As the CVBG around the carrier John C. Stennis of the United States Navy is conducting FON-Ops in the South China Sea, Chinese netizens posted photos of transiting DF-21D ASBM launchers on a highway on Hainan Island.
>>30019632
similiarily, it looks like Woody Island (China's main island-base outside Hainan in the SCS) is also getting upgraded for DF-21D ASBM deployment.
>>30019640
Eventually, all conventional strike weapons would be deployed in the SCS to cover all vectors of attack.
tl:dr DF-21 does the only thing it is good for, local consumption
>>30019640
>sticking launchers whos only defense is mobility on a 2km squared island
I dont even know anymore, china. I just dont even fucking know. Might as well make static emplacements.
>claim entire south china sea
>puff out chest
>say you will defend it vigorously against any aggression or territorial violations
>burger carrier waddles its fat way through
>post images online saying how strong you are in response
Is China the biggest cuck around?
>>30019868
Silos also are in static emplacements. So is Aegis Ashore in Romania.
>>30019879
Yes, but the 21D is not an interceptor or a nuke silo, its a conventional weapon whos main defense is mobility.
So chinas idea is to put these highly mobile launchers onto a 2km sandbox with no features where it can blend.
Those launchers are now a waste and nothing more than a target.
>>30019905
Before they become a target, they will launch their payload.
And it is not that those islands arent defended by SAM as well. Woody Island is especially well-defended with HQ-9 SAM and CIWS, as well as a complement of fighters.
>>30019922
A blind shot after their kill chain is broken isn't even worth expending an SM-3 to deal with.
>>30019879
>Aegis Ashore in Romania
>They actually built a static missile site that can just be saturated by Kalibrs
Fucking Romanians I swear
Their silo based missiles are not as good as df21d
>>30019938
>blind shot
China literally has an over 9000 asset redundant kill-chain in place.
Not only their satellites, but OTH radars, sonar networks and a shitload of maritime militia disguised as merchant ships and hiding within the busiest sealane in the world, who all can call in ASBM strikes against targets identified.
And if the carrier is really not in range or found, it is better to just launch the ASBMs against a random US base in the area than to leave it to destruction.
>>30019922
>they will launch their payload.
They are still very much a target after due to the fact that it can be reloaded.
>And it is not that those islands arent defended by SAM as well. Woody Island is especially well-defended with HQ-9 SAM and CIWS, as well as a complement of fighters.
There is logically not enough SAMs on the island to protect it from a concentrated attack from the foe the 21D is meant to strike.
For example, ONE single ohio class SSGN can launch 154 tomahawks from 1,700 km away.
Each HQ-9 system fires four missles before a time consuming reload process.
Do the math, there are not enough TA580 TELs in existance to stop an attack, even if you were to foolishly stick them ALL on the island.
>>30019963
>shitload of maritime militia disguised as merchant ships and hiding within the busiest sealane in the world, who all can call in ASBM strikes against targets identified.
>Marine militla shitheaps can give targeting info to the DF-21
Wew lad, its not true, but if it was the US would cream itself. Imagine the possibilitys for disinfo.
In reality the detection and communication chain is pretty damn long with lots of moving peices.
>>30019878
Kind of hard for them to be cucked when it's not Chinese territory in the first place.
>>30019905
Nigga, u wut?
The things have to stop for like 30 minutes to fire.
The reason they are useful is because they move positions each satellite pass, not because they are driving around in circles at 40 mph.
>>30019959
The DF-5A/B ICBMs are just as good as any other silo-bound and liquid-fueled ICBM, like the SS-18 Satan.
Before it comes to a nuclear exchange, tensions usually rise for months or at least days, which would be enough time to put liquid-fueled ICBMs to launch on warning status and at hair-trigger alert. So, the solid-vs-liquid fuel debate is non-sensical for that matter.
Liquid fueled ICBMs also have the advantage that their thrust can be controled and thus they can fly rather unpredictably, giving them some more survivability vs ABM measures. Compared to that, solid-fuel ICBMs are very predictable, as you cant just switch off or throttle down a solid-fuel rocket engine.
