DF-21 countered.

derete prease

>>32333664
Look at that, the MDA has been actually improving our missile defense.

File: don-draper-shrug.jpg (66KB, 848x477px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 848x477px

>>32333664
>china bet everything on this instead of an actual blue water navy or training
>countered by a fucking amraam with a booster

i feel bad for them

>>32333769

aieee ya its another beiyang fleet

gwailo tricks humiriate china yet again

>>32333767
...Have they not?

Xixixi american pigdog no way you can defeat glorious missile created with the blood, sweat and tears of chinese engineers

>>32333788
>stolen from the blood, sweat and tears of US engineers

Fixed.

>>32333797
Pretty sure Chinks got the idea for AShBM from Russia.

I guess they weren't concerned with the Soviet findings that AShBM seekers need to fight through sea clutter and are thus extra suceptible to soft-kill counterneasures.

File: 1478515689540.jpg (4MB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3072px

>>32333664

AsBMs were abandoned by Russia for a reason. They're a terrible idea.

>>32333664

>Chinese engineering

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nESfMlI19jY

File: 1481742633532.jpg (55KB, 258x360px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 258x360px

>>32333857

>chinese engineering

Lol America has to release propaganda to appease the civillians. The public know that this is for show and is not useful in a real scenario. But burgers will still eat it up because they can't handle the truth. It's like that coyote thing that America is trying to sell as a Chinese supersonic anti ship missile equivalent, which is very lacking compared to the real Chinese thing.

>>32333876
Coyote is a target drone, not a weapon. We don't sell them, we use them to test interception of sea-skimming Mach 2.5+ targets.

>>32333876

Careful not to bite.

>>32333876
More real than DF-21D, which has still never been tested against a moving target, let alone a VLO, BMD capable, AESA equipped target. For which China has no analog.

>>32333857
the fucking fuck

>>32333982
Maybe it's trying to do MRSI?

File: Donald-Trump-smug-FB.jpg (29KB, 750x393px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 750x393px

>>32333876
>Lol America has to release propaganda to appease the civillians.

This coming from a chinkposter.

>>32333911
America is selling them as Chinese supersonic anti ship missile equivalent to the public. They are saying their missiles can defend against superior Chinese missiles because they can defend against inferior Coyote mock ups.

>>32333857
>>32333874
What's going on and what's wrong ?

>>32334134

Its working perfectly in simulating engaging multiple airborne targets.

Just a retarded school-shooting-frog poster

>>32334112
They are not, they're only ever sold as target drones. They're not weapons, they're science experiments. And they're perfectly capable of providing realistic imitation of Missiles in the YJ-91weight class.

Good thing the DF21 was just a stopgap until the hypersonic missile with maneuvering capabilities enters production then.

And wheres the intercept video?

>>32334112
>America is selling them as Chinese supersonic anti ship missile equivalent to the public

I too like making things up. It's a drone, keep moving them goalposts, maybe you'll get some more gutter oil.

>>32333832

god damn Zumwalt looks A E S T H E T I C in real life

I always thought the cgi mockups looked garbage but irl she looks like a floating fortress

>>32333664
Delet dis
How am I going to have chink threads now?

>>32333777
Checked

>>32333857
Wew

>>32334193

It's an IRL Imperial Star Destroyer and my penis enjoys this.

File: 1433270758052.jpg (974KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 2000x2000px

>>32334162

>working perfectly
>engaging multiple airborne targets
>10/10 no problems here

>>32333664
Does anyone know how many of these missiles we have?

I'm guessing it is either high hundreds or low thousands and that we could crank out more if we needed too.

>>32334241

50c have been deposited into your amazon account

>>32334291
The SM-6 is relatively new and uncommon, production rates are also probably not high.
If war were to become a real possibility, production could be greatly increased.

>>32334174
The newer blocks of SM-3 will gladly kill BMs during the boost/ ascent phase, before they have a chance to separate.

This is a Russian opinion, made by Lieutenant-General Viktor Poznikhir this past October. http://navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2016/october-2016-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4438-us-sm-3-interceptors-can-take-down-ballistic-missiles-at-initial-flight-stage.html

but does it work against a crowded sky? Does it work against a maneuvering ballistic missile, that has decoys/chaff ?

