PLA missile defense system

Engineer

Major
In essence, China can "borrow" the Russian nuclear arsenal in the final exchange against the U.S. The Russians are not going to let the U.S. become the de facto superpower survivor.
No need. The US will do that itself, as it will not go down without dragging everybody to the grave.

Back on topic, the recent test of missile defense from the US has failed. This serves as a timely reminder to everyone to not put so much faith into missile defense:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Martian

Senior Member
And by now I believe everyone is quite clear that China do not just have silo based ICBM (I believe I did write it out in one of my posts).

So there...

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse. However, for the sake of completeness, I want to point out that "It is likely that a number of PRC cargo ships carry CSS-9 missiles to act as a sea-based nuclear response/strike force."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"The CSS-9 is an effective strategic system that has significantly increased the PRC’s nuclear strike capabilities. Though the PRC’s land-based systems are unable to directly threaten much beyond the west coast of the United States, the CSS-9 is a modern ICBM system that threatens Russia and India, two major PRC rivals. However, the CSS-9 missile system can easily reach all of the US with the placement aboard cargo ships disguised as shipping containers. The self-contained launch system could easily be placed on a PRC ship and launched against targets in the US. It is likely that a number of PRC cargo ships carry CSS-9 missiles to act as a sea-based nuclear response/strike force. Similarly, these containers could be smuggled into and stored in PRC controlled warehouses throughout the Americas. The modular nature of these modern missile systems makes them extremely dangerous since they do not need to follow tradition missile tactics. Even with modern satellite systems, the combination of hidden road and cross-country mobile launchers, missile silos, and rail/ship launchers make it impossible to destroy most of these missiles prior to launch."
 

Harley-One

Banned Idiot
It was only in the late 60s that she managed to do it... but also at around that time, the country is very poor and so it is quite difficult to get to build large amount of nuclear missiles.
Actually, according to accounts given by Chinese scientific circles which worked on the miniaturization program, it wasn't until China got the super computer from the States that she finally decoded the W88 secret. This would be the Clinton years.

But, in the 70's, China has to make precautionary measures against the Russians because Brezhnev was more of a threat to China than Americas was. Russia already have mobile short, medium, and intermediate range missiles spotted throughout the Chinese Siberian border. I suspect our inventory of missile delivery systems were around a dozen but we did have A-5's which can slip through to other parts of Russia.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I suspect we should have roughly 50 warheads (missile and bomber deliverable) by the end of 70's and tripled and quadrupled that by end of 80's, and from there, it should have multiplied exponentially at a rate of 150 initially to a max of 200 annually up till the end of Bushy's term...

All the posts had been relying on a retired general. My common sense question is... why are we relying on a retired general and not the official government statement that they could destroy cities in USA?
Chinese, by nature, are a very modest people. This General IMO sort of served as the voice of the decision makers in Beijing. This way, Beijing don't get the craps. The General does. Chinese General, too, are afraid of firing squats because Chinese Generals are not Gods... Mao and Mao's-likes are :D:D:D
 

Harley-One

Banned Idiot
Following is a conservative figure:

简氏 (Jane's) :印度引火上身!中国核武器足以摧毁整个世界

印度一再激怒中国 这是非常危险的 它似乎忘了中国不仅是个军事大国 而且手握核武器

/来自中华网社区 club.china.com/

许多分析家试图从数量上来推断中国的核力量,但中国政府和军方一直避免发布任何这方面的信息。 

仅是个军事大国 而且手握核武器

许多分析家试图从数量上来推断中国的核力量,但中国政府和军方一直避免发布任何这方面的信息。 

一名英国高级外交官对此给出了一个最佳建议:“不要理会中国所说的,而要注意它所做的。”以此为基础,或许有助于从一个全新的角度评估中国的做法。 

据信,中国在1964年到1996年期间总共进行了45-47次[核试验]

  从1990年5月到1996年7月,中国进行了12次核试验,所有都是在地下进行的。中国随后于1996年9月签署了《全面禁止核试验条约》。据信,中国人此后没有进行过核武器试验,但可能继续进行次亚临界条件试验。 
  中国政府没有发布任何有关高浓缩铀或钚的生产或储存的清晰数据。不过,有报道显示,中国在1987年高浓缩铀储量达23吨时停止了生产,并在1991年停止生产钚,当时中国拥有钚储量4吨。如果这些数字是正确的,那么中国可以用这些核原料造出1000枚核弹头。 

  评估北京对可信核威慑力的看法可以通过考察中国可能要威慑的国家来衡量。从长远来看,法国、印度、俄罗斯、英国和美国可能是中国的目标。 

  假设用9万吨至100万吨当量的空爆核弹头对首都和大城市实施打击,从中可估算出造成毁灭性破坏可能需要多少枚弹头。  

  我们可以粗略地认为:对付美国可能需要100枚,对付俄罗斯需要60枚,对付印度是30枚,对付法国和英国是20枚。这就意味着中国必须拥有210枚核弹头能经受住敌人的先发制人打击


