China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[Hyperwarp]

OK, this has been bugging me like $h!+ . More than missing serials for Deino . So, from my assumptions, there has been only one identified ICBM off-road/cross-country capable TEL. Whether it is DF-41 or DF-31B or something else, I have no clue. All others appear to be missile transports specially for underground tunnels. This is purely my understanding. If there is a big shrimps or tomato hiding somewhere in SDF, could you give us some hints to which is which?

 

[SinoSoldier]

OK, this has been bugging me like $h!+ . More than missing serials for Deino . So, from my assumptions, there has been only one identified ICBM off-road/cross-country capable TEL. Whether it is DF-41 or DF-31B or something else, I have no clue. All others appear to be missile transports specially for underground tunnels. This is purely my understanding. If there is a big shrimps or tomato hiding somewhere in SDF, could you give us some hints to which is which?

View attachment 25372

View attachment 25373

View attachment 25374

The DF-31B's off-road TEL looks quite different from that of the DF-41.

DF-31B TEL:


The first image that you've posted is of an alleged DF-41 TEL. I suspect that both the DF-31B and DF-41 would each have an off-road TEL and one suited for tunnels.

 

[Ultra]

OK, this has been bugging me like $h!+ . More than missing serials for Deino . So, from my assumptions, there has been only one identified ICBM off-road/cross-country capable TEL. Whether it is DF-41 or DF-31B or something else, I have no clue. All others appear to be missile transports specially for underground tunnels. This is purely my understanding. If there is a big shrimps or tomato hiding somewhere in SDF, could you give us some hints to which is which?

View attachment 25372

View attachment 25373

View attachment 25374

Those are water pipe transportation trucks. I am not joking because according to our forum expert Bltizo and PLAwolf here you are mistaken them to be ICBM. And according to PLAwolf you can actually buy these water pipe transportation trucks commerically too!

Ultra, you're being far too simplistic in your thinking. You see a TEL and a tube and do you immediately think it is an operational missile? Really?

Consider how many operational missile TELs China actually has, and how often we actually get pictures of them. Almost never.

Exactly. In addition, none of the vehicles in those pictures actually look like TELs. Sure, the cab layout looks a little similar, but remember those fake IRBMs NK showed off a little while back during a parade? They bought the transports from Chinese civilian companies.

If you wanted to and had the money to do so, you could go and buy yourself one of those exactly same superheavy trucks and paint it green. But adding a big cylinder to it does not make you a nuclear power.

Not every such superheavy truck with a large diameter cylinder on it in China is carrying an ICBM, otherwise China would have missiles to rival the Russians and Americans.

Do you actually see any sort of police or military escorts anywhere in those pictures you posted? A single person in uniform?

The fact that you have guys in jeans and trainers and other civilian clothing milling around, with the doors to the cab open would suggest those civies are the drivers and crews on that rig.

There is lax security, but there is zero security in those pictures you posted, which is a clear sign those trucks are not TELs, and what they are transporting are not missiles.

Those pictures just show trucks carrying large cylinders, which could be anything from a section of prefabricated tunnel, to specialist machinery, to the legs of oil rigs or wind turbines or any number of things.

That, incidentally, also shows how hard it is to find ICBMs in China - there is so much general civilian and commercial activity involving superheavy trucks that you are likely to get a hello of a lot of false positives.

As for Ultra's fanciful (to put it politely) plots about ambushes or bombs, well, lets just say that would be unrealistic even for the movies and does not warrant any more of my time.

Oh, I forgot, those trucks looking exactly like an ICBM Launcher is in fact transporting prefabricated tunnel, or legs of oil rigs or wind turbines. So I guess these are all civilian transports too then?

This one is really a truck transporting a water pipe.

Also a truck transporting water pipes. This one is higher capacity, it can transport 10 water pipes!

Chinese people are thirsty. Must have more water pipes.

This one is for oversize pizza delivery.

 

[Hyperwarp]

^^^ oversize pizza delivery may my day!

 

[Blitzo]

Those are water pipe transportation trucks. I am not joking because according to our forum expert Bltizo and PLAwolf here you are mistaken them to be ICBM. And according to PLAwolf you can actually buy these water pipe transportation trucks commerically too!

I never said they weren't TELs, I said that there was no reason to believe that they were operational weapons -- i.e.: no reason to suspect that the tubes contained missiles.

So please get your premises right before being so gleeful in your accusations.

 

[no_name]

Outriggers wouldn't be needed if they are simply transporters and not TELs, right?

 

[Hyperwarp]

Outriggers wouldn't be needed if they are simply transporters and not TELs, right?

Here is the LGM-30 Minuteman Transporter & Erector loading missiles into the silos -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. They are road mobile like DF-31 but they cannot actually launch missiles.

RS-24 Yars, RS-12M2 Topol-M are fully cross-country, off-road capable unlike the DF-31. Now if you look at this Chinese ICBM TEL it is the most sturdiest looking, very thick built of the supposed DF-41 TELs. Why is this one different from the other supposed TELs?

 

[kroko]

Here is the LGM-30 Minuteman Transporter & Erector loading missiles into the silos -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. They are road mobile like DF-31 but they cannot actually launch missiles.

RS-24 Yars, RS-12M2 Topol-M are fully cross-country, off-road capable unlike the DF-31. Now if you look at this Chinese ICBM TEL it is the most sturdiest looking, very thick built of the supposed DF-41 TELs. Why is this one different from the other supposed TELs?

I dont think anyone here knows what is DF-31A/B here and what is DF-41. None of these trucks have appeared in any chinese parade, or even shown in military exercices AFAIK. I think that they are diferent versions of an off-road capable ICBM in development (something that china still doesnt have in service).

But i find it weird that china would develop 2 mobile ICBMs (DF-31A/B and DF-41) at the same time. Perhabs they are just one? perhabs one is backup plan? who knows?

 

[Hyperwarp]

...

But i find it weird that china would develop 2 mobile ICBMs (DF-31A/B and DF-41) at the same time. Perhabs they are just one? perhabs one is backup plan? who knows?

I think it is a question of survivability. The DF-5B maybe MIRV capable now but they are silo based and liquid fueled. Off-road capable DF-41 with up to 10 MIRV will greatly improve survivability while being complemented by the smaller DF-31A/B. This would give PRC credible 2nd strike capability. Despite having dummy silos, I am not sure how many of those DF-5s will survive a 1st strike. The remaining DF-31A/B will still have to get pass whatever missile defence systems. Some of them will be intercepted further diminishing the deterrent. So I can see why PRC would have 2 ICBM system (DF-31A/B & DF-41) plus investing on hypersonic glide vehicles.

 

[kroko]

Off-road capable DF-41 with up to 10 MIRV will greatly improve survivability while being complemented by the smaller DF-31A/B.

There are limits on how much big and heavy you can make a mobile ICBM. With DF-3A/B and DF-41 both using 8 axis TEL trucks, i dont think that you can make one much diferent from the other on size and weight that justify developing 2 diferent missiles. But again im no expert on this. Without seeing a full picture of the latest trucks, i dont think that we can draw a conclusion.