>>32334291
~200 SM-6 as of March 2016.

Tbh, it's just an SM-2ER with an AIM-120 seeker; both missiles we've been using for decades. SM-6 isn't hard for us to build at all.

>>32334325
Aegis BMD has been killing complex separating targets since FTM-04-2 in '05. Defeating multiple BM targets simultaneously came in '07, separating IRBM intercept came in '11. In 2014 Aegis used an SM-3 and two SM-2s to defeat a simultaneous raid of an SRBM and two sea-skimming missiles.

>>32334241
So tell me what's wrong with it?

>>32334166
Yes that is why it is a missile 'equivalent'. Americans truly does not know english.>>32334166

>>32334492
Same flight capabilites with no warhead. How does your country test it's weapons again?

Oh wait. They don't.

>>32334512
>Oh wait. They don't.
This.
Chinkshit BTFO

>>32334512
Silly ameriburger. Who needs testing when you have the superior computer simulations of CMAO? Only 555 yuan and simulation stands 100% of the time.

File: 1466843657986.gif (892KB, 200x317px) Image search: [Google]

892KB, 200x317px

>>32334566
CMAO? more like LMAO.

>>32334201
Silly man. No more dim sum. Done with shashlik and stroganoff.

Only burgers now.

>>32334492
Impressive.

Chinese is so powerful it can alter other language definitions to suit itself. The party's memes will soon overtake the world.

>>32333664
So do we have actual evidence of this or just a youtube link?

Also, nowhere do I see the word "successfully intercepted" the MRBM.

>>32333857
>Chinese accuracy

>>32334222
>>32334193
>IRL star destroyer
>commanded by Captain James Kirk

How can CHYNA even compete?

>>32334694
https://www.mda.mil/news/16news0012.html
http://www.staradvertiser.com/2016/12/14/breaking-news/navy-conducts-missile-tests-off-hawaii/

>>32334452

What's it shooting at? Nothing?

BTFO
T
F
O

>>32334872
I mean we can't tell, target area is off screen.

I'm no chink apologist, that shit looks like hot garbage. I was just hoping that someone could explain what's going wrong from a technical perspective.

>>32333876

Don't you have a knife-fight to engage in after someone steals precious noodles from you, endangering your ability to survive the month?

>>32334328
>>32334305
So with all of these missiles hopefully getting spammed thanks to uppity norks/chicoms/iranians does /k/ think these loads of missile defenses would help us in any nuclear conflict?

Like a Russia-USA nuclear standoff since those are the two most prominent nuclear powers; would this proliferation of ABM capability greatly affect a nuclear exchange by helping mitigate loads of older missiles to reduce the damage we would take?

>>32334921
So would ballistic missIle defense systems help defend against a ballistic missile attack? That is what you're asking right?

>>32334921
There simply aren't enough capable interceptors to stuff a full-scale ICBM attack. SRBMs through IRBMs can be intercepted easily, but there's at best 40 missiles that can intercept true ICBMs before they separate. SM-3 can inter ept during boost/ascent phase, but this isn't useful against silo-based and road mobile systems that are either constructed inland or can fuck off inland if they so choose.

>>32334921

Yes

We'll get to the stage soon where ICBMs will be mostly nullified and we'll be back to cruise missiles and other means (such as the Rooskie long range nuke torp).

>>32334174
>hypersonic
>maneuvering

pick one

>>32333769
But they aren't betting on DF 21 instead of a blue water navy. They are trying to make the SCS a fortress to adversaries, just like NATO did with GIUK in the 70's - 80's.

>>32334946
More like how much would this limited ABM system mitigate a full nuclear war.

Percentage of warheads getting through, changing target lists, number of missiles reauired on target. Shit that guys like Oppenheimer would talk about.

>>32335079
Biggest problem would be the initial "is this real" factor and delaying on part of defensive launch's. This would primarirly determine how many attempted intercepts would be possible.

