Great... just freakin' great...

Bound to happen. We've all spent our souls to get cheap Chinese goods, and they've taken that money and built up a pretty decent air force and navy. Sooner or later they will want to use them. No point in having all that power if you don't use it!

See, this is how everybody ends up speaking Chinese in 'Firefly'.

eventually every weapon system is rendered first vulnerable then obsolete...

Did Warren Buffett add that mainland Chinese weapon production company to his portfolio of PRC investments ?

And, we are presupposing that U.S. R&D has simply stood by. Usually, when officials paint a picture of doom and gloom about any aspect of American defense, it is a ploy for money.  I'll bet that the U.S. has a counter under either research or development.

Bill

warshipguy

And, we are presupposing that U.S. R&D has simply stood by. Usually, when officials paint a picture of doom and gloom about any aspect of American defense, it is a ploy for money.  I'll bet that the U.S. has a counter under either research or development.

Bill

maybe and maybe not.......

from what I understand, weapons development funding depends on priorities set by Washington,DC-

and authorized in each budget by Congress.

Disclaimer: I am merely stating my understanding of the funding process and not expressing an opinion about whether such a process is good or bad.

Really? There is nothing that can counter this threat? I mean, couldn't something similar to Patriot missiles or Sea Whiz (CIWS) be employed against an incoming missile? Nothing to say that these weapon systems can't be upgraded to deal with a new missile like this.

Certainly, I think geo-politically, the US would have to think twice about entering waters within range of Chinese missiles, but I can't imagine a counter measure would be far off the horizon. Especially if China doesn't perfect the technology for another several years. Just my opinion.

Absolutely! But, by emphasizing the negative, officials do attempt to influence the process. Anyway, this is not a statement of values but fact. The Department of Defense (the officials in Washington, D.C. responsible for setting defense priorities) would be woefully negligent if, having discovered the development of this missile, they haven't been planning for its counter.

Bill 

"When a country has five percent of the world's population but spends fifty percent of the world's military spending, that country's persuasive power is in decline."

Quote from the movie Syriana.  Perhaps we need to think beyond using our carriers as diplomatic cattle prods.  Want to hurt China, stop buying their stuff!  Nearly impossible currently, but it wouldn't hurt us to begin shifting our policies there.

Besides, I am sure our R&D guys are capable of shooting down a big a** missile comming after a carrier.  They will be so expensive to manufacture, and so complex, it's not like they'll be launching waves of them.

Chris

warshipguy

Absolutely! But, by emphasizing the negative, officials do attempt to influence the process. Anyway, this is not a statement of values but fact. The Department of Defense (the officials in Washington, D.C. responsible for setting defense priorities) would be woefully negligent if, having discovered the development of this missile, they haven't been planning for its counter.

Bill 

Please remember:  planning is useless if the next bunch of politicians elected to power in DC starve it's appropriations.

It it not unusual.

Disclaimer: I am not stating any weapons systems have or have not been funded nor am I approving or dis-approving  such occurrences.

Military R&D goes on whether or not Congress is directly funding it. What do you think the $10,000 hammers are for?

I think that the reaction to this has been too panicked....

Consider the following facts--

1--China is involved very heavily in trade with the US, and if they became our enemy tomorrow they would not be able to sustain their current economic picture.

2--Why is no one mentioning the fact that if we went to war with China, WITH OR WITHOUT THESE MISSILES, that our one and only chance would be to use nukes?  Look at the sheer size difference of the forces.....the Chinese army has more cooks than we have fighting soldiers, folks!  The only way to realistically offset such a numerical advantage would be with the most massive weapons available.

3--This is China, folks.  How many successful indigenous weapons programs have they run in the last, say, 50 years?  I am not talking about building patrol boats or missile ships...I am talking about new technology such as this missile.  This is basically an existing ballistic missile that is modified to be able to hit a moving target with pinpoint accuracy.  Think about that--the existing guidance system is nowhere near good enough, since it was designed for a strategic nuclear missile and the accuracy didnt really matter.  Remember where they get their technology from--other places like NK and Russia.

