According to Russian military observation website, China is producing J-20 faster than US F-35B and F-35C to ensure China’s air superiority in long- and super long-range air battles.
A regiment of 30 J-20s is enough to quickly and effectively intercept US early warning and manned and unmanned reconnaissance aircrafts, turning US military blind in areas near China.
With the production capacity of making 36 J-20s a year, China will have a regiment of J-20s by mid 2018.
In addition, 2 J-20 regiment (60 planes) plus dozens of DF-21D are enough to drive away US and Japanese navies. The US may develop better missiles to intercept DF-21D and even DF-26 as US AN/SPY-1A/D multi-function radar can detect the ballistic missiles. However US radar cannot detect a fleet of 10 J-20s conducting stealth attack at US navy with their radars turned off. The 20 YJ-91 supersonic anti-ship missiles carried by those J-20s are enough to sink a US aircraft carrier.
China is now developing hypersonic microwave electromagnetic warheads and stealth warheads even more difficult to intercept. China will have 500 J-20s by 2026, which will enable it to have advantages over others’ navy in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
Source: mil.huanqiu.com “Russian media: US aircraft carrier battle group doomed facing fleet of J-20s” (summary by Chan Kai Yee based on the report in Chinese)
I reblogged Logan Nye’ article “The Navy relies on these awesome missiles to stop China’s ‘carrier killer’” on December 23. Of the 3 missiles Nye mentioned, THAAD is land based and has limited range about 200 km so that US Navy cannot rely on it. SM-6 has to intercept the missile at terminal stage. Even if it hits the missile, the explosion may still cause damage to the carrier.
Only SM-3 is capable of intercepting the missile but according to a mil.eastday.com article, it is no defense against saturate attack of DF-21Ds. An Aegis destroyer can be armed with only 90 Standard-3 Block1B missile defense missiles that cost $10 million each and $900 million in all. With their maximum interception rate, the defense of all those missiles can be broken by the volley of China’s anti-ship ballistic missiles that cost less than $20 millions in all. As China’s anti-ship missiles are based on land, their launch system costs much less than an Aegis destroyer that costs $2 billion.
Therefore, due to the much lower costs, according to previous reports, China has 7 anti-ship missile brigades each with the capabilities of launching 24-32 anti-ship ballistic missiles simultaneously from their mobile launch vehicles. Together, they can attack with the volley of 168 to 224 missiles capable of sinking an entire aircraft carrier battle group. Moreover, they can reload for a second round of volley within hours as China has a large stock of the missiles due to its low cost. US fleet, if not sunk, cannot reload in such a short time and will be defenseless.
China has conducted a drill of firing dozens of DF-21Ds at the same target simultaneously from sites far away from one another and reloading the mobile launch vehicles within hours after the launch. Can US Navy rely on its limited number of SM-3s on a US aircraft carrier battle group in defending such saturated attacks?
Moreover, is the US rich enough to fight a war with expensive weapons against much cheaper but more effective weapons?
Comment by Chan Kai Yee on WE ARE THE MIGHTY’s article, full text of which was reblogged here on December 23.
China’s Dong Feng-21D medium-range ballistic missile — otherwise known as the “carrier killer” — looms large in people’s minds as a weapon of ultimate destruction.
It’s designed to do exactly what the name implies: kill American and allied carriers, sending thousands of sailors to a watery grave.
But the Navy has been working to protect carriers from enemy ballistic missiles for decades. Here are three missiles that could stop a DF-21D in its tracks.
1. The Standard Missile-3
The SM-3 is the Navy’s preferred tool for defeating an incoming ballistic missile. The system is deployed on Aegis ballistic missile defense ships in the U.S. Navy and KONGO-class destroyers in Japan’s navy.
These missiles primarily engage their targets in space at the height of the ballistic missile’s flight path. To hit a DF-21D, the Aegis system will need to be on or near the projected flight path. Keeping carriers safe may require keeping an Aegis ship equipped with SM-3s permanently co-located with the carrier.
2. Standard Missile-6
The SM-6 is really designed to take down cruise missiles and perhaps the occasional jet, but the Navy has been testing its capability when pressed into an anti-ballistic missile role. In a Dec. 14 test, an updated SM-6 fired from an aegis destroyer successfully struck down a medium-range ballistic missile.
These are much cheaper than SM-3s, but the SM-6 is a final, last-ditch defense while the SM-3 is still the first call. That’s because SM-6s engage targeted missiles during their terminal phase, the final moments before the incoming missile kills its target. If the SM-6 misses, there isn’t time to do anything else.
3. The Army’s THAAD missile
The Terminal, High-Altitude Air Defense missile is a radar-guided, hit-to-kill missile that engages ballistic missiles either in the edge of space or soon after they enter the atmosphere. It might be capable of engaging a DF-21D after it begins its descent to the carrier.