This is why, for all ballistic missiles, the last stage, the "Bus" which carries the warheads, is always liquid fueled, so that it can perform fine-tuning and altitude controls before releasing their payloads back into atmosphere. Now, the DF-5 and similiar liquid fueled ICBMs can do that their entire flight, not just at terminal stage.
>>30019996
>Wew lad, its not true, but if it was the US would cream itself. Imagine the possibilitys for disinfo.
http://stockton.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1406&context=ils
>The Law of Naval Warfare and China’s Maritime Militia
>>30019978
>There is logically not enough SAMs on the island to protect it from a concentrated attack from the foe the 21D is meant to strike.
Source required
>>30020019
>The reason they are useful is because they move positions each satellite pass,
The reason that sats are used is because its unfeasible to use other assets to keep tabs on them.
Contain them to a very small island, and real time observation becomes a possibility.
>>30020038
>real time observation
Umm how?
>>30020045
How do you say airplane in Chinese?
>>30019905
>nothing more than a target
Settle down, navy seal
>>30019978
An Ohio-class that expends its warload against a single island base, is an Ohio less that can strike Hainan island and more important bases in the SCS.
China's strategy is sound. Give the US more targets to strike, harden the targets as good as it can be and give all of them the weapons to perform A2/AD so that the US cant ignore them.
And in the end, you'll have People's War and Human Wave, only with hardened island bases. More targets than the US has ordnance.
Also, Chinese airbase and missile base shelters are very very much hardened. Not even a Tomahawk with its pissy 450kg warhead would be able to take it out in a single hit. Pic related.
>>30020032
>DF-21 kill chain never, ever meantioned
Nice try?
>>30020063
>airplane
How do you say
"Interception" in Burger?
Either by SAM or fighter.
>>30020081
Why should they mention the obvious?
Chinese spy trawlers are a thing since the early 50s. And since every single of them carries a radio with them and at least simple navigation tools (nowadays, they would carry encrypted Beidou satellite messaging systems), every single of them would be able to report the position of US carriers that they detect with their Mk1 eyeballs.
It's not hard.
If the Serbians could shoot down the US stealth bomber by the help of HUMINT (serbian peasants in the near of the US base) reporting the scheduled flights of the F-117, the Chinese could as well.
>>30020071
>And in the end, you'll have People's War and Human Wave, only with hardened island bases. More targets than the US has ordnance.
This is the same flawed logic that had Japan garrisoning islands that were never attacked in WW2. America only needs to sweep a couple islands at most for the 'wall' to become irrelevant.
>>30020098
Setting aside that is not enough to target with, or that a Chinese fishing boat wouldn't be ignored.
>>30020118
Still that island hopping has costed the US valuable troops and material. So much, that they decided against invading Japans mainland and instead made them surrender by nuke.
These island bases fulfilled their missions quite well. Just the Japs never expected the US to nuke them twice, instead of attempting an invasion and giving them their apocalyptic last stand that they desired so much.
>>30020071
>An Ohio-class that expends its warload against a single island base, is an Ohio less that can strike Hainan island and more important bases in the SCS.
The point was the sub wont need its entire ordinance, it was just an example to show force parity.
Also, the tomahawks will be used to target static and semi static facilities, runways, etc.
Also, the ohio class and then make the short hop to rearm and strike again, and again.
>More targets than the US has ordnance.
This has yet to happen, in any meaningful way. I mean i gave you ONE asset that can conceivablely counter an entire island. Add in naval airpower and surface power, US based airpower and the force disparity is HUGE. One nimtz class aircraft carrier alone can hold 6 million pounds of ordinance.
>Also, Chinese airbase and missile base shelters are very very much hardened. Not even a Tomahawk with its pissy 450kg warhead would be able to take it out in a single hit.
The BLU-97/B is a hell of a drug, along with 1k pounds of PBXN has shown itself to be very good at hurting infrastructure.
Still, the target would be the runway and assets, not the bunkers.
Once the defensive equipment is gone, you can drop MOPs at your leasure.
>>30020098
>every single of them would be able to report the position of US carriers that they detect with their Mk1 eyeballs.