Also, CWIS is worthless against a missile of this size....it is designed to blow up incoming missiles close-in, and the sheer size of this missile means that even when hit by CWIS it will still almost definitely hit its target with massive force.  Then again, no one seems to be talking about the Boeing YAL-1A Airborne Laser, or any other similar projects.  The YAL-1A program was actaually designed to counter tactical ballistic missiles, which is exactly what this new missile from China is.  Whether or not the Boeing YAL-1 becomes a production model, the technology has been proven and has been in the works for at least ten years now.  The doom and gloom implications are there to frighten the public into agreeing to more defense program funds.  It makes the politicians' job easier.

............and nine rings were given to the race of men, who, above all things, desire power.

I give us less then a year before we have a small tactical missile that can shoot their missile out of their air before it gets halfway to our carriers.

smeagol the vile

I give us less then a year before we have a small tactical missile that can shoot their missile out of their air before it gets halfway to our carriers.

Before we announce that we already have (and have had for some time) a missile capable of doing this.  That's my guess.

Chris

I think the moment that a missile could be launched across the ocean with a nuclear warhead we have been looking and developing the technology to make interceptor missiles.

The fact we know the chinese have the missiles they have is either good espionage on THEIR part giving false information, or good intelligence gathering on our part.  I'm sure their population doesn't know our secret new weapons

Bgrigg

Military R&D goes on whether or not Congress is directly funding it. What do you think the $10,000 hammers are for?

"Bgrigg: I believe you misunderstand my point, perhaps I didn't make myself clear when I stated "weapons development funding depends on priorities set by Washington,DC-"

As an example I am citing former President Carter's cancellation of the B-1 bomber program June 30, 1977 in favor of cruise missiles. The program was never re-instated by the Carter Administration and not  until 1981 did the Reagan Administration re-instate the program and Congress appropriate funding for the revised B-1B.

R&D can continue but weapons aren't built and handed over to our troops unless backed by politicians in power and funded by Congress.

the fact is though, if were researching it thats all we need.

We figgure out how to make it, design it, build a prototype, test it.  If it all works it doesnt matter, it would take all of a day or so to have enough produced to protect our carriers from a threat

The Phalanx CIWS is being upgraded with a missile defeating laser, no lie. I don't know what its range is but it is not for targeting a gun.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/raytheon-airs-video-at-farnborough-airshow-of-ciws-laser-shooting-down-drone/story-e6frfro0-1225894498861

Now ya'll, relax a bit, OK? It is being addressed already.

Hasn't the Navy been workign on a ABM capabilty for the Standard Missile system for some time now?

Sprue-ce Goose

 

Bgrigg:

 

Military R&D goes on whether or not Congress is directly funding it. What do you think the $10,000 hammers are for?

 

 

"Bgrigg: I believe you misunderstand my point, perhaps I didn't make myself clear when I stated "weapons development funding depends on priorities set by Washington,DC-"

As an example I am citing former President Carter's cancellation of the B-1 bomber program June 30, 1977 in favor of cruise missiles. The program was never re-instated by the Carter Administration and not  until 1981 did the Reagan Administration re-instate the program and Congress appropriate funding for the revised B-1B.

R&D can continue but weapons aren't built and handed over to our troops unless backed by politicians in power and funded by Congress.

We're talking past one another. Congress decides who gets upfront funds for research (more often to continue the research, rather than kick starting it) and gets to approve roll-out once the R&D is done, but I firmly believe that the various arms of the military have slush funds for certain black op R&D. Which is why you hear of $10,000 hammers. Congress couldn't possibly read every line of every ledger (whether it's because of lack of time or brains is up for dispute) and certain monies get approved by a rubber stamp.

The B-1 program was started and stopped numerous times over its development, in fact development of a post B-70 Valkyrie that lead to the B-1 goes back to 1961! Nixon restarted the program after McNamara put it on hold in favor of ICBMs, and then Carter put a halt to it, as well. Mostly due to the emerging stealth technology, rather than cruise missiles, though they did have their influence as well (it's probably best to try and forget the Carter years!). Its development path could be used as a textbook case of showing how NOT to develop a product, and the first B-1B (Star of Abilene) wasn't delivered until 1985. Its operational history has been rife with problems, as well. Considering that all this expensive research was to come up with a replacement for the B-52, which is still operational almost 50 years later, its rather a lame duck.

stikpusher

Hasn't the Navy been workign on a ABM capabilty for the Standard Missile system for some time now?

