China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread

[BoraTas]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China has to operate its Boomers from the South China Sea so that they do not pass critical choke points in First island Chain where they can be detected. Also, JL-3 with a range of 10,000 kilometres does not have enough range to target all of US.

So, does China have a JL-4 in development that will have enough range to target all of US? Without that their second strike capabilities will not be comprehensive.

Two points:

All of the choke points are in TACAIR and MRBM range. Thus they will stop being chokepoints as soon as China fields a sub with comparable sound output to the ocean background noise. Which will happen in just ~5 years.

Road mobile ICBMs are good enough for second strike.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Two points:

All of the choke points are in TACAIR and MRBM range. Thus they will stop being chokepoints as soon as China fields a sub with comparable sound output to the ocean background noise. Which will happen in just ~5 years.

Road mobile ICBMs are good enough for second strike.

Road mobile is very cost effective for second strike, because of high readiness and situational awareness. Your TELs, even while parked, can launch within minutes. You can always shuffle missiles between pre-repaired trucks, so downtime is only the time it takes to transfer the missile (~1 hour?). You know for a fact that there's no enemy air or ground forces nearby. And if there are due to surprise, your TELs can signal for help or to tell others to launch instantly.

Subs are actually very dangerous to rely on for second strike. How would you know if your SSBN got sunk? You wouldn't until you just didn't hear back from them, since they can't signal back to base.

The reason why some countries don't use road mobile is political, as they don't want the public to think about a war that affects them too much. It is also strategic, as they've been in a first strike stance. Subs are much better for first strike as they can launch with depressed trajectory closeby, and minimize time above the radar horizon.

 

[BoraTas]

@Patchwork_Chimera

In past, I saw you listing deployed submarine-mobile missiles as prompt launch capable. But you weren't listing TEL-mobile missiles as such. What makes a deployed SSBN more prompt than a deployed TEL?

 

[Temstar]

Recall discussion in previous ballistic missile thread about new highly energetic fuel containing CL-20:

China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

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...

www.sinodefenceforum.com

Well people are now noticing it:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China, however, understood the potential of the CL-20 and developed its version of this explosive material which began mass production in 2011.

Most of the long-range missiles fielded by China to prevent the US warships and non-stealthy aircraft, such as refueling tankers, from intervening if the Chinese military attacks Taiwan, are believed to be propelled by CL-20.

“This is a case where we could potentially be beaten over the head with our technology,” Bob Kavetsky, head of the Energetic Technology Center (ETC), a nonprofit research group that works for the US government, told Forbes.

I don't really get this middle part. IIRC even though China can produce CL-20 on an industrial scale it's still relatively small quantity per year. I would have thought such precious fuel would be reserved for the most strategically important weapons ie ICBMs and SLBMs, yet the report is suggesting it's used in things like PL-17 and HQ-9B?

 

[Blitzo]

Recall discussion in previous ballistic missile thread about new highly energetic fuel containing CL-20:

China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

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...

www.sinodefenceforum.com

Well people are now noticing it:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't really get this middle part. IIRC even though China can produce CL-20 on an industrial scale it's still relatively small quantity per year. I would have thought such precious fuel would be reserved for the most strategically important weapons ie ICBMs and SLBMs, yet the report is suggesting it's used in things like PL-17 and HQ-9B?

Eurasian times isn't a good outlet and shouldn't be posted here because many of their authors can't make sense of information that they have.

They take original articles from other outlets (some of which are also poor quality), and then add in bits of unsubstantiated assumptions and conclusions.


In other words, it's better to just pretend Eurasian times doesn't exist and don't read it. Anything that may be accurate in any of their articles can be found in other places which does not have the incorrect information.

 

[Temstar]

Eurasian times isn't a good outlet and shouldn't be posted here because many of their authors can't make sense of information that they have.

They take original articles from other outlets (some of which are also poor quality), and then add in bits of unsubstantiated assumptions and conclusions.


In other words, it's better to just pretend Eurasian times doesn't exist and don't read it. Anything that may be accurate in any of their articles can be found in other places which does not have the incorrect information.

They copied Forbes' original article though and that line was there in the original too:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

They copied Forbes' original article though and that line was there in the original too:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Forbes isn't a particularly good outlet either given their writers are often just bloggers and their ability to interpret information is also variable.

The original source that does mention CL-20 is this one:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And they don't mention anything about CL-20 being used in things like SAMs or AAMs.

Even in the Forbes article, there's no direct quote from the expert interviewed about China using CL-20 in those missiles.


The issue with Eurasian Times is they take news and they "omgz"-ize it.
Yes, Chinese propellant advances are meaningful, and the US hasn't advanced as much as it really should have, but that's not exactly an "own" of the US in the way that the Eurasian Times article portrays it. We should avoid continuing that kind of emotive writing they like to churn out.

 

[Kalec]

I don't really get this middle part. IIRC even though China can produce CL-20 on an industrial scale it's still relatively small quantity per year. I would have thought such precious fuel would be reserved for the most strategically important weapons ie ICBMs and SLBMs, yet the report is suggesting it's used in things like PL-17 and HQ-9B?

China is producing CL-20 at 27t/yr production rate but it is the designed capacity not the actual production yet. And tbh the author doesn't seem to be understanding how CL-20 works by suggesting that it could be used against US over Taiwan.

If Washington intervenes in a fight on China’s home turf, U.S. forces will face greater numbers of Chinese missiles, including some with better range and power. That’s only partly courtesy of CL-20 – the Chinese have also developed technology to make propellants burn more efficiently and have built larger missiles than U.S. forces can bring to the fight by air or sea.

I mean it is theoretically possible if he means by ICBM and SLBM raining down over the globe in a nuclear exchange. But if it is a conventional war near Chinese shore, which I believe that 100% won't happen, China can still outgun US even if the missiles are all filled with black powders.

Back to the real world, CL-20 is not going to increase Isp by 40% but at a mere 10s, which is still great. But it won't increase missile range by that much if the author knows about a simple equation called "Tsiolkovsky rocket equation.” TL;DR the best way to use expensive energetic is to use them in the final stage of ICBM, not AAM nor SAM.

 

[Kalec]

Not entirely nuclear but still significant on their production estimation. Tl;dr the solid branch of CASC could be making 10,000t propellant mass into grain per year as of 2021.

I am still looking at the practicality of this "10,000 ton" theory and realize it is totally feasible.

Northrop Grumman expects to produce more than 75 motors per year, the majority of which will be GEM 63XL, said the spokesman.

GEM 63XL has propellant mass of 47 tons and not forget they are also producing SLS Booster which is over 600 tons, SLS was flying with two of them. Ofc the news mainly talked about "capacity" not the actual production, my rough estimation is that Northrop Grumman can fill 5,000t propellant into grain per year sometimes after 2023.

So they are producing solid boosters at the half production rate of CASC however CASC is also making many small and medium missiles in large quantities and Northrop Grumman will be producing Sentinel ICBM in the next few years.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[aqh]

Guys what is your opinion on the DF-27 leaks?