File: 1478557034189.jpg (61KB, 600x551px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x551px

Amerikanski finally learn how to hit missile with missile?

>>32334982
>We'll get to the stage soon where ICBMs will be mostly nullified and we'll be back to cruise missiles and other means (such as the Rooskie long range nuke torp).
I suspect we're already at the point that the X-37 can drop a weapon (or itself) on to Moscow faster than ICBM counterstrike.

>>32334921
>would help us in any nuclear conflict?
Currently, there aren't enough to counteract MAD. however, with increasing numbers we may reach a destabilizing stage where the US could concievably land a first strike and shoot down the response- and that is very dangerous for everyone.
Currently though, it's far less than that, and it acts as a containment for the Norks and Iranians- babby's first nuke is no longer enough to enter the MAD game, the bar is now "enough to concievably get one through"- so the real players are the UNSC permanents, the Israelis, and maybe the Pakis.
The number you'd need to counter the joint arsenals of the Russians and Chinese is too large for practical purposes, particularly taking into account that some will require multiple interceptors and that the price of failure is VERY high.

>>32335133
Hope we have a secret space fleet worth of X-37s and even more advanced spacecraft or starships to blow shit up.

>>32335148
That's at the moment but given enough time to grow our ABM systems and supplies geometrically wouldn't that 'improve' our situation in a MAD scenario, by reducing the damage an enemy first strike could do or protect nuclear assets for a secondary retaliation strike?

I'm not saying abms are magic shields that will end nuclear warfare, I'm just wondering if it makes a minor to moderate improvement that will find some utility in a full scale war. Which several people have already answered in this thread.

>>32335133

And what would that accomplish? You're faster than an ICBM counter-strike from Siberia? And Russians do what, just leave their submarines parked because why?

>>32335092
I guess so.

>>32334982
>We'll get to the stage soon where ICBMs will be mostly nullified and we'll be back to cruise missiles

Possibly. But it won't be done by other missiles. To get the same Delta V as an icbm you need (WOW SURPRISINGLY) something the same size and about as maneuverable as an ICBM.

Long range ballistic missile defense will still go the course of intermediate staged defenses where eventually the reentry defenses can get to a point where its physically possible to stop re-entering vehicles, but that will most likely be done with kinetic or energy weapons such as rail guns or lasers due to the higher accuracy involved with them.

>>32335133
I'm pretty sure shallow-trajectory SLBMs already can do that. Plus X-37 is barely big enough for the W88 physics package, point blank. Even if it were a faster response, you're not gonna make up for having no penetration aides and two warheads tops with just speed. A-135 isn't that out of date.

>>32334857
Nowhere does it say it destroyed the targets.

>>32333822
>>32333797

Isn't the DF-21 basically just an enlarged Pershing II? It's MaRV was very similar I thought?

>>32338558
>the video didn't specifically show the cum in your mouth because you swallowed it before we could see, so how do we know he actually came in your moth

>>32338574
It is, but the D variant has some changes to it's front end to make hitting moving ships even theoretically possible.

File: 1359320509367.jpg (22KB, 600x412px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 600x412px

>>32333664
>terminal
>MRBM

kek.

The DF-21D is an IRBM, flies much faster and higher than an MRBM, and when you have to intercept a mach 15 RV at terminal, you have already lost.
And when said RV does only modest course-corrections, as it is designed to, you will get fucked sideways.

China not impressed.

>>32339230
>you will get fucked sideways
Like your chances of procreating, commie.

DERETE THIS.

>>32339230

>Chink can't handle his worldview being shattered

>>32339230
Nope, D variant is firmly MRBM. And even China doesn't claim more than Mach 10.

File: Russia’s Navy - More rust than ready.jpg (3MB, 3500x2221px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3500x2221px

>>32335210
> Russians do what, just leave their submarines parked because why

pic related

>>32340025
Is that hole there on purpose?
Normally I'd assume it to be there on purpose but my knowledge of russians tells me it's not.

File: 671 yorsh.jpg (951KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

951KB, 3264x2448px

>>32340025
It's not rust, dumbass. Come on, post more old irrelevant pics, you can do better.
>>32340110
Yes it is, see pic related.

