Well, then there must be a reason why they didnt show it at the 2017 parade in northern china.
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
Well, then there must be a reason why they didnt show it at the 2017 parade in northern china.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
From Bill Gertz I guess they receive the message.Now where is Burnby who said that China ASBM is vaporware, immature and untested weapon system with questionable sensor
"China has apparently assembled a system of systems, anti-ship ballistic missiles plus the collection of satellite, radar and aircraft sensors needed to target them, to pose a threat to the carrier that it may not be able to defeat."
PACOM: China Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Tests a Signal to US, World
Admiral warns Chinese military could overtake U.S. military in next decade
Getty Images
- JULY 19, 2019 5:00 AM
China recently conducted the first test of a new anti-ship ballistic missile, firing a salvo of six missiles into the South China Sea in a threatening message to the United States, the commander of the Indo-Pacific Command said Thursday.
Admiral Philip Davidson, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions, also revealed that China earlier conducted a test of a new nuclear ballistic missile that took place after a threatening speech last month by Chinese defense minister Wei Fenghe.
Davidson, speaking at a security conference in Aspen, Colorado, bluntly outlined what he termed the "long-term strategic threat" posed by China, which is engaged in a range of pernicious activities in Asia and around the world.
The four-star admiral noted that Wei, the Chinese defense minister, spoke at a security conference in Singapore in early June in remarks he described as "quite chilling."
"Not only did [Wei] make it clear that he didn't think Asia and the Western Pacific was any place for America, he said Asia wasn't even for Asians—it was for the Chinese," Davidson said.
"Within 24 hours of that they tested a new nuclear ballistic missile, not in nuclear mode necessarily."
The admiral was referring to China's known as the JL-3
Then on July 8, Wei spoke to a forum of defense ministers from Latin America and Pacific island nations in China and admitted that China's global development program known as Belt and Road Initiative was indeed a basis for future military expansion.
Chinese officials previously insisted there was no military component to the multitrillion-dollar initiative.
Davidson said the Chinese defense chief made clear the initiative "was indeed a way to put a military foothold within other places around the globe."
"Within hours of that, they shot six anti-ship ballistic missiles—new ones that they have developed—into the South China Sea," Davidson said, adding that it was the first time the missile has been tested at sea.
He did not identify the type of missile but other defense officials said they were DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles, a high-tech weapon capable of maneuvering to target moving ships at sea several hundred miles from launch points.
The salvo of six anti-ship ballistic missiles was as a violation of a 2015 pledge made by Chinese president Xi Jinping not to militarize disputed South China Sea islands.
"One [test] might be a coincidence, but seeing this happen twice is indeed a message not only to the United States but indeed to the whole globe," Davidson said.
The DF-21D and the longer-range DF-26 are both said to be capable of targeting ships.
Davidson sidestepped questions about whether U.S. Navy aircraft carriers and other warships can counter China's anti-ship ballistic missile.
"Certainly they are developing capabilities that we haven't seen before—anti-ship ballistic missiles is the newest one. These are not monoliths that cannot be defeated," he said.
In discussions with the Pentagon, Davidson said he has made known what his requirements are and "the conversation that we have is very focused on the capabilities and capacities that we need to handle such threats now and in the future."
The Navy is currently developing the SM-6 anti-missile interceptor with an explosive warhead as one way to counter DF-21D and DF-26 missiles.
Davidson also warned that the U.S. military urgently needs to upgrade its weapons and capabilities to avoid being overtaken by the rapid buildup of conventional and high-technology warfare capabilities by China.
Developing smart weapons using artificial intelligence and secure communications with quantum computing are critical matters of national security.
"When I pull down the operational level and all my problems within the military, we're seeing essentially China surpass the capability that Indo-Pacific Command commands and controls in the area of responsibility I described earlier in numbers here in the next couple of years," Davidson said.
"And that capability in terms of just what we see—air, maritime, land, space, cyber—we run the risk if we don't take proactive action that China will indeed surpass our capabilities by the middle of this next decade."
The commander said it is important for the United States to adopt a whole-of-government approach to avoid losing out to Chinese advances.
China is rapidly orbiting satellites and will launch more than 100 this year.
China's military is building advanced weapons and in large numbers "without any extant threat," Davidson said.
Global deployments of Chinese forces also are increasing.
"China is moving quite perniciously across the whole Indo-Pacific if not the globe," he said.
