China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread

[Deino]

Mysterious TEL lookalike vehicle via

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Said to be even longer than DF-41 but most likely not a launcher.

Could anyone help identify possible location or the length of such vehicle? Looks like a PLAAF hangar and spacing line on the ground.

@Deino @Blitzo

View attachment 111078

I asked Sean O'Connor from Jane's and per his analysis - seems he has even clearer images available - it is not a ICBM.
It does not fit in length in (in fact it is closer to a DF-31AG) but too narrow and it lacks what can be rated a driver's cabin. As such it is most likely a truck & trailer covered by a tarp which is what makes it look like a single long vehicle.

 

[Kalec]

I asked Sean O'Connor from Jane's and per his analysis - seems he has even clearer images available - it is not a ICBM.
It does not fit in length in (in fact it is closer to a DF-31AG) but too narrow and it lacks what can be rated a driver's cabin. As such it is most likely a truck & trailer covered by a tarp which is what makes it look like a single long vehicle.

Thanks for the help. That's interesting, may we have the coordinate by any chance?

My assessment is based on the width of around 3.3m to 3.5m. Ofc the vehicle would be too narrow to be an ICBM if the length was about 20m - 21m.

 

[Deino]

Thanks for the help. That's interesting, may we have the coordinate by any chance?

My assessment is based on the width of around 3.3m to 3.5m. Ofc the vehicle would be too narrow to be an ICBM if the length was about 20m - 21m.

For those who kindly ask ...

Jiaozhou AB - 36.336056 120.021265

 

[Kalec]

For those who kindly ask ...

Jiaozhou AB - 36.336056 120.021265

Lmao only 21 meters and dude on Weibo acting like "sky is falling," I am personally moving @张之洞 into non credible defense analyst category.

 

[King ZhaoXiang]

3 Nuclear Superpowers, Rather Than 2, Usher In a New Strategic Era​

Russia delivered 25 tons of highly enriched U to China.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[gelgoog]

Fast reactors like the CFR-600 are essential to close down the nuclear fuel cycle. If China wants to expand nuclear use to a significant degree they cannot do it just with conventional liquid water reactors. China's energy needs are too large for that and there won't be enough nuclear fuel to power China otherwise. A fast reactor can better use nuclear fuel to generate power. Like up to 100x better.
The notion that because the reactor produces plutonium means it must be going to be used for producing nuclear weapons is kind of overstated. A lot of countries including France and Japan had fast nuclear reactor programs.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

These programs have stalled because of technical issues, and the vast glut of supply of uranium after the end of the Cold War. A lot of nuclear warhead HEU was downblended to produce extremely cheap nuclear fuel for reactors. Now that this practice ended and that there are attempts to get Russia out of the Western nuclear cycle, you can expect fast reactors to once again gain popularity.

 

[Kalec]

A fast reactor can better use nuclear fuel to generate power. Like up to 100x better.
The notion that because the reactor produces plutonium means it must be going to be used for producing nuclear weapons is kind of overstated.

This report is by far the best for-dummies explanation on how to produce weapon grade plutonium from a fast breeder. And the argument of "Each CFR-600 reactor can produce 200kg WgPu per year" is also derived from this report.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From my brief understanding, it is do-able by extract WgPu from fast breeder and tbh easier than I earlier thought from media report.

Separate processing of radial blanket: Reprocessing of the radial blanket in a separate campaign is straightforward and does not require any special provisions or equipment. 92 kg of weapon-grade plutonium per year can be obtained with this strategy.

Separate processing of radial and axial blanket: This approach requires chopping of the core fuel assemblies in order to isolate the top and bottom sections containing the axial blanket material. Such a strategy could require dedicated equipment and procedures in the reprocessing stage, 30 but it would yield an additional 52 kg of weapon-grade plutonium per year. For weapon-use, the isotopics of this material would be even superior to those of the radial blanket (96.5% versus 93.7% Pu-239). Total annual weapon-grade plutonium production increases to 144 kg.

In short, each Chinese CFR-600 can produce 110kg WgPu (93.7% Pu-239) in a straight forward way by reprocessing radial blanket. In theory, another 62kg even superior WgPu (96.5% Pu-239) can be producing from chopping top and bottom sections of axial blanket by special equipment.

Disclaimer: I am not a nuclear physicist, dunno how real case will differ with theory. For example, initial core is made of HEU instead of MOX fuel. Though US media and Pentagon is more concerning in producing WgPu, I don't know whether it is true or scare campaign.

From famous (or infamous) "China’s Civil Nuclear Sector: Plowshares to Swords?" quoted by Pentagon report:

The lower end of the estimated WGPu produced in the two fast reactors by 2030, to make about 2,300 kg of 6 percent Pu-240 WGPu. However, since China lacks reprocessing capacity, it is most likely that China would not produce super-grade Pu in the fast reactor blankets. Rather China would leave the radial blankets in the reactor for a period twice as long, thereby doubling the plutonium concentration and recovering WGPu (something close to 6 percent Pu-240).

