China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Discussion in 'Strategic Defense' started by homeless, Mar 3, 2006.

  1. manqiangrexue
    Offline

    manqiangrexue Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    1,134
    Wait, is this true? I'm thinking DF-41 can cover the whole of the US? So can later variants of DF-31?
     
    antiterror13, Equation and perfume like this.
  2. antiterror13
    Offline

    antiterror13 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Did I say "it has to be proprtional to GDP" ? ... it was statement from yourself, not me :mad:

    Very obvious GDP is a huge factor when you want to decide something big/expensive ... not the only factor obviously
     
    Equation likes this.
  3. Hyperwarp
    Offline

    Hyperwarp Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    2,433
    That is true for the old DF-31. In fact the DF-31 is more of a regional deterrent. But the DF-31A/31B have a range of 11,000+ km.

    The illustrations below mark the coverage from the very edge of the Chinese coast but even if the DF-31A/31B were placed deep inside China they still can reach a fair potion of the ConUS if not all.

    ICBM-Coverage-1.jpg

    ICBM-Coverage-2.jpg
     
  4. Hyperwarp
    Offline

    Hyperwarp Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    2,433
    Here is an estimate of the DF-31A/31B range reduced to 9000 km and 10000 km:

    ICBM-Coverage-mod1.jpg
     
    Equation and manqiangrexue like this.
  5. SanWenYu
    Offline

    SanWenYu New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    157
    No you didn't say that exactly but I think you implied it when saying China's GDP today is 65x of that in 1980s...
     
  6. antiterror13
    Offline

    antiterror13 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    very interesting logic ... where did you learn that logic?
     
  7. SanWenYu
    Offline

    SanWenYu New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    157
    Alright, perhaps I was misunderstanding you? My point is that China does not need more nuclear weapons for being richer.
     
    antiterror13 likes this.
  8. antiterror13
    Offline

    antiterror13 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    cool, but a lot easier for China to develop/produce them when China is richer and more advanced, no?
     
  9. SanWenYu
    Offline

    SanWenYu New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    157
    Yes. The question is whether PLA really need many more nuclear weapons now.
     
    Equation likes this.
  10. antiterror13
    Offline

    antiterror13 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Personally I would say yes (based on limited info of Chinese nuke), 260 is way too few. I'd say minimum 1,000 ... who knows China may already have that many ... which I wouldnt be surprised
     
    Equation likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page