09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
Satellite imagery of the missile containers as they lined up for the parade, scaled up to GE measurements of DF31, scaled up to GE imagery of surroundings in same location and to street imagery df31 containers (to their trucks/tyres, which have published figures for their civilian variants) suggest to me the following figures:
DF-31A around 15.5 m long, 2.8 m wide.
JL-2 12.5 m long, 2.5 m wide.
Container is surely a bit wider than the missile itself, but for JL-2 we should still be talking about ~11 m long missile, around 2 meters wide.
Poseidon missile was 10.4 m long and 1.9 m wide.
Trident I was basically the same dimensions, off by perhaps a decimeter, and slightly heavier.
Trident II is 13.5 m long, 2.1 m wide. over 12 000
M45 missile is 11 m long, 1.9 m wide.
Range figures are, of course, always very hard to verify. So we don't know if the following data, usually regurgitated online is correct:
Poseidon 5900 km (with 10 warheads?) 4600 km (with 14?)
Trident I 7400 km (with how many warheads? 8? )
Trident II over 12 000 km (with how many warheads? 10-14?)
M45 6000 km (with 6 warheads?)
We have also claim on the Layner missile - doing 12 000 km with a light load (a few hundred kg?) or 8300 km with max load (2800 kg throw weight) Missile itself weight 40 tons. While a different kind of missile, it's still interesting to see how much of a range extension can a light load have, even if it is not directly comparable to other missiles.
Therefore, from all the above, my guess about JL-2 would be:
7000-8000 km range with single warhead, depending on Chinese warhead miniaturization tech maturity - if missile tech itself comparable to 1960s Poseidon. (M45, despite being newer seems to have roughly same capability to me)
9000-10 000 km range with single warhead, same as above - if missile tech comparable to 1979 Trident I
Multiple warheads are probably not used in JL-2 in my opinion, as throw weight is simply not sufficient, and range is likely the main focus.
With the above being said, and the fact we're seeing more 094 subs being built, I'd say it's likely some modified JL-2A is going to be used on those subs. Probably using newer tech used in JL-3, both missile and warhead tech. So we may very well see a 10 000 km ranged JL-2 eventually. Even if it's not in use today. But even today I'd say chances are JL-2 can reach over 8000 km with a single warhead.
DF-31A around 15.5 m long, 2.8 m wide.
JL-2 12.5 m long, 2.5 m wide.
Container is surely a bit wider than the missile itself, but for JL-2 we should still be talking about ~11 m long missile, around 2 meters wide.
Poseidon missile was 10.4 m long and 1.9 m wide.
Trident I was basically the same dimensions, off by perhaps a decimeter, and slightly heavier.
Trident II is 13.5 m long, 2.1 m wide. over 12 000
M45 missile is 11 m long, 1.9 m wide.
Range figures are, of course, always very hard to verify. So we don't know if the following data, usually regurgitated online is correct:
Poseidon 5900 km (with 10 warheads?) 4600 km (with 14?)
Trident I 7400 km (with how many warheads? 8? )
Trident II over 12 000 km (with how many warheads? 10-14?)
M45 6000 km (with 6 warheads?)
We have also claim on the Layner missile - doing 12 000 km with a light load (a few hundred kg?) or 8300 km with max load (2800 kg throw weight) Missile itself weight 40 tons. While a different kind of missile, it's still interesting to see how much of a range extension can a light load have, even if it is not directly comparable to other missiles.
Therefore, from all the above, my guess about JL-2 would be:
7000-8000 km range with single warhead, depending on Chinese warhead miniaturization tech maturity - if missile tech itself comparable to 1960s Poseidon. (M45, despite being newer seems to have roughly same capability to me)
9000-10 000 km range with single warhead, same as above - if missile tech comparable to 1979 Trident I
Multiple warheads are probably not used in JL-2 in my opinion, as throw weight is simply not sufficient, and range is likely the main focus.
With the above being said, and the fact we're seeing more 094 subs being built, I'd say it's likely some modified JL-2A is going to be used on those subs. Probably using newer tech used in JL-3, both missile and warhead tech. So we may very well see a 10 000 km ranged JL-2 eventually. Even if it's not in use today. But even today I'd say chances are JL-2 can reach over 8000 km with a single warhead.
Broccoli
Senior Member
They usually mention if missile is MIRV capable but apparently they didn't do that when JL-2 and DF-31AG rolled trough parade.
Regardless of the cost & high-tech put into the building of submarines, warships etc. the absolute tests of their reliabilities are their performance during actual battles against adversaries. Also importantly are experiences of Commanding Officers & their officers In handling these subs, ships, equipment etc. From past history, the US Navy/military have experienced officers who were engaged in several stand-offs with the Soviet ships & subs etc. Hopefully these actual experiences are being passed on to present-day officers. Where China is concerned, perhaps the Russians could have most likely trained the Chinese in sea-warfare which unlike China’s guerrilla-land battles, the PLA-N lacked the experience.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
I think SSBNs or nuclear missiles can always be considered "trouble". And it is rare to see two SSBNs of the same type in one picture, especially for PLAN.
Please don't try to dampen the modest enthusiasm for this rather rare picture with that level of discourse.