>>32340177
>years of barnacle growth
That pic doesn't help your argument.

>>32334134
Nothing went wrong. Max rate of fire with max rotation.

K/unts are retarded when it comes to china

>>32334881
There's nothing wrong you moron.

File: dong-peng-21d[2].jpg (55KB, 490x314px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 490x314px

Nice job, you have a slight chance at intercepting a SINGLE warhead.

Too bad we have thousands, isn't it?

>>32340177
>years of barnacles at surface depth
Looks like it hasn't dived in 5 years.

>>32341567
>Too bad we have thousands, isn't it?
>implying
>[citation needed]
>Implying SM-6 isn't cheaper to produce than a fucking MRBM

>>32341567
No, you don't you only have a few hundred at best. Not nearly enough to put out of action all of the US and allied forces in the area.

>>32339230
DF-21D is an MRBM. Nice lie.

are the people who spend all these anti-chinese threads on /k/ the Bernie Sanders supporters of /k/?

>>32342140
Bernie sanders is a commie so im going to go with no.

If anything the chicoms are burners.

>>32341567
>see f-14s on the deck

Just rounds out that pipe dream of a jpg, imo.

File: 4k18 r-27k.jpg (161KB, 1417x824px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1417x824px

>>32333832
And the reason is following, retard:
>The missile system never became operational, since every launch tube used for the R-27K counted as a strategic missile in the SALT agreement, and they were considered more important.
Now Zumwalt on the other hand was abandoned by the US precisely because it's a terrible idea.

>>32342186
Thats like saying the seawolf got abandoned due to being a terrible idea.

Neither is/was truly abandoned, and act as a tech platform.

>>32342195
Whatever makes you sleep at night.

>>32342222
If you think the seawolf was abandoned, you would be straight wrong. It not only stuck around to this day, its tech advancements directly went into the Virginia class.

The exact same thing is happening to the zumwalt and the AB flight IIIs, not to meantion any new class.

But you come off as a salty motherfucker who will ignore this logic.

File: 667bdr kalmar k-44 ryazan.jpg (116KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1024x768px

>>32340845
>>32342073
Way to miss the point.
http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/why-has-russia-boosted-submarine-patrols/

>>32342238
No one is talking about Seawolf, except for you, of course.
>The exact same thing is happening to the zumwalt
Whatever makes you sleep at night.

>>32334297
>Even chinks need to copy western jokes

HAHAHAHHAHAHAAH

>>32342274
The seawolf is an exact analog to the zumwalt.

The AMDR (before the breach) was going on the zumwalt, and was developed for it. Now its going on the AB IIIs, along with battle computers and various other zumwalt tech.

Its not happening, its happened. Weather or not you see it is irrelevant.

>>32342301
Of course not sirry burger
Is superior Chinese shirr exposing pran
t. Chink

File: noticias cadiz fragata.jpg (93KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1024x683px

>yfw your country has AEGIS destroyers

FeelsGoodMan.png

>>32342317
What happened is that Zumwalt is cancelled because it's a shitty idea, the US sticks with more Burkes and this all has nothing to do with Seawolf.

>>32342340
The zum was cut to three (not canceled, nothing makes you sound more ignorant than that), because of costs. Had nothing to do with its "idea".

Its tech was transfered to other classes.

>>32342351
Its costs is the effect of the idea being retarded. that's why it got cancelled. Burkes are better in every respect.

>>32342366
Its costs were the effect of it bringing in a multitude of new tech, just like the seawolf. Jesus.

>Burkes are better in every respect.

Easily disproved. The zumwalts radar is far superior.

You really going down the "im wrong but im going to be a salty bitch about it" path, huh?

>>32342382
Too bad Zumwalt's cost is far inferior. That's why they abandon it and stick with Burkes.

>>32342392
In 3 years they are launching a replacement for the burkes.

Furthermore, cost is not everything. If so, poo in loo ships would be the absolute greatest.

>>32342402
Sure they are, whatever makes you sleep at night. Just like they launched Zumwalt. And then cancelled it for more Burkes.

