China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[DaTang cavalry]

China successfully tested the wave-body hypersonic aircraft, and the missile penetration technology was upgraded.
Global Times
2018-08-04 01:56
According to the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation Aerodynamics Research Institute, at 6:41 on August 3, 2018, the Hypersonic Aircraft System Xing kong-2 rocket developed by China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation Aerodynamics Research Institute was in a shooting range in the northwest. Successfully launched, after nearly 10 minutes of flight test, the rocket completed the active section program turn, throwing fairing, inter-stage separation, release of the high-speed test aircraft autonomous flight, aircraft ballistic large maneuvering turn and other test procedures, and finally enter the landing zone according to the scheduled ballistics.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[DaTang cavalry]

 

[Totoro]

Don't know if this was posted earlier... "Chinese Nuclear Forces 2018", by Hans. M. Kristensen

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

He makes an estimate of Chinese arsenal, one that is quite conservative. Basically, he counts only stuff that can be counted and leaves our various systems that have unknown numbers out of the total tally table. (Like cruise missiles, free fall bombs, DF-15 and so on)

When reading his whole text and bits where he does talk about possibility of further warheads, one gets a feeling he could've just as easily added another set of figures, speculating on plausible numbers of stuff he simply chose not to include in the list.

If one does that, then one could speculate the following list is plausible: (numbers in brackets warheads)

5 (10) DF-4 medium range
20 (60) DF-5B ICBM
dozen (25?) DF-15 tactical
45 (90) DF-21 medium
16 (16?) DF-26 medium
40 (40) DF-31/a ICBM
17 (17) DF-31AG ICBM
12 (36-72) DF-41 ICBM

36-48 (36-48) JL-2 ICBM

20-50 Freefall bombs

50-100 cruise missile warheads

Bomb and CM estimates are absolute guesses, trying to be conservative. They are also counted as tactical warheads, despite their theoretical decent reach.

Also, certain warhead counts are still fairly conservative. Not going with over 3-6 warheads for DF-41 and over 3 warheads for DF-5B. On the other hand, Kristensen's claim there are 48 JL-2 missiles may not be that clear cut. Most navies have less missiles than the total number their whole fleet can carry. it's simply unlikely more than 50-67% of the fleet will be able to be utilized in a nuclear war. Even the 36-48 missile estimate for the JL-2 may prove to be not conservative enough.

Anyway, compared to Kristensen's 280 warhead count, the above estimate counts 400-528 warheads. Of which 189-237 are ICBM ones, 116 are medium range ones and 95-175 are tactical.

Another peculiar thing is his increase of DF-31A (not AG) from his 2016 text. he basically added 7 more launchers/another brigade of them. Have there been news bits about that?

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Take it with a gob of salt The estimate number of Chinese warhead has not not change for 30 years That is outlandish statement to make! when everything else move at warp speed in China
We know China has the most active testing of missile Henri K chronicle it almost every week we had test. And we know they design more sophisticated delivery system everything form Hypersonic missile to skipping missile, ALBM. China supercomputer is now leading the world .They certainly could design more potent Nuc using the new supercomputer .

China stock pile of Plutonium U239 range from 3 to 5 ton enough material to built at least thousand of warhead

The keep building underground great wall that last 40 years and still going on with thousand of kilometer UGW.Chinese economy explode in the last 3 decade provide ample supply of cash and talent for nuclear program
What prevent them from adding warhead ? Because FAS like China as poster boy for nuclear disarmament?

 

[DaTang cavalry]

Don't know if this was posted earlier... "Chinese Nuclear Forces 2018", by Hans. M. Kristensen

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

He makes an estimate of Chinese arsenal, one that is quite conservative. Basically, he counts only stuff that can be counted and leaves our various systems that have unknown numbers out of the total tally table. (Like cruise missiles, free fall bombs, DF-15 and so on)

When reading his whole text and bits where he does talk about possibility of further warheads, one gets a feeling he could've just as easily added another set of figures, speculating on plausible numbers of stuff he simply chose not to include in the list.

If one does that, then one could speculate the following list is plausible: (numbers in brackets warheads)

5 (10) DF-4 medium range
20 (60) DF-5B ICBM
dozen (25?) DF-15 tactical
45 (90) DF-21 medium
16 (16?) DF-26 medium
40 (40) DF-31/a ICBM
17 (17) DF-31AG ICBM
12 (36-72) DF-41 ICBM

36-48 (36-48) JL-2 ICBM

20-50 Freefall bombs

50-100 cruise missile warheads

Bomb and CM estimates are absolute guesses, trying to be conservative. They are also counted as tactical warheads, despite their theoretical decent reach.

