5 ms·

Missiles are not targeted at a location. They absolubtely do "lock on" and can track a moving target. They would simply not be able to function if that were not

Missiles are not targeted at a location. They absolubtely do "lock on" and can track a moving target. They would simply not be able to function if that were not that case. Why even use a missile at all if it worked like that, just fire a big gun. Sure there are countermeasures, but manouvering a ship won't do anything on its own. The only way things like that help is when combined with chaff or heat signature dummies. What makes you think that tracking a ship the size of a skyscraper would be difficult but that tracking a missile would be easy? Yes, the US satelite network will soon be able to detect this type of missile launches, they are working on that capability right now - I never said ships wouldn't know that they are coming, just that there is little they can do with that information if more than one or two missiles are launched. You seem to be vastly underestimating how well these missiles can manouver. They can't adjust "slightly", they can make sharp turns, with many times more g-forces than a regular plane - a ship has no chance to outmanouver them, any manouvers would only be to present a lower profile to a single missile or to try to confuse the missile's tracking system using some other countermeasures as for reading articles about the millitary "sounding the alarm" how does the dod itself sound https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/1934290/hypersonics-remain-top-priority-for-dod/ https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/1934290... Finally cost. Yes these missiles are expensive but that is several orders of magnitude lower than an aircraft carrier. Heck, its orders of magnitude lower than a single plane on that carrier

ericmay 5y ago
> Missiles are not targeted at a location. They absolubtely do "lock on" and can track a moving target. They would simply not be able to function if that were not that case. Why even use a missile at all if it worked like that, just fire a big gun. Sure there are countermeasures, but manouvering a ship won't do anything on its own. The only way things like that help is when combined with chaff or heat signature dummies. I don't think this is correct with ballistic missiles or these hypersonic missiles - please correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that it's not like a fighter jet locking on to a target and firing a missile. When these missiles are fired they are launched into a general area - in this case where the Chinese think the U.S. Navy ships are, and then after that the missiles will lock on to a target as they re-enter the atmosphere - they have a few seconds to adjust course and do so. They can miss. > You seem to be vastly underestimating how well these missiles can manouver. They can't adjust "slightly", they can make sharp turns, with many times more g-forces than a regular plane - a ship has no chance to outmanouver them, any manouvers would only be to present a lower profile to a single missile or to try to confuse the missile's tracking system using some other countermeasures What I'm not saying is the U.S. Navy can just run away or something from the missiles once they are in range, but the ships can move and the missiles can miss. > as for reading articles about the millitary "sounding the alarm" how does the dod itself sound It doesn't sound like anything - it's no different. These are just reports that come out form the bureaucracy. The DoD sounds the alarm on all sorts of things. https://www.ausn.org/post/navy-sounds-the-alarm-on-biden-s-dod-budget-lucky-to-keep-up-with-inflation https://www.ausn.org/post/navy-sounds-the-alarm-on-biden-s-d... > Finally cost. Yes these missiles are expensive but that is several orders of magnitude lower than an aircraft carrier. Heck, its orders of magnitude lower than a single plane on that carrier Cheaper than a carrier but dunno about planes. Maybe the cost can come down over time if they aren't already cheaper. Also in the grand scheme of things the US Navy can just stay out of their range and harass supply lines, and then U.S. forces in the region can attack these missile systems and destroy them, then the US Navy can move in. The main concern really isn't these missiles. They present a problem, of course, because they make it difficult for the U.S. Navy to effectively operate in the region (and by effectively operate we mean unimpeded), but they aren't an ace in the hole or some sort of trump card that the Chinese have.
- hef19898 5y ago
  Ballistic missiles are things like ICBMs, there it doesn't matter if you miss by a couple of miles. Hypersonic missiles are fast enough to make ship movement a negligible factor, ship are slow. All other anti-ship missiles are guided. How bad that can end was shown in the Falkland war, the Royal Navy suffered quite a lot from Argentinian Exocets. Bought from France. A F-35 is what, 35 million dollar plus, excluding the pilot and training cost? Missiles are cheaper, by order of magnitude.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    > Ballistic missiles are things like ICBMs, there it doesn't matter if you miss by a couple of miles. Hypersonic missiles are fast enough to make ship movement a negligible factor, ship are slow. The hypersonic missiles are like ICBMs though. They operate similarly and enter the atmosphere before coming back down. They’re not nuclear weapons where you can be close enough, they have to be accurate. A miss by 3 feet jug as well be a miss by a mile. As the missile enters the atmosphere it only has a few seconds to course correct to hit a moving ship. The ship can potentially move just out of harms way. Not the most likely scenario but definitely plausible. > All other anti-ship missiles are guided. How bad that can end was shown in the Falkland war, the Royal Navy suffered quite a lot from Argentinian Exocets. Bought from France. Different kinds of missiles. Can’t really compare them. > A F-35 is what, 35 million dollar plus, excluding the pilot and training cost? Missiles are cheaper, by order of magnitude. Not sure that these particular missiles are. I think it’s likely they’re closer to $20mm-$30mm in cost. Plus all of the ones China has are basically R&D missiles and not proven.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      Having talked to former and active Navy guys, especially working on this stuff, I can tell you that ship don't dodge shit in a modern environment. They are simply to big and slow. If you can't get rid of the attack by counter-measures or shooting the missile down, the ship will be hit.
      - 5y ago

