China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Discussion in 'Strategic Defense' started by peace_lover, Nov 4, 2005.

  1. FORBIN
    Offline

    FORBIN Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    11,686
    Likes Received:
    20,710
    The " claims " are for 16

     
  2. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,190
    Likes Received:
    8,480
    They show it at parade and any weapon shown on the parade is operational!. Anyway here isHenri K take of recent shooting of 20 missile to simulate attack against THAAD and other facility in Japan and Korea
    http://www.eastpendulum.com/quand-l...ulent-une-attaque-contre-le-thaad-et-les-f-22

    On the eve of its military parade at the Zhurihe training center, which took place on July 30, the Chinese army had conducted a gigantic shooting exercise covering half of the country. An event we studied in the dossier " From the sea to the desert, a gigantic exercise of the Chinese army "), without being able to specify the types of weapons used.

    But according to US government sources , relayed by The Diplomat in an article published on 3 August, no less than 20 ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, three different models, as well as HQ-6 type anti-aircraft batteries , HQ-16 and HQ-22 from the Army and the Chinese Air Force, were employed in the exercise. Models simulating a THAAD anti-ballistic defense site and F-22 stealth fighter jets would also have been identified.

    Among these missiles, according to the same US sources, there are four DF-26C IRBMs capable of carrying nuclear or conventional charges to attack targets on the ground or at sea over a distance of about 4,000 km, ten MRBM DF-16A d A range of less than 2,000 km and six cruise missiles DF-10A .

    All these missiles participated in the parade the next day.

    [​IMG]
    The MRBM DF-16

    [​IMG]
    The IRBM DF-26 TELs

    [​IMG]
    In the background, the TELs of the cruise missile DF-10A

    However, it seems unlikely that all this arsenal representing tons of explosive is dedicated solely to the attack against two types of targets, even in an approach of the attack by saturation. For example, it is oversized and less economical to use DF-26s to attack a THAAD site, whereas cruise missiles appear to be more suitable and effective against this type of fixed ground targets, especially with regard to the mode of attack. Operation of THAAD.

    So among all the no-fly zones reported on the day of the exercise, which ones would correspond to which missiles, and what would be the targets targeted by each one of them?

    After analyzing, in particular the duration of each of these zones, the closed altitudes and the typical characteristics of the missiles in question, here is our first assumption :

    [​IMG]
    The air and maritime areas closed during the Chinese army's shooting drill on July 29 (Image: East Pendulum)

    [​IMG]
    The characteristics of the forbidden zones of overflying and navigation during the exercise of July 29 (Image: East Pendulum)

    For this exercise which lasted in total about 3h30 at sea as on the mainland, the Chinese army would first deploy its fighter planes in the north-west to secure the airspace (② and ③).

    Two air combat drills (⑤) were reported to have taken place from the center of Zhurihe, between which the DF-26 ballistic missiles were fired from the Gobi Desert (⑥, ⑦ and ⑧) Approximately 1,600 km, followed by the attack salvo of the ten short-range DF-16 ballistic missiles fired from Zhurihe (⑨ and ⑩) for a maximum flight of 1,000 km.

    This seems to simulate ballistic missile launches under ground anti-aircraft coverage, to protect units of Chinese rocket forces and their TELs from enemy air raids.

    At the same time that the DF-16s were launched, the six DF-10 cruise missiles would also leave their tubes at targets located at 700 km (⑪).

    It will therefore be noted that all ballistic and cruise missiles have been used at only 50% of their effective range.

    In order, the Chinese army would have proceeded as follows:

    1. Securing airspace throughout shooting, simulating fighting to achieve air superiority
    2. Anti-aircraft fight against possible air raids, such as drone strikes or enemy cruising missiles
    3. Strikes against US naval carrier groups deployed around Chinese coasts by long-range DF-26s
    4. Neutralization of strategic sites such as THAAD in South Korea and Japan, plus some ports and air bases by short-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles
    Potentially targeted sites would thus be not only the new deployment site of the South Korea THAAD, installed on a golf course near the town of Gimcheon, as well as the two Osan airbases in South Korea and Kadena in Japan, where the F-22s of the US Airforce are stationed, as well as the ports, air bases and especially the naval aircraft around their aircraft carriers of the 7th fleet of the US Navy.

    This exercise would therefore reflect the efforts of the Chinese Army in recent years to establish an A2 / AD (Anti-Access / Area-Denial) capability within a radius of 3,000 km around its coasts and borders, To consider together with the increasingly frequent exits of Chinese bombers and electronic warplanes, which regularly cross the first chain of islands to the south and north of the island of Taiwan.

    It may also be a warning to the US military to deter its use of military assets around the Korean peninsula, a scenario deemed inadmissible by senior Chinese leaders.

    To be continued.
     
    #2282 Hendrik_2000, Aug 13, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2017
    bluewater2012, N00813, delft and 5 others like this.
  3. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,190
    Likes Received:
    8,480
    Martian use to be active in this forum but he got pissed off and left He is a good forummer He is still active in PakDef
    Too many people in this forum underestimate the Chinese nuclear stockpile because China doesn't publish their stockpile
    But here is what he think which only make sense. So in other word in 37 years there is no additional warhead It just NONSENSE!

