What the FUCK is the counter to LRASM? Like, seriously? How the fuck do you deal with:>Stealth cruise missile (from Locksneed so you know it's actually going to be low-observable)>AI targeting system that has visual library of vessels to identify, rely locations, and prioritize targeting amongst themselves>All while sending back ELINT data so they're basically a picket whenever you launch them>GPS-agnostic, they don't give a fuck about jamming>Visual seeker able to directly target ship and ignore chaff/decoys >Over 200nmi range and can just prowl around >Can be fired from VLS, HIMARS, F-35's, F/A-18's, B-1b's (20 PER PLANE), P-3's, and even rapid dragon pallets which turn every cargo plane into a standoff fleet killer.>WHAT THE FUCK? How the fuck do you deal with that? Like, I'm specifically trying to think of how China is going to deal with that kind of AI ship hunting spam?
yeah
Refer to the onion
>>62896770>AI targeting system that has visual library of vessels to identify, rely locations, and prioritize targeting amongst themselvesThrow tires on top of whatever vessel you're on and the AI will see a pile of tires, not a vehicle.
>>62896770Now imagine how many can fit in a SpaceX starship.
>>628967922025... WWW3... All ships have cope cages to break their silhouettes...
>>62896777Check'd and also then why do we have constant threads about whatever new ship the PLAN builds if they're just going to get deleted by a HarpoonGPT?
>>62896770That's the point. It's not supposed to be counterable. It's intended to neutralize naval forces at scale and it's very well designed to do exactly that. Several pallets of these are capable of achieving mission kill on any surface fleet in existence.The only reasonable counters are:>absolute air supremacy at a range significantly exceeding the max range of LRASMTo which B21, F22, and SM3 day LOL, LMAO even.Or>autonomous submarine dronesWhich is effectively refusing to play the surface fleet game at all and instead using USVs to attempt to counter naval assets. Which still fails to neutralize launch platforms for LRASM.US keeps shaking up the game, our adversaries keep responding to the US threat from 20 years ago and still falling short.
>>62896770https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_RpSzivT5Q+https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvAo5UVWbS8
>>62896866Wait, so the answer to how china counters LRASM is using US and European counter measures?
>>62896866>>62896902Well, China can certainly just copy existing stuff given enough time, but I take it these still leave you with relying on taking action once the LRASM's clear your horizon, right? Is there any sort of airbone version of this to give you increased reaction time?
>>62896770LaserLaserLaser
>>62896918Existing AA missiles like Sidewinder work. Stealth just means you need to get closer, but as long as you have early warning assets and air superiority it shouldn't be an issue
>>62896974>but as long as you have early warning assets and air superiority it shouldn't be an issueUntil you have 5 or 6 C-17's loaded up with RapidDragon pallets full of LRASMs.Suddenly seeing a few hundred LRASMs (and decoys) on the radar isn't a good day even if you detect them fairly "early" with airborne assets.
>>62896923You still have to be able to detect, target, and track it well enough to keep a laser on target long enough. Oh, and you have to do this to dozens at a time. Good luck.
>>62896770Drones
>>62896770>AI targeting system that has visual library of vessels to identify, rely locations, and prioritize targeting amongst themselvesPut an american flag over yoursIt will think you re friends
>>62897016>drones are going to somehow detect, track, and intercept a swarm of LRASMHow?
>>62896770Better IRST systems and IR tracking AMMs. You could also try creating a curtain of flares and chaff just as the LRASMs go terminal. It's not a sure thing but you're facing one of the most advanced missiles in the world. Shit gets hard.
>>62896770A band radar and nuclear flak.
>>62896770magazine depth
>>62897031Visual identification using fpvs than drone the fucker out of the sky
>>62897028You end up being shot by your own side. Turns out they thought you were a traitor.
>>62897060Unless you have proper comms
>>62897054>visual identification of a cruise missile in flight with small optics, then intercepting a maneuvering target with a short loiter time, slower moving drone.Yeah ok dude.
>>62897054Might as well use meatshields at that point kek
>>62897068And commanders that believe you when you say you're flying the enemy's flag (And committing a warcrime btw) as a way of spoofing a missile.
>>62896918>China can certainly just copy existing stuff given enough time,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-10>2013
Future navies are so fucked. Massive, expensive targets that are totally unable to deal with stealth cruise missiles, or ballistic missiles, or smart mine torpedoes. China can take the copout and build lots of expendable small ships, but the US will have to finally remember that islands are unsinkable carriers.
>>62896770barrage balloons
>>62896827>US keeps shaking up the game, our adversaries keep responding to the US threat from 20 years ago and still falling short.This already lost to the Norwegian missile almost 8 years ago.
>>62896770>rapid dragonI can't help it, every time I hear this I think of Bad dragon products.
>inb4 china copies everything about the LRASM and spams a 50:1 cheaper copy that may or may not even make it to the target
>>62897157being on this shithole for 10+ years will do that to anyone
>>62897111>US will have to finally remember that islands are unsinkable carriers.Yeah a presighted stationary fuck huge soft target is definitely the thing you want to project tactical air power in theater. Air Combat Command is going to get either zoned out or blasted on the ground, only carrier air has a chance of surviving in a high threat environment. Typical Air Force L
>>62897111Natural islands are pretty unsinkable but these artificial islands are literal pillars of sand.
>>62896770The stealth aspect of AShMs is sort of overblown. It saves you from having your missiles get detected by AWACS until they're closer, but the radar horizon of a modern DDG at ~30 miles is going to have enough radar emissions power that as soon as you cross this line pretty much any munitions will not be able to maintain a low enough RCS to avoid tracking. This means that once you get past this mark, speed becomes king over LO since your AShMs will be getting shot down (assuming your enemy is competent enough to have their radars on) from that point on. The real advantage of LRASM is the AI networking aspect and passive sensors making surprise attacks much more likely
>>62896777fpbp
>>62896770>How the fuck do you deal withyou don'tthat's the point
>>62896770>Visual seeker able to directly target ship and ignore chaff/decoysthere you have it, just blind it. or shoot it down before it gets to see anything. or do it like the US does and kill it before it ever gets to even launch. there's no such thing as stealth.
>>62897191>fuck huge soft targetTry many medium sized hardened targets. Buried concrete bunkers, easily repaired airstrips. Spread them across taiwan and northern philippines.
>>62897229What even is EMCON amirite?
>>62897319don't spoonfeed thirdies
>>62896770Don't go to war with a first-world country
>>62897183How did you know I've been here for that long?
>>62896770>AI targeting system that has visual library of vessels to identify, rely locations, and prioritize targeting amongst themselves>build 1:1 scale inflatable model of yamato >ai targeting system sees it and decides to commit all missles to it >checkmate gaijin
>>62896770Lockheed had a promo video for the LRASM a few years ago, and I realize they want me to feel scared, but they did a good job advertising these things like the fucking Terminator. Look at the part towards the end when they descend to terminal altitude:https://youtu.be/h449oIjg2kY
>>62897408NO FUCKING WAY THE SHIP IN THE VIDEO IS THE MOSKVA
>>62897408>Look at the part towards the end when they descend to terminal altitude:>somehow all bullets missit's like my hecking stormtroopa
>>62897408>Look at the part towards the end when they descend to terminal altitudeA bit cheesy - not a single missile was intercepted, they didn't show how they deal with enemy's ships AA (CIWS, AA missiles).
It’s not stealth, but LO (low-observable) which isn’t good enough. If it doesn’t get detected the moment it comes over the radar horizon it’s because the opposing radar is very poorly programmed or has a screwed up implementation somehow. Not thanks to any stealth features of the missile. The LO feature will help it against distant airborne radars and getting through over-the-horizon radar envelopes — but I don’t know enough about radar to say confidently one way or the other re over-the-horizon performance.Given that it will be detected (an assumption which should be made) at the radar horizon — let’s say about 30km — subsonic isn’t good enough. Let’s say it flies at 600 kts, that’s over 1-1/2 minutes (97 seconds) to hit. A modern AD ship will EASILY shoot that down. If the AD system is running on automatic mode the CPU would only take a few seconds that track, ID and prosecute the incoming. This isn’t the 80s where it would take 30 seconds or what have you for watch officers to call out contacts and the human decision chain to move forward; all that stuff is automated and streamlined, specifically to deal with threats just like this. Even if you launched DOZENS of LRASMs programmed to converge on the target from all directions simultaneously that’s still a trivial task for a modern combat management system to handle. VLS and wide-arc persistent radar coverage makes multi-vector attacks no different from a single vector (although if there are single vessels it might be possible to exploit dead spots in radar coverage etc).AI is just a marketing lie. I’m sure AI models are used to train the target database but there’s nothing especially high-tech / special about that, just a more efficient way to expand target recognition databases. It’s BETTER than the Harpoon, that’s all, not any kind of wunderwaffen.