The Belt and Road Initiative is being carried out in secrecy and has been "marked by corruption" and "debt trap" loans designed to increase China's control and influence over developing nations.
Several nations are pushing back against the Chinese global drive.
China sought to punish Australia during a debate in that country on imposing controls over foreign investment by not moving Australian beef and wine from Chinese ports.
On the positive side, Davidson said efforts by the United States to highlight Chinese activities have created growing support throughout the Indian and Pacific Oceans for promoting a "free and open" Indo-Pacific unconstrained by China.
Davidson said Navy warship passages in the South China Sea are routine and designed to prevent China from claiming control of the waterway used for both $3 trillion in commerce annually as well as undersea Internet cables.
The Navy freedom of navigation operations will prevent China from seeking to disrupt the communications cables, many of which terminate in Singapore, in the future. The undersea cables transmit trillions of dollars in valuable financial information, he said.
"So freedom of navigation is not just about two destroyers passing safely in the night," he said. "This is about the world's access to the most critical waterway on the planet."
Other nations, including Japan, Australia, Canada, Britain, and France also have joint or conducted independent freedom of navigation operations in the sea to push back against China's claim to own up to 90 percent to the sea under a vaguely defined Nine Dash Line around the sea.
The admiral also said he is concerned by growing military ties between China and Russia, noting the , or East.
Davidson said the United States is seeking to compete with China and is not seeking confrontation or containment. Those narratives are "coming from China," he said.
"Compete does not mean we don't engage," he said.
Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said Davidson was discussing the reported firing of six missiles from mainland China into target areas north and south of the Paracel Islands, in the northern part of the sea.
"The test area south of the Paracel Island group was close to major sea lanes crucial to the economies of Japan and South Korea," Fisher said.
"This is the first People's Liberation Army ASBM test to have been acknowledged openly by a senior U.S. official," he noted.
China's anti-ship ballistic missile tests in the sea "signify that the age-old contest for control of the seas has entered a new era; the nuclear powered aircraft carrier battle group is no longer the dominant military force at sea."
"China has apparently assembled a system of systems, anti-ship ballistic missiles plus the collection of satellite, radar and aircraft sensors needed to target them, to pose a threat to the carrier that it may not be able to defeat."
PACOM: China Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Tests a Signal to US, World
Admiral warns Chinese military could overtake U.S. military in next decade
Getty Images
- JULY 19, 2019 5:00 AM
China recently conducted the first test of a new anti-ship ballistic missile, firing a salvo of six missiles into the South China Sea in a threatening message to the United States, the commander of the Indo-Pacific Command said Thursday.
Admiral Philip Davidson, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions, also revealed that China earlier conducted a test of a new nuclear ballistic missile that took place after a threatening speech last month by Chinese defense minister Wei Fenghe.
Davidson, speaking at a security conference in Aspen, Colorado, bluntly outlined what he termed the "long-term strategic threat" posed by China, which is engaged in a range of pernicious activities in Asia and around the world.
The four-star admiral noted that Wei, the Chinese defense minister, spoke at a security conference in Singapore in early June in remarks he described as "quite chilling."
"Not only did [Wei] make it clear that he didn't think Asia and the Western Pacific was any place for America, he said Asia wasn't even for Asians—it was for the Chinese," Davidson said.
"Within 24 hours of that they tested a new nuclear ballistic missile, not in nuclear mode necessarily."
The admiral was referring to China's known as the JL-3
Then on July 8, Wei spoke to a forum of defense ministers from Latin America and Pacific island nations in China and admitted that China's global development program known as Belt and Road Initiative was indeed a basis for future military expansion.
Chinese officials previously insisted there was no military component to the multitrillion-dollar initiative.
Davidson said the Chinese defense chief made clear the initiative "was indeed a way to put a military foothold within other places around the globe."
"Within hours of that, they shot six anti-ship ballistic missiles—new ones that they have developed—into the South China Sea," Davidson said, adding that it was the first time the missile has been tested at sea.
He did not identify the type of missile but other defense officials said they were DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles, a high-tech weapon capable of maneuvering to target moving ships at sea several hundred miles from launch points.
The salvo of six anti-ship ballistic missiles was as a violation of a 2015 pledge made by Chinese president Xi Jinping not to militarize disputed South China Sea islands.
"One [test] might be a coincidence, but seeing this happen twice is indeed a message not only to the United States but indeed to the whole globe," Davidson said.
