Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #antishipballisticmissile more →
New Chinese Missile Can Destroy US Supercarrier in One Go
| posts about #antishipballisticmissile more → |
New Chinese Missile Can Destroy US Supercarrier in One Go |
04/06/09
04/06/09
Now, seriously, had the Clinton administration not given this technology to them (for campaign money), then who knows, maybe Monkey Boy (Curious George), would've done it. I don't know, maybe, maybe not. Or maybe President BO (not Body Odor) would've gifted it to them (or given it to them as a monthly payment of our gigantic debt). Or maybe the Chinese could have bought the technology from the Russians or North Koreans or Iranians. Either case, we would've been ahead of them. But to just give them tech which they had a hard time figuring out on their own for just 100k is beyond stupid! Besides, who's to say North Korea and Iran didn't get this missile guidance tech from China (who got it from us for 100k)?
Read the Wired article. They do a better (non-partisan) way of explaining what I'm talking about.
[www.wired.com]
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
It's for when you care enough to send a wall of metal at someone.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
@daveNYC: The phallanx system shreds the inbound until it explodes itself. So the majority of the impact would be spread out. Unless China starts using mass drivers......
04/06/09
Sorry, don't have a link handy...
04/06/09
@WindySaturday_GitEmSteveDave: well the phalanx part was right anyway. I have always had a soft spot for rapidly moving walls of hot, depleted uranium death.
Would that "soft spot" be what's left of your lungs and liver after you ingest some? DU is flammable, and when it cooks up it turns into a seriously nasty heavy metal cloud. Heavy metal as in "would you like some mercury with that"?
DU should be illegal, and is in many places. The only reason they use it is because it's cheaper than tungsten (which is a way better penetrator). In a world of $500 toilet seats, this is one place where a little over-budgeting would be appreciated.
Maury
04/06/09
04/06/09
At a lower trajectory than a ballistic missile, a quasiballistic missile can maintain higher speed, thus allowing its target less time to react to the attack, at the cost of reduced range.
Missiles that combine a maneuverable reentry vehicle (MaRV) with a terminal guidance system, allowing them to adjust the flight path as they near their target, are thought to be under development in China for use as anti-ship ballistic missiles.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
and that's all there is to say about that.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
US military dominance is by no means assured. And disruptive technologies come along all the time - we've been working on anti-missile missiles for more than 30 years and we still can't reliably defeat an ICBM. Hitting a bullet with a bullet isn't as easy as some would like you to believe.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
On the other hand: if we ever get to the point where we're seriously pointing supercarriers at the Chinese and the Chinese are seriously firing supermissiles back, who sank whose battleship is going to be the least of our worries.
04/06/09
If you can lay out a 2sq. mi. patch of sky that is heavily contaminated with lead (in about 1 sec), something entering that space at mach 10 wouldn't stand much of a chance...
04/06/09
04/06/09
Stop watching Star Wars.
04/06/09
Why not shoot another missile at it? :P
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
Bravo Jesus! You present the facts with some humor and no bullshit stereotypical fear mongering for kicks.
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
04/06/09
It could be a 2,000 kilometer long new super-weapon with a warhead powerful enough to blow up the whole planet in a single strike
04/06/09
a $2,000 hooker capable of blowing me with a single suck.
04/06/09