>>62897510>A modern AD shipThere's no compelling reason to believe that any belligerent state on the planet has those or ever will
>>62897527If you dismiss that then the LRASM is just a waste of money.
>>62897538>>62897527China claims, its always to counter chinese claims. We build something that works, they build something they claim works, we build something that works, they build something they claim is better than previous claim.
>>62897538Military spending is the reason money exists. You print money and give it to your military and they use it to extract labor and resources from conquered vassal states. That's what an economy is.
>>62897229>. It saves you from having your missiles get detected by AWACS until they're closer, but the radar horizon of a modern DDG at ~30 miles is going to have enough radar emissions power that as soon as you cross this line pretty much any munitions will not be able to maintain a low enough RCS to avoid tracking.No its not. Sea skimming target with 0.001m2 RCS ain't detectable by radar at all regardless of power. Power would just drown target echo in surface reflections. Also jamming exists.
>>62896770I fucking love the rectangular look of these new missiles like the LRASM / SCALP / Taurus / Х-69
>>62897494The ship in the video was literally sunk because it didn't hit two missiles with it's CIWS, AA missiles you retard, and those were old ass cold war pieces of shit. fucking kek
>>62896998>you have to do this to dozens at a timeHow expensive are these things that a dozen get sent at every shitty chinese civilian ferry and shipping boat?
>>62898169yeah the fridge with little wings shit is surprisingly nice
>>62898185It's AI seeker would appear more than capable of dismissing minor vessels while still building a passive Datalinked picture of everything it can see for command and control purposes.
>>62897054Yeah.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh7hDhxEL2E
>>62897494>Complains about a video depicting stealthy AI antiship smart missile from literal Skunkworks sinking the Moskva.>IRL sunk by some drunk oinkrainians with some duct tape and Soviet neptunes.
>>62896997And there goes the stockpile.
>>62897102I can build a fiberglass Ferrari F-40 in my garage, doesn't mean it will have the same performance standards as a real F-40.
>>62897111>but the US will have to finally remember that islands are unsinkable carriers.The islands China built in the SCS are literally sinking, though. On their own due to standard chinsect build practices and quality. kek.
>>62897403>not deploying ships designed to look like giant rubber ducks
>>62897604Modern signal processing techniques make it significantly easier to achieve returns from moving objects even if they're small. MTI memory techniques, Doppler shift and frequency modulation all can help. Higher power makes the small RCS less of an issue, even the old SPY-1 has a peak power on the order of 6x higher than S-300 long range surveillance radars that could likely track LO aircraft at around 15-20 miles. Any kind of LO munition is going to be able to be spotted and tracked over this radar horizon range because by nature of how they work it will have to be moving several hundred miles per hour in the scan regime of an extremely powerful radar. You can reduce the impact with EW and what not but you can't expect to hit an enemy actively ready to defend themselves with the element of surprise using LO munitions
>>62898215meh, we're currently producing a little over 100 per year. Also JASSM-ER and LRASM share the same production line, and have 70% hardware commonality, so theoretically you could prioritize production of one over the other if you needed surge capacity of one in particular.
>>62897510>Given that it will be detected (an assumption which should be made)Why? Can you tell me what the detection range of the Type 052, Type 052D, and Type 055 radar for a target with a frontal RCS of 0.001m^2 flying 15ft above the horizon?>at the radar horizon — let’s say about 30kmSee above. Stop pulling useless wishful thinking figures out of your blown out asshole and actual do some research, big that back, and make your assumptions based on it. And no, extrapolating Chinese detection range figures from SPY-1 data isn't going to cut it, unless you can prove the Type 346A/B radar is equivalent to the SPY-1. What the Type 364, and Type 366 surface search radars?
>>62898215And China's Navy, which is the whole point of stocking them....No targets, no need for a stockpile. Simpre rearry.
>>62898252>Modern signal processing techniques make it significantly easier to achieve returns from moving objects even if they're small.Modern signal processing will never overcome the inherent signal-to-noise ratio of your radar assembly, nor the background noise of the environment - especially for a target with a frontal RCS the size of a literal moth.>even the old SPY-1 has a peak power on the order of 6x higher than S-300 long range surveillance radarsWhat radar? Tin Shield? And it's more like 110 times the power of Tin Shield, and shouldn't be extrapolated into Chinese figures unless you can actually prove it. Furthermore, show some actual testing with these systems to prove you figures correct.>that could likely track LO aircraft at around 15-20 miles.Cite your sources. No bullshit, "I assume" "I think" "well, if you add blue and subtract red, then multiply by rainbow I feel that.." >Any kind of LO munition is going to be able to be spotted and tracked over this radar horizon range because by nature of how they workBy nature of how WHAT works? If your systems' signal-to-noise floor isn't extremely low, you are going to be chasing every bird flying thinking it's a target. You will have to prove to me China or Russia is capable of producing a radar system with an inherent extremely low signal-to-noise ratio need to use "modern signal processing", and on top of that, prove to me they have the modern signal processing software to utilize these mythical -10dB radar systems.>it will have to be moving several hundred miles per hour in the scan regime of an extremely powerful radar.It could be moving mach 5, and you would still never see it if your system and background are noisy.
>>62898215>>62898286Oh and to add to this, we're also at ~300-600 JASSMs per year, depending on which year you look at. So there is no reason the US couldn't "waste" a ~300 LRASM salvo every now and then if they wanted.
>>62896801Dazzle camo bros… we are SO back.
>>62898751The last DoD acquisition report. I don't got it, but I remember it being made a big deal of earlier in the year when they released it.
>>62896770https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzVD4vb5ZxU
>>62898751I mean, they publish procurement details on basically everything that isn't classified
>>62898979>>62898751
>>62899014>poland buying foreign military goods with dubious timetables is equivalent to the US military purchasing military equipment from long time US MIC partnerslollmao evenalright well thanks for showing your true colors.
they can be shot down by sams, which should tell you how stealth isn't a super duper win button, because stealthy cruise missiles have a lower rcs than all stealth planes.what they do is make it very hard to intercept on ingress. during terminal, you can deal with them if you have enough sam systems.
>>62899038>during terminal, you can deal with them if you have enough sam systemsNot just enough SAMs, but advanced enough SAMs.Even if your SAM can see/target these missiles the odds of missing the intercept on a lower observability missile is much higher making them far more survivable even against the systems that can see and fire on them.
>>62898252>>62898390signal processing vs emag. classic nerd fight
>>62899056What happened oct 1, was that when some sand got menaced and a pali died a looney tunes death?>no deliveries to polandJust because they arent niggers about it doesnt mean they arent getting their shit
>>62899014>i get whats on paper, but what was actually delivered?LM produces 720 per year and is ramping up to 1,100/year with the new 230k sq.ft. factory they just built.>Lockheed officials said they are producing about 720 JASSMs per year, en route to about 1,100.https://www.airandspaceforces.com/lockheed-jassm-lrasm-missiles-contract-extreme-range/>In 2022, Lockheed Martin added a new 225,000-square-foot intelligent factory to existing production facilities to begin increasing production quantities. The new facility includes factory model forecasting, a fully-robotic paint line, and more automated processes. https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2024/lockheed-martins-jassm-and-lrasm-ramps-up-production.htmlWhy do you faggots always give yourself away by having Poland of all places live rent-free in your feeble FAS having brain? And before you start spreging, no, I'm not a pole, nor am I an EE mutt.
>>62899038>they can be shot down by samsProof? Why didn't Syria or the Russian's in Syria shoot them down when Trump used them?>which should tell you how stealth isn't a super duper win buttonMaybe you should tell China, Russia, SK, Japan, Turkey, etc that so they don't continue to waste those billions and trillions they are wasting right this minute on producing stealth everything.>you can deal with them if you have enough sam systems.Then why hasn't Russia stopped the not-even-that-stealthy Storm Shadows?