The DF-21D and the longer-range DF-26 are both said to be capable of targeting ships.
Davidson sidestepped questions about whether U.S. Navy aircraft carriers and other warships can counter China's anti-ship ballistic missile.
"Certainly they are developing capabilities that we haven't seen before—anti-ship ballistic missiles is the newest one. These are not monoliths that cannot be defeated," he said.
In discussions with the Pentagon, Davidson said he has made known what his requirements are and "the conversation that we have is very focused on the capabilities and capacities that we need to handle such threats now and in the future."
The Navy is currently developing the SM-6 anti-missile interceptor with an explosive warhead as one way to counter DF-21D and DF-26 missiles.
Davidson also warned that the U.S. military urgently needs to upgrade its weapons and capabilities to avoid being overtaken by the rapid buildup of conventional and high-technology warfare capabilities by China.
Developing smart weapons using artificial intelligence and secure communications with quantum computing are critical matters of national security.
"When I pull down the operational level and all my problems within the military, we're seeing essentially China surpass the capability that Indo-Pacific Command commands and controls in the area of responsibility I described earlier in numbers here in the next couple of years," Davidson said.
"And that capability in terms of just what we see—air, maritime, land, space, cyber—we run the risk if we don't take proactive action that China will indeed surpass our capabilities by the middle of this next decade."
The commander said it is important for the United States to adopt a whole-of-government approach to avoid losing out to Chinese advances.
China is rapidly orbiting satellites and will launch more than 100 this year.
China's military is building advanced weapons and in large numbers "without any extant threat," Davidson said.
Global deployments of Chinese forces also are increasing.
"China is moving quite perniciously across the whole Indo-Pacific if not the globe," he said.
The Belt and Road Initiative is being carried out in secrecy and has been "marked by corruption" and "debt trap" loans designed to increase China's control and influence over developing nations.
Several nations are pushing back against the Chinese global drive.
China sought to punish Australia during a debate in that country on imposing controls over foreign investment by not moving Australian beef and wine from Chinese ports.
On the positive side, Davidson said efforts by the United States to highlight Chinese activities have created growing support throughout the Indian and Pacific Oceans for promoting a "free and open" Indo-Pacific unconstrained by China.
Davidson said Navy warship passages in the South China Sea are routine and designed to prevent China from claiming control of the waterway used for both $3 trillion in commerce annually as well as undersea Internet cables.
The Navy freedom of navigation operations will prevent China from seeking to disrupt the communications cables, many of which terminate in Singapore, in the future. The undersea cables transmit trillions of dollars in valuable financial information, he said.
"So freedom of navigation is not just about two destroyers passing safely in the night," he said. "This is about the world's access to the most critical waterway on the planet."
Other nations, including Japan, Australia, Canada, Britain, and France also have joint or conducted independent freedom of navigation operations in the sea to push back against China's claim to own up to 90 percent to the sea under a vaguely defined Nine Dash Line around the sea.
The admiral also said he is concerned by growing military ties between China and Russia, noting the , or East.
Davidson said the United States is seeking to compete with China and is not seeking confrontation or containment. Those narratives are "coming from China," he said.
"Compete does not mean we don't engage," he said.
Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said Davidson was discussing the reported firing of six missiles from mainland China into target areas north and south of the Paracel Islands, in the northern part of the sea.
"The test area south of the Paracel Island group was close to major sea lanes crucial to the economies of Japan and South Korea," Fisher said.
"This is the first People's Liberation Army ASBM test to have been acknowledged openly by a senior U.S. official," he noted.
China's anti-ship ballistic missile tests in the sea "signify that the age-old contest for control of the seas has entered a new era; the nuclear powered aircraft carrier battle group is no longer the dominant military force at sea."
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
(cont)
"China has apparently assembled a system of systems, anti-ship ballistic missiles plus the collection of satellite, radar and aircraft sensors needed to target them, to pose a threat to the carrier that it may not be able to defeat."
Fisher urged the Pentagon to defeat the new missiles using high-energy weapons like lasers and railguns that may not be available for many years.
Alternatively, the United States could build its own anti-ship ballistic missiles and deploy them on Navy ships and submarines.
With enough of the missiles, "it is possible to deter China from using theirs against American ships."
