has any kind of relevance thanks to blatanly copying and stealing shit from murica or buying stolen shit from the pesky jews or ripoffs from russian crap
>>29732850
Senate can only consent funding not appropriate the house has to give a slush fund for this to be true. read the constitution idiot.
>>29730296
>>29730211
>>29730928
>>29731416
DF-21D. The last D is important, or else you are talking about a nuclear MRBM intended for use against land targets.
>>29732924
I should not be saying this as I am not supposed to know but yes we and do on a regular basis. Several times a year in the south pacific.
>>29730318
>>Nevermind that there's no damned targeting network for it
Starting strong with a lie - the sats have been up since '06 and the combined system reached IOC in 2010
>>and anything they do have will be so much debris in LEO five minutes after the war begins
Weaseling over your lie with threats to shit up outer space. You are literally the same people that claim a sunk carrier will guarantee a nuclear response.
>>29733486
Rumor mill says there's some new way of communicating with deep subs, with an actual decent datarate
>>29730211
It's the coastal artillery. It will do most of its work with forcing the USA in getting around the DF-21 - like operating carriers at a greater ranger away from China and the hotspots which will reduce possible sortie numbers dramatically.
>>29730211
Meme, no matter what the chink shills say. I mean, it's not like we've got an unsinkable aircraft carrier right next to the SCS anyway... OH WAIT...
>>29732928
>thinks any DF is an ICBM
>>>/out/
>>29733096
>muh meme vtol
>V22 attempts combat insertion
>fails to stay vertically
>drops to the ground, killing everybody on board
>no modifications were made to the plane ever since
>>29733096
>It is for troop movements and cargo resupply.
Yea things that could be done by a C-130 for a fraction of the price.
>It lifts 2 times as much vertically
Only if you are trading fuel for payload, it'll lift 5k lbs vertically with a full tank of gas at sea level, which drops to nothing by 5000 ft
If you are taking off & landing STOL you might as well just use a fixed wing plane.
>It also slings shit just fine
Slinging means it can't use its forward flight mode, which is the whole point of building it.
>It saw extensive use in anbar and hemland.
It saw makework usage, and marines getting army choppers to do the real work.
>>29732339
While I applaud your hatred of the chinks as it should be, you're a delusional retard if you don't realize the US bullies the entire world into doing what is advantageous for the US whenever possible and before you call me a eurocuck I live in a first world country in north america not an immigration center
>>29735710
You really don't understand the elements and applications of power. The US setup the global system, in conjunction with Europe, to make it so that aligning with the west is mutually beneficial. That's not bullying. That's a smart application of power.
>>29735484
>C-130 for
brb hovering with a c-130
brb landing on a 200 m uneven plain with a c-130
you should kill yourself
>>29735726
good job on using double speak you massive faggot, I didn't say it's wrong but you should be able to admit it and understand it because if the truth makes you uncomfortable you can't handle it.
>>29735765
You can land on carriers with C-130's
Nothing stops them from putting full sized flight decks on every other ship too
Other than corruption & the helicopter mafia
>>29735484
>Slinging means it can't use its forward flight mode
You are literally claiming it can't go anywhere with a sling load. What's in this picture, then? Appears to be flying forward to me.
>>29735839
?
Is english not your first language? Look at the orientation of the proprotors
>>29735848
>forward flight mode
What does this mean to you? Is English not ~your~ first language?
>>29735778
"The truth" as you represent it is just your uninformed and uneducated opinion. Nothing more.
The VAST, VAST majority of alignment with western preferences comes from soft power, not hard power.
>>29735863
?
What do you call it?
>>29733135
>>29733098
Yes, ICBMs go into space.
>>29732509
>DF-21D can be engaged at every one of its flight profiles, including terminal.
Midcourse is still challenging, and involves the intercepting platform being in the right place at the right time.
>>29734472
>I should not be saying this as I am not supposed to know but yes we and do on a regular basis. Several times a year in the south pacific.
What?
>>29732208
>No US president is EVER going to order a 3rd world country nuked.
For something that is never going to happen they sure do plan for it a lot.
>>29732227
It's not doctrine, its that the time it takes for the US to detect and attack, decide what to do, issue those orders, and for the orders to be executed is pretty close to the flight time of an ICBM
>>29732382
Illegal order.
