China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[plawolf]

Wait, is this true? I'm thinking DF-41 can cover the whole of the US? So can later variants of DF-31?

I wasn't aware the DF41 was operational yet. Although China does go out of its way to obscure its nuclear developments, so it may indeed be operational, but I prefer to err on the side of caution and assume it isn't for now.

 

[plawolf]

That is true for the old DF-31. In fact the DF-31 is more of a regional deterrent. But the DF-31A/31B have a range of 11,000+ km.

The illustrations below mark the coverage from the very edge of the Chinese coast but even if the DF-31A/31B were placed deep inside China they still can reach a fair potion of the ConUS if not all.

View attachment 35529

View attachment 35528

How official are the range estimates of 11,000km+?

 

[Hyperwarp]

How official are the range estimates of 11,000km+?

I don't think PLARF releases actual specs on strategic assets, but the US DoD says the following -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...
The PLARF continued to modernize its nuclear forces by enhancing its silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and adding more survivable, mobile delivery systems. China’s ICBM arsenal to date consists of approximately 75-100 ICBMs, including the silo-based CSS-4 Mod 2 (DF-5) and multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV)-equipped Mod 3 (DF-5B); the solid-fueled, road-mobile CSS-10 Mod 1 and 2 (DF-31 and DF-31A); and the shorter range CSS-3 (DF-4). The CSS-10 Mod 2, with a range in excess of 11,200 km, can reach most locations within the continental United States.
China also is developing a new road-mobile ICBM, the CSS-X-20 (DF-41) capable of carrying MIRVs.
...

 

[supercat]

Does China have enough nuclear weapons that can
1. survive a first strike by the U.S.?
2. penetrate the U.S. missile defense to deliver sufficient damage to prevent a first strike?

I doubt it. Considering that China was subject to nuclear blackmail several times in its recent history, I think China's policy makers should err on the side of over-capability and build up a credible second strike capability as soon as possible - with China's current economical strength, there are no compelling reasons not to do so.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[antiterror13]

Does China have enough nuclear weapons that can
1. survive a first strike by the U.S.?
2. penetrate the U.S. missile defense to deliver sufficient damage to prevent a first strike?

I doubt it. Considering that China was subject to nuclear blackmail several times in its recent history, I think China's policy makers should err on the side of over-capability and build up a credible second strike capability as soon as possible - with China's current economical strength, there are no compelling reasons not to do so.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

there is no nuclear blackmail toward China since China has had nuclear weapon

 

[Equation]

Does China have enough nuclear weapons that can
1. survive a first strike by the U.S.?
2. penetrate the U.S. missile defense to deliver sufficient damage to prevent a first strike?

I doubt it. Considering that China was subject to nuclear blackmail several times in its recent history, I think China's policy makers should err on the side of over-capability and build up a credible second strike capability as soon as possible - with China's current economical strength, there are no compelling reasons not to do so.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China's advancing HGV will put all that so called "US first strike and nuclear blackmail" to mute. By the way I believe the US doesn't do first nuclear strike upon anybody unless they get attacked first (by nukes).

 

[supercat]

there is no nuclear blackmail toward China since China has had nuclear weapon

But it's the future that I worry about, especially in the case of Taiwan crisis. There are always hawks among America's policy makers and advocates of America's policies that harbor some very dangerous intentions.

The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[supercat]

China's advancing HGV will put all that so called "US first strike and nuclear blackmail" to mute. By the way I believe the US doesn't do first nuclear strike upon anybody unless they get attacked first (by nukes).

HGV will certainly mitigate the problem, but it cannot eliminate it without sufficient quantity. As for the first strike policy of the U.S., I'm not sure that's the case as you stated. Please see "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy" in the previous post. Remember the U.S. is the only one that actually used nuclear weapons.

 

[tidalwave]

If the world in 2017 isn't going to be dramatically worse than in 2016, China wouldn't suddenly need more nukes for no reason.

Guess what? tillerson just calls for blockage of man-made island.
China official paper in response , calls for war against US.

Are you ready??
Wake up, smell the coffee!

 

[SanWenYu]

Guess what? tillerson just calls for blockage of man-made island.
China official paper in response , calls for war against US.

Are you ready??
Wake up, smell the coffee!

Sigh, you are so fixated upon this. What "China official paper", Global Times again? No that does not count. Didn't I tell you come back to me only when the People's Daily editorial changes tone?

If you want to dance as the Global Times or Tillerson speak, well, that's your choice.