China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

davidau

Senior Member
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
The concern expressed by Navy Adm. Charles A. Richard is genuine and sincere, not some exaggerated fear-mongering to get more defense spending. It reflects the current status of the US military, against its adversaries.



Indeed, see how fast PLAN has been building their ships of all kinds, how quickly they ramp up the production rates of J-20 and J-16, and the vast variety of the drones they're rolling out. Just look at Zhuhai Airshow.



Indeed. Underwater capabilities is probably the single biggest area where PLAN has significant weakness, particularly nuclear submarines. But then again, when we talk about within the first island chain or even around the first island chain, China's large fleet of advanced conventional submarines are serious force to be reckoned with.

In some way, it's like the US takes a look at the formidable and fast advancing Chinese industrial capabilities and sees the semiconductor as the only area it still has asymmetric advantage...



The Admiral's solution is looking backward to the history, i.e., getting nostalgic, to a time when the US was the unquestioned industrial behemoths. The sad thing is that it is China today that is closer to the US in the '50s in terms of industrial capabilities--China simply moves faster and at a larger scale.
Click to expand...
And China has a core of young, talented, devoted, innovative scientists, engineers, and government/private financial supports to make their designs to mature...... Financial rewards are not their incentives, unlike their counter part of the West. That is why China advances very quickly to meet any challenge.
 
Kalec

Kalec

Junior Member
Registered Member
Kalec said:
PLARF Brigade HQ has appeared in Hami, similar size (0.2 km2) to the one in Yumen. One silo field, one brigade HQ.

I think it can end hearsay like "They have to deploy many brigades in one silo field." or "What about shell games, you know [buzzwords and more buzzwords]."

PLARF Hami HQ
42.32013, 92.16283
View attachment 101154

PLARF Yumen HQ
40.06244, 96.42573
View attachment 101155
Click to expand...

I think I have found the possible PLARF HQ in Hanggin Banner silo field. It almost gets twice the size of its cousins in Hami and Yumen.
40.08455, 108.29591
1667774794452.png
 
TK3600

TK3600

Captain
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
The concern expressed by Navy Adm. Charles A. Richard is genuine and sincere, not some exaggerated fear-mongering to get more defense spending. It reflects the current status of the US military, against its adversaries.



Indeed, see how fast PLAN has been building their ships of all kinds, how quickly they ramp up the production rates of J-20 and J-16, and the vast variety of the drones they're rolling out. Just look at Zhuhai Airshow.



Indeed. Underwater capabilities is probably the single biggest area where PLAN has significant weakness, particularly nuclear submarines. But then again, when we talk about within the first island chain or even around the first island chain, China's large fleet of advanced conventional submarines are serious force to be reckoned with.

In some way, it's like the US takes a look at the formidable and fast advancing Chinese industrial capabilities and sees the semiconductor as the only area it still has asymmetric advantage...



The Admiral's solution is looking backward to the history, i.e., getting nostalgic, to a time when the US was the unquestioned industrial behemoths. The sad thing is that it is China today that is closer to the US in the '50s in terms of industrial capabilities--China simply moves faster and at a larger scale.
Click to expand...
In my opinion US should reference WWII Germany in terms of strategy. How to combat enemy with superior manufacturing using tech lead. How to disrupt enemy that rely on global trade.
 
W

weig2000

Captain
TK3600 said:
In my opinion US should reference WWII Germany in terms of strategy. How to combat enemy with superior manufacturing using tech lead. How to disrupt enemy that rely on global trade.
Click to expand...

The US's past (successful) references are WWII and Cold War, but China is neither Nazi Germany nor USSR, and today's US is not the US right before WWII or during Cold War. The international environment is also drastically different now.
 
A

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
The US's past (successful) references are WWII and Cold War, but China is neither Nazi Germany nor USSR, and today's US is not the US right before WWII or during Cold War. The international environment is also drastically different now.
Click to expand...
The US had combined and become both plus with a little touch of Mao Cultural Revolution, truly an exceptional country. ;)
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
How does the US propose to deter China? Make more nukes than the ones they have now that can nuke China many times over already...? The US is afraid to bring up an international ban on nuclear weapons, not that it ever crossed their minds, even more now because of Ukraine. The Ukraine War has exposed how the US would run out of conventional weapons quickly.
 
Kalec

Kalec

Junior Member
Registered Member
Some digging work on possible propellant for third stage engine:

Patent filed by CASC 42 Institute says that it developed a GAP/CL-20/AlH3 propellant, theoretical Isp 2790.40 Ns/kg, density 1.80g/cm3
To give you an idea how insanely powerful it is, it means Isp 271s at sea level in reality and Isp >311s in the vacuum, an Isp on par with liquid pbv used by US and Soviet.

In comparison with hypergolic engine:
RD-270, the most powerful hypergolic ever built, has an Isp 322s in the vacuum.
RD-869, MIRV bus used by R36M, has an Isp around 311s-313s in the vacuum.

1667922590599.png
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

However, it is too expensive and sophisticated to produce, its annual production is around 10t/a and a price tag of 60,000RMB/kg. CL-20 production is not high either, only around 27t/a. The real production rate of such propellant is around 50-60t/a with consideration of two important ingredient in mind, so it will be enough for 10 DF-41 or 5 DF-45 per year.

Why you are so sure CL-20, AlH3 will be used in solid propellant not something else?
Click to expand...
Too expensive and unnecessary for other purposes. Ofc you can use AlH3 for solid battery if you want to pay for 60,000RMB/kg for a car battery product. One 10t/a AlH3 production line costs 278 million RMB to build, no one is going to waste that money on it without clear prospect.
Are production rate of CL-20, AlH3 expected to increase or static?
Click to expand...
AFAIK, another company is currently auctioning for AlH3 production line, 10t/a in initial investment and another 30t/a in the future. It will increase AlH3 production for 4 times, to 25 DF-45s/50 DF-41s in total per yer. It could be higher if there is other undisclosed production expansion on the way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top