China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread

[Jason_]

Says "more silos than missiles" strategy.

To force adversary to expend a large number of their own warheads to target every single silo. It's cost effective since adding silos is much much cheaper than an adversary needing to add many more warheads to target them all. And the Uncertainty factor to complicate adversary's first-strike.

More silos than missiles is a stupid strategy that no country ever used.

 

[Blitzo]

LoW is still in development and won't be implemented until enough EW satellites are placed in each orbit (work is being done).

And the missile silos are not likely going to be filled with only DF-31BJs either, and at least some of them are likely to await new larger silo based missiles, so it all works out ..


The point is that there's no reason to view their long term strategy for their silos as one for a shell game

 

[RoastGooseHKer]

That's the shell game argument, which is not infeasible, but at the same time there is no reason to believe that filling all the silos in the long term won't be done.

After all, these silos do not exist merely as a second strike system but also as part of a launch on alert system before opposition warheads touch down. Large scale throw weight is important for that regard.

And they also function as a “sponge” to absorb a significant portion of adversary’s first strike, so there isn’t the necessity of putting MIRVs or expensive missiles/warhead for SILO-based strategic weapons. They are meant to used or lost anyway.

 

[BoraTas]

Says "more silos than missiles" strategy.

To force adversary to expend a large number of their own warheads to target every single silo. It's cost effective since adding silos is much much cheaper than an adversary needing to add many more warheads to target them all. And the Uncertainty factor to complicate adversary's first-strike.

Even more guaranteed way to force the adversary to target all the silos: Filling all of them with real missiles

People who assume silos won't be filled are coping. 300-400 is not that big of a number. The famous MPS basing of the MX had 4600 shelters planned. And it was famously called a Rube Goldberg scheme by Reagan

LoW is still in development and won't be implemented until enough EW satellites are placed in each orbit (work is being done).

There are enough early warning satellites already. The Arctic, Indian Ocean, North America, and the Pacific have 7/24 surveillance.

 

[Kalec]

Nothing new or unexpected, but some corroboration that the silos are getting filled. The exact missile might be or not be the DF-31 but still a bit of news.

__________

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Exclusive: China likely loaded more than 100 ICBMs in silo fields, Pentagon report says​

China is likely to have loaded more than 100 intercontinental ballistic missiles across three silo fields and has no desire for arms control talks, according to a draft Pentagon report which highlighted Beijing's growing military ambitions.
In particular, the report said that China had likely put in more than 100 solid-fuelled DF-31 ICBMs in silo fields close to China's border with Mongolia - the latest in a series of silo sites. The Pentagon had previously reported the existence of the fields but not the number of missiles loaded.
...

Reminded me that we've still haven't got the CMPR yet this year. Wonder what this pentagon report is. N

Based off the information from Reuters about CMPR, I would ask for a refund if I was in the U.S. Congress.

The report said China's nuclear warhead stockpile was still in the low 600s in 2024, which reflected "a slower rate of production when compared to previous years."
But the report added that China's nuclear expansion was ongoing and it was on track to have over 1,000 warheads by 2030. (CMPR 2025)

In 2023, Beijing continued its rapid nuclear expansion. DoD estimates the PRC has surpassed 600 operational nuclear warheads in its stockpile as of mid-2024 and will have over 1,000 operational nuclear warheads by 2030, much of which will be deployed at higher readiness levels. The PRC will continue growing its force through at least 2035. (CMPR 2024)

Hmmm I mean they just pull out the same data from last year's report?

In particular, the report said that China had likely put in more than 100 solid-fuelled DF-31 ICBMs in silo fields close to China's border with Mongolia - the latest in a series of silo sites. The Pentagon had previously reported the existence of the fields but not the number of missiles loaded. (CMPR 2025)

It is already obvious that they loaded over 100 of DF-31 into the silo if anyone does math on the "600 warheads" remark last year. Also it is because China may have produced just around 150-200 DF-31 series in total for the past decades. My guess is that they loaded some mobile DF-31 into the silo under the designation of DF-31BJ and mobilize the TEL fleet with newer DF-41/61.

Beijing was refining its military options to take Taiwan by "brute force," the report said, adding that one option could include strikes 1,500-2,000 nautical miles from China. (CMPR 2025)

It is just the sheer number of DF-26/27s which we have seen from satellite image. Nothing new.

 

[Tomboy]

It is already obvious that they loaded over 100 of DF-31 into the silo if anyone does math on the "600 warheads" remark last year. Also it is because China may have produced just around 150-200 DF-31 series in total for the past decades. My guess is that they loaded some mobile DF-31 into the silo under the designation of DF-31BJ and mobilize the TEL fleet with newer DF-41/61.

DF-31BJ iirc was larger than roadmobile DF-31 variants, so I don't think they are capable of being directly loaded into silos or modified to the BJ standard.

 

[Kalec]

DF-31BJ iirc was larger than roadmobile DF-31 variants, so I don't think they are capable of being directly loaded into silos or modified to the BJ standard.

The canister is 15% larger but not sure about the missile inside.

 

[AndrewS]

41 is not silo based, I think you meant 5C alleged to have 12 warheads besides 31BJ.

And just a reminder not all vehicles/silos will have warheads some are decoys.

5C is liquid fuelled? So not a good choice for a silo-based system.

My understanding was that DF-45 is the silo-based version of the DF-41?

But my point is that if China has no plans to put 10 warheads on each missile, they might as well use a smaller and cheaper DF-31 instead.

 

[AndrewS]

Indeed, I expect the PLARF to have 1000 silo-based DF-41/DF-61 level missiles by the end of the decade as their build rate effectively matches the US's best ICBM field rate of the 1960s, even before counting road and rail-mobile missiles.

That would be imply a maximum of 10,000 warheads.
Plus other warheads from the Navy, Air Force and other PLARF rockets.

That just seems far too excessive, given that the US and Russia maintain a deployable force of 1500 warheads each.

China deploying just 1500 warheads should be enough to make its point, which could be done with a lot less missiles, which could also be smaller DF-31s.

For example, 200 DF-31 with 5 warheads each means 1000 warheads. Add in everything else, and that is over 1500 total warheads already

 

[magmunta]

That would be imply a maximum of 10,000 warheads.
Plus other warheads from the Navy, Air Force and other PLARF rockets.

That just seems far too excessive, given that the US and Russia maintain a deployable force of 1500 warheads each.

China deploying just 1500 warheads should be enough to make its point, which could be done with a lot less missiles, which could also be smaller DF-31s.

For example, 200 DF-31 with 5 warheads each means 1000 warheads. Add in everything else, and that is over 1500 total warheads already

Df-31 can't deliver 5 warheads to the east coast. The original df-31 was equiped with a single warhead, primarily intended against Russia. The successive variants of the df-31, such as df-31AG, can carry no more than 3 warheads to the east coast.