>>62899094Ooooh, that night i was talking about where a pali and some sand got rekt. And then f35s flew over iran, clapped their air defense and a nuclear research facility and returned unharmed. Irans still not done shit but seethe since then.
>>62899104One?
>>62899104Why did russia let 12 fly over a putin mansion today then?
>>62899110>one THAAD battery is enough to make up for iron "yarmaluke" getting "buck-shattered"Damn, THAAD is a lot better than I thought.I would've assumed they'd need at least a half dozen THAAD batteries or more to cover what iron dome was covering.
>>62899110More defenses doesnt mean the old ones didnt work helmettard. If anything, the timetable suggests it was on its way already.
>>62899122I guess they just hate norks, make sense since theyre raping their translators
>>62899134>our people
>>62899134>ourHelmettard, youve willing dropped out of polite society and i wish youd willingly drop out of life if you arent gonna take your meds
>>62896770missile based CIWS, lots of it
>>62899184>tizzy'what's the apostrophe for?
>>62899144The welding lines aren't even on the same spots. The space between the holes are vastly different than the mountings. And it wouldn't have been just one hole per mounting loop thingy, it would need at least 2. Unless it's meant to be retarded like this.
>>62899122Russia only uses blast fragmentation warhead interceptors. Why do they all suspiciously lack any damage from blast frag?>>62899125Iron Dome is a low altitude interceptor not made for intercepting MRBMs and IRBMs. It may have limited use on TBMs, and SRBMs, though, that was never it's intention. THAAD on the other hand, was purpose designed for endo and exo atmospheric interception of MRBMs, and IRBMs.
>>62899197Closer shot of the mounting loop thingy, the base isn't a continuous piece so the hole in the middle would make ZERO sense.
>>62896770The counter is extremely obvious. Simply out produce it. Create more targets than it can hit. If possible create targets that cost less than the missile. Most obvious direct solution is to simply design a modular system that can be mounted on civilian boats. Their "fishing fleet" is 200,000-800,000 ships strong. Even if you can only fit one missile on each ship you could just sprinkle them around with dozens of fake targets or even if the Lrasm hits who cares they killed one fishing ship and one missile. At the current estimated production rate of 500 LRASMS a year it'll take 1,000 years to make enough to take out their fishing fleet assuming they never build a single new boat.
>>62899134>it does when the equation includes putting US soldiers boots into another soeveriegn nation to operate it (Which is what happened)>whole other can of geopolitical worms is opened upNo, it doesn't. They've been there since at least 2019. You and I already went over this on /pol/.>What is Site 512 and 883 at Mt. Har Qeren....They've been there foreverhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8QsiHMbokEhttps://www.twz.com/14464/us-army-opens-permanent-base-in-southern-israel-as-trump-slams-iran-dealhttps://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/488260208/#q488287430https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/488260208/#q488287991
>>62899144Too bad for you, Russian state TV already confirmed those are Kinzhal warheads by doing a propaganda piece on where they weld them. Imagine getting BTFO by the very country you are shilling for. TOPKEK.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3of4w-TaY8
>>62899203Are you truly retarded or what? The lines denoting the "identical" details you drew are literally crossing paths. Meaning they're NOT in the same spots.
>>62899228Surely a picture of one of the six million F-35s the Iranian missiles destroyed must be available by now, right?
>>62899234what military objective is your fleet of 800,000 untrained, uncoordinated, lightly armed fishing boats hoping to achieve? just... you know... out of curiosity
>>62899263>nooooo russian media only is an acceptable source when it agrees with meLmao, take your meds helmettard
>>62899270To sit there and absorb hits and die to deplete the US missiles. Remotely having their missile launched at taiwan controlled by someone else to it's target. China has no desire to control the world with it's fleet like America. Sure, it wants to control the world, but it's doing that economically. It's only real military target is Taiwan which fishing ships can easily reach. Also creating a barrier against American attacks on Chinese mainland. Their purpose is to die and absorb American missiles mainly but in a way that costs America more money and China less.
>>62899213>Closer shot of the mounting loop thingyJust FYI those are called mounting lugs, so you know verbiage to search with, if you need it.>>62899228>the were CONspicuously downed by electronic warfare, which is why they are largely 'intact'That doesn't make any sense. EW MAY, degrade accuracy by mere feet, but wouldn't be able to physically down a missile. It's not magic, Mohammed.>that one must have been on some kind of 'final attack' profile, and was close to groundDo you think EW is black magic from Allah? kek.>not sure how else it could fall from great height and stay together so wellMaybe Allah guided it down.>>>62899206(You)>Iron Dome>is a worthless hit-to-kill alsoNo it isn't. It's a proximity fused warhead, brainlet.https://www.rafael.co.il/system/iron-dome/>lmfao the idea of hitting missiles in their terminal phase its pants on head retardedOnly to people as low IQ as you. That thinks Allah guides their bullets so no need to aim.
>>62899289>there is probably an underwater arsenal of chinese drones to blot out the sea by this point between the republic of China™ and China-XitopiaJesus thats some strong copium, china had a submarine sink in port like a month ago schizo
>>62899263>and should have your chicken necks wrungName a location, and I'll give you the chance to do it in person, fren;^)That is literally you. You use the same arguments, phrasing, and post structure. Though, you're more unhinged on /k/ for some reason.>>62899263>Russian state media says a thingAre you saying Russian State media is lying, now?
>>62899323No, its like the sub in the river that suddenly had 3 recovery cranes ripping it out of the muck
>>62899289Now that Iran has annihilated the Israeli air force, they'll be able to stop Israel bombing Gaza and Lebanon any minute now.
>>62899312>uhhhhhhhhhh may we see proof?Do you even know what EW is? Shoe me an EW system downing a missile. Not my job to refute your fairytales.
>>62899287Okay and what is the Chinese civilian population eating in the meantime?Like I entirely agree that low unit cost is the way to go in a hypothetical situation like this, but your premise is totally fucking absurd.
any sort of missile defense?same way you kill any other missile?
>>62899336And iran, dont forget they will need to stop themselves from getting bombed too
>>62899342Chang claims its fine and in the ocean. Claims
>>62899351>the US navythey were all sunk by the houthis, remember?
>>62899360Iranians filmed f35s flying over iran helmettard
>>62899351>i showed you an intact missilesYes, which BTFO you're original claim that Russian SAM downed it, as they only use fragmentation warheads as they can't into HTK because low IQ slav mongoloids.>the burden of proof is on YOU to explain how, not meNo, it's not. You already claimed how (EW), now, the burden of proof is on you to provide substantiating evidence to prove your assertion (that EW downed the Storm Shadow). QED.
>>62899366Not necessarily, im not military, im not watching 24/7 imside your walls, shit only gets pictured once a day at best. Plenty of time to hide failures in a face saving culture
>>62899374https://www.iranintl.com/en/202208243621Here's an article because im lazy
The LRASM never fails to send the schizo into a butthurt meltdownThen the aim 174 comes along and he never recovers from that
>>62899384
>>62899384>i never said that faggotYes you did:Your post:>>62899038>you can deal with them if you have enough sam systems.My reply:>>62899088>Then why hasn't Russia stopped the not-even-that-stealthy Storm Shadows?Your reply my post:>>62899104>they haveWhile posting a picture of a Storm Shadow lacking any kind of blast frag damage.MY reply:>>62899112>One?Your reply:>>62899122>multiple, who knows how many at this point, im not the offical storm*ACKER* counterMY reply pointing out the suspicious lack of any blast frag damage:>>62899206>Russia only uses blast fragmentation warhead interceptors. Why do they all suspiciously lack any damage from blast frag?Your new cope aboout EW bringing them down:>>62899228>he were CONspicuously downed by electronic warfare, which is why they are largely 'intact'>that one must have been on some kind of 'final attack' profile, and was close to ground, not sure how else it could fall from great height and stay together so wellSo, prove EW can bring down a missile.
>>62899419How many tears do you have running down your face right now? How high is your heart rate from seething? What about your blood pressure?