"China has apparently assembled a system of systems, anti-ship ballistic missiles plus the collection of satellite, radar and aircraft sensors needed to target them, to pose a threat to the carrier that it may not be able to defeat."
Fisher urged the Pentagon to defeat the new missiles using high-energy weapons like lasers and railguns that may not be available for many years.
Alternatively, the United States could build its own anti-ship ballistic missiles and deploy them on Navy ships and submarines.
With enough of the missiles, "it is possible to deter China from using theirs against American ships."
"Carrier that'd be unable for it to defeat" or so read the sub Heading.
China,of all nations with a respectable military might, can easily take down a carrier.
But China cannot do that to a "Carrier Battle Group". Submarine wing of the CBG is the biggest hindrance to China. The US submarine power is nothing to scoff at. China needs to build up its ASW capabilities. It is legitimately a weak link in the chain.
But unsurprisingly, Submarines are the biggest threat to a US CBG too. China isn't lacking in that department, especially when it comes to SCS and the first island chain.Diesel electric submarines of China are harder to detect than the Nuclear counterparts. I honestly don't think there'd be even a theater level conflict between the two nations. Its posturing.
The militarization of the SCS isn't an uniquely chinese undertaking. Asean nations have their own island bases there. Basically, it is something that needs to be accepted as the reality.
China should have been defeated best before January 1, 2000. But alas, the God that blessed USA didn't forget to bless China too.
China,of all nations with a respectable military might, can easily take down a carrier.
But China cannot do that to a "Carrier Battle Group". Submarine wing of the CBG is the biggest hindrance to China. The US submarine power is nothing to scoff at. China needs to build up its ASW capabilities. It is legitimately a weak link in the chain.
But unsurprisingly, Submarines are the biggest threat to a US CBG too. China isn't lacking in that department, especially when it comes to SCS and the first island chain.Diesel electric submarines of China are harder to detect than the Nuclear counterparts. I honestly don't think there'd be even a theater level conflict between the two nations. Its posturing.
The militarization of the SCS isn't an uniquely chinese undertaking. Asean nations have their own island bases there. Basically, it is something that needs to be accepted as the reality.
China should have been defeated best before January 1, 2000. But alas, the God that blessed USA didn't forget to bless China too.
This is a beautiful ( ominous ) image of the re-entry vehicles of the MX missile ( LM -118). Long exposure shots of the MIRVs are plenty but are primarliy US source. I couldn't find such shots of the Chinese mirvs and it would be nice if such images are made available.
Didn't the PLA tell you that they won't show up DF-41, instead DF-31AG ?
No, they didnt tell me. Why didnt they show the DF-41, and why does china have that many ICBM programs?
@Orthan
China might be having the multiple programs because
1. China has a requirement to target enemies at varied ranges ( Japan, Australia, India, Europe and finally USA).
2. China is a late comer to the ICBMs and strategic systems in general, compared to the other members of P5 who were industrialized and quite developed nations early on ( US,UK,FN,USSR).
This means China has to work its way up to the Gold Standard. Step by step, iteration after iteration, series after series - the ultimate would be/ should be on par with the world's best. China seems to have accomplished that with the DF-41. But it is still lagging with the JL-3. It is a never ending race.
3. China isn't constrained by bilateral treaties (START treaty which has affected US and Russian weapons ) or economic reasons (which might have been a factor in forcing FR and UK to make their strategic deterrents largely Sea Based) .
China might be having the multiple programs because
1. China has a requirement to target enemies at varied ranges ( Japan, Australia, India, Europe and finally USA).
2. China is a late comer to the ICBMs and strategic systems in general, compared to the other members of P5 who were industrialized and quite developed nations early on ( US,UK,FN,USSR).
This means China has to work its way up to the Gold Standard. Step by step, iteration after iteration, series after series - the ultimate would be/ should be on par with the world's best. China seems to have accomplished that with the DF-41. But it is still lagging with the JL-3. It is a never ending race.
3. China isn't constrained by bilateral treaties (START treaty which has affected US and Russian weapons ) or economic reasons (which might have been a factor in forcing FR and UK to make their strategic deterrents largely Sea Based) .
antiterror13
Brigadier
only 3 countries in P5 have ICBM (USA, Russia and China). UK and France never have ICBM ..... but they do have SLBM
China already have had ICBM since 1981 when DF-5 successfully in service 1981, almost 40 years ago. Imagine the technology gap China was in 1981 compared to now 2019
- Status