This does not equal the kill chain for the 21D.
>>30019940
>Romanians
>Building AEGIS systems
They just stole it from the americans
>>30020132
Modern Chinese will not fight to the death like Japanese WW2 soldiers, and cleaning off a few small islands is a cakewalk compare to what had to be done for Okinawa or Iwo Jima.
>>30020045
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Support_Program
>>30019632
Where do you even find photos like this? Other than sorting through pages of chink media.
>>30020164
>Also, the ohio class and then make the short hop to rearm and strike again, and again.
>One nimtz class aircraft carrier alone can hold 6 million pounds of ordinance.
Remember when muh scenario tried to argue a carrier only has enough AShM for one attack? 50 cent arguments seem to rely heavily on one and done.
>>30020221
Anon, op is from chink media. He is paid to be here.
>>30020182
Aegis is not an acronym.
>>30020267
>Remember when muh scenario tried to argue a carrier only has enough AShM for one attack?
I do indeed.
In reality the US has made over 7,500 harpoons.
>>30020164
>I mean i gave you ONE asset that can conceivablely counter an entire island
Uh no it cannot
>>30020482
How will the island shoot down over one missles in one attack?
>>30020530
Over 100* missles.
Keep in mind the HQ-9 TEL only can shoot four interceptors before reloading.
>>30020276
No. He is using sources straight from google.
Also, they are in english.
>>30020542
Are you saying chinese internet "news" is not in English?
>>30020023
>liquid fueled
>good
>>30020538
They have a lot of HQ-9 systems on the island. Plus CIWS guns.
>>30020568
>reading comprehension
>>30020552
>are most news articles from a foreign country in the foreign country's language?
>>30020023
>giving them some more survivability vs ABM measures
why would your missiles be under threat of ABMs during ascent? does the US station ABM systems in mainland china that I'm not aware of?
that is the most retarded excuse for liquid fueled ICBMs i've ever heard and balanced against taking a long time to reach max readiness/ready to fire condition and the fact that ready to fire condition can't be maintained indefinitely it isn't exactly a great reason
if the chinese government really are paying you 0.50¥ per post then they are getting scammed
>>30020288
And every single of those 7500 Harpoons are deployed in a single US CVBG?
Bullshit.
A strike package will only amount to a few dozen Harpoons max, since they need escort, jammers and buddy refuel planes as well. And that's assuming that the CVN sends its entire airwing in one strike.
And a few Harpoons are nothing that a modestly sized PLAN SAG cant defend against, especially when they have at least two 052D and 054As in their group.
After that failed strike, the SHs have to return to the carrier and it takes at least 2 hours until they are ready for another strike.
And 2 hours are plenty for a Type-901 AOE and a Type-903A AOR to replenish four ships with SAMs to defend against another similiarily sized strike.
>>30020164
>The point was the sub wont need its entire ordinance, it was just an example to show force parity.
No, a single sub isnt enough. China could literally place their own Aegis Ashore equivalent on those island, with more missiles than even ten Ohio could fire off. Both scenarios are not realistic, but it just shows that a two square kilometer island is always at the advantage in terms of possible weapon load than some 170m long submarine.
>Also, the ohio class and then make the short hop to rearm and strike again, and again.
Where to? Okinawa? Meet the DF-16 'Okinawa Express'.
Guam? Meet the DF-26 'Guam Express'.
Surface tender? I want to see one that can replenish 154 tomahawks at sea. Or even have the space for that many.
Back to the US? Enjoy your weeks long trip. Maybe the US will still exist when that Ohio arrives.
>This has yet to happen, in any meaningful way. I mean i gave you ONE asset that can conceivablely counter an entire island. Add in naval airpower and surface power, US based airpower and the force disparity is HUGE. One nimtz class aircraft carrier alone can hold 6 million pounds of ordinance.