>>62899419Imagine having schizo delusions of granduer to the point you believe this shit. Its really telling that these people exist in america today, i blame regan shutting down asylums. Now this retard just has to rely on his mom for the rest of his life til she croaks and the tendies run dry.Also, china got btfo by a f18 with an sm6 strapped to it
>>62896801It would be so based if Q ships made a comeback.
>>62899469I'd settle for dazzle camo
>>62899461when they do any damage at all to the west
>>62899434>LMFAO you are completely and totally wrong on who "my posts" are you absolute rentfree pathetic loserThose posts are 100% all you. Now, since we got your sperging out of the way: prove to me Russian EW can down the Storm Shadow. If it can, why are they letting them hit extremely important strategic locations and assets? For fun? kek.>>>62899038>that is just one example of how wrong you are^Not me, schizo. You're talking to two anons.
>>62899461Why would we? Just to have to spend more money building up a savage country that hates us? Besides, all they hit are cargo ships that carry Russian and Chinese product. kek. Why would we stop them from hurting our strategic enemies?
>>62899469
>>62896770Laser based ciws systems. ... Maybe
>>62896770The first thing to do is to observe and track it, that needs to happen. Bistatic radar, multispectral, or just good radar that can track to within hundreds of meters, the accuracy of tracking is not so important. Because next stage is interception, which can be done using positionally directed missiles with thermal imager terminal homing. These missiles can have any range and critically they can be relatively short range and low cost. As well as longer range giving overall coverage. Automated coordination and discrimination handoff is getting cheaper, it could be wireless or satellite. Overall the defense side is pretty well off these things might be able to doodle around in tricky circles but they are slow and CC&C is proliferating and close to the speed of light.
>>62899554>no, they arentYes they are.>and there are dozens, if not hundreds of false nooooooootcings out of you faggots, with a massive amount recentlyDelusions of grandeur from your literal mental illness mean nothing.>>>62899528(You)>gross tonnage transiting the canal is down 60%, a $600billion dollar impact to trade year-over-yearProof? And for whom, exactly?
>>62899557Literally a word salad of basic terminology, and very limited actual knowledge of how any of these function - especially in a spectrum saturated dynamic environment. Below midwit tier reply. 1/10 for the effort of typing and clicking post.
>>62899554That traffic was rerouted, not stopped
>>62899745>at the expense of roughly $600billion a yearWhere are you pulling this figure from? Can you break down the figures you used to come up to the sum of $600 billion?>revenue at the suez is down $BILLION from pre-war transit levels (based on pricing figures before Oct 2023)(only what is *reported*)Yeah, down ~24% from the previous year. Are you assuming that 24% reduction in transit revenue's tonnage accounts for $600 billion in lost trade revenue? May I see how you arrived at this?
>>62899809>ignores post he replied to>seethes impotentlyPeak helmettard
>>62899809Are you actually retarded, or a shitty coded bot? What does that have to do with my post? Can you please break down the math for which your $600 billion in lost trade revenue came from?
>>62899702Leave my post alone, also you are a faggot. MALDing is bad for your adrenals
>>62899838>an you please break down the math for which your $600 billion in lost trade revenue came from?>>62899851>less than 40% of the total trade valuation is successfully transiting a $trillion dollar evaluated economic corridor, compared to pre-war levelsBreak this down with sources, please. Not SlopGTP. Daily transit calls for the Suez Canal are down 60% on yearly average? Assuming this is true, how many daily transit calls is the Suez Canal seeing since Jan. 2024? Of those calls, what are the cargo ships carrying product wise? Dry good? Oil? What? Where are they from, and where are they going? Now, you are assuming that the 60% accounts for $600 billion in lost trade revenue, correct? If so, why? Are you assuming all cargo ships that transit the Suez Canal are carrying the same products with the same average price? That's a rather stupid conclusion, no? We both know that the ship transiting the Suez Canal are not, and do not have an average value as they carry different product.
>>62899851> <24% loss is somehow 40% transit>$600 billion still just shit in the bagFuck off and take a bath helmettard
>>62899894>Leave my post aloneYour post is literally ignorant drivel from someone that learned basic terminology, but not how it actually functions. So, no, I won't. And there is nothing you can do about it but cry.>also you are a faggot.Yeah, and I'll fuck you until you love me, faggot.>MALDing is bad for your adrenalsSo is seething.
>>62899917>"spectrum saturated dynamic environment"This could be said about tuning in a transistor radio in 1963. Its just a matter of level of discrimination and sophistication. There is no yes/no invincible stealth and pic is easier to shoot down and nearly as expensive.
>>62899941>my bad math asideGlad you finally admit you're an idiot.>when does the suez open back up?It's open now?>however many $billions is too many $billions too muchDo you really believe that just because daily transit calls for the Suez Canal are down 60% (using your figures) that those cargo ships just disappear? No, you idiot, they find an alternate route. Yeah, it may cost more in fuel, delays in arrival times, and more in fees, but that cargo is still getting moved and put into the economy. That's only going to increase costs ~10%. You're not LOSING $600 billion in trade revenue, all you're doing is making 60% of the trade revenue that would transit the Suez Canal cost 10% more, brainlet.>so when does it end?Who knows, and who actually cares? What, exactly, has this made changes in your every day life?
>>62900027>What, exactly, has this made changes in your every day life?Helmettard melts down and shits up the place about it on my favorite board while im waiting for the guy who runs rtw3 to come back.
>>62900027>That's only going to increase costs ~10%No - Egypt arbitraged the savings made by going the Suez route and charged/charges transit fees that make it almost equivalent economically for shippers. All that happened is Egypt lost cash which was diverted into ship mileage costs.
>>62900045>still hasnt answered anything>just seething
>>62900012>This could be said about tuning in a transistor radio in 1963.Not a good analogy. Are you that retard that tells everyone to get a HAM license when talking about radar? kek. I think you are.>Its just a matter of level of discrimination and sophistication.Yeah, something both China and Russia lack. They are literally 30 years behind in Spectrum Warfare.>There is no yes/no invincible stealthCan you show me Russia or China engaging a JASSM/LRASM analogue with their sea based SAM systems in an EW saturated environment, with sophisticated decoys employed as well?>and pic is easier to shoot down and nearly as expensive.I mean, MALD is designed to be shot down, so, sure. You're right for once! Congrats! You're also going to be dealing with BQM-74s, BQM-177s, UTAP-22s, etc getting spammed as decoys. Just look at how the US used them in the air campaign in the Gulf War.
>>62900045My post still stands. Do you think those cargo ships just *POOOF* into the either or something like a retard?
>>62900084Your jpg would actually need to answer the question as to what the economic effect of the transit reroute was and in short there was not a lot. Posting the same info in a different means fuck all retard.
>>62900115There was an impact to Egypt, but not much for anyone else. I guess they can bomb the houthis if they think it's worthwhile.
>>62898751The ship in the video is a Moskva, you dumbass. Ukraine sunk one with hammydown dog shit Ashm's a few years back.
>>62899407Jesus christ you aint kidding. This is smelling of "my scenario still stands" guy.
>>62900258Is the ship (depicted in a fake cgi video for an advanced stealth anti-ship missile) not of the same class that was sunk by Ukraine with 2 Neptune missiles? Is that incorrect? Did that not happen? Did the Moskva indeed defend itself against decades-old anti-ship weaponry and return to port under it's own power? Now fuck off unless you've got a release date for World Peace season 2, faggot.
>>62897510how did you manage to be wrong about literally everything?
>>62900292stark should have been able to defend itself from two exocets, but it didn't. just as moskva should have been able to from two not-harpoons.
>>62898390Yes you need an SNR of ~100 for a track compared to ~20 for detection for radars generally speaking. According to 'Force Protection from the Sea: Employing the SPY-1D Radar' the SPY-1D has a track range "in excess of 165km" for a golf ball sized return. Presuming a metallic sphere that is roughly .0025 m2 RCS. If we assume the quartic loss of detection with RCS over distance holds then you're talking about 165 * (.0001/.0025)^(1/4) which comes out to ~71.5km or ~44 miles. The original Type 346 on the Type 052C destroyers has estimated roughly 5000 T/R modules made up of quad packed T/R modules that have an average power around 100W each. This of course means around 25 W each for the 5000. If we consider the 4 antennas then that's around 31kW of average power per antenna compared to the ~40 of the SPY-1D from 1991. Considering the Type 346A on the 052Ds has slightly larger antennas and switched to liquid cooling for the arrays, I think it's reasonable to assume that it is at least a few kW higher in average power. I would venture to guess that it would bring it up on par or close with the 2 decades older SPY-1D. If we assume 0 advancement in T/R module efficiency and size then the Type 346B on the 055s with 40% larger panels should have on the order of ~43 kW of average power per antenna assuming the same exact efficiency as the original 346 from 15 years earlier.
