Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis

[ZeEa5KPul]

They are moving *towards* a LOW capability, but the relative immaturity of the overall system and enabling subsystems means they are not yet at that level.

Frankly speaking if it's something Russia can manage, I don't imagine whatever's holding back China will be a factor for very long.

One day they may well populate the silos, but we have no reason to believe that they presently have the warhead and delivery vehicle inventory

Some very rough back of the envelope math shows that for roughly 350 silos, each armed with a 3x MIRV missile, with each warhead requiring 3kg of plutonium gives around 3 tons of plutonium required. Estimates of China's WGPu stockpile is in the single-digit tons (unless you know something about this we don't), so it seems plausible that China could manufacture these warheads and missiles without tell-tale fissile material production.*

* I don't believe Chinese HEU production would leave any tell-tale signs, given China's large centrifugation capacity. WGPu requires something like restarting Plant 404, which any satellite would spot. China would have to load all of the silos with either live missiles or decoys no matter what posture it goes for, so they would superficially all look the same.

coupled with the prompt warning to salvo kill-chain that would allow for that to occur at the present.

Interesting. What of that warning to salvo kill chain is currently missing?

 

[ashnole]

US is betting big on 'attritable' these days. From USAF's cheap, attritable UAV loyal wingman's to USN's cheap, attritable USVs & UUVs to now US Congress' cheap, attritable politicians!

 

[siegecrossbow]

Has her husband shorted TSMC?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Untoldpain]

They are moving *towards* a LOW capability, but the relative immaturity of the overall system and enabling subsystems means they are not yet at that level. One day they may well populate the silos, but we have no reason to believe that they presently have the warhead and delivery vehicle inventory, coupled with the prompt warning to salvo kill-chain that would allow for that to occur at the present.

It is important to remember that the US has also contemplated a shell game during the Cold War for its LGA-118 MX Missiles. It was eventually rejected due to the "perceived" silo vulnerability to a splendid Soviet first strike.

I highly doubt a shell game is practical for the PLARF today. SAR/EO Satellite capabilities have come a long ways and "shuffling the deck" is likely a fool's errand. If the PLARF is serious about reaching strategic nuclear parity with the US, it has no option but to go LOW for it's silo based missiles.

 

[Abominable]

Although the weight is more, diameter of a U235 core is only slightly larger than a plutonium one. Given the overall size of the warhead in most applications the differences are negligible.

U235 is more expensive than plutonium which can be bred from the massive stockpiles of U238.

IIRC Pakistan had both a uranium and plutonium programme running concurrently and both produced functional warheads. I don't think CIA had any problems identifying it, Paksitan was an ally in the Soviet-Afghan war at the time.

South Africa's nuclear programme was uranium based and quickly discovered by both America and the USSR.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Ah, so that's why miniaturized missile warheads only use Pu? That's a nontrivial weight saving.

yep that's pretty much it. With high enough throw weight of course you can go around it. Or you just accept that you need more launch vehicles and reduce number of MIRVs. Most missiles aren't used with their max throw weight. That's why I think 10x MIRV estimate for DF-41 is for a Pu weapon, but maybe only 5-6x for a U weapon.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Although the weight is more, diameter of a U235 core is only slightly larger than a plutonium one. Given the overall size of the warhead in most applications the differences are negligible.

U235 is more expensive than plutonium which can be bred from the massive stockpiles of U238.

IIRC Pakistan had both a uranium and plutonium programme running concurrently and both produced functional warheads. I don't think CIA had any problems identifying it, Paksitan was an ally in the Soviet-Afghan war at the time.

South Africa's nuclear programme was uranium based and quickly discovered by both America and the USSR.

IIRC China was actually able to fool Soviets from a first strike thinking that China had nothing because the breeder wasn't ready yet, and they did not anticipate China had large scale enrichment instead.

 

[Sleepyjam]

China is still doing business with India despite being economically attacked by India. No wonder all of those China/India border meetings never result in any agreements. Why would India stop making unjust demands?

US would still sanction PRC over taking outlying Taiwanese islands. Why risk overwhelming sanctions and likely asset seizure over such small payoff? If war broke out over Taiwan with US, PRC should go big or go home instead of following Russian half-hearted attempt in Ukraine. We can all see how that's going.

US would still supply Taiwan with intel and military aids carried by US flagged ships even when PRC chose to only attack Taiwanese arm forces in hope of limiting the scale of the conflict.

China has a massive trade surplus with India what’s not to like? India is making those demands due to a weakened position. Actually US would be more likely to sanction in case of a major China/India war than with a small island of an unofficial government. If the US really wanted to sanction any excuse would do. Again Taiwan can’t fight a war of attrition their resources would be depleted quickly and to supply them from the outside would be much more difficult than with India. Also don’t forget Taiwan would feel emboldened with a large ongoing war between China and India, two front wars should be avoided if possible.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

U only designs are less compact but are harder to detect both for startup and operation

U only designs are inferior designs. China is a recognized nuclear weapons state, so it doesn't worry about detection of its activities. Furthermore, China already has enough plutonium for a couple thousand (granted the error bars are quite large) warheads before it needs to make more. China with ~2,000 more warheads is a lot more difficult to threaten than China today.

There's also the substantial fixed capital savings from not having to build new reactors.

Plant 404 still exists. Whatever capital cost savings are dwarfed by the increased weight of the warheads, requiring much more throw weight to deliver the same kilotonnage.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

as well, so it's not like this is a serious downgrade, it is what Chinese designers 100% knew. Note that it was a miniaturized airdrop device test, not a stationary setup like Ivy Mike.

That was a test, not a production weapon. All known Chinese warheads in military service (535 and 575) use plutonium pits.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

So what about revoking the "no first use" policy? Would that be a noticeable "tough" response?

no way. NFU is a huge advantage for China, as now IRBMs won't be construed as being nuclear. it allows China to develop IRBM based precision strike capabilities without the risk of strategic escalation, and separate strategic developments from tactical.

A revised NFU is better by including, like Russia, a clause about "equivalent existential threats".