A Chinese government-backed newspaper stated that United States air defense systems such as THAAD, Patriot, or SM-6 cannot stop the People’s Liberation Army hypersonic DF-17 deployed along its SouthEastern coastline within range of Taiwan.
“US air defense systems including THAAD, SM-3 and Patriot missiles deployed in South Korea, Japan, the island of Taiwan and on US warships will not work against the DF-17,” the PRC’s Global Times states.
Could China’s DF-17 hypersonic missile track and destroy moving targets hundreds of miles away traveling at Mach 10 speeds? Is there simply no defense against it at the moment? The question sounds serious and is likely under close examination by the Pentagon.
The DF-17 Threat Goes Hypersonic…
The Chinese paper essay, written years ago, indicates that the threat may indeed be more significant now than it was at the time of its emergence in 2018 and 2019.
According to the PRC’s Global Times newspaper, the weapon reportedly operates within a range of 2,500km and has been deliberately placed within striking distance of Taiwan.
The Chinese essay suggests that the DF-17 could, in effect, form a protective “area” or “denial zone” around Taiwan and parts of the South China Sea.
“The PLA Rocket Force’s older generation missiles are already sufficient to wipe out most of Taiwan’s key military installations, and the island is not capable of intercepting them, so it is not necessary to use the DF-17 against the island’s military, Chinese mainland experts said, noting that the DF-17 will play a more significant role in stopping forces from the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia and other locations, should they attempt to militarily interfere in China’s internal affairs,” the Global Times writes.
The Anti-Access Threat and DF-17
Should the PRC’s claims regarding the DF-17 be accurate, it might explain why so many public think tank reports, essays, and Pentagon wargamers have publicly expressed concern about a Chinese “fait accompli” wherein the PLA exploits its temporary advantage in the realm of hypersonics to, in effect, take Taiwan before any defensive forces can respond.
However, building an anti-ship missile to travel at sustained hypersonic speeds certainly presents technological challenges. However, adding maneuverability and precision guidance not only requires more advanced engineering but presents a far more serious threat.
The specifics of the DF-17 may not be apparent, and indeed, it may not operate with the performance parameters claimed in the Chinese government-backed newspapers, yet an interesting CSIS Missile Defense Project essay maintains that the DF-17 threats are serious.
Image of DF-17 missile. Image: Creative Commons.
“The DF-17 has demonstrated a high degree of accuracy in testing, with one U.S. government official saying a test warhead “within meters” of its intended, stationary target. US defense officials have also said the DF-ZF HGV performed “extreme maneuvers” and “evasive actions” in previous test flights,” the CSIS Missile Threat essay says.
The CSIS essay does not say how this precision is achieved, per se, and maintaining maneuvering precision at hypersonic speeds is not an uncomplicated task. Yet, it would make sense that this would be against a stationary target.
Hypersonic Defenses
Multiple hypersonic weapons defenses are fast-tracked by the Pentagon and its industry partners, some progressing quickly and showing great promise.
One of them is an evolving effort known as Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor Satellite, a networked system of Medium-and-Low-Earth-Orbit satellites capable of establishing and transmitting a radar “track” of an attacking weapon traveling at hypersonic speeds. MEO and LEO satellites operate closer to earth, proliferate in large numbers and have high-throughput compared to standard GEO satellites.
These satellites can also function as “nodes” within a meshed network and pass information from one radar aperture to another to establish a continuous track.
Additionally, there are likely many ways hypersonic attack technology may still need to improve before it reaches full operational maturity.
Tech Insertion
Maneuvering to hit targets “on the move” is altogether different, which is one reason why Pentagon weapons developers are already working on “tech-insertion” plans for now-in-development hypersonic weapons to prepare for a new generation of hypersonic projectiles able to track and destroy moving targets.
DF-17 Missiles
“Tech insertion” would include software upgrades to existing hypersonic weapons, enabling increased maneuverability against moving targets in ways that are not currently possible. However, should the CSIS Missile Threat assessment be accurate, the DF-17 could only maneuver toward and destroy a stationary target, which presents a less significant threat to ships moving at fast speeds.
Nevertheless, should the CSIS Missile Threat assessment of the DF-17 be accurate, it would present a threat to US Navy surface ships and carriers of a new variety.
For example, the existing DF-26 anti ship carrier-killer missile can travel as far as 2,000 miles to attack enemy ships (some say far more), yet it does not travel at hypersonic speeds. Suppose an incoming missile is not traveling at hypersonic speeds. In that case, multi-domain sensors, countermeasures, and layered ship defenses have a much higher probability of tracking, jamming, intercepting, or destroying the missile.
Speed is without question a lethality multiplier, as it, of course, massively shortens the time window within which ship commanders can defend against the threat.
DF-17. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
About the Author: Kris Osborn
Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
