PLA ICBM Force in 2016

* Inertial guidance. The simplest principle for guidance is the law of inertia. In aiming a basketball at a basket, an attempt is made to give the ball a trajectory that will terminate in the basket. However, once the ball is released, the shooter has no further control over it. If he has aimed incorrectly, or if the ball is touched by another person, it will miss the bas-ket. However, it is possible for the ball to be incorrectly aimed and then have another person touch it to change its course so it will hit the basket. In this case, the second player has provided a form of guidance. The inertial guidance system sup-plies the intermediate push to get the missile back on the proper trajectory. The inertial guidance method is used for the same purpose as the preset method and is actually a refinement of that method. The inertially guided missile also receives programmed informa-tion prior to launch. Although there is no electromagnetic contact between the launching site and the missile after launch, the missile is able to make corrections to its flight path with amazing precision, controlling the flight path with accelerometers that are mounted on a gyro-stabilized platform. All in-flight accelerations are continuously measured by this arrangement, and the missile attitude control generates corresponding correction signals to maintain the proper trajectory. The use of inertial guidance takes much of the guesswork out of long-range missile delivery. The unpredictable outside forces working on the missile are continuously sensed by the accelerometers. The genera-ted solution enables the missile to continuously correct its flight path. The inertial method has proved far more reliable than any other long-range guidance method developed to date.
* Celestial Reference. A celestial navigation guidance system is a system designed for a predetermined path in which the missile course is adjusted continuously by reference to fixed stars. The system is based on the known apparent positions of stars or other celestial bodies with respect to a point on the surface of the earth at a given time. Navigation by fixed stars and the sun is highly desirable for long-range missiles since its accuracy is not dependent on range. The missile must be provided with a horizontal or a vertical reference to the earth, automatic star-tracking telescopes to determine star elevation angles with respect to the reference, a time base, and navigational star tables mechanically or electrically recorded. A computer in the missile continuously compares star observations with the time base and the navigational tables to determine the missile's present position. From this, the proper signals are computed to steer the missile correctly toward the target. The missile must carry all this complicated equipment and must fly above the clouds to assure star visibility. Celestial guidance (also called stellar guidance) was used for the Mariner (unmanned spacecraft) interplanetary mission to the vicinity of Mars and Venus. ICBM and SLBM systems at present use celestial guidance.
* Command Guidance Multi-source radio signals that allow a triangulation of position offer an alterna-tive to acceleration measurements. Advanced missile powers dropped radio guidance in the 1960’s and switched to autonomous inertial measuring units, which are carried onboard the missile. The United States considered radio guidance again in the late 1980’s for mobile missiles but dropped the idea in favor of a Global Positioning System (GPS). A radio guidance system could transmit signals from the launch site, or an accurate transmitter array near the launch site to create the signals. Radio command and control schemes, because of the immediate presence of a radio signal when the system is turned on, alert defenses that a missile launch is about to occur. And performance for these systems degrades because of the rocket plume and radio noise. Also, these systems are very much subject to the effects of jamming or false signals.

Click to expand...

Mate said:

Can some one enlighten me what targetting systems the Chinese Ballastic Missiles use? What is the Navigation equipment used?

Click to expand...

antiterror13 said:

PLA ICBM force in 2016 would be

30 DF-5A/B MIRV
150 DF-31A MIRV
100 JL-2A/B MIRV with 7-8 094/096 Subs

Click to expand...

kroko said:

Theres no way that china will have that many ICBMs by 2016. Its ICBM production has been very small. Far less than what was expected years ago (when this thread was opened)

I think its because they give little priority to them (either because you cant really win a war with nukes, or they dont have confidence on second artillery to handle so many ICBMs, or they are afraid of the political fallout of going near-superpower nuke numbers)

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

I can't imagine the 2nd Arty is somehow unable to handle so many ICBMs... It's not like it's new technology or something. But if numbers are smaller than expected (and we don't even know anything close to real numbers for recent years, keep in mind) they probably will not be for the reasons you mentioned either.
Nukes are for deterrence, and the PRC never wanted to "win" a war with nukes... It was to avoid war, and that's a given for every country with nukes. And if there was the need for large nuke numbers they wouldn't care about the political fall out. There was and is currently no need, therefore there are no massive numbers of them -- simple as that.

And China's always had a stance of minimal deterrence and no first use, though they have deviated slightly on occasion, but that's still their official message.

If numbers of ICBM production were low (compared to what we expected, or different to China's current needs), then it is probably due to a change in focus to conventional missiles (AShBM and the like) and spending on other weapons like SRBMS/IRBMs and LACMs, or maybe technical difficulties/cost.

Click to expand...

kroko said:

Hmm...we know little of second artillery. In order to have 100+ ICBMs they would have to considerably enlarge capabilities. Remember that PLA likes to play safe in everything it develops (which also can mean: we dont have much confidence in our capabilities).

Click to expand...

case in point: they keep moving the nuclear warheads from one place to another to reduce the chance of them being destroyed in a surprise attack, because they have so few of them. How credible is the chinese nuclear deterrent?

Click to expand...

And yes...the thruth is there is need for a large ICBM force if you are an independent nuclear power. Remember that in the cold war France and UK relied mostly on USA nuclear deterrent to defend against USSR massive arsenal. China doesnt have this luxury. If china only fields 30-40 ICBMs and only 3-4 SSBN, its strategic nuclear force is in peril. In a first strike its arsenal can be almost wiped out. Then what?

Click to expand...

How can you "avoid war" in this circunstances? you must have a credible nuclear deterrent, and that means numbers. Even USA Congress is worried about the USA-Russia START treaty effects on the USA nuclear strategic arsenal. Imagine china.

Click to expand...

IronsightSniper said:

It's only 2011. 5 years won't turn China into a Nuclear Superpower with stockpiles reminiscent of the Cold War. It's agreeable that China needs a credible nuclear force but 5 years won't make that dream a reality. I'd say at least 10 years.

Click to expand...

Bltizo said:

I can't imagine the 2nd Arty is somehow unable to handle so many ICBMs... It's not like it's new technology or something. But if numbers are smaller than expected (and we don't even know anything close to real numbers for recent years, keep in mind) they probably will not be for the reasons you mentioned either.
Nukes are for deterrence, and the PRC never wanted to "win" a war with nukes... It was to avoid war, and that's a given for every country with nukes. And if there was the need for large nuke numbers they wouldn't care about the political fall out. There was and is currently no need, therefore there are no massive numbers of them -- simple as that.

And China's always had a stance of minimal deterrence and no first use, though they have deviated slightly on occasion, but that's still their official message.

If numbers of ICBM production were low (compared to what we expected, or different to China's current needs), then it is probably due to a change in focus to conventional missiles (AShBM and the like) and spending on other weapons like SRBMS/IRBMs and LACMs, or maybe technical difficulties/cost.

Click to expand...