China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread

[ChongqingHotPot92]

of course actual research and development goes back to Jiang's time .. but major work has done during Hu Jintao time ..

if i remember correctly DF-41 get operational status in 2017 and officially unveiled to public during 70th National day parade in 2019.. it took time but not that much..

I wonder if China’s warhead miniaturisation has faced hurdles because it was pressured into ceasing nuclear tests by 1996.

China appeared to lack both the supercomputers and other simulators that US national labs have, and the number of tests to generate the variety of data necessary for warhead stewardship and future designs. Of course this is relatively speaking. China’s data from its 45-47 tests (including a number of fizzled ones) could still help with stewardship of existing warheads (like the 535 on top of DF-31/41s, and the one on JL-2). However, despite talks of a new 575/shadow warhead tested after 1992 (those 90-95 kt yield tests), we don’t see evidence of the existence of a light warhead (something similar to the W-76) in service. It all appears that the 535 warhead (tested in 1992) is now the most numerous warhead in PLARF/PLAN service, forming the backbone of China’s nuclear force for decades to come.

However, China was actively trying to join the U.S.-led order in 1996, so ceasing nuclear test to sign the CTBT (but not ratify) was a necessary concessionary move. Now, given Washington’s changing stance on China since 2018, I wonder if this changing geopolitical environment could be an excuse for China to restart nuclear testing. The 2022 Pelosi visit to Taiwan could have been a great opportunity for China to jettison CTBT. If China, Russia, and the U.S. all abandons CTBT, China arguably has the most to gain since it needs more test data for future warhead stewardships and development of new weapons.

 

[antiterror13]

of course actual research and development goes back to Jiang's time .. but major work has done during Hu Jintao time ..

if i remember correctly DF-41 get operational status in 2017 and officially unveiled to public during 70th National day parade in 2019.. it took time but not that much..

DF-41 is a real game changer (and DF-31AG as well somewhat), very credible ICBM to hit the US

Wondering how many DF-41s is planned to be in service ? my bet is over 300 including TEL and Silo based

Actually it really puzzles me of how small the Chinese warhead number is. I think even 1,000 is small considering DF-41 can carry 10 MIRV and DF-31AG can carry 6 MIRV

 

[antiterror13]

I wonder if China’s warhead miniaturisation has faced hurdles because it was pressured into ceasing nuclear tests by 1996.

China appeared to lack both the supercomputers and other simulators that US national labs have, and the number of tests to generate the variety of data necessary for warhead stewardship and future designs. Of course this is relatively speaking. China’s data from its 45-47 tests (including a number of fizzled ones) could still help with stewardship of existing warheads (like the 535 on top of DF-31/41s, and the one on JL-2). However, despite talks of a new 575/shadow warhead tested after 1992 (those 90-95 kt yield tests), we don’t see evidence of the existence of a light warhead (something similar to the W-76) in service. It all appears that the 535 warhead (tested in 1992) is now the most numerous warhead in PLARF/PLAN service, forming the backbone of China’s nuclear force for decades to come.

However, China was actively trying to join the U.S.-led order in 1996, so ceasing nuclear test to sign the CTBT (but not ratify) was a necessary concessionary move. Now, given Washington’s changing stance on China since 2018, I wonder if this changing geopolitical environment could be an excuse for China to restart nuclear testing. The 2022 Pelosi visit to Taiwan could have been a great opportunity for China to jettison CTBT. If China, Russia, and the U.S. all abandons CTBT, China arguably has the most to gain since it needs more test data for future warhead stewardships and development of new weapons.

I think it would be the US to start testing nukes within 5-10 years and of course Russia and China will follow in no time, and also India, Pakistan and possibly Israel.

China has enough data and the simulation is good enough even in early 2000s, let alone now. Chinese supercomputers are among the best in the worlds together with the US .. in fact actually Russia and others are lacking of supercomputing power (not China & US)

 

[sunnymaxi]

I wonder if China’s warhead miniaturisation has faced hurdles because it was pressured into ceasing nuclear tests by 1996.

China appeared to lack both the supercomputers and other simulators that US national labs have, and the number of tests to generate the variety of data necessary for warhead stewardship and future designs. Of course this is relatively speaking. China’s data from its 45-47 tests (including a number of fizzled ones) could still help with stewardship of existing warheads (like the 535 on top of DF-31/41s, and the one on JL-2). However, despite talks of a new 575/shadow warhead tested after 1992 (those 90-95 kt yield tests), we don’t see evidence of the existence of a light warhead (something similar to the W-76) in service. It all appears that the 535 warhead (tested in 1992) is now the most numerous warhead in PLARF/PLAN service, forming the backbone of China’s nuclear force for decades to come.