I don't know about that, but who needs an ABM when you've got a Deathray?

interesting; this is sort of old news actually... an article on the 'carrier killer missile" was published in the proceedings journal couple years ago or so. I guess it is "news" because of the pic from the parade.

oh, and the 10,000$ hammers was a cover up to fund alien craft research in Area 51, didn't you all heard the explanation by "Data" in "Independence Day"? ;)

Probably the bad news will be when the Chinese start selling these around the globe.

As for countermeasures, I took a tour of a guided missile frigate 25 years ago. When I asked our guide what the ships primary mission was, he responded that they were a screening vessel for a carrier force, and he didn't mean air-to-air specifically.  Little ships protect the big ships.

smeagol the vile

the fact is though, if were researching it thats all we need.

We figgure out how to make it, design it, build a prototype, test it.  If it all works it doesnt matter, it would take all of a day or so to have enough produced to protect our carriers from a threat

Really??  You mean, just like we were so quick to produce enough body armor and up-armored humvees for service in Iraq.  I guess all that scrap metal I had welded to my hummer was just for show...

bondoman

Probably the bad news will be when the Chinese start selling these around the globe.

Considering that China's government doesn't seem to care who they sell to, I imagine NK and Iran will be high on the buyer's list.

I seriously doubt China would use this technology directly against their biggest trading "ally", but the kooks running NK and Iran would, in a heartbeat. This is called war by proxy. Then Beijing could claim they weren't involved as they were playing Mah Jong for pin money, and have the witnesses to prove it.

bondoman

Probably the bad news will be when the Chinese start selling these around the globe.

As for countermeasures, I took a tour of a guided missile frigate 25 years ago. When I asked our guide what the ships primary mission was, he responded that they were a screening vessel for a carrier force, and he didn't mean air-to-air specifically.  Little ships protect the big ships.

Absolutely.  In fact, what was the missile that the Aegis cruiser used to shoot down the 'dead' satelite a year or so ago (probably longer now, but as I age, these events seem to blend together...).  That would seem like a likely candidate as a counter-measure, no?

bbrowniii

 

smeagol the vile:

 

the fact is though, if were researching it thats all we need.

We figgure out how to make it, design it, build a prototype, test it.  If it all works it doesnt matter, it would take all of a day or so to have enough produced to protect our carriers from a threat

 

 

Really??  You mean, just like we were so quick to produce enough body armor and up-armored humvees for service in Iraq.  I guess all that scrap metal I had welded to my hummer was just for show...

I'm surprised your "leaders" let you "decorate" your Hummer in such a way!

Bgrigg

bondoman:

Probably the bad news will be when the Chinese start selling these around the globe.

 

Considering that China's government doesn't seem to care who they sell to, I imagine NK and Iran will be high on the buyer's list.

I seriously doubt China would use this technology directly against their biggest trading "ally", but the kooks running NK and Iran would, in a heartbeat. This is called war by proxy. Then Beijing could claim they weren't involved as they were playing Mah Jong for pin money, and have the witnesses to prove it.

Yup... shades of Korea, Vietnam, Angola, Afghanistan, Nicaragua and every other little war that the US and USSR fought 'against' one another without actually fighting each other...

Bgrigg

bbrowniii:

 

smeagol the vile:

 

the fact is though, if were researching it thats all we need.

We figgure out how to make it, design it, build a prototype, test it.  If it all works it doesnt matter, it would take all of a day or so to have enough produced to protect our carriers from a threat

 

 

Really??  You mean, just like we were so quick to produce enough body armor and up-armored humvees for service in Iraq.  I guess all that scrap metal I had welded to my hummer was just for show...

 

I'm surprised your "leaders" let you "decorate" your Hummer in such a way!

Oh, they were VERY supportive.  Better to have a 'Beverly Hillbilliies' hummer than to have to explain to mama why Junior got wasted in a vehicle with nylon cloth for doors...

Actually, body armor and vehicles aside, we were (and from what I hear, still are) woefully short on basic operational gear - for example, radios.  HUGE problem.  Not nearly enough comm assets to support the missions guys are being sent on.  Shameful really...

But I digress...