China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

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

  1. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,361
    Likes Received:
    25,320
    Right the orbat is a bit old and does not account for the latest and greatest missile you can add 2X DF41 brigade and maybe 2 X DF31A
    Don't know how many missile in one brigade using low number of 12 you see there are at least 11 or 12 brigades so roughly 150 missile but does not counted MIRVED warhead and JL2 series
    Assuming 5 warhead per mirved missile that is 120 warhead add 3X12X4 for JL2=144 warhead
    So you are talking about 300-400 warhead
     
    Equation, Josh Luo and antiterror13 like this.
  2. antiterror13
    Offline

    antiterror13 Colonel

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,051
    Likes Received:
    4,425
    and DF-31AG?
     
    Josh Luo and KIENCHIN like this.
  3. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,361
    Likes Received:
    25,320
    WEasel update the missile orbat

    Updated this with data from various sources. Items in yellow = particularly not verified.

    For launcher numbers refer below.
    https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-balance/2019/05/pla-rocket-force-trajectory
    ICBM - 12 per bde
    IRBM - 18 per bde
    MRBM - 12 per bde
    GLCM - 27 per bde

    Based on US DoD, there should be at least 2 more CJ-10 units not identified.

    upload_2019-5-27_10-21-59.png

    Here is the estimate for all Chinese missile and CM from Pentagon report
    upload_2019-5-27_10-23-55.png

    Number changes
    The most obvious launcher number changes are for ground-launched cruise missiles (GLCMs), which have in effect doubled, and those for intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs), which have nearly tripled. Launcher totals for intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) have both seen slight increases, whilst short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) launchers remain essentially static. The totals for the missiles themselves are even more diverse, including a five-fold increase in IRBMs and a potential decrease in MRBMs and SRBMs.

    What might be behind these adjustments? The missile changes are probably easier to explain than the launchers: the report appears to have shifted to a simpler, formula-based approach to calculating missile totals. For ICBMs, the report seems to now allocate one missile per launcher regardless of type; for IRBMs the multiple is 1–2 missiles per launcher, with 1–3 missiles for MRBM launchers and 3–6 for SRBMs and GLCMs. If such a change has indeed been adopted, the 2019 missiles totals are probably not directly comparable with their predecessors; a disappointment for open-source observers of the Rocket Force.

    Spec of CJ 10
    In the September 2014 edition of Joint Forces Quarterly, an article reportedly described CJ-10 as a subsonic missile with a range of more than 1,500 km and a 500 kg payload. The article attributes the missile having a guidance package using inertial navigation system, satellite navigation, Terrain Contour Matching, and a likely Digital Scene-Mapping Area Correlator for terminal guidance. Ships and ground transporter erector launchers were listed as launch platforms.[1]

    In 2013, the United States believes that the missile has a range of more than 1,500 km, and can potentially carry either conventional or nuclear payloads;[2] other sources claim the missile has ranges of 2,000 km (1,200 mi; 1,100 nmi),[16] or as much as 4,000 km (2,500 mi; 2,200 nmi).[17] In 2004, the CJ-10 was credited with a CEP of 10 m.[18]

    The YJ-100 is a subsonic anti-ship missile version of the CJ-10 with a range of 800 km (500 mi; 430 nmi). The missile can be air-launched by the H-6 bomber and fired from a vertical launch system of the Type 055 destroyer.[19] The YJ-100 will have an onboard radar and is potentially a counter to the American Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM).[20]

    Variant of CJ-10
    CJ-10K
    Air-launched version with a 1500 km range; may be carried by the Xian H-6K.[25]
    DF-10A
    Ground attack cruise missile.[25] Reportedly a stealthier, more accurate, version of the CJ-10.[15]
    "DH-2000"
    Supposedly a supersonic version of the DH-10A.[26]
    CJ-20
    Air-launched version of the CJ-10.[27] Reportedly been tested on the Xian H-6; each bomber may carry four missiles externally.[28]
    YJ-100
    Anti-ship missile version with an 800 km range, launched by H-6 bomber and Type 055 warship
     
    #2803 Hendrik_2000, May 27, 2019
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
    Yodello, KIENCHIN, PanAsian and 2 others like this.
  4. Lethe
    Offline

    Lethe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,073
    Likes Received:
    1,462
    This is a fantastic graph that communicates a clear narrative, i.e. of who started and escalated the nuclear arms race and how it was eventually brought under control.

    Indeed, I would argue that this narrative extends well beyond nuclear deterrence. The basic point is that power doesn't compromise or negotiate unless and until it has to, by encountering comparable or superior power.