The report also agrees that it is not even hard to reprocess weapon grade plutonium from radial blanket. And super grade plutonium can be reprocessing in a more complicated method, but still achievable. "Since China lacks reprocessing capacity" is no longer true after China has started building three 200t/yr reprocessing plant in Jinta and not to mention huge expansion in old Plant 404 where has added three stacks in the newest round of construction. Normally it means three new factories as the existing factories have five stacks, so a 60% upgrade in Plant 404.

The NATO briefing reportedly said Plant 404 also built a new reactor, which is not required in a purely reprocessing plant, unless they want to reprocess WgPu in a traditional way like they did back in 60s.

乏燃料处理是一 部分，目前规划有 3 个项目:R1 项目，200 吨，总投资 400 亿,前后建设了 5 年 时间。R2 项目,正在建设中，也是 200 吨，预计建设周期 3 年左右。R3 项目， 明年启动，也是 200 吨，预计 2-3 年建成。

The interviewee is probably indicating that first reprocessing plant has been completed and the second one is being built with a construction period of 3 years, so probably completed by 2024 -2025, the third one is likely to be completed by 2026 - 2027.

Not only the quantity of reprocessing plant has already exceeded widely reported number, but also the construction speed is faster one over the other.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

The idea that fast reactors will be used to produce weapons grade plutonium is a red herring; US "experts" pushing it are either clueless or duplicitous. Using a fast reactor to produce WgPu is like using a Lambo to pick up groceries - it's unsuited to the task and there are much cheaper options that can move a much larger volume of groceries.

If China is interested in producing WgPu, it will use a graphite moderated reactor like it and everyone else did in the past. Graphite moderated reactors are much cheaper and simpler (the core is a large block of graphite with holes drilled through it), and the plutonium can be extracted without shutting down the reactor. You just cycle rods through the reactor, dump the spent rods in a pool for a while, send them to the reprocessing plant right next to you (as it is in Plant 404) to extract the plutonium, and send the uranium back into the reactor.

 

[Kalec]

The idea that fast reactors will be used to produce weapons grade plutonium is a red herring.

Actually no, at least not the same interpretation from this report. WgPu is far easier to extract than they are from graphite-moderated reactor. FBR requires far less reprocessing process to produce WgPu.

Savannah River Site can reprocess 5000t/yr and Hanford Site reprocessed 24,000 tons spent fuel over its lifetime. China only has about 600 + unknown capacity t/yr in 404 through 2030s. Ofc China doesn't even so much excess plutonium like US and Soviet did in Cold War.

If the report from NATO is right about new reactor in 404, there is certainly an option to produce WgPu in old school method meanwhile FBR could play a role as backup.

 

[sunnymaxi]

This report is by far the best for-dummies explanation on how to produce weapon grade plutonium from a fast breeder. And the argument of "Each CFR-600 reactor can produce 200kg WgPu per year" is also derived from this report.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From my brief understanding, it is do-able by extract WgPu from fast breeder and tbh easier than I earlier thought from media report.


In short, each Chinese CFR-600 can produce 110kg WgPu (93.7% Pu-239) in a straight forward way by reprocessing radial blanket. In theory, another 62kg even superior WgPu (96.5% Pu-239) can be producing from chopping top and bottom sections of axial blanket by special equipment.

Disclaimer: I am not a nuclear physicist, dunno how real case will differ with theory. For example, initial core is made of HEU instead of MOX fuel. Though US media and Pentagon is more concerning in producing WgPu, I don't know whether it is true or scare campaign.

From famous (or infamous) "China’s Civil Nuclear Sector: Plowshares to Swords?" quoted by Pentagon report:

The report also agrees that it is not even hard to reprocess weapon grade plutonium from radial blanket. And super grade plutonium can be reprocessing in a more complicated method, but still achievable. "Since China lacks reprocessing capacity" is no longer true after China has started building three 200t/yr reprocessing plant in Jinta and not to mention huge expansion in old Plant 404 where has added three stacks in the newest round of construction. Normally it means three new factories as the existing factories have five stacks, so a 60% upgrade in Plant 404.

The NATO briefing reportedly said Plant 404 also built a new reactor, which is not required in a purely reprocessing plant, unless they want to reprocess WgPu in a traditional way like they did back in 60s.


The interviewee is probably indicating that first reprocessing plant has been completed and the second one is being built with a construction period of 3 years, so probably completed by 2024 -2025, the third one is likely to be completed by 2026 - 2027.

Not only the quantity of reprocessing plant has already exceeded widely reported number, but also the construction speed is faster one over the other.

excellent explanation.

but a person like me, who is still a student in this field. tell us about maximum capacity of China to produce WgPu throughout this decade. and how many warheads they can produce at maximum by 2027. lets suppose they set the target date of 2027 coz of 100 years anniversary of PLA. thank you.