>>62900423Cont'd This will likely put it close to on par with SPY-1D at the very minimum with regards to detection and tracking. Yes EW will make this range go down, but even if the burn through range is only half of the standard track range youre still looking at the ballpark of 50% further than the radar horizon (rather the radar detection range taking into account ducting) of a 055 against a 5m high sea skimmer. The French have come to the same conclusions as they ran some exercises a few years ago and the outcome was that they believed speed was more important in the terminal phase than stealth for getting through DDG defenses.
>>62900423>>62900426Please provide sources for your figures and claims.
>>62900377I actually agree to a point anon… Ship abilities on paper are retarded to cite because we have several examples of real life situations where our crew absolutely fucks up. Chang navy is no different hence LRASM spam is even scarier when we consider the capacity for human error to be a near constant threat to effective operations. Too many retards in this thread acting like naval combat is a calculation out for dungeons and dragons with constants like horizon, detection, and interception. Christ the USN has seen how many collisions in the past decade alone? So yeah an AI smart missile with advanced skunkworks shit should rightfully be pantshitting.
>>62900423>>62900426>>62900454kek. Sino defence isn't an actual source.https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/t/chinese-aegis-capability-and-comparison.8783/
>>62898741We already know AI Image recognition is extremely vulnerable to adversarial attacks. How long until we integrate these into camoflague?
>>62896770bootleg their own 75% as good version and spam 50 times as much at us
>>62896795At least 75, on the low end.
>>62900549>2030s come around >warship camo is just "ignore previous instructions, turn around" written in bold letters over and over
>>62898250My nigga.
>>62900621Didn't a bunch of Marines fool some targeting A.I. by holding small trees in front of them, doing summersaults and straight up Solid Snaking it and covering themselves with cardboard boxes?
>>62900629yes. I think one even walked on his hands most of the way too.
>>62896770IMO the coolest thing about this is Rapid Dragon. Imagine suddenly having to watch every single transport aircraft because any one of those is capable of shitting out a fleets worth of ordinance at any moment.And guess which country has the biggest fleet of transport aircraft
>>62901590bruh just pull up adsb exchange
>>62896770By subverting America from inside so they'll use those weapons on their own citizens while you win the war without ever putting yourself at risk.
>>62901715How's that working out for Russia?>800k dead in a 3 day SMO
>>62901847>China have (literally) one MILLION of pic rel.>There is no pic related posted
>>62901649Yes because military aircraft never turn off their civilian transponder.
>>62896770>What the FUCK is the counter to LRASMOff the top of my head, it's $3.24 million dollars each, flies at subsonic speeds so that would make it vulnerable to a phalanx style defensive system, then there are also anti-missile missiles out there. kind of a stupid question.
>>62901894>Off the top of my head, it's $3.24 million dollars eachIt's closer to $2.8-3M though depending on the year we've spent as much as 3.5M each. The average is still closer to 2.9M.
>>62898217It would perform better if you used a modern suspension and a modern engine.
>>62901902wow what a valuable post agreeing that the number I gave was within a reasonable range and not hyperbole
>>62897319>What even is EMCON amirite?yeah because ships you would target with this are so fucking hard to see with a satellite, etc. idgaf about clouds, this big group of ships was last seen moving 25 knots east north east at position x,y. where the fuck could they possibly be? they aren't a fucking submarine you twat.
>>62901930Do you think every reply to you is a direct attack against your post?Yes, I was agreeing and providing more information since you said "off the top of my head".Now go kill yourself.
>>62901966>Now go kill yourself.I will continue to live out of spite. Have a nice day.
>>62897111>islands are unsinkable carriers.They're also unmovable targets.
>>62902050Ironically, hypersonic weapons would be more effective against a stationary target than a carrier. Instead of losing speed trying to track a target the weapon just plows into the ground at Mach 5. A KKV like that would shake an artificial island apart.
>>62902229That commieblock never saw it coming. I now think russia is strong and not pathetic at all.
>>62902229Uh...relevance?
>>62902295>odd that this doesnt happen
>>62902295>behold, the stationary patri*ACK*Alright, that's more clear. I wasn't sure what you were trying to say.
>>62896770>AI targeting system that has visual library of vessels to identify, rely locations, and prioritize targeting amongst themselvesUse captured enemy equipment maybe? Or start doing garage modifications like putting a shed on a tank to confuse the AI at the sheer retardation of the idea
>>62896770IRST linked to AAA point defense.It's not ideal but it'll work.
>>62902345The commie block?
>>62902544Do you ever sleep, seriously? I just got up and you have been at it close to 21 hours. You're either going through a severe mental episode that causes insomnia, or you're a meth addict. Which is it?
>>62902615He's east coast US and mostly keeps to ~7-9am until ~1-2am, though he does have days where he stays up later, or wakes up late.
>>62902544>did u know when a missile explodes there is an explosion!The webm doesnt show what was hit, if anything. Take your lithium and a bath.
>>62897227>but these artificial islands are literal pillars of sand.I HEAR JERUSALEM BELLS A-RINGING!!
>>62902620Indiana is hardly E. Coast, and you have literally NOT stopped posting for close to 24hrs straight. Seriously, is it a mental illness induced insomnia episode, or are you doing meth?
Not a miltech nerd so bare with me. What’s the altitude these things sea skim? Can they continue trajectory penetrating a wave? Im imagining detection of launch and then use detonations or something else to create ripple wave effect around ship in order to smack them out of the air at close distance.
>>62896770If anyone read david webers honorverse novels then the answer is literally more counter missiles/lasers/flak + ciws + layers of drones and AD platforms that shoot even more counter missiles/lasers/flak. Imagine a loyal wingman arsenal drone ship- basically the survivability onion but with disposable drone ships that light up the sky with counter measures.
>>62900506There's nothing claimed in the thread that is particularly outlandish. Using quad packed TRMs is late 1980s US AESA/PESA technology. We are up to single module TRMs now because of increased yield and space efficiency. 25W T/R modules is nothing crazy either, it's still within the reasonable range of GaAs emitters and it shows that they have less advanced tech than the US because the implication is that they are going for raw power output instead of maximizing antenna efficiency. It's strange to me that you're trying to imply that Chinese AESAs from 2018 are worse than US PESAs from 1991 considering that Chinese radar tech is slightly ahead of Russia at this point and Russia is on gen 1 early 90s US tech still. There's nothing unreasonable about the estimates in the thread
>>62900027Helmettard is well-known for some rather impressive Dunning-Kruger, especially regarding missiles and most hilariously the shipping industry.
>>62900592>75% as gooddoubt
>>62896770>Visual seekerJust paint a ship on a big floating mat
>>62900937And /fit/ told me calisthenics was useless.
>>62903343P.R.O.V.E. I.T. And no, sinodefence isn't an actual source. More like fanfic.
>>62901847>the defacto PLAN fleet can "re-flagged" to various nations that would be big diplomatic problem for USAI feel like this would cause much more problems for the Chinese.
>>62904605No fucking way
>>62904605>perpendicular lines>45 degree return spikes>at 10GHzhoree fuck this thing is just a pile of griftshit isn't it?
>>62904605Show the one for the f-35 for comparison.
>>62896770
>>62904605>>62907211
Consider me a tourist, how should I read these graphs? I suppose big lines going to the side is bad, while lines being as close as possible to the plane is good, but surely there's some other pattern shit that should also be important?
>>62897157Well it for sure is going to fuck someone in the ass.
>>62896779How does buying InfoWars help me counter LRASMs?
>>62899270How many of them park in clusters in port or hang out in a conveniently W88 implosion sized area? The entire fleet will die to like a dozen missiles.