ericmay 5y ago

> Missiles are not targeted at a location. They absolubtely do "lock on" and can track a moving target. They would simply not be able to function if that were not that case. Why even use a missile at all if it worked like that, just fire a big gun. Sure there are countermeasures, but manouvering a ship won't do anything on its own. The only way things like that help is when combined with chaff or heat signature dummies. I don't think this is correct with ballistic missiles or these hypersonic missiles - please correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that it's not like a fighter jet locking on to a target and firing a missile. When these missiles are fired they are launched into a general area - in this case where the Chinese think the U.S. Navy ships are, and then after that the missiles will lock on to a target as they re-enter the atmosphere - they have a few seconds to adjust course and do so. They can miss. > You seem to be vastly underestimating how well these missiles can manouver. They can't adjust "slightly", they can make sharp turns, with many times more g-forces than a regular plane - a ship has no chance to outmanouver them, any manouvers would only be to present a lower profile to a single missile or to try to confuse the missile's tracking system using some other countermeasures What I'm not saying is the U.S. Navy can just run away or something from the missiles once they are in range, but the ships can move and the missiles can miss. > as for reading articles about the millitary "sounding the alarm" how does the dod itself sound It doesn't sound like anything - it's no different. These are just reports that come out form the bureaucracy. The DoD sounds the alarm on all sorts of things. https://www.ausn.org/post/navy-sounds-the-alarm-on-biden-s-dod-budget-lucky-to-keep-up-with-inflation https://www.ausn.org/post/navy-sounds-the-alarm-on-biden-s-d... > Finally cost. Yes these missiles are expensive but that is several orders of magnitude lower than an aircraft carrier. Heck, its orders of magnitude lower than a single plane on that carrier Cheaper than a carrier but dunno about planes. Maybe the cost can come down over time if they aren't already cheaper. Also in the grand scheme of things the US Navy can just stay out of their range and harass supply lines, and then U.S. forces in the region can attack these missile systems and destroy them, then the US Navy can move in. The main concern really isn't these missiles. They present a problem, of course, because they make it difficult for the U.S. Navy to effectively operate in the region (and by effectively operate we mean unimpeded), but they aren't an ace in the hole or some sort of trump card that the Chinese have.

hef19898 5y ago
Ballistic missiles are things like ICBMs, there it doesn't matter if you miss by a couple of miles. Hypersonic missiles are fast enough to make ship movement a negligible factor, ship are slow. All other anti-ship missiles are guided. How bad that can end was shown in the Falkland war, the Royal Navy suffered quite a lot from Argentinian Exocets. Bought from France. A F-35 is what, 35 million dollar plus, excluding the pilot and training cost? Missiles are cheaper, by order of magnitude.
- ericmay 5y ago
  > Ballistic missiles are things like ICBMs, there it doesn't matter if you miss by a couple of miles. Hypersonic missiles are fast enough to make ship movement a negligible factor, ship are slow. The hypersonic missiles are like ICBMs though. They operate similarly and enter the atmosphere before coming back down. They’re not nuclear weapons where you can be close enough, they have to be accurate. A miss by 3 feet jug as well be a miss by a mile. As the missile enters the atmosphere it only has a few seconds to course correct to hit a moving ship. The ship can potentially move just out of harms way. Not the most likely scenario but definitely plausible. > All other anti-ship missiles are guided. How bad that can end was shown in the Falkland war, the Royal Navy suffered quite a lot from Argentinian Exocets. Bought from France. Different kinds of missiles. Can’t really compare them. > A F-35 is what, 35 million dollar plus, excluding the pilot and training cost? Missiles are cheaper, by order of magnitude. Not sure that these particular missiles are. I think it’s likely they’re closer to $20mm-$30mm in cost. Plus all of the ones China has are basically R&D missiles and not proven.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    Having talked to former and active Navy guys, especially working on this stuff, I can tell you that ship don't dodge shit in a modern environment. They are simply to big and slow. If you can't get rid of the attack by counter-measures or shooting the missile down, the ship will be hit.
    - 5y ago