China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread

[RoastGooseHKer]

my guess is that the commentary is bit misleading. my understanding is that the DF5C supposedly is an upgraded DF5 with more capable MIRV. My guess is the following:

Old DF5: single warhead 5MT (type 503). Take off weight around 180-190t. Range 13000km.
DF5B: 4 65KT warheads (type 535). takeoff weight around 200t. range 13000km.
DF5C: 6 65KT warheads. similar weight and similar range. There are also claim that the DF5C used new staged combustion cycle engines.

All the 5Bs and 5Cs should be modified DF5s manufactured during the 80s and 90s. there are a total 3 brigades (18 silos).

Also rumor is that a new type of solid fuel missile is in development to replace all DF5. It has a take off weight around 100 tons and can carry 2.5 tons of projectiles with a range of 13000km, that's around 9 type 575 warheads (15-20kt, 160kg each), together with decoys and RVs.

But the DF-5C clearly has a pointed warhead identical to that of DF-5A. How is that an MIRV?

 

[henrik]

DF-51 probably skipped because the pronunciation conflicting with DF-5

Do you think they fear a mispronunciation will cause the unintended launch of the wrong missile?

 

[RoastGooseHKer]

larger size able to accomodate more number of mirvs and more sophisticated mirvs

But the DF-5C warhead shown in this morning’s parade is clearly a single warhead identical to that of DF-5A shown in the 1984 parade. How is that an MIRV?

 

[ougoah]

Do you think it's possible to fit multiple warheads inside it, even though I know the shape is already conical

The conical housing shown is just a fairing. Underneath these are often MIRV of whatever type - could be smaller conical warheads, dual conical warheads, dual conical MaRV steerable warheads, dual conical hypersonic gliders, wedge shaped hypersonic gliders etc.

It was previously suggested that they are going to show the components inside the main conical fairing. They didn't end up showing it.

 

[ougoah]

But the DF-5C warhead shown in this morning’s parade is clearly a single warhead identical to that of DF-5A shown in the 1984 parade. How is that an MIRV?

Because miniaturisation of warheads have basically completely removed the existence of warheads of this size. It would contain a significant % of all the fissile material produced by China if there's a single warhead that big. DF-5A from 1980s was before China had MIRVs.

Why would they waste a giant silo ICBM to just carry a single warhead. Megaton warheads can be equipped on MIRV ICBMs like DF-41 and even DF-31 can take MIRV into orbit for enough range to hit continental USA now with the previously revealed DF-31 variant. You don't even need DF-41, DF-5 or DF-61 for that task.

That conical payload fairing at the tip of the DF-5C is nearly the size and volume of a Shenzhou manned space re-entry module. What a waste of an entire missile with global range just to put a single warhead when you can MIRV it with close to 10 warheads plus decoys or use MaRV or even HGV for greater penetration.

Besides, take mockup details with a grain of salt. Some details of actual equipment are kept out of the mockups. They could have multiple types for the DF-5C. If they really wanted to go with a 100MT + warhead of that size, they would have been producing a lot more nuclear weapons grade material that even the most optimistic estimates assumed.

 

[qwerty3173]

Because miniaturisation of warheads have basically completely removed the existence of warheads of this size. It would contain a significant % of all the fissile material produced by China if there's a single warhead that big. DF-5A from 1980s was before China had MIRVs.

Why would they waste a giant silo ICBM to just carry a single warhead. Megaton warheads can be equipped on MIRV ICBMs like DF-41 and even DF-31 can take MIRV into orbit for enough range to hit continental USA now with the previously revealed DF-31 variant. You don't even need DF-41, DF-5 or DF-61 for that task.

That conical payload fairing at the tip of the DF-5C is nearly the size and volume of a Shenzhou manned space re-entry module. What a waste of an entire missile with global range just to put a single warhead when you can MIRV it with close to 10 warheads plus decoys or use MaRV or even HGV for greater penetration.