The system is rapidly deployable and the Army has already stood up five air defense artillery batteries with the new missiles. One battery is deployed to Guam and plans are ongoing to deploy another to South Korea.
The main problem for the Navy when using THAAD to protect its ships is that the THAAD system is deployed on trucks, not ships. It’s hard to keep land-based missiles in position to protect ships sailing on the open sea.
Source: WE ARE THE MIGHTY “The Navy relies on these awesome missiles to stop China’s ‘carrier killer’”
Note: This is WE ARE THE MIGHTY’s article I post here for readers’ information. It does not mean that I agree or disagree with the article’s views.
Rare disclosure of arsenal seen as warning to US not to provoke military confrontation
The Southern Theatre Command of the People’s Liberation Army unveiled a series of new weapons for sea and air combat during a visit by top military officers.
In a rare revelation, the weapons were shown on state television in the wake of a landmark international tribunal rejecting Beijing’s claims to almost all of the South China Sea.
Military experts said the disclosure was intended to show that the newly formed Southern Theatre Command, which covers the South China Sea, was well-prepared for any potential military confrontation with the US.
In an inspection tour after the ruling, General Fan Changlong, vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission, which oversees the PLA, called on troops to train hard to meet any challenges, Xinhua reported on Tuesday.
“Air and sea patrols should be tightly organised to handle all kinds of emergencies to ensure security of sea and air borders,” said Fan, who was accompanied by General Ma Xiaotian, commander of the PLA Air Force, and General Wei Fenghe, chief of the army’s Rocket Force, which operates the country’s missile arsenal.
Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said Fan’s visit indicated that the southern command could carry out joint combat operations of land, rocket, naval and air forces as well as other strategic support forces.
“All the weapons showed on state media are defensive arms of short to medium range within 1,500km, meaning China so far is using restrained deterrence to warn the US not to challenge Beijing’s bottom line in the South China Sea,” Li said.
State broadcaster CCTV showed footage of troops in the southern theatre handling the DF-16 missile, which has a range up to 1,000km. The missile, which was first displayed on September 3 in a military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of the second world war, could strike US military bases in Okinawa.
Earlier reports said the southern theatre was equipped with DF-21Ds, or “carrier-killer” anti-ship ballistic missiles, which have a range of 1,450km.
The CCTV footage also showed new H-6K bombers. A division of the jets has been deployed to the southern theatre to patrol Scarborough Shoal.
Source: SCMP “PLA unveils new weapons for air and sea combat following Hague tribunal ruling”
China’s DF-21D and DF-26 anti-ship ballistic missiles have already been well-known. In my post “Volley of China’s DF-21D Missiles Kills US Aircraft Carrier at Very Low Cost” on June 6, I said China was able to launch a volley of at least 168 DF-21D missiles simultaneously from its six DF-21D rocket brigades to kill an entire US aircraft carrier battle group in no time.
In addition, the launch vehicles can be reloaded in hours for a second volley.
DF-26 is said to be more powerful, but there is no information about its number and the number of DF-26 China is able to launch in a volley.
According to Depth Column of mil.news.sina.com.cn, to ensure that no US warships can escape China’s annihilation counterattack, China has, in addition, developed three kinds of anti-ship cruise missiles that the US has no effective defense: YJ-12, YJ-18 and YJ-100.
YJ-12 weighs between 2-2.5 tons. It has a terminal speed of Mach 4.0 as it uses a scramjet engine. It has a range of 400 km. As it is carried by fighter jets, fighter/bombers and bombers such as Su-30MKK, J-16 and H-6G/K, the range of attack of YJ-18, including that of the warplane, can be 2,000 km and longer. Its high speed makes it difficult to intercept. One such heavy missile can kill one US Aegis destroyer while more than 2 can neutralize an aircraft carrier.
YJ-18 is another powerful anti-ship cruise missile that the US has no effective defense. It is but supersonic at its terminal stage but it flies with a zigzag trajectory difficult to intercept. It is mainly launched from the VSL of China’s Type 052D destroyers and 093A/B attack nuclear submarines.
According to mil.sohu.com, Britain’s Jane’s Defense Weekly says that the anti-radiation function of YJ-18 is so powerful that it destroys 60% of an Aegis warship’s electronic system even if it explodes 50 meters away from the warship.
Compared with YJ-12 and YJ-18, YJ-100 is not well-know as it is a new missile disclosed by foreign media not long ago. Its greatest advantage is its long range of 800 km for beyond visual range attack with a low trajectory. It is said to be used by China’s new large Type 055 destroyer.
According to mil.news.sina.com.cn, the simultaneous attack by two of the above five kinds of missile will be surely lethal.