STRATCOM does not answer to the JCOS. It answers to the President and the Secretary of Defense who are both termed the National Command Authorities.
Only the NCA can issue orders to STRATCOM.
>>29732412
The Secretary of Defense must have an Acting President to issue orders to STRATCOM.
If the President is incapacitated, a lawful successor must be found before any lawful orders can be given.
The Secretary of Defense is sixth in line.
You would need to pass the Vice President, Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate, Secretary of State, and then Secretary of the Treasury before the Secretary of Defense was in line. At that point he becomes acting president, and the Undersecretary of Defense becomes acting Secretary of Defense.
>>29732474
>is it not?
Yes.
>>29732417
>. If it were then the US would be vulnerable to a nuclear strike where the CIC was taken out.
It is.
>>29732484
>You are really silly if you think a 2nd strike cannot be carried out by JSOC.
It can not.
>>29732491
Still need properly formatted orders from STRATCOM.
>>29732514
This is incorrect.
The JCOS can NEVER act as NCA.
>>29732517
>The military's allegiance is to the U.S. constitution first. If a president fails to defend the nation he will be replaced, quickly, by someone who will.
This is incorrect. If he is in sound mind, his orders stand. Not liking his order is not sufficient to decide he is not of sound mind.
>>29732534
>President can fire the SecDef and move down the chain of command as needed to get approval,
Only if the Secretary of Defense is mentally defective.
>>29732572
>Taking out the CIC won't prevent retaliation by the US.
It will until a lawful successor to the president is located.
>>29732574
>Commanders of boomers have full discretion to unleash hell.
Incorrect.
>Thats their entire point. If the US dissappears into a black hole its not as if the boomers are now toothless.
They must have the consent of the XO and the presence of lawful orders from STRATCOM.
>>29732683
>The SIOP first given to them must have a fail deadly policy in order for boomers to have any independent authority to fire. Otherwise they stay as a second strike deterrent.
It's not called SIOP anymore.
SSBN's do not have independent authority to fire.
In order for them to launch without authority (an illegal act) the XO as well as the majority of the crew would have to agree to purposefully engage in an illegal act.
>>29732630
>on't boomers radio to the modern equivalent of SAC and get the "hey we're still alive" code, and then if for any reason they don't get that code the next time they try, launch?
No.
>fuck, even the minuteman silos have a sort of dead hand system.
No.
The missiles require the majority of LCC's in the flight/squadron to 'vote' to launch. If they do then they all launch.
The ICBMs can also be remotely launched from the E-6.
>>29736363
Do you ever get tired of knowing everything?
>>29732761
>A harpoon to the top of the deck would mission kill the carrier in most cases.
To the deck of what? The Queen Mary with the fire sprinklers off and the cabins filled with gasoline vapor?
>>29731844
For which item in particular? The hit probability I calculated based on a 30 knot carrier speed, and approximately 15 minutes of flight time. That's probably being generous because the CSG will get a flash notification within 30 seconds of launch being detected.
The Australian think tank link and the link for the DOD estimates of the numbers per year are both on the Wiki page for DF-21.
>>29732163
Good way to get 3 gorges dam busted open.
>>29732194
They both cost about $10 million.
>>29732761
Doubtful. You need to take out all of the cats, so you need about 4 hits. Good luck with that. You'll also want something more robust, to do more damage than can be repaired by the crew overnight.
>>29732181
>>29733098
>Mach 15? What? Which interceptor?
You rang?
>>29736363
>>29736309
hey, learn something new every day.
thanks for correcting me there.
>>29737817
shitty comic but pretty much, yeah.
>>29733265
>The DF-21 and DF-26 are simply shorter ICBM's.
>Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile
>Shorter so doen't have the same range
>Doesn't have the range to be inter-continental ranged
>Is still an inter-continental ranged ballistic missile
Really now?
guys
why don't we just drop grand slams, MOABS, or daisy cutters onto carriers?
>>29732065
No- no we didn't. And I'd wager we don't now either.
>>29732299
HAHAHAHA!
Shut the fuck up, Chinoy, or well send the Vietnamese in to knock some of your sharp corners off.
