Juicy details of US military power

Haha.

Iran does not have an Interconitinental Balistic Missile. They do have regular balistic missiles though.

Man, you're funny.

The whole rhetoric for the shield in Europe has not been about Iran's nuclear capability all this time. The US state department and it's vast media control has not been crying about Iranian nuclear missile threat this whole time.

Now in the wake of Iran deal, the rhetoric was changed to just missiles from middle east. Which is lunacy in itself.

It's funny how our government jumps from Using one story to the next. You are equally funny for following in those footsteps

Just shows how brainwashed you are


Going from 1 impossibility to the next. Even to useing such a crappy argument.

 

Where'd you get your degree in orbital mechanics?
What happens when you slow a satellite down to keep a carrier group in its tracking arc?

 

Nothing if the spy satellite is in the high orbit.

 

The 'spy" satellites you refer to are not in "high orbit".

So...
What happens when you slow a satellite down to keep a carrier group in arc of its sensors?

 

And you know where the spy satellites are? You know top secret information now? I already went over this.

 

You and I both know you cannot cite an example of a tactical reconnaissance satellite that operates from anything higher than low earth orbit.

 

Neither can you. Comeven and site the location of modern spy satellites and in which orbit that they would be in? If you have read my reason then you would know that it far more probabile.

 

As you claim that these satellites operate from high orbit, I'm not sure how that's relevant.
Fact remains - you cannot cite any tactical reconnaissance sat that operates from anything other than low orbit.
This means the laws of physics precludes these satellites from maintaining a constant track on a moving group of ships.
Know what happens when you lose fire control on a maneuvering, moving target? You miss.

 

You cannot cite that they dont.

 

I accept you concession of the point.

 

And they can't build ICBMs? Again their IRBM missiles already can reach Europe.

Really? It's about who then? As clearly explained, it's not pointed in the trajectory of Russian missiles to the United States. And due to the low range and speed of the SM-3 it cannot defeat a Russian SLBM attack on Europe that is not angled through Romania and Poland. They are to handle a future Iranian threat. Get over it.

 

Yeah, shut that Fallen BS "expert" up, and his magic star trek sattelites that can spot American carriers and guide missiles.

Russian spy satelites
Zenit=200-350 km
Persona=750 km
Yantar=370 km max
Orlets=321 km max

No high 2000 km Global Navigation orbit. An orbit that high is for Navigation Satellites(GPS, GLONASS) Even if they do travel fast as Earth they are not aligned with Earth's turn so the paths would be different. So that spot would be horrible for a spy satellite. Another point in Fallen's stupidity. He'll bring up a stupid RT source or some other assumption of "top secret satellites" like he thinks in this movie logic. Yeah top secret sattelites that need to be hidden in orbit somehow. No way you can create them in numerous enough numbers to benefit a full on war coverage of the Earth.

 

He very clearly has no idea what he's talking about.

 

The M30 and M31 are guided rockets not missiles you don't know what you're talking about they have cluster airburst variants but the decision had been made to make guided rockets the standard for use in urban environments to reduce collateral damage and increase accuracy.

 

Sure you did says the guy who does absolutely nothing on this site but copy/paste directly from the Russian Ministry of Mass Media and Communications. Payed Russian trolls are not fooling anyone.

Ah yes magical carrier killer missiles that can sink an entire supercarrier designed specifically to be able to take 3 times the damage of WW2 carriers before even coming close to sinking.

You do understand that the purpose of those thousands of water tight compartments is to enable the ship to sustain multiple hits without sinking right? These magical missiles are going to pierce 1/3 of those compartments in a single shot are they? Interesting, tell us more as you are clearly an expert not only on satellite telemetry but ship building and design as well.

 

Do they have one that can hit Germany?
If yes, then missile shield.

 

The camera in the latest Windows phone isn't far off that.

When that plane went down over the sea, Malaysian Airlines, the satellites they used to hunt for it found shipping containers.
Therefore it is not unreasonable to believe they can find an aircraft carrier.

Mostly I expect them to have a good idea where aircraft carriers are at all time. They don't move very fast and are easy to spot.

 

Keep in mind Google Earth is not real time. It is imagery taken usually 2 weeks-3 years before you see the image on Google Maps. Also street views where you can see people and your face are not from sattelites, but Street view, cameras located on streets not from satellites. That is why you can use Google Maps to spot streets in the United States and not in Africa. The United States has full coverage, so you can see every street in the US. More features are computerized maps, and traffic detectors into the Google Maps system. They are not a magic satellite network.

