China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

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

  1. SamuraiBlue
    Offline

    SamuraiBlue Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    2,071
    Likes Received:
    1,964
    You can test an implosion device without actually detonating nuclear material if you have enough data to create a simulation. Just stick in sensors to collect data and compare them with past data.
    Basically if you have a strong and fast enough implosion that is spread out evenly through out the implosion sphere then you can theoretically lower the amount of reaction material.

    The US have switched to simulated blast to design their nuclear arsenal a long time ago.
     
    #2641 SamuraiBlue, Aug 8, 2018
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2018
    Yodello, Figaro and antiterror13 like this.
  2. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,203
    Likes Received:
    284
    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...-nuclear-arms-race-us-and-russia-experts-warn
    This is for to improve/develop o the thermonuclear stage of the warheads :
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282546162_Overview_of_pulsed_power_researches_at_CAEP
     
  3. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,203
    Likes Received:
    284
    Any country developing thermonuclear weapons has its own Z machine, but those not using water lines had long rising pulses (for example 800ns in the Sphinx, the French machine at Gramat). In the UK, the Magpie[17] machine was situated at the Imperial Collegeunder control of Malcolm Haines.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_Pulsed_Power_Facility
    The above link gives parameters for the Chinese/USA Z-pinch machine.
    USA machine vs Chinese:
    USA : 18 million ampere , 100 ns ,after refurbishment 28 million ampere , Roentgen 2.7 MJ
    CHina :10 million ampere , 90 ns , 0.5 MJ Roentgen

    I think neither of these machines are used for weapon development, that should be a restricted, controlled machine.

    They need this machine to test the behaviour of materials in the bomb, during the phases of explosion, without detonating a bomb.
     
  4. DaTang cavalry
    Offline

    DaTang cavalry Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2014
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    408
    Taking about China type 32 ballistic missile test submarine "Great Wall - 201" recently appeared in DL harbour, it's possible prepare for testing lunch JL-3 missiles.

     
    N00813, davidau and mr.bean like this.
  5. Totoro
    Offline

    Totoro Captain
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,327
    Likes Received:
    1,126
    Recent US report on Chinese military said China's ICBM arsenal numbers 75 to 100 missiles. They included DF-4 in it. For comparison, Kristensen's tally is 86.

    The report also mentions expanding nuclear delivery role for the H-6 fleet, including cruise missiles and possibly an airborne launched ballistic missile.
     
    N00813 likes this.
  6. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,288
    Likes Received:
    3,482
    It seems a bit odd that the H-6 would be flagged for shifting towards a nuclear delivery role in the DoD report without a corresponding indication or announcement on the Chinese side, given the point of such shifts is to change deterrence calculus, and to do that you need to send some kind of unambiguous signal.
     
    N00813 and PanAsian like this.
  7. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,519
    Likes Received:
    16,298
    Tbh I consider many of the DoD reports claims to be doubtful. Some are out of date, some are just derived from random news reports and some are both.

    Some information such as organizational structure, administration etc in the report can be quite good, but in terms of reporting actual state of military equipment and system capabilities and developments I think there are some domains that leave a lot to be desired.
     
    N00813, PanAsian, taxiya and 2 others like this.
  8. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,288
    Likes Received:
    3,482
    I mean, you and I are on the same page here, but I think it’s worth noting these kinds of discrepancies just so we have specifics to point to when critiquing these reports.
     
  9. Totoro
    Offline

    Totoro Captain
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,327
    Likes Received:
    1,126
    I do agree that the DoD report is most likely made up by people with no real security clearance or access to proper US intelligence, relying mostly on publicly available data. Some stuff are blatantly repeated year after year and are very much out of date. However, real worth of the report comes from the gravity of its source. For some stuff, when even the report mentions them, it means they've progressed far beyond speculation and are basically a fact. Of course, there are those other stuff which may be plain wrong, and it's important (and very hard sometimes) to differentiate the two.

    The report did not say PLAAF was shifting H6's role to nuclear one but expanding its roles to include nuclear roles. For all we know, old H6 may have never lost the nuclear role. So this may point out merely to H6K being integrated to carry nuclear bombs. However, it may very also mean testing of nuclear tipped cruise missiles is progressing. There may not have been any mention of that from the Chinese side if it's work in progress. Plus, PLA may regard those as tactical nukes and may not see them as crucial part of deterrence. Just as the Russians and US (especially recently with the new proposal of more tactical nukes) also rely on tactical nuke weapons.

    Since we're talking about the report, it also mentions 6 093B attack subs, but then says 5 SSN subs are in service. (also this may be the first "proper source" mentioning there are 6 093 built?) So they seem to believe (for what it's worth) that all 091 subs are retired and that the sixth 093 has not been commissioned yet. They also distinguish just two types, the initial two 093 and four of what they call 093A. They do also mention 093B, as "future subvariant to carry cruise missiles, to come by mid 2020s" So are they suggesting there will be several more 093 before 095 comes online? Actually, they do not mention 095 at all. (they did mention it in previous reports!) So have they switched their nomenclature from 095 to 093B?
     
    PanAsian likes this.
  10. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,519
    Likes Received:
    16,298
    I noticed that as well, but my rationale -- and I might be beating a dead horse here -- is that discrepancy and others in the report are a result of not being careful and any such obvious mistakes or discrepancies from what we otherwise know can be occam's razored as a result of poor sourcing rather than a reflection of the reports having access to more privileged information than what we do.
    DoD reports are neat curios to read when they come out, but are largely useless in providing any reliable information in new weapons developments or the manner in which they have been fielded.
     
    N00813 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page