China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[Suetham]

Não foi no dia 5 de fevereiro?

wasn't it on February 5th?

 

[Suetham]

Não foi no dia 5 de fevereiro?

wasn't it on February 5th?

 

[siegecrossbow]

This is basically impossible with the big three. Their territories are so vast that no missile based boost phase ABM is possible, only thing remotely within reason is space based laser which is currently banned. (Particularly Project Excalibur style bomb pumped gamma ray laser, which is in itself a space based nuclear weapon and nuke in space is a big nono).

Never mind that trying to put ABM next door to the big three is on its own enough to trigger a Cuban Missile Crisis event - how can you be sure the missiles are ABMs and not nuke tipped MRBMs?

The Outer Space Treaty bans the deployment of nukes in orbit, not lasers. Orbital DEW are limited by technology, not treaty.

 

[Temstar]

The Outer Space Treaty bans the deployment of nukes in orbit, not lasers. Orbital DEW are limited by technology, not treaty.

The laser system in question, Project Excalibur uses a nuclear bomb as the power source for the laser. Hence "bomb pumped gamma ray laser".

 

[siegecrossbow]

The laser system in question, Project Excalibur uses a nuclear bomb as the power source for the laser. Hence "bomb pumped gamma ray laser".

X-ray laser was never gonna work anyway since the nuclear explosion caused too much vibrations (surprise!) and threw off the aiming system.

 

[gelgoog]

Nuclear X-ray lasers are a pipedream. The technology was never demonstrated.
Which is not to say that orbital SDI is unworkable.

 

[Nobonita Barua]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Broccoli]

Exceptionally good chance China currently has well over 1000 active warheads already.

Let's summarise the learnings and facts.

1990s western ESTIMATES on number of Chinese warheads based on what Chinese government claims is around 300. Context of this era is CCP taking extremely low profile for rapid development base. Even if they had 30,000 warheads by miracle, they would say something like 300 or "Britain and France levels". And being + or in between is inconsequential since 300 or 600 really is still a low count in comparison to Russia and US.

30 years later the same estimate is being used to claim China has 300 warheads by a wide variety of folks with some very different interests and agendas. Better to cut the shit and ignore all that motivated posturing talk.

China has an economy that is still supremely undervalued with a currency that is undervalued. Yet it is already nominally the size of the US economy which is trillions in debt kept afloat only from their financial hegemony. It is also hyperinflated by FIRE sector. Whatever though let's just say China is about US size and is on the up and up with only realising about 20% of its full potential now and already steaming upwards to catch the US while the US is rolling downwards. Momentum and inertia matter but I would say this at least means China can afford to match US warhead numbers. That's just a fact.

Next, China has a population size over four times that of the US and slightly more than the US combined with Russia combined with Europe. That's a lot of people to protect with a properly decent deterrence or at least a lot of people to avenge with global coverage in case it is struck first. More reason to have at least equal warhead count to US. It should be more since US warheads would realistically be focused on only the nation it is performing strike on whereas China would need to have enough warheads to cover every city in US and Europe + whichever other antagonist. This depends on policy but it is fair to assume this is the ideal capability.

So tldr China has both the funds and the moral obligation to ensure its citizens that it has at least as many warheads as the US. Consider also how often threatened it is by US since the Korean war. MacArthur wanted to nuke China same with many hawks after. This hasn't changed since the 1960s. So there are the funds, the obligations, and the necessity.

How could it be that modern China still would feel secure with a measly 300 warheads? It shouldn't surprise anyone to learn they've stockpiled over 3000.

There is a small hole in your theory.... PLARF doesn't have enough missiles for 3000 warheads unless you think they'll use slingshots to fire them (especially since most numerous missiles are conventionally armed).

 

[escobar]

Exceptionally good chance China currently has well over 1000 active warheads already.

Let's summarise the learnings and facts.

1990s western ESTIMATES on number of Chinese warheads based on what Chinese government claims is around 300. Context of this era is CCP taking extremely low profile for rapid development base. Even if they had 30,000 warheads by miracle, they would say something like 300 or "Britain and France levels". And being + or in between is inconsequential since 300 or 600 really is still a low count in comparison to Russia and US.

30 years later the same estimate is being used to claim China has 300 warheads by a wide variety of folks with some very different interests and agendas. Better to cut the shit and ignore all that motivated posturing talk.

China has an economy that is still supremely undervalued with a currency that is undervalued. Yet it is already nominally the size of the US economy which is trillions in debt kept afloat only from their financial hegemony. It is also hyperinflated by FIRE sector. Whatever though let's just say China is about US size and is on the up and up with only realising about 20% of its full potential now and already steaming upwards to catch the US while the US is rolling downwards. Momentum and inertia matter but I would say this at least means China can afford to match US warhead numbers. That's just a fact.

Next, China has a population size over four times that of the US and slightly more than the US combined with Russia combined with Europe. That's a lot of people to protect with a properly decent deterrence or at least a lot of people to avenge with global coverage in case it is struck first. More reason to have at least equal warhead count to US. It should be more since US warheads would realistically be focused on only the nation it is performing strike on whereas China would need to have enough warheads to cover every city in US and Europe + whichever other antagonist. This depends on policy but it is fair to assume this is the ideal capability.

So tldr China has both the funds and the moral obligation to ensure its citizens that it has at least as many warheads as the US. Consider also how often threatened it is by US since the Korean war. MacArthur wanted to nuke China same with many hawks after. This hasn't changed since the 1960s. So there are the funds, the obligations, and the necessity.

How could it be that modern China still would feel secure with a measly 300 warheads? It shouldn't surprise anyone to learn they've stockpiled over 3000.

Nice story, now count the number of PLARF missile launcher

 

[ougoah]

Nice story, now count the number of PLARF missile launcher

There is a small hole in your theory.... PLARF doesn't have enough missiles for 3000 warheads unless you think they'll use slingshots to fire them (especially since most numerous missiles are conventionally armed).

Both of you fail basic maths and comprehension. Nowhere did I say China has over 1000 warheads. Furthermore, you both realise that missiles aren't all TEL launched right?

There are containers that can be disguised. There are plenty of silos. There are SS launched missiles and then there are cruise missiles and various non-ballistic missile delivery platforms. All those technically need warheads. So no it isn't a matter of counting launchers. That's as stupid as trying to work out how many leashes a household has by counting number of dogs inside a single room.

Iran has at least one revolver style launch facility in the mountains. China's been building underground launch facilities since the 1960s.

What else? China doesn't report how many launchers it has. So good luck finding out. Chinese rumours from usual "official" disinfo and info agents always talk about thousand/s of missiles. Sure many are short ranged and many are used conventionally but that also doesn't negate anything.

Even it it were a matter of counting launchers, how on earth would either of you know better? You're just as in the dark as I am. I could say there are indeed 1000 launchers and neither of you could prove otherwise.

Again read my post and see that it is trying to prove that thinking China still only having 300 warheads like it preferred everyone to think back in the 1990s is pretty shallow minded. The Chinese economy and industry has grown many orders of magnitude since the 1990s. The threats have grown and yet it would keep its warhead count as is? Dream on. It's 100 times wealthier and could actually get into a nuclear war with the US as Chinese leaders may have made contingencies for.

Again prove to me China has <1000 silos and launchers then we'll talk otherwise it's cool story from you two. At least I can reason my hypothesis out unlike you guys still with the "bU...BuTt ChYnA seYs dEY hAs onLY 30o nuKulARs."

...oh and each ICBM and SLBM usually carrier quite a lot more than 1 warhead. So 10 silo DF-5s could potentially have up to 40 warheads possibly more.