    [​IMG]
    I think it's hilarious that the Pentagon estimate of China's total thermonuclear warheads hasn't budged since about 1990. The Pentagon keeps repeating the falsehood that China only has 200-250 thermonuclear warheads.

    Since 1990, China has modernized the DF-5A ICBM into DF-5B 10-MIRV ICBMs. That's a 10-fold jump in the number of thermonuclear warheads per DF-5 missile. Yet, there is no spike in the chart to reflect the 10-MIRV upgrade of China's DF-5A into DF-5B ICBMs.

    China introduced the DF-31 and DF-31A 3-MIRV ICBMs into service in 2006-2007. Once again, there is no spike in the chart to show the increase in Chinese thermonuclear warhead total.

    Last year, we saw China deploy brigades of DF-41 ICBMs in northeast China and Tibet province. Each DF-41 ICBM carries 10 MIRVs. The Pentagon's annual report on Chinese military power kept repeating the claim of 250 Chinese thermonuclear warheads (which is basically unchanged from 1990).

    Also, China increased the number of Type 094 SSBNs from two to four. Once again, the Pentagon ignored the increase in Chinese JL-2 8-MIRV SLBMs.

    Last week, we saw China parade 16 DF-31AG 5-MIRV ICBMs. Popular Science says there are more DF-31AG ICBMs, because China is on a nuclear build-up. Chinese military experts have said that China intends to reach parity in thermonuclear weapons with the United States. China has been modernizing its nuclear forces for 40 years. Yet, the Pentagon keeps claiming that China's total thermonuclear warheads hasn't budged from 250 for three decades.

    You get to decide whether your eyes are lying or the Pentagon is lying. Are the pictures of China's DF-5B ICBMs, DF-31A ICBMs, DF-31AG ICBMs, DF-41 ICBMs, and JL-2 SLBMs all fake? If you believe the pictures of Chinese ICBMs are real and there are also pictures of Chinese ICBM launches (and there is an old video of a Chinese DF-5 ICBM launch into the South China Sea) then China's total thermonuclear warheads is NOT 250.

    Here is some more of his thinking even when you assume one DF41 has 3 warhead it is still a lot of warhead 4 X 12 X 3=144 war head

    There are pictures of four brigades of DF-41 ICBMs in China (Heilongjiang, Henan, Xinjiang, and Tibet Provinces).

    I saw the video of the DF-41 ICBM in Heilongjiang. I also saw picture(s) of the DF-41 ICBM on the Tibetan Province plateau.

    Each brigade of Chinese ICBMs contains 12 missiles.

    4 DF-41 ICBM brigades x 12 ICBMs per brigade x 10 MIRVs per DF-41 ICBM = 480 thermonuclear warheads

    China's DF-41 ICBMs alone is double the Pentagon estimate of 250 total Chinese thermonuclear warheads.
     
    perfume, bluewater2012, delft and 3 others like this.
  4. tidalwave
    Offline

    tidalwave Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Likes Received:
    778
    Don't worry, once China fields 6 or more 096 SSBN or nuclear capable stealth bomber, Pentagon will dramatically up China stockpiles.
    Pentagon only respect China once it has an admirable delivery platforms.
    Otherwise, it would just cast China into north korean , Pakistan level category.

    The 250 number is obviously an intention to disrespect/discredit China.
     
    perfume likes this.
  5. Lethe
    Offline

    Lethe Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2014
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    775
    China has been very sensible in restraining the size of its nuclear stockpile whilst modernising delivery platforms, guidance systems, etc. Look at the enormous bill the US is facing to regenerate its nuclear capabilities over the next 15 years (up to $1tn by some estimates) and one can see the wisdom of China's approach.
     
  6. Equation
    Offline

    Equation Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    9,698
    Likes Received:
    10,377
    Make that $2 Trillion over the next 15 years as cost over runs, inflation, and the rising value of the dollar creeps up. o_O:eek:
     
    perfume, KIENCHIN and antiterror13 like this.
  7. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    473
    Likes Received:
    333
    It seems that there is a cultural trend with the way every U.S Administration, U.S Congress or U.S Senate has been behaving these 75 years. The culture of borrowing money with no-limit. America has a national debt of $19 Trillion dollars. It is perhaps the only way America could afford the highest military budget, which is larger than the next top 7 countries budget combined. This is a perpetual spiral that America finds itself in. To be a Global Super Power, means it has to spend more than anyone on its military. To spend more than anyone else on earth, It must borrow more and more and more. This is an irresponsible, reckless and illogical behavior. And after reunification of Germany and the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been no justification for America to have it's military to be based in Europe. Of course such a large presence of American military in Europe and around other parts of the world, does cost money and a lot of it.

    For America to be spending $1 Trillion on the updating of it's nuclear arsenal, gives the impression of a man gambling uncontrollably. And one is more than likely to gamble like that, if it's not his own money (rather borrowed).
     
    plawolf, jonnochan, Yodello and 4 others like this.
Loading...

Share This Page