China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[shanlung]

The report is a bit "obsolete" without mentioning DF-41, obviously DF-41 is already in service in a reasonable number

Also DF-31A and AG carry more than one warheads, most likely 3

DF-31A will hurl 3 nukes ever since their introduction in 2007.
7 brigades DF-31A ICBM (since 2007 introduction and adding one brigade per year) .

Since then, China tested and got operational DF31AG and DF31B.

A very very good question if DF-31AG or DF-31B can throw at least 3 nukes.

Can even be less if we go from records that while
"US intelligence projection made late in the 1960s that China would have 435 nuclear weapons by 1973.
Karber’s report mentioned that “PRC data in 1995 gave the figure at 2,350.”
We all know China is a lot more advanced since 1995."

And yet almost all the 'Murican pundits are saying China now in 2019 got 200 nukes or thereabouts.

So maybe again, going with that kind of logic, DF-31AG or DF-31B be hurling dimsums , sweet and sour chicken and wulung tea bags instead of nukes.

 

[shanlung]

An interesting inside story of the struggle in early days to build China H bomb.
Sadly, still nothing yet on the Yu Min configuration at all.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[taxiya]

So the rumored DF-51 is like the RS-28 Sarmat? Extra-large ICBM carrying 10 - 20 warheads?

Or, it could be that the rumors derive from the photo. In that case, the DF-51 designation is not reliable. But the photo of new silo does not necessarily prove anything either (DF-41 or DF-51). Yes, the US intelligence saw a hole on the ground, but that is all, without human intel to verify, it is just a hole.

My take, nobody knows.

 

[Xizor]

DF-31A will hurl 3 nukes ever since their introduction in 2007.
7 brigades DF-31A ICBM (since 2007 introduction and adding one brigade per year) .

Since then, China tested and got operational DF31AG and DF31B.

A very very good question if DF-31AG or DF-31B can throw at least 3 nukes.

Can even be less if we go from records that while
"US intelligence projection made late in the 1960s that China would have 435 nuclear weapons by 1973.
Karber’s report mentioned that “PRC data in 1995 gave the figure at 2,350.”
We all know China is a lot more advanced since 1995."

And yet almost all the 'Murican pundits are saying China now in 2019 got 200 nukes or thereabouts.

So maybe again, going with that kind of logic, DF-31AG or DF-31B be hurling dimsums , sweet and sour chicken and wulung tea bags instead of nukes.

Very interesting points.
Except for the word - "Murican", I think your points have many merits.
All most all discussions on China, in an english language forum, is populated by China bashing and racist undertones. This forum is one of the rare ones that takes quite strict policies against that. Just go to the comment section of China related article in a popular western, english "man-cave" website - "The drive, WarZone" *cough* - and you'll see very beautiful and raw racism and country bashing in action.

"Give respect, take respect".

I don't want to sound all patronizing about this. Neither do I think I have the "veteran member" badge to "call you out". I'm just passing on a neat idea.

 

[Broccoli]

DF-31A will hurl 3 nukes ever since their introduction in 2007.
7 brigades DF-31A ICBM (since 2007 introduction and adding one brigade per year) .

Since then, China tested and got operational DF31AG and DF31B.

A very very good question if DF-31AG or DF-31B can throw at least 3 nukes.

Can even be less if we go from records that while
"US intelligence projection made late in the 1960s that China would have 435 nuclear weapons by 1973.
Karber’s report mentioned that “PRC data in 1995 gave the figure at 2,350.”
We all know China is a lot more advanced since 1995."

And yet almost all the 'Murican pundits are saying China now in 2019 got 200 nukes or thereabouts.

So maybe again, going with that kind of logic, DF-31AG or DF-31B be hurling dimsums , sweet and sour chicken and wulung tea bags instead of nukes.

US intelligience also estimated back in early cold war days that Soviets would build several supercarriers. Did that become true?

 

[Anlsvrthng]

US intelligience also estimated back in early cold war days that Soviets would build several supercarriers. Did that become true?

Yes, that was true.

 

[Xizor]

US intelligience also estimated back in early cold war days that Soviets would build several supercarriers. Did that become true?

Nuclear Weapons are of no use if they are developed and kept in perpetual secrecy.
What if...what if there is a "backstage" agreement between the P5 countries regarding the nukes numbers ( esp of China). Wherein, everyone has agreed to state the chinese warhead numbers as 300 ( which in reality could be larger than that but still a quarter of that of Russia / US).
What if China's deal was to maintain the numbers as it is and the WTO entry was a nice "gift" for getting on with the arrangement.

All these are simply my conspiracy theories. I simply cannot believe or digest the fact that China is choosing to limit the numbers. What is stopping it from having three times as large a number? Money? Technology? Resources?

 

[Anlsvrthng]

The Chinese numbers state secret in China, USA , Russia, India and so on.

No one in say the USA will publicise the capability/available information about an enemy weapon system.

There is only downside if anyone do that.

All available number that is in public domain come from the analysis of publicly available satellite thermal images of the Pu manufacturing reactors heat output.

 

[Broccoli]

Nuclear Weapons are of no use if they are developed and kept in perpetual secrecy.
What if...what if there is a "backstage" agreement between the P5 countries regarding the nukes numbers ( esp of China). Wherein, everyone has agreed to state the chinese warhead numbers as 300 ( which in reality could be larger than that but still a quarter of that of Russia / US).
What if China's deal was to maintain the numbers as it is and the WTO entry was a nice "gift" for getting on with the arrangement.

All these are simply my conspiracy theories. I simply cannot believe or digest the fact that China is choosing to limit the numbers. What is stopping it from having three times as large a number? Money? Technology? Resources?

China has enough fissile material to make 900 new warheads but are they in a hurry? Nuclear weapons aren't exactly cheap and both US & Russia pour billions into maintaining their needlessy large arsenals. Russia & USA are also targeting all potential nuclear weapons installation so they need larger arsenal and as far we know China is only targeting cities and such.

I'd imagine DF-41 can carry massive haul of decoys/penaids if it's armed with 1-3 warheads.

Yet the United States could further reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons without sacrificing security. Indeed, we have calculated that the country could address its conceivable national defense and military concerns with only 311 strategic nuclear weapons. (While we are civilian Air Force employees, we speak only for ourselves and not the Pentagon.)

This may seem a trifling number compared with the arsenals built up in the cold war, but 311 warheads would provide the equivalent of 1,900 megatons of explosive power, or nine-and-a-half times the amount that Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara argued in 1965 could incapacitate the Soviet Union by destroying “one-quarter to one-third of its population and about two-thirds of its industrial capacity.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Anlsvrthng]

90%of the cost of nuclear weapons coming from the delivery systems.

So, making ICBMs without warheads doesn't make sense