Long before China developed their anti ship ballistic missile the U.S.S.R had developed the 4K 18 (R-27K) anti-ship ballistic missile. This, despite the fact that the U.S.S.R had the largest stockpile of cruise missiles, both long range and AShM.
I know, and they might have used some scientists from Ukraine or Russia to help them develop their own weapons, but that is not to take away that they have created interesting and likely very effective weapons to counter US aggression in their region... without having to build dozens of aircraft carriers.
These ballistic weapons are interesting but is no substitute for real aircraft carriers which provide air support to surface ships operating away from land base support.
This suggests that China is planning to expand out to the rest of the world in terms of trade and their interests.
However, users here were saying russia doesnt NEED them because they have kinzhal and zirkon, but now this news shows that the Russian naval command doesn't think so.
They couldn't have them.
However now that the INF treaty is gone IRBM as well as IRCM (intermediate range cruise missiles) can be back on the table and for targets in the Middle East and Europe and Asia an IRCM or IRBM is smaller and lighter and cheaper than an ICBM or ICCM.
There are no limits on numbers for theatre based nuclear weapons like intermediate range weapons so START treaties don't apply, so they can build lots of IRBMs for use against Asian and European and Middle Eastern threats, and keep all their ICBMs for the US and Canada.
And it is clear that in amongst those IRBMs will be dedicated anti ship weapons too... likely in the 3-4 thousand km range. The conventional warheads designed to kill carriers will be rather large compared with nuclear warheads fitted in the standard missiles which makes them even more powerful.
Such small missiles (relatively speaking) should easily fit on standard train carriages making them very mobile and easy to shift from one part of the country to another at a moments notice... or to put on ships or carry in transport aircraft...
Nevertheless, having an antiship ballistic missile thats accurate enough requires an accurate dense satellite network to track carrier groups. Its unknown if the liana system is as dense as the defunct legenda or the current chinese satellite surveillance system.
Not true at all... carrier groups are enormous and don't move very fast compared with a hypersonic missile.
If you get a coordinate of a carrier that is 4,000km away from your missile launcher, and you have the direction it is sailing and the speed it is sailing at, you really don't need any other information even if two seconds later the captain of the carrier calls all stop and all reverse full speed.
If the carrier was sailing at speed... say 30Knts which is 30 nautical miles per hour it would take 5 minutes to stop and start moving backwards... a mach 10 IRBM would take the missile about 23 minutes to reach where the ship was going to be... the missile would be coming down from an altitude of 40-50km and from that altitude if you draw a circle around the place the ship was for the distance it could possibly travel at 30 Knots in 23 minutes you get a very small circle and an aircraft carrier is a very large piece of metal surrounded by lots of large bits of metal called cruisers and destroyers... coming down from altitude the large flat deck of a carrier is going to stand out starkly.
If the range is less than 4,000km or the speed is higher than mach 10... both of which is likely the job gets easier...
Second, Im frustrated by the lack of integration of the avangard on even mobile ICBMs and SLBMs. Its claimed these missiles have too little throw weight to launch it. The Russians dont have a conventionally armed avangard either. This means that theres very little progress on the zmeevik concept. Who knows how long it will take to:
I would think the best use for Avangard is to launch it on their biggest missile via the south pole... bypassing their radars and sensors... and attacking their radar and ABM systems from the south... once they are destroyed any missile will be effective at reaching its target.
1.Develop and test an HGV small enough for an IRBM
2. Develop an HGV with the guidance system to target moving ships. Admittedly they can copy whatever the zirkon has, but in such high technology, every little modification takes at leasr
half a decade to iron out.
What is the urgency to create something that would require an SSBN to carry?
Every new ship they are making and old ship they are upgrading will be able to carry Zircon which is smaller and lighter and cheaper and while it is also shorter ranged it can be carried in volumes to wipe out the entire western navy.
Developing a new system that could only be carried by an SSBN makes very little sense as they would be better used to destroy land targets.
As I mentioned, the speed of ships is so slow and the speed of missiles is so fast... an ICBM is much faster and would travel thousands of km in less than 20 minutes... and the distance a carrier could move is not a circle unless it could hit the brakes and turn 180 degrees and instantly accelerated to 30 knots going the other way... which is totally impossible.... an ICBM with a dozen warheads could allocate one or two warheads for a spot in middle of the ocean, and with three or four other ICBMs doing the same you could drop three or four nukes into the water near the carrier group.
Naval nukes you see in photos are normally tiny... one or two kilotons... and they are vastly more deadly than ground or air burst nukes because they super heat the salt water to thousands of degrees... a super heated steam that would boil a human like a chicken in seconds... and the warheads from ICBMs are 150-300Kts usually so they would be immense overkill most of the time.
Standard SLBMs could be used against carrier groups too.
It is incredible, but it causes delays and gaps at times and it is a pretty slow process of modernizing everything and putting into full production thr latest kit.
And there is no wisdom in spending money creating a capability they already have, but now the INF treaty is gone then IRBMs and IRCMs make sense so the work on hypersonic attack payloads starts to make more sense for tactical and theatre targets... cheaper than ICBM versions, and more usable.