China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

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

  1. azretonov
    Offline

    azretonov New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    51
    ATACMS is straight away a TBM/BRBM, thus not so comparable with these less tech intense solutions.

    According to the marketing manager of the Turkish missile maker, Roketsan at Eurosatory 2018, their combat-proven TRG-300 Tiger precision guided MLRS munition costs between $90K to $130K depending on the block model. Also note that; TRG-300 Tiger <- T-300 Hurricane <- WS-1B
     

    Attached Files:

  2. azretonov
    Offline

    azretonov New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    51
    I partially agree but a nuclear conflict at global sizes would automatically trigger & involve the other actors such as Russia and DPRK. So eventually no one would survive that, regardless of the initial belligerents.

    A steady increase in the arsenal would do just fine. And by limiting a maintenance-intense arsenal, China actually saves tremendous amount of money, which can be diverted to the more urgent needs, such as conventional power projection across the globe.
     
  3. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,860
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    Generally agree, but I think the key priorities are:

    1. Conventional Military Superiority in the Western Pacific. There's no point going for global power projection if your coastal China is not secure
    2. Domestic economic development
     
  4. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,860
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    The Turkish missiles have a smaller payload and a lot less range.
    But if I use them as a baseline, I get a maximum cost of $500K for a Chinese ATACMS equivalent.
     
  5. azretonov
    Offline

    azretonov New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    51
    Yes, that was my point. And since they are actually somewhat related, I believe the Turkish 300mm munition can be, at some degree, little bit more comparable with the Chinese 370mm munition. Can't say I feel good with the $500K price tag but I'm not equipped well enough to make accurate assumptions.
     
  6. Rachmaninov
    Offline

    Rachmaninov Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    248
    From Henri K on the DF-17

    http://www.eastpendulum.com/df-17-ce-que-lon-sait-de-cette-arme-hypersonique-chinoise

    And a google translation...

    We had known about it since January 2014, the date of its first test flight west of China, but we did not know at the time what it really is and for what purpose China launched its development in 2009. The Americans first gave him the name "WU-14" and then "DF-ZF", before revealing, in 2017, his official reference: DF-17.

    It is therefore exactly 10 years after the beginning of the program that China decided to present it to the public last Tuesday in Beijing, during a large military parade to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the People's Republic of China.

    Visually, the DF-17 looks like the combination of a single-stage ballistic missile and a "mini-shuttle", which is actually a hypersonic glider. The latter has a different form of maneuverable bi-conical heads of Chinese ballistic missile, but also the HTV-2 of the USAF or the AHW of the US Army.

    This is a kind of "Wing Body", a hybrid configuration called integrated fuselage, with a very large boom and four pivotable rear fins, all mounted on a TEL vehicle (Tractor-Rotor-Launcher)) 10 wheels, a priori 10 × 10 (①).

    The white paint on the forward tip of the craft seems to suggest the presence of radar guidance, which could be provided by Institute No. 38 of the CETC group if one correctly interprets an article published by the Chinese radar operator. According to China National Radio (CNR), the missile-glider, "using various guiding methods," has already "accurately destroyed several different target types in test shots" (②).

    While no technical details of DF-17 have yet been given today, the official presentation of this new member of the family of "Dong Feng" missiles (东风, "Eastern Wind" bed) emphasizes that a conventional load missile.

    "DF-17 is a new generation conventional weapon of short to medium range. Developed to conduct precision hits at all times, in multiple directions and from multiple angles, the system has many notable features such as shorter turnaround time, longer maneuvering distance, greater effective range, power greater strike force and greater penetration ability ".

    In Chinese military jargon, "short to medium range" for a ballistic missile actually corresponds to a range of between 1,000 and 3,000 km.

    Operational level, and still according to the official presentation of the parade, the sixteen TEL of DF-17 participating in the parade come from two different brigades of the Chinese Rocket Force, but both come from the same "Base" that had been led by Major General YANG Ye Gong (杨 业 功).

    This information clearly indicates that these two brigades equipped with DF-17 belong to Base No. 61, formerly Base No. 52, whose units are mainly deployed along the east coast of China, facing Taiwan, Japan and Japan. the peninsula of Korea.

    It is a "regional" weapon, just like the DF-11, the DF-15 and the DF-16 before it.

    It should be noted that Base No. 61 is the first entity of the Chinese Rocket Force to have conducted "ballistic missile salvage tests" and also passed "penetration tests at areas guarded by anti-missile systems. (③).

    After the official elements come now more "unofficial" information, which goes from the most wacky to the most denigrating, and it requires a long work of sorting and filtering to draw really useful elements.