China's Islands are based in a triangle to each other, each equipped with multiple redundant layers of air and missile defense, as well as anti-ship cruise missiles and now ASBM. If you want to take out one Island, you gotta take out all of them at once. Becauce all of them will launch their ASBMs at the intruding carrier. Not to mention the ASBM assets based on China's mainland that will come to aid as well. And also, the PLAN and PLANAF is nearby. A single carrier is literally dead meat compared to the ordnance these islands can carry. Islands carry more than 6 million pounds of ordnance. More like 60 million pounds. Pic: Weapon storage on an artificial island - each of them larger than the weapon storage of a Nimitz class.
>>30021559
>And 2 hours are plenty for a Type-901 AOE and a Type-903A AOR to replenish four ships with SAMs to defend against another similiarily sized strike.
Whats it like posting about things you know nothing about anon?
Is it entertaining?
>>30020164
>The BLU-97/B is a hell of a drug, along with 1k pounds of PBXN has shown itself to be very good at hurting infrastructure.
You for real, nigger?
If these hardened shelters do anything, it is to defend against shitty cluster bomblets like these.
Better come over with yoru MOAB. If you actually dare to fly a B-1/2/52 over them in war-time.
tl;dr
Artificial islands have potentially more ordnance than any US carrier group ever could have. They are ISLANDS and not some shitty bote.
>>30021659
China did that shit for decades. A PLAN frigate could be reequiped in less than half an hour even with the old shitty makeshift AORs that they had back then.
How willing is USA for nuclear war in the SCS? The only way USA can stop chinks at this point is to use nukes since chinks can't win a nuclear war.
>>30021654
>. China could literally place their own Aegis Ashore equivalent on those island, with more missiles than even ten Ohio could fire off.
No, they dont have 154 VLS intercepter launchers. They dont have 154 launchers period.
Straight up.
They dont.
Prove. Me. Wrong.
>>30021688
And the Type 052Ds have retractable deck-cranes at each VLS cluster for that matter.
Here, a Type 052D uses that deck-crane to load a YJ-18A supersonic AShM cannister into the VLS cell.
>>30021666
>If these hardened shelters
The shelters are not the target, the runway is.
Stay with the program.
>>30021703
Pretty willing if the Chinese start by firing multiple ballistic missiles at a carrier.
>>30021707
They never had any artificial islands less than 2 years before.
Pic related is the 32-cell VLS cluster for a 052D. They are getting mass-produced, just as the Destroyers are that carry them. A 052D has two of them.
Now, China merely takes eight of them and they will immediately have 256 VLS cells. Since the islands have no weight restrictions (they build fucking concrete fortresses with deck-guns on them), they can equipp them with all these VLS clusters, add fourType 346A AESA arrays (that are mass-produced as well to equip the 052D and 055 Destroyers), and they will immediately have 256 cell Aegis Ashore on every single artificial island to protect their ASBM launchers.
Simple as shit.
Pic related is stronger and makes more Americans go mad than any Supercarrier.
>>30021773
Except they have not done this at all.
They havent anon. Straight up, have not.
I asked you to prove me wrong. Instead you gave me your wet dream head cannon.
>>30021798
And the US has never attacked China with 154 Tomahawks.
Prove me wrong. You cant.
Instead, you gave me your wet dream and head cannon [sic!] as well.
>>30021703
>How willing is USA for nuclear war in the SCS?
Very.
A lot of people with a lot of post Cold War ideas for fighting and winning a nuclear war are keen to place US strategic forces back on the forefront of US security policy.
They see a rising antagonism with China as key to this.
This small, insular group are of the opinion that only by showing a willingness to use nuclear weapons against them, can Chinese posture be placed in check.
They believe that the US can do all this and also avoid a strategic arms race.
>>30021826
Indeed.
This is why Xi Jinping and his hawkish supporters are considering the final burial of the minimum deterrence posture. Putting all nukes to har-trigger and launch on warning alert is their first step. Just as ending their decades long self-limitation of not equipping their DF-5As with MIRVs despite having that technology since the 80s, until the US unilaterally ended the ban on ABM development.
A more hawkish US posture plays into the hand of the War-Hawks around Xi.
>>30021826
>Very willing
Well, shit, if China fires DF-21D AShBMs at a CSG (either at anchor in Yokosuka or at sea), how would the US respond? Would China be glassed?
