China claims it can destroy US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier ‘with certainty’

State-controlled media reports new tests conducted by Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) researchers demonstrated a 100 per cent success rate when 24 hypersonic missiles were fired at the US Navy’s most modern aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford.

The Chinese government Journal of Test and Measurement Technology reportedly states the result proves US carrier groups could be “destroyed with certainty”.

The South China Morning Post says a computer-based war game focused on evicting a US carrier battle group from the South China Sea was run a total of 20 times. Under the scenario, the US force was attacked after “repeated warnings” not to approach one of the disputed islands claimed by China, Vietnam and the Philippines.

“Every US surface vessel was shattered by the attack and eventually sank in the simulation,” the SCMP states.

The Hong Kong-based publication is now subject to Beijing’s strict media control laws after the Chinese Communist Party abandoned its promise to grant the financial centre autonomy until 2047.

The report comes after the repeated failure of Russia’s new “superweapon” Kinzhal (Dagger) and Iskander (Defender of Mankind) hypersonic weapons over Ukraine. But these ballistic missiles do not have China’s much-touted ability to manoeuvre at extreme speeds.

“This capability threatens to sideline US aircraft carrier groups in the Pacific, potentially shifting the strategic balance of power and leaving the US with limited options for assisting Taiwan in the event China invades,” warns University of Colorado Boulder Professor of Aerospace Engineering Sciences Iain Boyd.

“Because their flight paths can change as they travel, defending against these missiles requires tracking them throughout their flight.”

Scary story

The South China Morning Post says the Chinese military displayed “unusual prowess in their sophisticated launch strategy”.

The war game apparently tested an “intentionally complex three-wave attack” with some of the 24 long-range missiles being launched from the Gobi Desert in China’s north.

These were deployed against a force including the USS Ford, a Ticonderoga-class cruiser and four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

The premise was for successive waves of missile attacks to separate the real warships from decoys, wear down their defensive systems – and “mop up” any survivors.

The simulation reportedly gave the defending ships a total of 264 air-defence missiles. These failed to have any significant effect on warheads approaching at more than 11 times the speed of sound – and manoeuvring while doing so.

Two types of Chinese hypersonic missiles – “with vastly different performances” – were simulated.

“Both models are capable of sinking a carrier or large warship within two hits,” the report states.

“The operational range of one model at 2000km with an 80 per cent probability of hitting its intended target. The other Chinese model has double the range and a higher success rate of 90 per cent.”

The SCMP quoted an anonymous Beijing-based engineer as confirming these performance figures were accurate and reliable.

“The underlying principle of the war game was to be ‘lenient with the enemy and strict with oneself’,” the study’s lead researcher Cao Hongsong reportedly added.

Despite the overwhelming success, the report included a word of warning.

“Some military experts caution that the real-world performance of these missiles may differ from what is predicted by simulations due to terrain, weather and other unforeseeable factors,” it reads.

“It therefore remained critical for government leaders and the public to approach these simulations with caution and realism.”

Alternate realities

“Hypersonic missiles with conventional, non-nuclear warheads are primarily useful against high-value targets, such as an aircraft carrier,” says Professor Boyd.

“Being able to take out such a target could have a significant impact on the outcome of a major conflict.”

The technology is also costly and difficult to produce. But nowhere near as complex or expensive as building a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

However, the effectiveness of these missiles is yet to be proven.

“As seen in the recent use by Russia, hypersonic weapons are not necessarily a silver bullet that ends a conflict,” he adds.

Earlier this month, Admiral John Aquilino – the commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific region – told a House Armed Services Committee meeting that hypersonic defence and weapons programs “need to go faster” and that China’s advances were “concerning”.

But the most significant threat these weapons pose, says Professor Boyd, is confusion.

Both China and Russia say the missiles can be fitted with either conventional explosive or thermonuclear warheads.

And their target has no means of knowing the difference. Nor time to find out.

“In the case of the US, if the determination were made that the weapon was nuclear, then there is a very high likelihood that the US would consider this a first strike attack and respond by unloading its nuclear weapons,” he writes.

“The hypersonic speed of these weapons increases the precariousness of the situation because the time for any last-minute diplomatic resolution would be severely reduced.”

The Beijing-based researcher Cao reportedly asserts the exact opposite.

The SCMP reports him saying releasing details of the war game offered “greater transparency about China’s military capabilities and intentions could help to reduce misunderstandings and miscalculations on both sides, which could in turn help to reduce the risk of conflict”.

“Increasing transparency could also help build trust between China and other countries in the region, which could contribute to greater stability over the long term,” he added.

Jamie Seidel is a freelance writer | @JamieSeidel