    We learn for example from a source close to the group CASIC, yet competitor of the CCAC, manufacturer of the DF-17, that the new hypersonic weapon is "the cheapest" among the weapons of the Chinese rocket force that marched on October 1st. .

    If this sounds normal considering that most of the missiles shown on the parade are of the strategic order - MRBM DF-26, ICBM DF-31AG and DF-41, as well as SLBM JL-2 - it is still amazing that the DF-17 is more "economical" than the new DF-100 supersonic cruise missile.

    But if this is confirmed, then it will support some institutional texts according to which the DF-17 missile-carrier engine is focused on "high performance, low cost, and capable of mass production".

    As for the official announcement on the entry into service of the DF-17 in the first range units once the parade is completed, it is thought that it is an operational deployment (正式 列 装), after the validation shots (试验 定型) and transformation (换 型 转 训) were successfully conducted by the brigades in question.

    For the characteristics of the missile and the hypersonic glider, the most reasonable estimates give the following figures: A length of 14.4 meters for 14 tonnes at takeoff, including 1.4 tonnes for the planer head and the equipment compartment . The range is estimated at 1,700 km with a speed of 3,200 m / s at the end of the powered phase.

    And applying data revealed by US intelligence and relayed by our colleague Ankit Panda (see our file "DF-17, the world's first hypersonic glider gun" published in 2017) in formulas patented by the group CASC, including by researchers having been identified as the designer of the DF-17, we obtain a planing distance of about 1.438 km, for a fineness of 3, an almost equilibrium flight altitude 60 km from the ground and a terminal speed of 1.360 m / s.

    It is also not excluded that the hypersonic glider is equipped with some propulsion in the equipment compartment, but this remains to be confirmed.

    Finally, we can notice the relatively short duration between the beginning of the program in 2009 and the entry into service of the weapon system in 2019, a total of 10 years, including an intensive test phase between January 2014 and April 2016 where at least 7 trials were clearly identified and confirmed. This could be reflected on the one hand by the emergence of the vital need to have weapons that can counteract the anti-missile systems that are starting to mass on the first chain of islands, around China, and secondly by a clear positioning of the project which consists in rapidly providing an industrializable and usable product, by relying on technological achievements resulting from pre-study phases previously carried out.

    To a lesser extent, therefore, the DF-17 can be considered as a "Quick-win" and "Stop gap" weapon, to address problems of the mass deployment of American anti-missile systems in the region.
     
    Yodello and antiterror13 like this.
  7. LiBoHanse
    Offline

    LiBoHanse Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2017
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    3
    Well, my thought is, first, they are not covered and don't seem that you can even fit them with covers, and that is problematic, especially when considering that the rocket force have a lot of launch sites in desert / Gobi desert where they always get lot of floating sand. For the DF-26 drill video, you can try this
    you will see what the real missile look like and why they may need a sealing cover. Also, the parade is just to make the official debut to the people, the Americans already know the existence of WU-14 and its high successful rate. If that is still insufficient, this gif: [​IMG]
    likely showing the launch of DF-17 from its TEL in action is enough to assure people that it exist and is in service. Lastly, I don't really agree with the point that China and U.S. are likely to have a real conflict after 2016 south china sea crisis, in which both USN and PLAN entered "high combat readiness" ending with USN backing of with its CSGs(likely due to their CSGs' been located by mysterious methods, who knows?). More about that, you can check this link https://www.zhihu.com/question/275771161/answer/663350663
     
  8. LiBoHanse
    Offline

    LiBoHanse Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2017
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    3
    ok, my mistake, that GIF is actually df-21 from years ago.
     
  9. styx
    Offline

    styx Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    204
    the gif in my opinion if you look with attention exibhit an asymmetrical Reentry vehicle compatible with df-17 hypersonic glider
     
  10. Totoro
    Offline

    Totoro Captain
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    1,128
    https://twitter.com/nukestrat/status/1182314198577160194

    I've tried to calculate the dimensions of the missile containers using this image. Of course, resolution is low so some figures aren't precise. Especially width of containers. (I am getting 9 pixels for JL2, 10 pixels for DF31AG and 11 pixels for DF41) So measurements may easily be off by a few decimeters or even close to half a meter.

    Anyway, my measurements are these:
    JL2: 12.5 by 2.5 meters
    DF-31AG: 15.5 by 2.8 meters
    DF-41: 18.5 by 3.1 meters
    DF-26 missile length (not container) 16 m

    I really wish I had satellite images of DF-31 and DF-31A for comparison, as well. Sadly, I don't. Unless someone can help me out and provide GE coordinates or something...
     
    antiterror13 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page