They let Disney shoot a friggin movie in a missile silo? Talk about military transparency.
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
They let Disney shoot a friggin movie in a missile silo? Talk about military transparency.
I mean old DF-31 could probably reach Hawaii but they was designed to deter against Soviet when the program was approved in the middle of 1980s.
DF-31A and DF-31AG could reach some parts of west coast for example Seattle or Portland. DF-41 and DF-5 series can reach most parts of CONUS.
US has been underestimating Chinese nuclear capability for the past few years and they were still insisting each brigade has only 6 launchers in their previous nuclear report until 2022's. However it has been rumored that PLARF is concentrating DF-31 into existing brigade and replacing & procuring DF-41 in new brigade. Anyone who follows closely to PLARF garrison would draw the same conclusion as each TEL brigade is not only improving in quality but also quantity in term of launchers.
645 and 665 BGD have almost three times the size of garrison compared with their counterpart and other brigades are also gradually upgrading or building new large garrisons. Just like the case of PLAAF airport regarding upgrading. Look at 645 Brigade's new shiny garrison. They got three times in land size and at least twice in term of garages compared with the first DF-41 brigade 644.
The bottom line we get here is at least 12 launchers per brigade and optimistic 18 or 24 launchers per brigade in the future.
There are two confirmed DF-41 brigades:
The first one is the 644 brigade, one of two DF-41 brigades in 2019 parade. It begins with a small old garrison then gradually extends its garage eastward then northward during the past four years. Now it occupies around 1 km2 land. I have to correct myself that 644 brigade is actually larger meanwhile 665 is smaller but other still holds and you know the gist.
The second one is 651 brigade, which is being re-located and relative modest in size, only 0.37 km2.
Here's my list of potential DF-41 brigades:
645 Brigade, land size 1.2 Km2
647 Brigade. It is weirdly separated between three neighboring areas, which were used for other purpose before conversion. Still in very early stage. Land size 0.89 km2
.
652 Brigade, still in construction stage. But it could be non-nuclear unit after re-location. Land size 0.67 km2.
665 Brigade, also modest in land size. Unclear whether it will be a nuclear unit. Land size 0.37 km2.
The first one is the 644 brigade, one of two DF-41 brigades in 2019 parade. It begins with a small old garrison then gradually extends its garage eastward then northward during the past four years. Now it occupies around 1 km2 land. I have to correct myself that 644 brigade is actually larger meanwhile 665 is smaller but other still holds and you know the gist.
The second one is 651 brigade, which is being re-located and relative modest in size, only 0.37 km2.
Here's my list of potential DF-41 brigades:
645 Brigade, land size 1.2 Km2
647 Brigade. It is weirdly separated between three neighboring areas, which were used for other purpose before conversion. Still in very early stage. Land size 0.89 km2
.
652 Brigade, still in construction stage. But it could be non-nuclear unit after re-location. Land size 0.67 km2.
665 Brigade, also modest in land size. Unclear whether it will be a nuclear unit. Land size 0.37 km2.
I think this may be the point. When it comes to infrastructure work like digging holes in the ground and building big concrete structures China has comparative advantage globally, and silo based ICBM is already the cheapest way to to increase warhead and delivery vehicle count. If US want to get into a silo building race with China they will be at a disadvantage. If they want to maintain their advantage with more SSBN and stealth bombers it will be even more expensive than new silos.
China is also launching a lot of solid fuel rockets per year like Kuaizhou-1A for space program while US is focusing on reusable liquid fuel rockets like Falcon-9, which while fantastic cost wise is much further from ICBM than a mass produced Kuaizhou.
So that is where the trillion dollar infrastructure went.
Lul copium that silos are empty, despite silos often costing several times more than missiles themselves.
It's not even possible to estimate the scale of Israel's nuclear program, despite it being a tiny statelet that's riddled with both American and islamist intelligence.
US has simply near no data on China's nuclear program except whatever numbers Beijing decides to tell them.
Are there any methods to destroy ICBM silos without using nuclear warheads, and capable of being delivered in multiple units at once using ICBMs or FOBS as well?
Sure, but such attack is pretty much inviting immediate nuclear retaliation, in which case why not use nukes to start with?
What I mean is doing such attacks during a nuclear attack.
The idea would be using conventional warheads to destroy missile silos and key military stations, while using nuclear warheads against population centers, key military bases and civilian infrastructures. This saves nuclear warheads for targets which nuclear warheads can deal better effects against.
Note the difference between military stations and military bases.
Which is a net win for China. The US nuclear arsenal is way too big and sophisticated for simple deterrence use. And all that counterforce, decapacitation strike and tactical nuclear warfare ideas are delusional.
China needs more nukes for several reasons but it seems the biggest benefit of its nuclear modernization will be the US wasting hundreds of billions on its already oversized and over sophisticated nuclear arsenal.
Nuclear warheads themselves are so cheap compared to other expenses of maintaining a nuclear arsenal that you'd be better served by just using a nuclear warhead. The idea of counterforce itself is a massive pipedream anyway. It is just so easy to have enough mobile launchers. And any attempt at any counterforce strike guarantees an all out launch from the other side. In fact it might be the only thing that guarantees that. You can always wait and retaliate later in kind if you have a city nuked. Having your nuclear arsenal itself targeted has very different consequences.
Last edited:
- Status