>>30021876
China would first have to build up the nuclear deterrence foundation they need to use the ASBMs in anger. But that's already happening, as China is finally ramping up nuclear production after decades of self-limitation.
>>30021820
The US has that capability, currently, to do it.
China, does not have your head cannon defense.
>>30021870
China doesn't have enough nukes to scare USA, MIRV or not
>>30020286
Is that a retirement home joke?
If so thats really funny because
>>30021914
And that's only because of self-limitation and their doctrine of 'limited deterrence'.
Rest assured, China is ending that quickly.
The US brought this on themselves, by ending the ABM treaty and swinging the nuclear dick around.
>>30021940
So, logically, we should nuke them now before they become a true threat.
>>30021795
underrated post.
>>30021870
China has no hope of catching up to US nuclear forces.
Zero.
Their use of MIRVs has nothing to do with trying to match US strategic forces and everything to do with decreasing US ABM capabilities.
The last thing China wants is to try a nuclear arms race with the US. Near term pit production with the LANL expansion is many times the near term production of the Chinese.
Never mind the fact that the US has several thousand pits awating blending and warehouses full of weapon components in storage at Pantex.
The US has a massive, insurmountable head start.
>>30021876
Its possible that the US would take that as an opening to perform a limited countervalue strike against Chinese ballistic missile forces.
Depends on the exact circumstances.
>>30021940
Thats because of the limits of their material production capabilities.
>>30021940
>China is ending that quickly.
>The US brought this on themselves, by ending the ABM treaty and swinging the nuclear dick around
Most of the time I doubt the "50 cent brigade" bs on here. But posts like this make me almost believe it.
>>30022028
>tfw that crazy fucking trip was right the whole time
>>30021987
Ok, let's say the DF-21Ds are fired at the Reagan, at anchor in Yokosuka (Where they have a reasonable chance of hitting). Given that the Chinese have just fired multiple ballistic missiles, potentially with nuclear warheads (can't tell until they hit), toward the Tokyo Metropolitan area, how would you expect the US to respond?
>>30022114
Is this an opening strike as part of an escalating crisis?
Is it part of conventional conflict that has been ongoing?
Lots of questions like this would need to be answered.
The US would be inclined to strike Chinese strategic forces to prevent the possibility of further strikes and force a final conclusion to the conflict.
>>30022209
Chinese strike against USN, without warning. No ongoing conflict, high tensions on both sides.
>>30022258
Probably a massive nuclear strike on Chinese strategic forces, strategic command and control, and some conventional assets.
MILITARY AIRCRAFT GO HOME
[MEOW]
>>30021559
>A strike package will only amount to a few dozen Harpoons max, since they need escort, jammers and buddy refuel planes as well. And that's assuming that the CVN sends its entire airwing in one strike.
>>30021688
>underway replenishment
>neither ship moving
>underway
>>30021940
>The US brought this on themselves, by ending the ABM treaty and swinging the nuclear dick around.
Vatnik detected, Russia is the primary nation 'swinging its nuclear dick' around.
>>30021559
>And 2 hours are plenty for a Type-901 AOE and a Type-903A AOR to replenish four ships with SAMs to defend against another similiarily sized strike.
That's an amazing amount of wrong to pack into a single post. I really want to hear your detailed timeline of how this could happen.
>>30021688
Why aren't the ships in the pic underway? Based on sea conditions, I would guess that it's a pic of a dockside training exercise.
Your claim of 15 minute reload times are laughably ignorant. Possibly 15 minutes per missile, not to resupply every cell.
>>30022284
So basically the DF-21D is a missile that will never get used, because using it would probably result in China getting glassed?
>>30020132
the island hopping was a completely unnecessary thing done only to drag out the war
>>30023163
island hopping sped up the war
>>30021940
You mean Russia and China's fault because their insistence on cockblocking the US' attempts at preventing North Korea and Iran from getting nukes means they have to start investing in ABM.
>>30021940
Comrade Putin needs his salad tossed again, so you'll have to pick this conversation up later.
Everybody forgets the main tactical drawback of these things.
Thier launch signature is the same as an ICBM.
If china uses one they risk triggering a nuclear response.