    This is why the United States refused Japan access to the F-22 and why Japan is now pursuing the F-3 project with an eye to using it as leverage to gain access to F/A-XX. This is why the US walked away from the ABM treaty when it did. That the US does not yet credit China as an equal partner is the reason why arms control talks have yet to emerge, and also the reason why, at some point, they will. US media and institutions talk incessantly of the "threat" posed by China and Russia, but this view is grounded in a belief in the fundamental superiority of the United States, such that the resolution of these threats (and the restoration of America's righteous global hegemony) is held only to require the adoption of the correct policies. The United States still dreams of "putting China back in its box", it has scarcely begun to imagine, let alone seriously confront, the prospect of having to live alongside a nation as powerful as itself.
     
    #2804 Lethe, May 27, 2019
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
    Shaolian, N00813, Tam and 7 others like this.
  5. Josh Luo
    Offline

    Josh Luo Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2015
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    I remember visiting Yichun back in Fall 2017 and saw hundreds of PLA soldiers dressed in PLARF camouflage near the old railway station loading cargo onto a freight train. Now I finally know they are CJ-10 operators.
     
    Hendrik_2000 and KIENCHIN like this.
  6. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,361
    Likes Received:
    25,320
    Unmistakable warning
    After being postponed for 24 hours, a new Chinese test of strategic ballistic sea-ground missile (SLBM) seems to have taken place today very early in the morning. The craft took off from the Bohai Sea and flew west of China. An article is in preparation.
    From Henri blog
    Here is the video
    https://twitter.com/Defence_blog/st...o/iframe/twitter.min.html#1135115866352304130
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    New Chinese submarine-launched ballistic missile spotted on test in the Bohai Bay

    [​IMG]0

    The Chinese People’s Liberation Army-Navy successfully tested its next-generation of a submarine-launched ballistic missile on 2 June.

    According to several media reports, the Chinese navy launched a new submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), allegedly JL-3, in the Bohai Bay near the Shandong Peninsula at 4 hours 28 minutes in the morning on June 2, 2019.


    Tests of the new Chinese SLBM were spotted by numerous witnesses and fishermen.

    The JL-3 third-generation solid-fuelled missile, which must be used to equip the next-generation Chinese nuclear missile submarines, has an intercontinental range (up to 12-14 thousand km) and is capable of carrying up to ten independent warheads.

    Earlier, the Maritime Security Administration of Liaoning Province issued a navigation warning about the closing of the maritime zone for “military exercises” in the Bohai Bay area on June 2, 2019.

    According to Jane’s Missiles & Rockets, the JL-3 SLBM is intended to arm the next-generation Type 096 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) class, the first of which is expected to enter service in the late 2020s.

    The JL or Julang series – meaning “big wave” in Chinese – are intercontinental ballistic missiles designed for China’s nuclear-powered submarines, as part of the People’s Liberation Army strategy to extend the country’s nuclear deterrent capabilities from land to sea.

    https://defence-blog.com/news/new-c...VfauFngZaG0mYS0J_L9y3gThbT9VMWGfVNcr8i9-SyWf0
     
    Yodello, davidau, montyp165 and 3 others like this.
  7. DaTang cavalry
    Offline

    DaTang cavalry Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2014
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    400
  8. dawn_strike
    Offline

    dawn_strike New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    58
    Yodello and KIENCHIN like this.
  9. by78
    Offline

    by78 Colonel

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    4,172
    Likes Received:
    23,207
    Some high-resolution photos of the recent SLBM test launch...

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Equation and Hyperwarp like this.
  10. AssassinsMace
    Offline

    AssassinsMace Brigadier

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    7,624
    Likes Received:
    8,516
    Odd reading articles in the media writing about this test. Normally when something like this occurs, it'll be mistaken as a UFO and then later identified as a military test. This one it was identified as a military test first but then discounted as really a UFO. And it seems to originate from SCMP. And the logic how this is not a SLBM test... China wouldn't dare conduct a test during trade tensions with the US. Also it flew too short to be able to target Europe or the US. How do ICBMs target at all if they have to fly its supposed maximum range? Ever hear of a guidance system? It was the SCMP that also wrote that China's J-31 flying at Zhuhai wasn't stealthy because a US C-17 parked on the tarmac during the air show could see it on its radar... Or how about when China started building large number of submarines, one of their journalists wrote that no one was building submarines because the rest of the world saw them as obsolete. See, contrary to the stereotype that all Asians are smart, there are Asians that can be dumb as hell. Yeah and if it were aliens from another planet, why would their ship have such short range as concluded? Maybe they want to claim it's really the US using black project aircraft where the US is displaying they can molest China at will... but it has short range.
     
    Equation and Hendrik_2000 like this.
Loading...

Share This Page