  考虑到在首次打击中的损失,以及对方弹道导弹防御系统的拦截,战略核弹头的数量可能要增加一倍,达到420枚。这种战略核弹头将需要较低当量的战术核弹头———用于短程弹道导弹、巡航导弹和战斗机———作支持,这部分数量较少,150枚就足够了。 

  考虑到可能出现核弹头设计或发射系统的重大缺陷,一定数量的核弹头储备是需要的,这可能需要150枚。

  我们现在得出一个估算:中国需要大约720枚核弹头才能满足其长远需要。  

  分析家们对于中国人民解放军拥有的在役弹道导弹和核弹头数量存在诸多分歧。最低的估计是认为中国军队现役弹道导弹和核弹头数量为90枚左右,另有40枚适于通过战斗机发射的弹头。 

  这种估算是基于这种看法,即每一枚导弹只携带一枚核弹头,并且“东风-31”型导弹尚未服役。  

  但是,最初报道中国进行多弹头分导再入式飞行器的飞行试验是在1986年,中国自1981年就已进行了一箭多星的卫星发射。一个能把人送入太空的国家不太可能没有掌握与多弹头分导再入式飞行器相关的技术。 

  最近披露的中国弹道导弹是“东风-25”,中国人称它能携带一枚或三枚弹头,没有理由认为这是不可能的。  

  中国射程更远的导弹可配备分导式多弹头,这将改变对核弹头的预测。

  今后10年,随着东风-31、东风-31A、东风-25以及巨浪-2导弹的服役,中国拥有的核弹头的数量将大大增加,中国核威慑力的存活率也将大为提高。如果说当前中国的核弹头实际数量是400到500枚左右,并且今后10年将增加到700到 800枚左右,我不会感到意外

:D
 

Infra_Man99

Banned Idiot
Missile defense becoming increasingly important:

Conventional "Prompt Global Strike" Weapons
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I recall this forum discussing this topic before, but I would like to bring it up again.

Obviously, there are tremendous benefits and dangers of using ballistic missiles with conventional warhreads and fast, long-range missiles with conventional warheads to attack other nation's real estate. Using ballistic missiles and fast, long-range missiles to attack enemies away from their land MAY not cause nuclear retaliation.
 

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
Obviously, there are tremendous benefits and dangers of using ballistic missiles with conventional warhreads and fast, long-range missiles with conventional warheads to attack other nation's real estate. Using ballistic missiles and fast, long-range missiles to attack enemies away from their land MAY not cause nuclear retaliation.

Although China had always pledge not to be the first one to use nuclear weapon. However when an opposition or enemy (if you will) launched an attack on China with the intention of destroying the current government, do you seriously think that the Chinese or whoever will not retaliate using their nuclear arsenal...

It was like this... afterall they are going to be killed, why don't they pull someone with them? And that is why nuclear deterrence is so important, it would cause the enemy (whoever that was) to think twice when attacking China mainland with whatever arsenal - be it nuclear or conventional.

And if Harley-One was right about the nuclear arsenal of China, then I believe against large and traditional adversary, China really do not have anything to worried about. They have all the stuffs to hold the hand of these adversaries.

The only adversaries that China had to be aware of is the smaller and non-traditional oppositions, and most don't have ballistic missiles so ABM is basically not really important against these people.

The only nation that I can seriously think that the ABM might be useful against was Taiwan and thats it.
 

Harley-One

Banned Idiot
:)


With MAD proving to be a pain in the butt for all who possesses nuclear weapons hence rendering it obsolete and useless unless of the very last resort, new ideas and concepts in weapons of mass destruction is starting to take on a new twist... "Prompt Global Strike" (C-PGS) system as they call it are starting to make wave in the net, at least the ideas of it anyway... But, by Golly, how can one tell which missile is armed with nukes and which one is actually armed with conventional warheads...

US's strike threat catches China off guard
By Peter J Brown

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The United States plans to unveil later this decade a new conventional "Prompt Global Strike" (C-PGS) system. It will enable the US to instantly carry out a massive conventional attack anywhere in the world in an hour or less.


:)
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Correct. That is why I keep preaching about striking your enemy first before they could strike you. Always being on the defensive would only means that the war will be fought in your land and water... and it will be your people (normal citizens) to be hurt and die... while nothing really back would happen to your opponents and the real culprits of the whole thing.

I'd prefer, "I'll do what you do!"
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Just a quick aside, but does anyone join me in wondering if America's desire to build and field the C-PGS system is actually an implicit admission that the weapons platform previously tasked with such missions; ie the Carrier Strike Group, is indeed now obsolete against a rival major power?
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Thread open. Obey the rules of this forum when posting. I've deleted several post. Post your negative comments about any nation in a gentlemanly manner. Sampanvikings comments are quite well done as are others... and remember;

FORUM RULES: Things to Remember Before Posting, important, please read!

# Posts that are offensive to any ethnic, racial or religious groups or government. This isn't political forum.

# Posts that prompt hatred between different countries or groups of people.

Thread open.

bd popeye super moderator

 
Top