Source: mil.news.sina.com.cn “Depth Column: The five Chinese Missiles that the West will have no effective defense for a decade” and mil.sohu.com “Foreign media regards YJ-18 as one of the best anti-ship cruise missiles, one of which can paralyze a US warship” (summary by Chan Kai Yee based on the reports in Chinese)
By Dave Majumdar June 20, 2016
The United States Navy will have to live with the proliferation of anti-ship ballistic missiles that have the potential to threaten an aircraft carrier. However, the threat from such weapons is not insurmountable, and in many cases, the danger might be overblown.
“I think there is this long-range precision strike capability, certainly. Everybody says A2/AD [anti-access/area-denial],” Adm. John Richardson, the U.S. Navy’s chief of naval operations, told an audience at the Center for a New American Security’s annual conference on June 20. “A2/AD is sort of an aspiration. In actual execution it’s much more difficult.”
While U.S. Navy officials—and many Washington, D.C., think tanks—have talked about the potential threat to the service’s aircraft carrier fleet from weapons such as the Chinese DF-21D and DF-26, the difficulty of developing a true A2/AD capability is seldom discussed.
As Richardson pointed out, A2/AD strategies have existed since the dawn of warfare. What makes the new Chinese capability different is the combination of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability with long-range precision weapons. “The combination ubiquitous ISR, long-range precision strike weapons take that to the next level,” Richardson said. “It demands a response.”
But the threat is not just contained in the South China Sea, Richardson said. The anti-ship ballistic missile threat is increasingly found around the world and will continue to proliferate. Indeed, the hermit kingdom of North Korea has apparently acquired anti-ship ballistic missile technology. As such, the Navy will have to get used to living with the threat of anti-ship ballistic missiles and other similar threats.
“I think that the proliferation of anti-ship ballistic missiles is just a fact of life we’re going to have to address,” Richardson said. “That fact that it’s in the hands of North Korea—a leader who has been less predictable than many others brings another dimension to that equation.”
However, that does not mean that the aircraft carrier is obsolete or that the carrier air wing is unable to conduct its mission. As Navy officials have mentioned repeatedly in private conversations—weapons such as anti-ship ballistic missiles require an extensive “kill chain”—including ISR sensors, data-networks, command and control and other systems—in order to be effective. That extensive kill chain can be attacked and disrupted through electronic attacks, cyber warfare or some other kinetic means. “Our response would be to inject a lot of friction into that system,” Richardson said—disrupting the enemy kill chain.
Indeed, when A2/AD zones are discussed, often the entire radius of where an enemy missile can attack targets—such as an aircraft carrier out at sea—is marked as a no go zone. But in the Navy’s view, it can operate inside those zones, but the service would have to use different tactics. Moreover, the assumption that an area defended by a weapon such as a DF-26 is a no-go zone makes the implicit assumption that the Chinese—or other enemy—has the ISR assets and networks to make their weapon work perfectly. “That’s just not the reality of the situation,” Richardson said.
Nonetheless, anti-ship ballistic missiles and China’s growing A2/AD capabilities will remain a potential threat. But that threat is not insurmountable and will not render America’s mighty super carriers or their air wings obsolete in the near future.
Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for the National Interest. You can follow him on Twitter: @davemajumdar.
Source: National Interest “Here Is Why the US Military Is Not In Panic Mode Over China’s Carrier-Killer Missiles”
According to a mil.eastday.com article, the US can no longer boast the strong missile defense capabilities of its Aegis destroys in an aircraft carrier battle group. An Aegis destroyer can be armed with only 90 Standard-3 Block1B missile defense missiles that cost $10 million each and $900 million in all. With their maximum interception rate, the defense of all those missiles can be broken by the volley of China’s anti-ship ballistic missiles that cost less than $20 millions in all. As the anti-ship missiles are based on land, their launch system costs much less than an Aegis destroyer that costs $2 billion.
According to previous reports summarized in my posts dated May 20 and February 17, China has 7 anti-ship missile brigades each with the capabilities of launching 24-32 anti-ship ballistic missiles simultaneously. Together, they can attack with the volley of 168 to 224 missiles to sink an entire aircraft carrier battle group. Moreover, they can reload for a second round of volley within hours.
Source: mil.eastday.com “US spends 60 tons of gold but unable to defend China greatest anti-ship ballistic missiles”, mil.huanqiu.com “Rocket Force conducts drill of simultaneous attack with lots of missiles” and Mingpao “Rocket force’s drill to attack aircraft carrier and bombard airfield which, according to experts, aims politically at scaring the US and shocking Taiwan” (summary by Chan Kai Yee based on the reports in Chinese)
PLA Drill of Simultaneous Multiple Missile Attack at Aircraft Carrier dated May 20
China Launch DF-21D Anti-ship Missiles with Maneuverable Warheads dated Febrirary 17