China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[kroko]

Inside a 2A underground bunker...

Does anyone knows how deep these bunkers are?

 

[Broccoli]

This video explains quite well the "shell game" concept and it will work with a single warhead ICBM too.
[video=youtube;44zytG8O40w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44zytG8O40w[/video]

The Shell Game was a proposed MX missile deployment mode. Each of the 200 missiles would have its own oval "racetrack," ten to 15 miles long. Along every track would be 23 underground shelters. A monstrous, 180-ft.-long TEL (transporter-erector-launcher) would move the MX from one shelter to another. Alternatively, the TEL might leave the MX missile in place for a while and carry a dummy MX to another shelter or around the course. Soviet spy satellites could never be sure exactly where the missile was and thus would have to knock out all 23 shelters on each of the 200 tracks.

Here is a lot of good info and pics Peacekeeper basing concepts they were thinking. I assume that PRC is doing something similar with DF-31A and in future with the new ICBM they are developing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[AssassinsMace]

I don't know how the US would counter 3000 miles of tunnels if one MX Peacekeeper hidden somewhere within 15 miles was enough to stymie the Soviets. It not like the US has a map of the tunnels either. Sounds more like another scare tactic to get military funding for something else.

 

[broadsword]

I don't know how the US would counter 3000 miles of tunnels if one MX Peacekeeper hidden somewhere within 15 miles was enough to stymie the Soviets.

But is it true about the reported 3000 miles of tunnels or some guesswork?

 

[AssassinsMace]

I don't think China needs 3000 miles of tunnels if it had 3000 nukes. That MX video tells you with a hardened silo the Soviets need a virtual direct hit to eliminate the threat of that missile. It would be cheaper for China just to make a whole lot of silos or hardened shelters. Also as discussed before the tunnels have to be used for something other than just moving nukes around. If they can make a long tunnel spanning maybe hundreds of miles at a time, maybe there's an underground railroad system to transport supplies and troops as well. There's been talk of testing a vacuum tube for a bullet train that can go 500mph. Who knows they maybe using these tunnels as a precursor experiment for it.

 

[escobar]

PENTAGON ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

* The Second Artillery is developing and testing several new classes and variants of offensive missiles, forming additional missile units, upgrading older missile systems, and developing methods to counter ballistic missile defenses.

* PLA is also introducing new SRBM variants with improved ranges, accuracies, and payloads. The Second Artillery continues to field
advanced variants with improved ranges and more sophisticated payloads, while gradually replacing earlier generations that do not possess true precision strike capability.

* China is fielding a limited but growing number of conventionally armed, medium-range ballistic missiles, including the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM). The DF-21D is based on a variant of the DF-21 (CSS-5) medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) and gives the PLA the capability to attack large ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific Ocean. The DF-21D has a range exceeding 1,500 km and is armed with a maneuverable warhead.

* China is working on a range of technologies to attempt to counter U.S. and other countries’ ballistic missile defense systems, including maneuverable reentry vehicles (MaRVs), MIRVs, decoys, chaff, jamming, thermal shielding, and anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons. China’s official media also cite numerous Second Artillery training exercises featuring maneuver, camouflage, and launch operations under simulated combat conditions, which are intended to increase survivability.

*The PLA continues to field air and ground-launched LACMs fostand-off, precision strikes. Air-launched cruise missiles include the YJ-63, KD-88, and the CJ-20.

 

[Broccoli]

They say same thing about "DF-41" project as they did last year, and this should confirm the new 8x8 TEL is used to haul single warhead DF-31A instead of new MIRV capable ICBM.

China may also be developing a new road-mobile ICBM, possibly capable of carrying a multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV).

 

[kroko]

They say same thing about "DF-41" project as they did last year, and this should confirm the new 8x8 TEL is used to haul single warhead DF-31A instead of new MIRV capable ICBM.

I think that the DoD based this "new ICBM" story on the pictures of this TEL that appeared in 2009.

Well, the old TEL was only road-capable. The new TEL appears to be all-terrain capable. The tyres point to that. But the cannister also appears to be longer, and that may be the reasoning of why the DoD thinks that a new ICBM is on the works. Perhabs the new TEL will serve DF-31A and the new ICBM.

If so, and taking into account that we have yet to see a DF-31 vídeo launch and even a full picture of DF-31A (after all this years) i dont think we will see this new ICBM for a loooong time (if it exists).

PENTAGON ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I find it strange that they say that china will posses more DF-5A within 2 years. I mean, DF-5 is a 40 year old design liquid fuel ICBM who takes betwen 30 to 60 minutes to fuel (acording to wikipedia). Does this indicates that they are unhappy with DF-31A, and/or that they are having dificulties with the "new ICBM" ???

 

[Broccoli]

If so, and taking into account that we have yet to see a DF-31 vídeo launch and even a full picture of DF-31A (after all this years) i dont think we will see this new ICBM for a loooong time (if it exists).



I find it strange that they say that china will posses more DF-5A within 2 years. I mean, DF-5 is a 40 year old design liquid fuel ICBM who takes betwen 30 to 60 minutes to fuel (acording to wikipedia). Does this indicates that they are unhappy with DF-31A, and/or that they are having dificulties with the "new ICBM" ???

Yeah, there is no pictures where we can see whole DF-31A, but there is pictures where we at least see some parts of it from quite close. We have actually better pictures of the DF-31A than the original DF-31.

DF-31A. Difference to original DF-31 is that it's third stage has a larger diameter, RV covered with payload shroud, and the RV it's carrying is probably more compact.

DF-5A is probably used because it's claimed to be only ICBM what can reach all of USA with MIRV payload.. DF-31 series missiles are carrying only one RV with yield less than 700kt.

 

[Hyperwarp]

...

If so, and taking into account that we have yet to see a DF-31 vídeo launch and even a full picture of DF-31A (after all this years) i dont think we will see this new ICBM for a loooong time (if it exists).

You are probably right. There are only a handfull of images and models of the DF-31 and only one warhead photo and one launch sequence of the DF-31A. There is only one Silo based DF-5A image. All ICBM/SLBM seem to be under strict cover unlike SRBM/MRBM/IRBM.

I find it strange that they say that china will posses more DF-5A within 2 years. I mean, DF-5 is a 40 year old design liquid fuel ICBM who takes betwen 30 to 60 minutes to fuel (acording to wikipedia). Does this indicates that they are unhappy with DF-31A, and/or that they are having dificulties with the "new ICBM" ???

Most likely would be that they are facing difficulties. Russia has a mix of RT-2UTTKh 'Topol-M' and RS-24 'Yars' ICBM for their new generation. Topol-M usually carries a single 700-800 kt warhead but 3-4 smaller 200+ kt warheads are possible. DF-31/31A is similar. It carries a single 700 kt warhead with speculated three 100~ kt warheads MIRV. What PRC lacks is that 'Yars' type ICBM. The DF-41 was supposed to fill that role. It is possible they are having difficulties especially if they are trying to develop Topol-M like warheads that maneuver to evade EKVs. Russians are the only ones on earth who have this.