>>32342407
So you admit cost is not everything.

>And then cancelled it

I mean, its a free country and all, you are allowed to be wrong, and intentionally ignorant, but simply stateing something is canceled does not mean it was cancled. The zumwalt was not cancled, the CG (X) was.

>>32342433
Of course cost is not everything. Cost/effectiveness is. And that's why Zumwalt got cancelled. Because Burkes are cheaper and better in every respect.
>B-b-b-b-but it was not cancelled
So when they are planning to build the rest 30 ships? Oh, right, they don't. Because it was cancelled. For more Burkes.

>>32342446
>i...its c..cancelled!

Cutting an order is not cancleing.

>Because Burkes are cheaper

Its funny, we will see when the flight iii's cost come out.

>better in every respect.

I already objectively proved you wrong here.

File: Firefox_Screenshot_2016-12-08T20-33-08.654Z.png (72KB, 937x686px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 937x686px

>>32342457
Cutting it more than tenfold from over 30 ships to "just a couple we managed to construct before someone was smart enough to stop" is cancellation. They do not decommission what they managed to build and they are cancelling the rest of the project. It will never see life again. The idea is not just dead,it's stillborn. Deal with it.
>we will see when the flight iii's cost come out
Indeed, we will see, lol.
>B-b-but muh littoral artillery barge
Burkes are better in every respect. Deal with it and let it go.

You should have checked your story, this test was a joke
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/us-navy-conducts-missile-tests-off-hawaii-1.444605#comment1

File: 1392387356369.jpg (69KB, 467x413px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 467x413px

>>32333777
duppel trips check

>>32335133
START II was never ratified, but doesn't New START also ban the development of FOBS platforms?

>>32342524
>Cutting it more than tenfold from over 30 ships to "just a couple we managed to construct before someone was smart enough to stop" is cancellation

First off, no, thats called cutting an order. Second off, when this eas decided, only one ship was laid down. The third only JUST got laid down last year.

So there goes that logic right out the window. Care to try again?

>Indeed, we will see, lol.

Seeing as how the outdated flight IIs cost just under 2 billion 5 years ago, and the zumwalt costs just under 4 billion today, we will. The flight IIIs are getting new power genorators and new computers and new radars, thats where a great majorty of the cost comes from.

>>32342573
>I-i-i-i-it's just c-cut, not cancelled...
It is cancelled. Cutting it from over 30 ships to just a couple does mean a complete cancellation of the program. Just like cutting off your foreskin means a complete cancellation of sexual pleasure. There will never be new Zumwalts.
>zumwalt costs just under 4 billion
7.5 billion. And there is absolutely nothing on that ship that advocates for such a price. that's why it got cancelled for more Burkes. Because they are better.

The three Zumwalt even only exists because the shipyards are in Blue states when Obama got elected.

>>32342617
>Cutting it from over 30 ships to just a couple does mean a complete cancellation of the program.

No, not building any ships is a complete cancellation of the program.

>Just like cutting off your foreskin means a complete cancellation of sexual pleasure.

You are argueing in my defense now. Because it clearly does not, just lowers pleasure. Fuck man, even your analogys are wrong. Get it together

>including R&D costs into unit costs

Wew laddy.

File: 1600px-USS_Stark_-_external_damage_by_exocet.jpg (303KB, 1279x854px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1279x854px

>DF-21D got introduced
>It doesn't work it's a fake anyway!
>after years the USA get some SM-6 with the theoretical capacities of intercepting DF-21D
>We countered!

adorable

>>32342655
>talks about "theoretical capabilitys" in regard to sm-6
>completely ignores the fact that the DF-21D has not been tested at all beyond hitting an ambiguous (no target marker, obviously not moving) tract of land somewhere in china.

If anything the SM-6 is more tested than the DF-21D is.

China has 7 anti-ship missile brigades, each with the capabilities of launching 24-32 anti-ship ballistic missiles simultaneously.

>The bomber will always get through

>>32342682
China does not even have over 200 DF-21D TELs familam, unless you are counting reloads. Saturation is the way to go and china cant do it with the number of launchers realistically, considering said launchers will be dispersed thoughout china.