To spot an aircraft carrier, there are the same limitations of a satellite of Google Earth. You have to avoid clouds which are always in the air, which are almost always there. Sattelites move 7/kms sec or above....that is ICBM speed by the way, meaning you quickly loose track as you move in another location above Earth. You would need multiple to however over a target at a given time to continuously track a moving target. Not to mention newer anti-satellite missiles that can kill them while they are spying. Tracking it is not only problem, finding the carrier is also a problem. Since you are using a very large zoom 300 km away, it is like looking for through a black soda straw for a ant somewhere in your room. Another type of sat the Chinese have is SAR sattelites which can see through clouds with radio energy, although, SAR cannot spot moving target.

Also, even if the carrier is found, what help does that do really? The DF-21D, the Chinese missile carrier killer, is a ballistic missile just like any ballistic missile it is dependent on INS/Global Navigation guidance which means they hit already mapped stationary targets and tell their own position through Global Navagation sattelites. Their terminal seeker, is very small and limmited so they can only hit a moving target that is in the seeker's vicinity which means their is a small radar on the missile that turns out right before impact. The missile has no datalink capability like radar guided missiles, meaning they have to guess where the carrier is from the moment the spy sat spotted them, how fast it is going, launch the missile in it's trajectroy, the carrier spotting this can easily speed up, the missile reaches terminal phase where it's radar seeker turns on and can be fooled to lock on to anything from plane(which will miss since planes manuver a lot harder than ballistic missiles), to island, or just crashing into the ocean because nothing is there.

 

No, it uses the guidance system from latest Russian Aerial torpedo.
Think Silkworm or Exocet but with more dodging.

Essentially all it has to do is get close enough and it will acquire it's target.

Accuracy of Scud is enough to hit a moving carrier with a spotter and a few missiles. I agree a carrier can dodge these to good extent but only by assuming random evasion patterns, not by seeing it and adjusting course in time.

If they put a nuke in one, and they will if they are fighting America, then even if they miss they get the kill.

 

They aren't capable of tracking anything in real time, that's why the US uses integrated sonar systems to track enemy vessels.

- - - Updated - - -

They don't need to dodge SCUDs in the first place as they and their strike forces are able to shoot them out of the sky.

 

They are ballistic missiles with terminal guidance. Basically, a rocket only designed to hit stationary mapped target, at the last seconds of intercept, they home on a target with it's warhead active radar homing.

A exocet's terminal seeker quite easily spots targets because it is already fired from a range only around 70-180 km and will be heading straight at the target via sea skimming. A DF-21D is fired in the air, into space, with zero tracking of the target, then it's warhead separates, and as it reenters the atmosphere by dropping downwards, turns on it's radar and hopefully, it finds it's target(whatever it is, it can lock on to anything from a island or a plane, whatever and the home on to it). It's not a practical anti-ship weapon. It's very good in hitting American stationary airbases.

No. Scuds can't hit moving targets, because they use INS guidance and TERCOM.

A nuke are too de-escalating. War between China and US is too unlikely in terms of an actual war. It will be like the Kagril War or the Sino-Soviet Border conflicts. A few exchanges made but nukes would cause a nuclear war where nobody can win.

- - - Updated - - -

SCUDs can't hit moving targets, so one slight movement, when cause them to fall meters off point.

 

Unfortunately the world has seen the success rate of American missile defence vs SCUD. So you won't be believed.
Especially as at the time you made all the same such ridiculous claims about it too.
As you always do. About everything.

 

wiki tells a very different story to you about the dooferdang.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-21#DF-21D_.28CSS-5_Mod-4.29_Anti-ship_ballistic_missile

Anything can hit a moving target, even a SCUD.
Given that Scud can carry a nuclear tip, A carrier isn't fast enough to move out of range between launch and impact time.
But instead of imagining just one SCUD, imagine a salvo of them.

 

No. Here is what your sources say.

So the Chinese and American fear mongers annalists with no military experience say it's deadly. However both Russian and US Military officials say it can be countered. The Chinese have to:
-Use Over the Horizon radars which can't see jack sh*t as mentioned in your source, a radar cannot see pictures unless it's ISAR or SAR
-Recon optical sattelites are just spy sattelties, they have the same limitations
-A SAR radar cannot see moving targets
-Although it is quite difficult to shoot down ballistic missiles, shooting down a sattelitie that travel in predictable orbits is quite easy.(they can't maneuver))

So the Chinese have to pretty much guess where the carrier is, or have to gain air superiority, to get close enough with their spy planes to track down the carrier.

No, you cannot hunt down a moving target with nukes unless it's an ICBM hitting or a Czar bomb everything. SCUDs use 80 kiloton warheads. The blast radius is too minimal for a moving target. Also the Chinese won't use nukes unless they are used on them. China has adopted No-First use policy.

China does not use SCUDs.

 

But these are the magical carrier killer SCUDs which not only can track moving vessels, but evade all supercarrier and escort strike force anti-Missile countermeasures, and breach 1/3 of the thousands of the carriers water tight compartments in a single shot as well! They work best when synced up to their gods eye omniscient satellite technology.