China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[r41]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it looks like a very big area The Hami missile silo field covers an area of about 800 square kilometers and is in the early phases of construction

CNN comment

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[AndrewS]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it looks like a very big area The Hami missile silo field covers an area of about 800 square kilometers and is in the early phases of construction

CNN comment

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The only surprise is that it has taken this long.

You could see the path of US-China relations going rapidly downhill 4 years ago.

 

[Broccoli]

I actually think deploying DF-41s in silos would be a waste. They are designed to be mobile and are relatively light comparing to silo based heavy ICBMs. They simple do not have sufficient throw weight to justify the lost of mobility.

Thus, I think China is either deploying a new type of ICBM similar to RS-28 or an upgraded version of DF-5 (DF-5C was tested a few years back).

A lot of silo based missiles aren't heavy liquid-fueled ones but solid-fueled like the Minuteman and Topol.

 

[escobar]

I wonder if CN is planning to resume nuclear testing. they have done few compared to US/RU

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364963517305147395

 

[escobar]

I actually think deploying DF-41s in silos would be a waste. They are designed to be mobile and are relatively light comparing to silo based heavy ICBMs. They simple do not have sufficient throw weight to justify the lost of mobility.

Thus, I think China is either deploying a new type of ICBM similar to RS-28 or an upgraded version of DF-5 (DF-5C was tested a few years back).

DF-5C is liquid fueled. Even if CN is planning to put some in silo, their number will be limited.
Those 230 silos are for a solid fueled ICBM.

 

[taxiya]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it looks like a very big area The Hami missile silo field covers an area of about 800 square kilometers and is in the early phases of construction

CNN comment

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

FAS' article also referred to the earlier reported "silo site in Yumen". That site is right next to a wind farm. Are you going to believe they are missile silos? Why is this new "silo site" more believable? I am afraid that FAS is becoming a FARCE.

 

[weig2000]

* thumps the desk*
//We need more SSBNs and extended range SLBMs. 15 - 20 trillion economy needs protection. 1.4 billion needs deterrence and defence. //


But the silos are nice to have. I'm pretty sure China has the manpower to construct thousands of more silos but the important question is whether the supposed network found at Yumen got underground interconnected web of roads.

Are these silos filled in the open ( subject to reconnaissance sat eyes) or underground? What about the entry and exit tunnels?

They should just go ahead build them, and think of these silos as key national infrastructure projects. The missiles can be built gradually over time and the early warning system is currently under development. Right now, China has huge infrastructure building capacity and they can be deployed and put in good use. It will not always be so, as the population starts aging and labor will become expensive. In the '90s, China built the Underground Great Wall project. Time to start the In-the-ground Great Wall project now.

 

[AndrewS]

FAS' article also referred to the earlier reported "silo site in Yumen". That site is right next to a wind farm. Are you going to believe they are missile silos? Why is this new "silo site" more believable? I am afraid that FAS is becoming a FARCE.

The Pentagon has tweeted about the silos

 

[escobar]

The empty silo strategy was a US proposal in the late cold war. Up to 200 peacekeepers with 12 350 kt warheads each were going to be built. For each missile, there would be 24 silos and 23 decoy missiles. Each of these silos would be hardened to withstand 70+ MPa overpressure. This means a 750 kt warhead may go off just 200 meters away from the silo and the silo would still survive. The missiles and decoys would be reshuffled periodically to prevent intelligence leaks. This scheme would require the soviet union to spend 14400 warheads to reliably destroy 200 missiles. The US thought the Soviets would just target cities at that point, guaranteeing survivability of the arsenal. We are talking about 2400 warheads, 200 missiles, 4600 decoy missiles, and 4800 extremely hardened silos here. This was in addition to 300-400 already existing silos, 40 SSBNs and 300+ bombers. It was so outrageous that even Raegan (the guy who increased the military spending to 8% of the US GDP) called it a Rube Goldberg scheme. China doesn't need such an elaborate scheme when it can just fill all of its silos with real missiles. China needs 300+ ICBMs to be on the same footing with the US and Russia. Filling all of the coming 250 silos would barely achieve it. If we were talking about 1000+ silos in construction then I would say a good chunk of them were fake but we are talking about just 250. I bet at least half of them will be filled with real missiles.

At this time, US already had a reliable and survivable nuclear deterrent SSBN fleet, so having empty silo was a resonate strategy. CN need an assured second strike. I expect them to gradually filled all these silo and build a third silo site.

 

[bustead]

A lot of silo based missiles aren't heavy liquid-fueled ones but solid-fueled like the Minuteman and Topol.

Yes but silo based liquid fuel missiles generally have a larger payload. For example, R-36 can carry 10 750kt warheads while minuteman III can only carry 3.

You can load ICBMs designed for mobile operations into a silo. However, it will be more effective to design a new missile around it. It can be solid fueled. I have nothing against solid fuel missiles. However, I am leaning towards developing a new missile for this purpose instead of loading DF-41s into the silos