A Chinese lab has claimed that it could destroy US warships with “space weapons” after concluding a mock missile strike.
Researchers carried out computer-simulated attacks that saw missiles launched at an aircraft carrier 750 miles away.
They used low-flying satellites – so-called ‘space weapons’ – to reflect the carrier’s radar signals so it couldn’t detect the missiles until they were 30 miles away.
The research, published in the Chinese journal Shipboard Electronic Countermeasures, concluded that three satellites would be enough to attack a group of aircraft carriers and just 28 satellites would enable a global strike.
Scientist Liu Shichang wrote: “Commanding height has always been a pivotal tactic in war since ancient times.
“With the evolution of the concept of war and the advancement of technology, space has become a new commanding height fiercely contested by the world’s military powers.”
The simulation was carried out by the secretive Science and Technology on Electronic Information Control Laboratory, which works on electronic warfare equipment for the Chinese military according to the South China Morning Post.
The team said that China is “forging ahead with related research and applications” and that “electronic warfare in outer space using low-orbit satellite constellations has become an important means of information warfare”.
In May last year, China claimed to have destroyed the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, in a similar simulation.
The carrier is thought to be unsinkable by conventional weapons but China said it took it down using 24 hypersonic missiles in 20 battles.
Drew Thompson, a former US senior defense official told the Telegraph: “Anyone who discusses publicly the outcome of a war game or a simulation has a political objective, especially if they frame the result as a win or a loss.
“Effective war games are ones that test an assumption, a function, or variable to inform the sponsor of the game about the complex interaction of elements. War games are not about winning or losing. They are about learning.”