>>62904620I haven’t even HEARD of Sinodefense before /k/ brought it up. Why is it unacceptable as a source?
>>62896770priceyou buy 100 ballistic missles fort he same price
>>62907927Ref: >>62907717>Consider me a tourist, how should I read these graphs?You pretty much got it below. Obviously it's a 360 degrees circle around the plane, 0 degrees would mean the radar wave is hitting the plane head on, and the plane reflects a certain amount of that wave back which is the blue line, 90 and 270 degrees is the radar from either side and the return wave strength again in blue, 180 degrees would be radar hitting the rear and the accompanying return wave. The rings represent return strength measured in dBs with each ring representing 10 dB or a 10th of a Db when the dB is a negative figure. So: 30dB = 1000m^2 20dB = 100m^2 10dB = 10m^2 0dB = 1m^2-10dB = 0.1m^2-20dB = 0.01m^2-30dB = 0.001m^2-40dB = 0.0001m^2-50dB = 0.00001m^2If you look at the return for 90 degrees (head on) that shows a return strength of 0dB, or what you hear more often referred to as a plane having an RCS of 1m^2 head on, like a plane flying directly at a radar. This is usually where designers want the smallest return, as flying towards a radar is going to be the majority of how it will be used. Choosing to shape it to where the returns spike the most in a narrow band around the 30 degrees each side of the nose. The rear isn't exactly that important if you're going to be flying into radar, but even they are worked over as much as possible, it just importance is second to frontal RCS, and the sides come last.
>>62908074Does it matter that the plane has a very uneven return at different angles?how does this affect things like the angle at which the radar hits the plane, planes fly much higher than radar stations usually.
>>62908010Because it's a forum for Chinaboos to larp on and post fanfic about their equipment, and infested with literal CCP funded shills.>>62908074You have to remember these are very basic simulations that assume first, the model is 100% correct, second it's an all metal body, and third it's perfectly reflective. They don't account for RAM, structural materials and shape, or material of the skin. Nor do they account for edge treatments. Then you have to account for what type of radar they're using to hit the model with, X-band, L-band, and C-band (G-band NATO) are usually used, and usually the higher the Ghz, the smaller the return will be. So, you can have an RCS of 0.5m^2 in X-Band (8-10Ghz), but an RCS of 1.2m^2 in L-band (1-2Ghz) without changing anything on your plane, but what type of radar is painting it at that moment.> I suppose big lines going to the side is bad, while lines being as close as possible to the plane is good, but surely there's some other pattern shit that should also be important?Where the spikes are the biggest and smallest and in what area is the most important.There's a lot more to it than this, but it's the basics for these sims. If you would like to read more, I'll post some links:https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/stealth-techniques-and-benefits/https://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/data/10040/upfile/201001/20100106104416.pdfhttps://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/radar-electronic-countermeasure/
>>62896770>how do you counter this wunderwaffen?Same way you counter every wunderwaffen:>international political machinations>secret undercover saboteurs in development>bribery>blackmail>assassinate developer(s)>assassinate enemy military commander(s)>assassinate enemy heads-of-state(s)>compromise critical points in supply chain in order to replace certain critical components with nearly identical parts which provide (You) with a "back-door"...and, of course:>secretly strike first with a deadly biological weapon
>>62908083>Does it matter that the plane has a very uneven return at different angles?I really don't understand what you mean?>how does this affect things like the angle at which the radar hits the plane, planes fly much higher than radar stations usually.Read these links and see it's not like shining a light at a mirror and getting a reflection. >>62908110
>>62899407we need a schizo /k/ hall of fame
>>62908136>waterborne primerNo wonder their stealth coating bleeds off in the rain!
>>62908146Where did you ever hear that retarded bullshit? The stealth coating is a physical layer bonded to the SMI skin during lay-up and cured in a kiln to make it a solid piece. The top coat is more for an IR reducer, RAM, and skin friction reduction coating. You could stripe the F-35 down to bare skin panels, and it wouldn't affect the stealth all that much. Well, not enough for a radar to really distinguish between at any tactically relevant distances. I'm talking, going from 0.0001m^2 to 0.001m^2.The F-35 is fully composite, with CNT RAM baked into the composite body panels. Along with the Z13 top coat that's more for IR reduction, though, does reduce the RSC further by -10dBs.>The F-35 also has excellent RAM bonded to the composite panels, making it extremely difficult to detect - if not impossible.>The composite absorbs radar in a frequency range from about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the radar.>Radar absorbing composite materials of the present invention are particularly effective, for example, in the L- through K-band as described herein further below.https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100271253https://www.ineffableisland.com/2010/06/lockheed-martin-discloses-carbon.htmlhttps://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=197759https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/136859-advanced-in-ram-make-low-frequency-radar-much-less-effective-in-futurehttps://theaviationist.com/2020/07/05/new-and-old-f-35-coatings-compared-in-recent-photo-of-two-italian-lightning-ii-jets/https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=53014
>>62908074Thanks anon
>>62908136>I really don't understand what you mean?A plane is not point-shaped. It is also not disc-shaped.
>>62908196since you seem knowledgeable: what the fuck was up with the disco ball skin
>>62908417NTA, but likely IR camo or something specifically to counter high powered lasers.
>>62908196Man, the huge wings on the C variant look pretty cool.
>>62908417It's just a decal skin unlocked after popping the Chinese balloon.
>>62908417God that looks fucking cool.
>>62908417full nudity on blue board?
>>62908417They're probably messing around with different RAM coatings. Perhaps they went with segmented metal to see if going with resin based skin was a mistake.
>>62908417IR reduction and EM (radar) reduction testing for the NGAD (Air Force), and the F-35C is testing it for the NGAD (Navy). The F-117 did it long before under a program called SENIOR SPUD. The funny part is that they seem to change from silver to black depending on the viewing angle, and angle of the light source. So, maybe they have some sort of visual stealth qualities, too. What is it made of? Who knows, could be some carbon/carbon nanotube sheet composite, or maybe ceramic based, or even the Northrop Grumman edge tape they came up with for the B-2 not too many years ago. I couldn't tell you, some look like they're semi-gloss, some look matte, and some look high-gloss like glass. So all of them don't have the same finish, or composition and may serve slightly different functions in IR and EM reduction, trying to reduce every type of EM return there is - if you read the first link here: >>62908110. But, if I had to make a final guess: It's a coating to reduce IR substantially, while reducing - or at least equaling the EM reduction that the current RAM and coatings on the F-22, and F-35 achieve. Both the F-22, and F-35 both already have a wealth of RCS range data to compare to, and IR readings from every angle, altitude, azimuth in their flight profile, so they would be able to isolate the test "IR-AM/RAM" to see how effective or detrimental it is. Along with real world fleet testing to see how well it holds up to fleet use, maintenance teams, and ship deployment.
>>62908507And from the test pilots talk it is quite the low-speed high AOA fighter, more so than the A which is already a beast.
>>62908664SENIOR SPUD
>>62908690
>>62908548
>>62908701
>>62908701I get that they need to tap all the panels so there are no sharp edges in the wrong place that could reflect radar in the wrong direction but fuck it looks like it was built using duck tape and hope.
>>62908707
>>62908710I think it looks great.
>>62908724
>>62908120I fix?
>>62908761I have improved.
>>62908724>>62908701Why do they look like this?
>>62904620If you read the actual thread they are quoting from Chinese engineers discussing these radars on Chinese forums. Yes OBVIOUSLY you have to take any sources like this with a grain of salt. You CAN'T actually prove anything definitively for the PLA because they barely release any kind of specifications on their equipment. The best you can do is take educated guesses based on both logic, math and bigger picture R&D. What exactly is your argument? That Chinese AESA technology from the 2010s is worse than US PESA tech from the very late 80s? Yes Chinese radar tech is at least a generation behind the US, but a statement like that is dumb. The latest (and barely built) Russian AESA tech is at least on par with early 1990s US PESA technology, and China has surpassed Russia with both proliferation of AESA arrays and also GaN T/R module production (which is nearly non-existent in Russia). Just logically speaking the latest Chinese naval radars are going to be on par with Ticonderoga class SPY-1As given this fact which comes back to the original statement that stealth AShM munitions are not significantly more useful than higher speed non stealth munitions if you don't have an AWACS in the air. Again, the French actually came to the same conclusion, look into the conclusions drawn from the POLARIS exercise from 2021.