There are well over 200 SM-6s in inventory, along with plenty of SM-3s to get midcourse kills, AND sm-2 block IV has been proven to do terminal intercepts too (but obviously a last choice).

>>32342648
And they are not building any ships.
>it clearly does not, just lowers pleasure
Whatever makes you sleep at night.
>Wew laddy.
It's 7.5 billion per ship.

File: 101554341.jpg (59KB, 550x520px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 550x520px

The anti-ship missile brigades are the modern coastal artillery.

Pushing a carrier strike group several hundred kilometers away is already a success for them because it would reduce the sortie ratie drastically, reduce the loiter time and the amount of possible targets.

>>32342706
>And they are not building any ships.

Sweet child...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Lyndon_B._Johnson

>>32342702
>My argument is based on the delusion that anti-missile systems have a 100% kill ratio

>>32342721
Every US related weapon thread ever.

>>32342721
Where did you get that from my post? I gave 3 you assets than can be used to engage the 21D. USN clearly intends to use two sm-6s at terminal.

Shall i put words in your mouth and say your arguement is based on the delusion that missile systems have a 100% kill ratio?

The fact that the USA put a lot of money and effort into anti-ballistic missiles of all types is quite the proof that weapons like the DF-21D are a serious threat for American ships.

And the DF-21D is just the first kind of that type of weapon. China is right now the leading force in hypersonic glide vehicles.

>>32342736
>China is right now the leading force in hypersonic glide vehicles.

Us is ahead in both glide and powered hypersonics.

The US army tested, and hit a target, with a hypersonic glide weapon, endo atmo nonballistic.

Right now the WU-14 is semi ballistic and bounces on the atmo, and has not hit a target at all.

>>32342744
>USA
>hypersonic vehicles

pick one

>>32342719
>Awarded: 15 September 2011
So like I said, they are not building any ships. Just sticking with what money was already wasted on and trying to forget it as a horrible nightmare.

>>32342744
Oh, and the US army did this nearly 6 years ago.

>>32342747
How about both?

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/advanced-hypersonic-weapon-ahw/

>In November 2011, AHW was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii, to the Reagan Test Site on the Marshall Islands. The glide vehicle successfully hit the target, which is located about 3,700km away from the launch site.

>>32342750
>So like I said, they are not building any ships.

Except they are currently building a ship. What you mean is they are not increaseing the order. With trump wanting a 350 ship navy, and the R&D work already done on the zum...

>>32342757
>two flight tests
>50% success rate
>nothing is finalized

>meanwhile the WU-14 went through several successful tests

China is pushing for hypersonic glide vehicles more than anyone else.
No need to get butthurt about it.

>>32342771
Well, China doesn't have the largest hypersonic wind tunnel for nothing.

>>32342719
You are so easy to bait

>>32342771
The WU-14 is a testbed, the AHW is a weapon. The WU-14 is being used to generate data, the US already has said data.

No need to be butthurt, the moment the WU-14 hits a target, is the moment china will be equal with 2011 US army.

Btw, glide is a meme. You want powered hypersonics.

>>32342784
>AHW is a weapon

Oh god.

>>32342788
It flew with explosives and successfully hit a target.

The WU-14 does not do any of the above.

While China's seemingly sudden success in hypersonic flight may be surprising to outside observers, hypersonic technology is a key part of the national security 863 research initiative. In spite of longstanding Chinese difficulties in building turbofan engines, scramjet engines are a vastly different and emerging field that China has a opportunity to build a lead in. Along with the successful hypersonic glider vehicle WU-14 tests (which demonstrated Chinese capability in working high strength, thermal resistant aerospace materials), China has the world's largest hypersonic wind tunnel, the JF-12. The JF-12 can produce speeds of up to Mach 9 (NASA"s hypersonic wind tunnel reaches to only Mach 7). The JF-12 would provide Chinese scientists with a convenient way to observe supersonic airflow of different scramjet configurations, in addition to directly testing material durability in laboratory conditions, rather than having to make difficult and expensive high-altitude engine test flights.

