万维读者网>世界军事论坛>帖子
美国要研制新反舰导弹,改变被动挨打现状
送交者: 古宇庙 2013-11-16 04:26:04 于 [世界军事论坛]
0

Preston VT· 1 day ago

Anyone know the context of the stock photo included in the posting? There appears to be a civilian tanker in the background, behind which is another ship also firing a missile. Would the two Navy vessels really be test firing missiles with a civilian tanker so close and between them? It's possible the tanker is actually a Navy support vessel (oiler, etc.), but as best as I can tell it appears to be white, not grey. Just wondering...
3 replies · active 1 day ago
+6

Steve B.· 1 day ago

That's a Harpoon in the photo. 

As well, the DF-21D is emphatically not a "cruise" missile, but is a derivative of the DF21 ballistic missile, used by China.
Wonder if those SM missiles will do the job against a BM coming in from above at terminal velocity? Fire a ripple and hope for the best?
3 replies · active 6 hours ago
+7

STemplar· 22 hours ago

Anyone read the Rand study on land based anti ship missiles? If the Army an the Marines were smart they would ditch some of their silly procurement notions an develop a land based mobile ant ship missile that is MLRS compatible.
7 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
+3

PolicyWonk· 20 hours ago

China’s development of the DF-21D ASBM (Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile), technically a cruise missile dubbed the “carrier killer,” has raised alarms on Capitol Hill. 
======================================================== 
This is dumb. If the ChiComs built a true ASBM, we can resolve that problem easily, by simply informing them, that if a ballistic missile is launched, we have no way to determine if the warhead is nuclear or otherwise. 

Therefore, we will respond (i.e. launch) accordingly, assuming the worst case. 

Thats what the Russians told the US when GWB was POTUS, and the idea of "Global Strike" (conventional ICBM) was floated. That put the kibosh on that idea PDQ.
14 replies · active 57 minutes ago
+3

Big-B· 13 hours ago

Just to tell China the USA will go nuclear when fired upon by any ballistc missile is a thin protective shield. I think it is wise to to prepare for that China does not believe it. 

Back to topic it might be cheaper to buy off the shelf in Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Strike_Missile 
But i guess thats not the american way ;-)
3 replies · active 5 hours ago
+3

josh· 8 hours ago

Ok .. why havent we developed a anti ship missile more advanced than the harpoon ages ago?? It seems like we never look far ahead until a country like china gets a weapon that can outclass one of ours then it becomes a issue.
8 replies · active 2 minutes ago
-3

TDMarine· 8 hours ago

Good thing Clinton and Gore sold them the missile tech for campaign funds so the Chicoms could develop their weapons.
3 replies · active 4 hours ago
0

Lance· 5 hours ago

Ye ah the author put the wrong pic in place thought they were going to scrap the Harpoon which would be a mistake for air assists like F-18s. Overall think people are too panicked over China and want to use China to get unlimited spending back which is a real waste of money. Id prefer Dg-1000 New fleet defender fighter and new subs way over this, for sea warfare.
1 reply · active 4 hours ago
0

Stan· 3 hours ago

I would be more impressed if they started working on a support ship-mounted long range directed energy weapon which could reach out far enough to get those missiles in boost phase. That would do a pretty good job of neutralizing this particular threat. I doubt the Chinese would dare to put a conventional warhead on a longer range missile. 
Also, that laser could be used to take out sats guiding the missile and would make the idea of attacking a battlegroup from the air a bit obsolete.

Post a new comment

Mobile Theme
ONOFF


Read more: http://defensetech.org/2013/11/14/darpa-works-on-new-anti-ship-missile/#ixzz2klKQ8tjM 
Defense.org 
0.00%(0) 0.00%(0) 0.00%(0)
当前新闻共有0条评论
笔  名 (必选项):
密  码 (必选项):
注册新用户
标  题 (必选项):
内  容 (选填项):