China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[Rettam Stacf]

Well this is clearly a airburst thermobaric warhead (most effective against armour columns or stationary soft targets) as opposed to one penetrating warships. So maybe it is supposed to hit a target near the fake carrier as opposed to hitting the fake carrier itself.

To sink a carrier, you will need a direct hit.

But with an airburst thermobaric warhead, will 1 or 2 close hits be sufficient to destroy the airplanes on flight deck and damage the radars, communication and other equipment on the island to render the carrier inoperable as a fighter ship ?

Irrespective of whether an enemy carrier is sunk or render inoperable, one successful strike will ensure all other enemy carriers will immediately pull out of the missile's range. Isn't that what A2AD is all about ?

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

To sink a carrier, you will need a direct hit.

But with an airburst thermobaric warhead, will 1 or 2 close hits be sufficient to destroy the airplanes on flight deck and damage the radars, communication and other equipment on the island to render the carrier inoperable as a fighter ship ?

Irrespective of whether an enemy carrier is sunk or render inoperable, one successful strike will ensure all other enemy carriers will immediately pull out of the missile's range. Is that what A2AD is all about ?

thermobaric is a pressure weapon, it is designed to take out personnel inside confined spaces. a carrier flight deck is open to the air and reinforced below. so a thermobaric warhead will kill personnel on the flight deck and would damage planes, but might not be guaranteed to render them inoperable. for that, you need shrapnel.

a submunition weapon may be more effective at putting holes through aircraft and the deck.

 

[Rettam Stacf]

thermobaric is a pressure weapon, it is designed to take out personnel inside confined spaces. a carrier flight deck is open to the air and reinforced below. so a thermobaric warhead will kill personnel on the flight deck and would damage planes, but might not be guaranteed to render them inoperable. for that, you need shrapnel.

a submunition weapon may be more effective at putting holes through aircraft and the deck.

Thanks. So a carrier killer ballistic missile with a thermobaric warhead still needs a direct hit to penetrate the deck.

I was confused by the statement " a airburst thermobaric warhead (most effective against armour columns or stationary soft targets) "

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Thanks. So a carrier killer ballistic missile with a thermobaric warhead still needs a direct hit to penetrate the deck.

I was confused by the statement " a airburst thermobaric warhead (most effective against armour columns or stationary soft targets) "

I am not sure how it is effective against armor columns. A thermobaric warhead is a warhead that dispenses the explosive first, then ignites it with air from the outside, rather than packing its own oxidizer. however, the dispense mechanism means that there won't be too much fragmentation; indeed, the dispense means there's no fragmentation, only heat and pressure. another feature is the oxygen removal.

oxygen removal, heat and pressure is great against people but how does it help against metal armor inside a sealed vehicle that is supposed to be NBC air tight?

 

[Deino]

Seems as if that Tweet has been deleted!

 

[Philister]

The US nuclear force is decrepit. Mechanical systems don't last forever and our systems are decades past there sell-by date. He wanted to replace existing systems, not increase the overall size necessarily.

What about W-76-2? I don’t know what outdated warhead it was going to replace , and to be aggressive , you don’t have to manufacture more warheads,in fact, both US&Russia have much more warheads than their vehicles could carry, and here comes the GBSD&columbia class SSBN

 

[Philister]

What's the point of keeping obsolete DF-31 around and the cost of maintaining the production line when you can just load DF-41 with less?

DF-31and31A are obsolete, but DF-31AG is quiet new, I guess since DF-41 production could still be ramping up, 31AG could be around for quiet some time, priority here is to increase the nuclear arsenal ASAP

 

[antiterror13]

DF-31and31A are obsolete, but DF-31AG is quiet new, I guess since DF-41 production could still be ramping up, 31AG could be around for quiet some time, priority here is to increase the nuclear arsenal ASAP

I wouldn't call DF-31 is obsolete, far of it, let alone DF-31A. How would you define obsolete anyway?

 

[Philister]

I wouldn't call DF-31 is obsolete, far of it, let alone DF-31A. How would you define obsolete anyway?

For DF-31, steel shell (first stage)and HTPB-only fuel
For 31A, fiberglass (first stage) and still HTPB-only fuel if I remembered correctly, there’s not many changes on the missile itself, it’s more focused on the vehicle, replaced the semitrailer with TEL

 

[antiterror13]

For DF-31, steel shell (first stage)and HTPB-only fuel
For 31A, fiberglass (first stage) and still HTPB-only fuel if I remembered correctly, there’s not many changes on the missile itself, it’s more focused on the vehicle, replaced the semitrailer with TEL

Well, if it is the case Minuteman III (the only land base ICBM in the US) is obsolete too and also most Russian ICBMs. Currently only 3 countries have operational ICBM, USA, Russia and China

Like Deng once said, doesn't really matter whether the cat is white or black, as long as it catches mice ... even better if one is cheaper (less fancy) than the other but can catch mice as good