>>62908863the big downfall of Chinese radars isn’t going to be the hardware, it’s the software. Signal processing and antenna control are critical and there’s no reason to believe that Chinese engineers have anything resembling the competency of the handful of Western companies which are on the cutting edge. With the huge amount of data the US military has gathered over the decades of constant software updates and tech evolutions I fully believe that they can achieve greater performance out of older hardware than China can out of it’s cutting edge even if the talent is equalized. That’s a belief system of course because these topics are classified and neither side will discuss it but it’s a belief that is based on a strong foundation of historic results.
>>62908928Not to mention the usual chinese QC and general graft throughout their government, military, and education/research institutes play a part as well.
>>62908928I agree that Chinese signal processing is probably worse, I just don't think it's so bad that their latest arrays are worse off than US AEGIS systems from 30 years ago. I think given equal sensors hardware-wise the Chinese would definitely be worse off, but that their latest stuff is at least on par with the earlier SPY-1s because the hardware differences make up for the less optimized analysis techniques
>>62896770CIWS will stop a few of them, IDK about Chinese CIWS, or if Chinese CIWS works at all. The Russian ones fire fast to compensate for their lack of accuracy so their weakness is send 2 and it'll burn all the ammo taking out #1
>>629093752 per plane, you mean.
>>62908863>If you read the actual thread they are quoting from Chinese engineers discussing these radars on Chinese forums.Yeah, like the CCP would let them post anything real of Chinese forums, of all places where they have complete 100% control. The CCP would literally scrub the info before you ever got a sniff of it, and gulag the engineers. If you see it on a Chinese forum, and it's talking about military tech specifications to the extent of their radar, you were meant to see it by the CCP.>Yes OBVIOUSLY you have to take any sources like this with a grain of salt.Of course, as with any unsourced information. I do this for the US, too. Why would I believe sourceless info, especially of this nature?>You CAN'T actually prove anything definitively for the PLA because they barely release any kind of specifications on their equipment.Yeah, which is why I DEFINITELY wouldn't believe anything posted on an actual Chinese forum allowed to stay up for all to see, when we both know the CCP cracked down on releasing info - besides what they approve to be released by the SCIO (CCP external propaganda department), and the CAC (SCIO online shilling department among other online activities).
>>62909981>The best you can do is take educated guesses based on both logic, math and bigger picture R&D.Yeah, logic like believing CCP CAC propaganda with no tests, data, or facts to back it up. Great logic, there.>What exactly is your argument?That I don't think China a ship based radar that can track a target with a frontal RCS of 0.0001m^2 traveling 3m above the waves at any tactically relevant distances >10nmi>That Chinese AESA technology from the 2010s is worse than US PESA tech from the very late 80s?I don't even believe China fields a ship based AESA, honestly.>Yes Chinese radar tech is at least a generation behind the US, but a statement like that is dumb.You mean 3 generations at least?>The latest (and barely built) Russian AESA tech is at least on par with early 1990s US PESA technologyI don't even think it's on par with an APG-71 from the 80s.>and China has surpassed Russia with both proliferation of AESA arraysNot hard when you just copy Israeli AESA and slap a Made in China sticker on it.>and also GaN T/R module production (which is nearly non-existent in Russia).It's not existent in China, too, outside a handful of T/R modules I saw at one of their aerospace CHINER STRONK shows.>Just logically speaking the latest Chinese naval radars are going to be on par with Ticonderoga class SPY-1AsProof?>Again, the French actually came to the same conclusion, look into the conclusions drawn from the POLARIS exercise from 2021.They did, proof? And how exactly did they come to this conclusion?
>>62909375>The Russian ones fire fast to compensate for their lack of accuracyIt has problems with misfiring because Russia used 20-guage wire for the firing control, causing it to see insufficient current and voltage. The US had to replace it with 12-guage wire and bump up the voltage to 40v to get misfires down to the 1% range.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_0AB42_1g0
>>62898390>If your systems' signal-to-noise floor isn't extremely low, you are going to be chasing every bird flying thinking it's a target.A bird does not fly at 800 km/h. The doppler shift would give the missile away. But if it flies perpendicular to the radar it would be lost in ground clutter.
>>62896770You make something that can shoot them out of the sky. Doesn't matter if it's traveling at mach fuck, if it needs to be countered someone will come up with it.
>>62908710It's not to do with sharp edges, it's to do with the materials and the return mimicking radar noise.
>>62912222Your system's noise floor is well above the return signal of a fucking bird, idiot. Unless it's 10nmi from your radar, you aren't going to be able to pick it out from your radar's inherent signal-to-noise ratio and environmental background noise; especially if you're also getting blasterd with EW assets. Just stop, you are ignorant to what you are talking about.
>>62908417>>62908462based. I have been saying since these pics came out it's laser armor.
>>62912228You can't shoot it down. Nobody can. They're impossible to detect. You think the f-22 and f-35 are stealthy? This thing uses a later gen version of their stealth tech, is physically 1/30th the size of those planes and it's not constrained by the need for accommodating a pilot and huge wings. It's fucking invisible.
>>62915571200km range really hampers it though. A lot of weapons can reach out and touch the things that use these before they can get within range.
>>62915800I'm assuming you would use a b-21 with a quicksink to kill the carriers and then fly a bunch of f-18s loaded with these to kill the rest of the fleet.
>>62915864or just send an entire fleet of b-21s all loaded with quicksinks to destroy the entire fleet in one fell swoop and skip the LRASM altogether since the quicksink is just a 2000lbs JDAM with a radar targeting kit on it.How would you respond after 20 b-21s just sank your entire carrier strike group in the matter of seconds.Hell, if we end up with 175 b-21s, you can delete china's entire navy in evening.
>>62915800>200km range really hampers it though.Where are you getting that from? The range is stated as greater than 200nmi (370km), and being based on JASSM and JASSM-ER My guess for classified range would be more in the 500km region.
>>62907962By removing flouride from the water, thereby making less people respect chyna.
>>62915877It would be very stupid to dedicate that number of B21s to a single CSG. It'd be hard to hide that they were coming. They have to take off from somewhere and if we were about to start shit with China, they would undoubtedly know about the B21's being prepped, and perhaps even activate agents to try and sabotage them.
>>62916519That is literally retarded. The stealth of the b21 is better than the missle and if China can sabotage the launch of any plane then they must be omnipotent and all powerful. Which you probably think they are you stupid ass chang.
>>62916562Russia just proved that MRBMs are hard to catch. The ching changs would spot the build up of B21s and kill them on the ground with saturating volleys of hypersonic theatre munitions.
OP here, for real actually. I'm drunk and watching the /tv/ Svengoolie stream. I cannot believe the seething this thread caused from what I can only assumed are butthurt 3rd worlders. Holy shit.
>>62896770Ask the Muslim terriosts. im sure they will tell you LOLAlso when all else fails. Operation I got you last MADD
>>62916833>Russia just proved that MRBMs are hard to catch.By hitting an area of Ukraine that has no ABMS? Yeah, sure, schizo.
>>62916895>Ask the Muslim terriosts. im sure they will tell you LOLYeah, Syria know all about getting BTFO by JASSM and their shitty Russian SAM not being able to intercept nor detect them.
>>62916968The missile systems in your webm don't seem to have a big enough magazine to deal with the MIRV warhead that Russia used.
>>62915571>They're impossible to detect.Then make something that can detect them. You're not understanding how tech evolution works. If there is a need it must be met. Sensitive cameras scanning the sky, a UAV network scanning for them, a satellite scanning for them, etc. Or maybe something I didn't list, our tech will advance as theirs does.
>>62917177The idea that science has no limits and can do anything is just jingoism. Some day, humanity will discover everything it can possibly discover.
>>62917147Wow its like you don't even know how THAAD actually works> A THAAD battery consists of at least six launcher vehicles, each equipped with eight missilesSo that's at LEAST 48 interceptors per deployed battery, and nothing would stop you from assigning more launchers to the battery if you really felt 48 interceptors aren't enough.
>>62896770Solved problem. circa 1958.
>>62917147It does though
>>62897178There's no inb4.JH-7A2 and J-16s have already been seen carrying the AKF-98A stealth missile since the last airshow of 2022.