>>32342797
Everything above mach 7 is decadent anyway!

>WU-14

Loved the threads on /k/.

So many butthurt people.

>>32342805
>>32342797
>NASA"s hypersonic wind tunnel reaches to only Mach 7

I feel like you guys come from the same forums that just circlejerk.

Hypervelocity Wind Tunnel 9 at AEDC goes up to mach 14.

>>32342837
Nope.

The Hypervelocity Wind Tunnel 9 can't reproduce high altidude Mach 9 conditions

>>32342890
>The facility can generate air flow up to Mach 14 with Reynolds numbers between 4 - 7.6 million per ft. Pressure and temperature can be controlled to further simulate flight altitudes from sea level to 173,000 ft

It sure can. Actually, the higher you go the easier it gets. Less atmosphere to push though.

>>32339942
>what is delta v?

7-10 mach RV + 5+mach interceptor = minimum delta v 12 mach

The Pentagon’s most recent annual report on the Chinese military said that in May 2012 China opened a new JF12 shockwave hypersonic wind tunnel—the largest of its kind in the world—that replicates flying conditions between Mach 5 and Mach 9.

>>32342931
Reletive delta-v still does not make the DF-21D an IRBM.

>>32342667
So what was that one shot they declared before impact that was dropped in the middle of US Navy games(?)

>>32342935
>JF12 shockwave hypersonic wind tunnel

Lens-x, as a shock tunnel, goes faster.

Mach 30.

>>32342941
Wut.

>>32342947
>he doesn't know how wind tunnels work

>>32342950
I remeber reading something about chinks firing df-21 close enough to US Ships that they could verify the pre-declared strike area...Can't find the news report on it anymore...this was first "big scare" regarding the dong...Dunno maybe it was all bullshit.

>>32342993
Nah, never happened. The only reason i am 100% sure is the shills didnt explode in /k/.

>>32342986
>his country cant into expansion tunnels

Lel

File: Why cant you just let me earn money in peace.png (2KB, 524x66px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 524x66px

Fuckin gweilo

>>32343038
Delt is

>>32342392
Cost because you cut 32 to fucking 3 do the math spread the development over 32 instead of 3 and it looks more reasonable you dense fuck

>>32343358
Maybe, if its effectiveness was worthy of a 7.5 billion 15k ton warship. Too bad it is a littoral artillery barge.

>>32342263
>the hole's supposed to be there
>shows barnicle farm
>more patrols blyat
Cool, you finally got money for paint.

File: ultra hd lel 8k.jpg (2MB, 7680x4320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 7680x4320px

>The Navy is looking to Raytheon’s Excalibur guided artillery round to replace the effective but expensive Long Range Land Attack Projectile for the Zumwalt-class of guided missile destroyers, defense officials confirmed to USNI News.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>The benefit of Excalibur is the munition is ready now. The GPS-guided round – developed by Raytheon and BAE-Systems Bofors – has about half the range of the 60-mile LRLAP but costs about a quarter of LRLAP’s estimated $1 million per round price tag.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
https://news.usni.org/2016/12/13/raytheon-excalibur-round-set-replace-lrlap-zumwalts
>N-no, it wasn't getting replaced!
>M-mere rumours!
>I-it's worth its price!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAH HOLY FUCK AAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
SHIIIIIIIEEEEET
This level of reality simply can not be fucking fabricated. Is it even possible to get any more rekt?

>>32343626
U wot m8?

Nobody said it was not getting replace senpai, the arguement is that it was no bid deal due to Excalibur.

>>32343689
>Nobody said it was not getting replace
Dat backpedaling, holy shit. Last time I posed that thread about it getting cancelled due to 800k per round cost /k exploded with denial and "lies" screams.

>>32343712
Huh, i didnt see it.

Link to thread?

>>32343715
https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/31926122/

>>32343760
All i see is people bitching about price misrepresentation.

Nothing about "N-no, it wasn't getting replaced! M-mere rumours!" Post number?

>>32343923
https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/31926122/#31926958

>>32343929

Thats it?