Besides, take mockup details with a grain of salt. Some details of actual equipment are kept out of the mockups. They could have multiple types for the DF-5C. If they really wanted to go with a 100MT + warhead of that size, they would have been producing a lot more nuclear weapons grade material that even the most optimistic estimates assumed.

Like, larger thermonuclear weapons don't really need more fissile material. Increasing the size of the fusion stage or even adopting a three-stage thermonuclear design like the Tsar Bomba is obviously superior. Besides, a FOBS system requires significant end-stage boosting capabilities to de-orbit and strike the target so not all the size is the warhead.

 

[nativechicken]

Because miniaturisation of warheads have basically completely removed the existence of warheads of this size. It would contain a significant % of all the fissile material produced by China if there's a single warhead that big. DF-5A from 1980s was before China had MIRVs.
因为弹头的小型化已经基本完全消除了这种尺寸的弹头的存在。如果有一枚这么大的弹头，它将包含中国生产的所有裂变材料的很大一部分。1980 年代的 DF-5A 还没有中国拥有 MIRV。

Why would they waste a giant silo ICBM to just carry a single warhead. Megaton warheads can be equipped on MIRV ICBMs like DF-41 and even DF-31 can take MIRV into orbit for enough range to hit continental USA now with the previously revealed DF-31 variant. You don't even need DF-41, DF-5 or DF-61 for that task.
他们为什么要浪费一个巨大的发射井洲际弹道导弹来携带一枚弹头。百万吨级弹头可以装备在 DF-41 等 MIRV 洲际弹道导弹上，甚至 DF-31 也可以将 MIRV 送入轨道，以达到足够的射程，现在使用之前发布的 DF-31 变体击中美国大陆。您甚至不需要 DF-41、DF-5 或 DF-61 来完成这项任务。

That conical payload fairing at the tip of the DF-5C is nearly the size and volume of a Shenzhou manned space re-entry module. What a waste of an entire missile with global range just to put a single warhead when you can MIRV it with close to 10 warheads plus decoys or use MaRV or even HGV for greater penetration.
东风-5C 尖端的圆锥形有效载荷整流罩的大小和体积几乎相当于神舟载人空间再入舱。当你可以用近 10 个弹头和诱饵对其进行 MIRV 或使用 MaRV 甚至 HGV 来获得更大的穿透力时，仅仅放置一个弹头，就浪费一枚具有全球射程的整个导弹。

Besides, take mockup details with a grain of salt. Some details of actual equipment are kept out of the mockups. They could have multiple types for the DF-5C. If they really wanted to go with a 100MT + warhead of that size, they would have been producing a lot more nuclear weapons grade material that even the most optimistic estimates assumed.
此外，对模型细节持保留态度。实际设备的一些细节被排除在模型之外。他们可以有多种类型的 DF-5C。如果他们真的想使用这种尺寸的 100MT + 弹头，他们将生产更多的核武器级材料，即使是最乐观的估计也假设的。

 

[gelgoog]

fair enough. So I guess the 5c is basically modified upper stage then.
I seriously doubt that the point head shown at the parade is not 5C.

Maybe the upper stage of the DF-5C uses a staged combustion engine but they kept the boost engines as gas generators. Much like Russia did with Soyuz-2.1b.

 

[Maikeru]

If DF31BJ is silo-based, why would it need a gas generator in the canister?

Also if DF31BJ is the new silo based missile, and DF61 uses the same TEL as DF41, what was on that 10-axle transporter we saw last year?

Finally, the commentator said DF5C could hit anywhere in the world (presumably FOBS) "at any minute". Is that an indicator of LOW posture?

 

[qwerty3173]

If DF31BJ is silo-based, why would it need a gas generator in the canister?

Also if DF31BJ is the new silo based missile, and DF61 uses the same TEL as DF41, what was on that 10-axle transporter we saw last year?

Finally, the commentator said DF5C could hit anywhere in the world (presumably FOBS) "at any minute". Is that an indicator of LOW posture?

DF5C have greatly improved fuel storage capability. Liquid fuel can be stored safely much longer and thus the majority of missiles can be set on alert more like solid fuel missiles.