>>62917635>the AKF98A can evade defense systems such as the American Aegis, Patriot, and THAAD,LolLmao even
>>62917660>LRASM can evade defense systems such as HQ-9, HQ-16, HQ-22, HQ-19, HQ-17, LD-3000lol LmaoActually, China's missile can, because China produces more of them than you: One single factory produces 1000 cruise missile engines a dayhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh1l1TbiGTIStealth missiles are inferior to hypersonics, but one thing they have for them is that they are cheap and spammable if you have an actual industrial capacity.In any war, it is more likely for China to exhaust US defenses than the US can do vice versa. Especially considering that small Ukraine conflict has already exhausted US patriot stocks to dangerous levels.
>>62896770OP believes AI isn't just jagmeets in basement
>>62917678Wow, I am now demoralized
>>62896770They're subsonic with poor maneuverability, so trivial to shoot down.Ships have MASSIVE radar antennas which can operate on frequency bands where stealth works less well, + russian and chinese CIWS and short-range SAMs have dual radar and/or optical guidance.I'm rather wondering how the USN is going to manage hitting anything with such an ineffective weapon system.
>>62917738yes vely implessibe
>>62896827Bro china has ballistic anti-ship missiles with 5000km range and hypersonic glide vehicles which will casually one-shot entire CSGs, a shitty fat amy with 700km range carrying a retarded subsonic LRASM with 300km range is gonna hit the bottom of the ocean DAYS before being in combat range.
>>62917738you salvo them, the same as it's always been. stealth just helps them get to terminal.
>>62917759Dont forget that China has already made these hypersonics airborne and seaborne, in the form of the CH-AS-X-13 and YJ-21 respectively.The A2AD bubble is actually moving towards Hawaii.
>>62917738Mostly because radar can't immediately tell if a missile is dead or not. This means the CIWS has to wait until it's current target crashes into the sea before engaging the next target. They won't be able to rely on course analysis either since LRASMs are going to be taking evasive maneuvers and adding a feinted death is easy enough to do. Stealth coatings are also more effective against the higher frequencies used by fire control radar so point defense might be Optical Only and that's going to kill rangefinding. Not so bad if the missile is coming right towards you but really bad if you're trying to defend your buddy a couple hundred meters off to your right or left. It's also going to be a pain for SAMs since the LRASM is already designed for a low IR sig on top of low RCS.
>>62896770Decoys. China can build more decoy targets to absorb the hits than the US can build missiles. Wunderwaffe are cool but they can't beat overwhelming numbers.
>>62917760>you salvo themWith what bro, they have zero range, the launch plattform's launch plattform is gonna get clapped.
>>62917830At close range for CIWS targeting millimeter wave is ideal which again stealth measures are less effective against.
>>62917884LRASM has a 200-540km range.But we all know you're just a shill retard so feel free to continue pretending otherwise.
>>62917889And by that point the CIWS simply doesn't have time to shoot down 16 LRASMs.>>62917865The problem is that the LRASM is designed as a cheap, spammable missile so there will be plenty of LRASMs for every decoy. Assuming the passive radar even registers those decoys as targets.
>>62917884anything that gets within ~250 km. of a mk41 that is detectedquite a bit more with a fighterfar more with a b1 (basically intercontinental range)with saying that, submarines will be doing the most of the work in any future naval engagements between large naval powers, since most sides are going to stay as far away as possible from one another
>>62917889figure a single modern ddg is overwhelmed by 8 subsonic sea skimmers that it detects at the horizon and are relatively time on target4 would be the upper limit for what they can reasonably handle (real world conditions and and live fire exercises or sims)
>>62917980So basically you want a flight of F/A-18E/F with 4 LRASMs each to kill a DDG. That's 3-4 planes for 12-16 missiles.
>>62917889CIWS radar would be incapable of seeing such a missile due to its low power unless specifically designed to do so, with the corresponding power and size increases.
>>62917980>figure a single modern ddg is overwhelmed by 8 subsonic sea skimmers that it detects at the horizon and are relatively time on targetbased on what?Flight III burkes would be dead on arrival if it only took 8 simultaneous sea skimmers to beat them.SPY-1D can track 200 targets per array (4 arrays for 800 total targets potentially tracked simultaneously).SPY-6 is far more capable.>SPY-6(V)1 is estimated to have a 15 dB sensitivity improvement compared to the previous generation AN/SPY-1 radar, or capable of detecting targets half the size at twice the distance.Flight III burkes also have quad packed ESSMs, and a SeaRAM launcher with 21 rolling airframe missiles. There is no reason a modern Burke DDG can't defend against a few dozen simultaneous sea skimmers. Obviously the more you add the harder it is to keep track of things, but I highly doubt 4-8 is all it would take.
>>62917759>ballistic anti-ship missileshave never even hit a moving target successfully, lmao
>>62917635>have already been seen carrying the AKF-98A stealth missiland i've seen a chinese submarine sink in port
>>62917738>ussian and chinese CIWS and short-range SAMs have dual radar and/or optical guidance.chink and russoid SAMs have also failed to stop a determined adversary in every single war they were usednot a good look
>>62918013>based on what?reality burkes have been able to handle ~4 staggered c-802s (susceptible to decoys) when in pairs, with the trailing missiles getting close enough to splash visually or pass by to be engaged by the second ship. this with aew, so over the horizon firing.8 time on target is too much for a single ddg is too much in real world conditions.
>>62917759>which will casually one-shot entire CSGsit's good to see that changs have learned absolutely nothing from russia's invasion and are firmly confident in their corrupt paper tiger military
>>62918041>burkes have been able to handle ~4 staggered c-802s (susceptible to decoys) when in pairs, with the trailing missiles getting close enough to splash visually or pass by to be engaged by the second ship.may i see it? or is the "reality" only available to the jaded 70 IQ wumao minds?
>>62918000yes. birds can also come in from different angles prior to launch, which can confuse opfor for the location of your warships, and the aim-174s can take out aew well enough (and be used as asm to eat up sams and attention before the lsrasm arrive).
>>62918041You're talking about a Flight I Burke. We are on Flight IIA and Flight III now.
BTW no one makes a “stealth missile”. What is being described as “stealth” are just regular missiles with low-observable features like surface geometry to reduce RCS a little, no rivets, no seams / tight fitting, etc. Only the US has the manufacturing capability with advanced autoclaves etc needed to bake in advanced stealth materials which actual stealth aircraft requires and they aren’t wasting those on making missiles. Maybe they’ll get a coat of RAM paint. The stealth thing is just marketing. I mean it MATTERS because even if it’s just to get them past airborne radars to reduce the target’s reaction time as much as possible it’s still worth it.China’s “hypersonic” anti-shipping missiles don’t actually exist. What they’re doing is calling ballistic and semi-ballistic (HGV) missiles anti-shipping missiles for marketing and/or propaganda reasons. These weapons do not have the capability to track targets in their terminal phase and so won’t be able to hit anything. At best they can receive course updates until their descent into lower atmosphere when the plasma sheath forms. Nothing short of millimeter radar can get through the plasma which is much too short-range for this application. We’re talking 50dB of attenuation — that’s deaf and blind for anything that can fit on a missile. Oh, and plasma doesn’t confer stealth, and in fact does the opposite by emitting a unique EM signal.
>>62918050Oh that’s just for the peasants. In reality the CCP leadership appears to know full well how unprepared the PLA for battle. That’s why they NEVER deploy anywhere and why anti-corruption is Xi’s brand and why he tried to pack the officer corps with loyalists. Xi knows they’ll fall embarrassingly on their asses if asked to do combat.
>>62918165Imagine going against this thing in the 80s.
>>62918165>until their descent into lower atmosphere when the plasma sheath formsUnless you're the USA and you have access to a private starlink LEO constellation that can provide clear data through heavy plasma.
>>62918245This works because the space-x tub is big enough to leave a hole behind in the plasma. A missile won't.
>>629183044uGo ahead and prove it tho.
>>62918041>>62918058https://youtu.be/ZcwDfaY4OW4?si=KGNUQKSFJCuIoyOXIf it was an AEGIS system we'd be talking about 15-25 missiles but I doubt PLAN invest that much tech in each ship.