However, China was actively trying to join the U.S.-led order in 1996, so ceasing nuclear test to sign the CTBT (but not ratify) was a necessary concessionary move. Now, given Washington’s changing stance on China since 2018, I wonder if this changing geopolitical environment could be an excuse for China to restart nuclear testing. The 2022 Pelosi visit to Taiwan could have been a great opportunity for China to jettison CTBT. If China, Russia, and the U.S. all abandons CTBT, China arguably has the most to gain since it needs more test data for future warhead stewardships and development of new weapons.

back then China lacked supercomputers and simulator testing facilities.. i m not an expert in this field but someone here mentioned, actual testing is still very important to acquire ground data of warhead no matter how advanced your supercomputers are.. but you can get some basic idea about warhead design and other specifications with supercomputer simulations.. China right now have one of the most advanced facilities in the world. so there is a strong possibility, China might have tested new design already.. just a guess

and i don't think, China will restart Nukes testing .. absolutely zero chance. only possible if US do some nuke test..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@antiterror13 China right now have one of the most advanced supercomputer in the world and other facilities ..

and you mentioned about DF-14 .. let me tell you one more thing , next generation ICBM DF-45/DF-XX is about to debut ..

difference between DF-41 and DF-XX ..

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

DF-41 is a real game changer (and DF-31AG as well somewhat), very credible ICBM to hit the US

Wondering how many DF-41s is planned to be in service ? my bet is over 300 including TEL and Silo based

Actually it really puzzles me of how small the Chinese warhead number is. I think even 1,000 is small considering DF-41 can carry 10 MIRV and DF-31AG can carry 6 MIRV

At maximum range it needs to cut back the payload. I think it's more like 3x on DF-41 and 1-2x on DF-31AG.

Being able to launch from anywhere is key for road mobile forces.

The silos based ones can have maximum payload for their range though since you don't need to consider factors like changing launch locations.

 

[ChongqingHotPot92]

At maximum range it needs to cut back the payload. I think it's more like 3x on DF-41 and 1-2x on DF-31AG.

Being able to launch from anywhere is key for road mobile forces.

The silos based ones can have maximum payload for their range though since you don't need to consider factors like changing launch locations.

Theoretically if you got a small warhead like to W-76 (100 kg or less in total weight), the range of DF-31A could be extended to cover the entire CONUS. The range improvement from the 8000 km of DF-31 to 11,200 of DF-31A was likely due to the weight reduction of the 535 warhead/reentry vehicle from 470 kg to 360 kg, whilst maintaining the same yield of 650 kt. Generally speaking, the 535 warhead is somewhat comparable to the W88 in yield to weight ratio.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

China declines to meet with US on nuclear arms control, US official says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That's right. Why should China keeps engaging with the US in nuclear arms control when China is still yet to be an equivalent to the US in terms of nuclear weapon fielding and delivery capabilities?

In fact - Until either the US voluntarily reduces her own nuclear arsenal in terms of (whichever of the two is lower) the number of nuclear warheads or the cumulative yield in megatonnage to match that of China - OR let China increases her own nuclear arsenal in terms of (whichever of the two is higher) the number of warheads or the cumulative yield in megatonnage to match that of the US - Then China shouldn't bother with any talks that serve to stifle her own MAD capabilities and/or putting her own MAD capabilities in a decisive disadvantage situation to the US.

 

[Bob Smith]

China declines to meet with US on nuclear arms control, US official says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That's right. Why should China keeps engaging with the US in nuclear arms control when China is still yet to be an equivalent to the US in terms of nuclear weapon fielding and delivery capabilities?

In fact - Until either the US voluntarily reduces her own nuclear arsenal in terms of (whichever of the two is lower) the number of nuclear warheads or the cumulative yield in megatonnage to match that of China - OR let China increases her own nuclear arsenal in terms of (whichever of the two is higher) the number of warheads or the cumulative yield in megatonnage to match that of the US - Then China shouldn't bother with any talks that serve to stifle her own MAD capabilities and/or putting her own MAD capabilities in a decisive disadvantage situation to the US.

Considering India is increasing their stockpile and Russia still has 10x the amount China has, China still shouldn't stifle their buildup even if America will somehow miraculously agree to lower their stockpile.

 

[phrozenflame]

I wonder if China’s warhead miniaturisation has faced hurdles because it was pressured into ceasing nuclear tests by 1996.

China appeared to lack both the supercomputers and other simulators that US national labs have, and the number of tests to generate the variety of data necessary for warhead stewardship and future designs. Of course this is relatively speaking. China’s data from its 45-47 tests (including a number of fizzled ones) could still help with stewardship of existing warheads (like the 535 on top of DF-31/41s, and the one on JL-2). However, despite talks of a new 575/shadow warhead tested after 1992 (those 90-95 kt yield tests), we don’t see evidence of the existence of a light warhead (something similar to the W-76) in service. It all appears that the 535 warhead (tested in 1992) is now the most numerous warhead in PLARF/PLAN service, forming the backbone of China’s nuclear force for decades to come.

However, China was actively trying to join the U.S.-led order in 1996, so ceasing nuclear test to sign the CTBT (but not ratify) was a necessary concessionary move. Now, given Washington’s changing stance on China since 2018, I wonder if this changing geopolitical environment could be an excuse for China to restart nuclear testing. The 2022 Pelosi visit to Taiwan could have been a great opportunity for China to jettison CTBT. If China, Russia, and the U.S. all abandons CTBT, China arguably has the most to gain since it needs more test data for future warhead stewardships and development of new weapons.

If Pakistan can achieve miniaturisation, then China probably already has achieved it a while back.

 

[Red tsunami]

Russia still has 10x the amount China has

Based on what?