Also, certain warhead counts are still fairly conservative. Not going with over 3-6 warheads for DF-41 and over 3 warheads for DF-5B. On the other hand, Kristensen's claim there are 48 JL-2 missiles may not be that clear cut. Most navies have less missiles than the total number their whole fleet can carry. it's simply unlikely more than 50-67% of the fleet will be able to be utilized in a nuclear war. Even the 36-48 missile estimate for the JL-2 may prove to be not conservative enough.

Anyway, compared to Kristensen's 280 warhead count, the above estimate counts 400-528 warheads. Of which 189-237 are ICBM ones, 116 are medium range ones and 95-175 are tactical.

Another peculiar thing is his increase of DF-31A (not AG) from his 2016 text. he basically added 7 more launchers/another brigade of them. Have there been news bits about that?

DF-4 suppose retired.
Rumors DF-5C deployed?

 

[DaTang cavalry]

This video is talking about PLA missile army training, lunchs DF-10 cruise missile, sort range, mid range, long range ballistic missiles, ICBM etc.

 

[DaTang cavalry]

This video is talking about PLA missile army training, lunchs DF-10 cruise missile, sort range, mid range, long range ballistic missiles, ICBM etc.

The second section describes the artillery's laser-guided projectile training on the 4,500-meter plateau.

 

[Hyperwarp]

DF-4 suppose retired.
Rumors DF-5C deployed?

DF-4 retired? Don't think so. DF-4 and the early DF-31 are ICBM but for regional deterrence. DF-4 might be replaced in the future by the DF-26. I don't China is producing anymore DF-31. They shifted to DF-31A and DF-31AG.

 

[Deleted member 13312]

While totting around enough nuclear warheads to level the earth 3 times over sounds like a good way to display military superiority/competence. In reality they have much less of an impact than one might think.
The first problem that comes with nukes is their practical usage or their lack of in better words, simply put. Short of a full scale war, there are few instances where leveling an entire city is justified. People like to bring up low yield nukes or "dial downs" as they like to call it for this matter, but even those things are tricky to use and even worse when used properly.
Among the few nuke states in the world currently, none of the current geopolitical issues they face requires the use of overwhelming or even limited use of nuclear weapons. And in the event they are required, it is almost always one of MAD. The only real way that nukes can be used with no repercussion would be against a non-nuclear state. But we have seen how quick that such usage is to force the other party to consider having nukes on their own. Then there is the costs needed to build and maintain those warheads and the accompanying delivery vehicles, long term nuclear storage and security can very often cost more than the actual weapon itself over its useful life.

In short, the greatest benefit that having a nuke would be to merely balance out the status quo of MAD, and for that to be achieve one hardly needs to have over 7000 warheads, just merely enough to half of a continent into a nuclear waste land for the next century. Even just a 100 warheads falling on the CONUS would be enough already.

Having less nukes is not always a case of weakness, in some cases it can be one of strength to be able to perceive the limited utility of a weapons platform. China would be better off having 7000 cruise missiles than 7000 nuclear warheads, at least those can be use in any situation.

 

[Anlsvrthng]

In short, the greatest benefit that having a nuke would be to merely balance out the status quo of MAD, and for that to be achieve one hardly needs to have over 7000 warheads, just merely enough to half of a continent into a nuclear waste land for the next century. Even just a 100 warheads falling on the CONUS would be enough already.

The problem is that the bombs are needed for retaliatory strike.
Means enough bomb with delivery vehicle has to survive the USA first strike.
And they have to count with the USA missile shield as well.

Means if the USA can destroy 100 Chinese warhead with ABMs, AND china has 500 warhead, AND the USA can destroy 80% of Chinese warheads in first strike then China doesn't has any MAD protection. So, the US can invade North Korea, can declare the independence of Taiwan, can start a war against China mainland, and China can't do anything. For anything less than complete unconditional surrender by China the USA can destroy her in two hours time.


Based on the above I think the next:
1. China increased the number of warheads, the US know it (otherwise what is the point of it? ) , but it was a secret project outside of the known manufacture sites, so nod data in literature.
2. China improved the quality of the warheads by decreasing the required amount of the Pu239, and/or increased the survival ability of them with decoys, or/and hypersonic manoeuvrable weapons.
3. The mixture of above.


Actually, I think it is the no2.

Russia managed it (no2) , hence they are not interested to cancel the START.