They'll need live targeting data all the way to the target and that's a big issue. We're very good at electronic warfare and that won't change in the near future. On the other hand we do need to work on countermeasures. Our BMD systems assume fixed trajectories calculated at launch whereas the D21 is capable of inflight course corrections.

-

We'll do everything we can to stay out of range and that's really the biggest issue. The D21 means fewer sorties every day and a proportional decrease in kinetic power. We'll launch from further out and spend more time simply getting to the target. The D21 doesn't even need to work very well.

Currently, there is no defense for these types of missiles that has been fielded. This is a known gap in the fleet defense scenario, and a primary decision driver behind SM-3 and SM-3ER.

DF-21 is real, and it is a threat to the Battlegroup. This has been discussed in Naval and Defense Forums and Seminars for years. I have attended three in the past two years where DF-21 and systems like it dominated the discussion and Q&A time.

The problem right now is with it's terminal attack guidance. We are not sold on the fact that it can effectively single out and target a carrier before or during the atmospheric re-entry phase, which is critical. We are also unsure that there is much, if any, post re-entry maneuverability capability. Also, we are very skeptical that there is any ECCM or ACCM capability in the existing weapon or planned variants.

-Skater

The defense against this sort of weapon is early detection. You detect them launching and change course. IIRC these missiles are interial/sattelite guided, rather than acquiring the target itself.

It skims at half that speed; Mach 3 is a high-altitude figure, and such missiles have been knowing to have loft profiles of up to 40000m in some cases (yes, meters).

In other words, if you discount the onboard eccm (which may be good-for-nothing against certain guidance types anyway), it is potentially an easier target than an MRBM.

If it skims, it's still pretty bad despite having 'only half' that speed. This, plus the ECM is why you are seeing SeaRAM instead of CIWS now.

Also, given the E-2D plus SM-6 (which is not in service yet but will be coming) the AEGIS system will be able to complete over-the-horizon intercepts of such sea-skimmers while they are not being illuminated by or visible to any one ship within the AEGIS network.

That's exactly what I've been reading from people in the know since these things were announced a few months ago. An EMCON CSG at XX Knots over the time from the last satellite pass to the estimated time/point of impact could turn out to be anywhere in a very large piece of water.

These missles may not be a deal killer in of themselves, but they're just one more factor that raises the cost and hassle of doing CVBG business, and at some point someone's going to ask if it's still worth the cost and risk to get a mere 50 fighter-bombers within range of an enemy coastline.

Not for the Dong Feng's that we are discussing here.

DF-21C (CSS-5 Mod-3)

Revealed in 2006, DF-21C is believed to be a mod of DF-21. Its actual designation is unknown; it may be a version of the DF-25 missile. Its maximum range is believed to be about 1,700 kilometres (1,100 mi). The accuracy of DF-21C is comparable to a cruise missile. The new GPS-based guidance system has reduced the missile�s CEP down to between 30m to 40m, allowing it to be used for precision-strike missions.

DF-21D (CSS-5 Mod-4) Anti-ship ballistic missile

DF-21D is a conventionally-armed, high hypersonic, land-based anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) based on the DF-21C, with a range of up to 3,000 km (1,900 mi). This would be the world's first and only ASBM, and the world's first weapons system capable of targeting a moving aircraft carrier strike group from long-range, land-based mobile launchers. These would combine maneuverable reentry vehicles (MaRVs) with some kind of sattelite-augmented terminal guidance system. Such a missile may have been tested in 2005-6, and the launch of the Jianbing-5/YaoGan-1 and Jianbing-6/YaoGan-2 satellites would give the Chinese targeting information from SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) and visual imaging respectively. The upgrades would greatly enhance China's ability to conduct sea-denial operations to prevent US carriers from intervention in the Taiwan Strait. A professor at the U.S. Naval War College states that DF-21D highlights the fact that the U.S. can no longer assume naval supremacy as it has since the end of World War II.

China has also recently launched a series of satellites to support its ASBM efforts:

Yaogan-VII electro-optical satellite - 9 December 2009
Yaogan-VIII synthetic aperture radar satellite - 14 December 2009
Yaogan-IX Naval Ocean Surveillance System (NOSS) constellation (3 satellites in formation) - 5 March 2010.


-Skater

Sounds like the system is just waiting for a directed-energy weapon to be built and installed aboard all USN ships.

Just another reason why we need a viable anti-satellite weapons system - preferably a mix of land-based, seaborne, airborne, and spaceborne.

The countermeasures are probably a lot more expensive than the system in question, so even if these missles are never used against a naval target they will have had some effect.

Missile-in-being is the new fleet-in-being

I'm glad I'm retired. Now on top of everything else, you have to worry about somebody trying to give you the Dong while you're out there. No thanks. I'll stay retired.

Cheers!

Rick...

More than a few countries have Exocet, I'm not sure why this is news.

Exocet is a Gen-I or Gen-II sea-skimmer. Very limited terminal attack guidance. DF-21 is the world's only ASBM. Real-time satellite guided. That is like comparing apples to watermelons... Watermelons with lasers strapped to them.

Exocet cannot hit-to-kill an Aircraft Carrier. DF-21's with penetrator warheads can.

Exocet's can be spoofed and/or shot down. DF-21 ASBM has no known counter. Yet.

-Skater

Let's see, clouds, chaff, SM-3's ... no counter?

Nope. Not yet. Hopefully soon.

BTW, SM-3 has not reached IOC yet and SM-6 still has years of testing to complete, and there is no ECM, ECCM, or ACCM that can affect it after it is in the terminal attack phase.

-Skater

Wouldn't count on that, China has the largest internal market worldwide, with more people growing out of poverty daily than the rest of the world combined. It won't go bankrupt even if it lost this.

But as far as I can see now this is mostly strategic. It's the arms race all over again. And it shows the world not to mess with China. Well, China is hardly the only country that suffers from that characteristic.

That was my next question- do we know anything about the estimated size of the warheads on these things?

Thanks for the info Skater, learn something new every day.

DF-21? What-ever. Standard SM-3 and the latest AEGIS upgrades are designed to take out ballistic missiles. That's just for starters. The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization at the DoD has been working on this very problem for years. This is why they've been working so hard on computer-controlled laser systems, too, and that stuff is about as secret as secret gets. The Chinese'd have to have literally hundreds of MIRV-style warheads for a real shot at just one carrier group. Not practical.

And SM-3 may not be fully deployed yet, but it is being equipped.

Miao, Cat