Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)

[dingyibvs]

From Harbin, 8000km reaches Hawaii and Seattle

From Xinjiang 8000km reaches the entire European continent, even Greenland.

 

[iewgnem]

I don’t quite understand the logic behind the 8,000-km range. At first glance, it looks more like a weapon intended to target Russia, northern Australia (Darwin), and US bases in the Pacific (2nd and 3rd island chain), but even Hawaii is out of range. Is the limited range more of a voluntary restrain (by deliberately not targeting CONUS) on China’s behalf, or is it technological limitation.

You know it only take a few minutes to check how far 8,000km is on Google Earth
Hawaii is only 7,000km from mainland China, at 8,000km you're talking the entirety of Washington and Oregon State, plus the northern 3rd of California.
To the west 8,000km covers the entirety of Greenland, i.e. all sea lanes of communication between CONUS and Euroasia.
To the South East from Hainan 8,000km covers the entirety of Australia including Tasmania
8,000km is exactly what you want short of ICBM
With anti-ship capability we're basically talking a system that can blockade the Americas from rest of humanity.

 

[Andy1974]

If I add France and UK into the 8000km range then all your equestions are answered.

It is not voluntary favor to the US. Everyone is equal in front of nuclear deterrance.

[add] 8000km is enough to hit any ABD installations by US over arctic. A 8000km DF-27 is perfect in breaking this line due to its higher accuracy and survivability. 8000km for a glider is a technical choice instead of limitation because its max altitude is lower than a 10000km counterpart, lower max altitude reduce the chance of early warning and detection by enemy.

It covers most of Africa too, including the Gulf of Guinea, and it can close off access to the Indian Ocean as well.

From AI:

To cover every ocean and sea globally from China, a missile would need a range of approximately 15,000 kilometers (9,320 miles). This is the distance required to reach the farthest points of the South Atlantic and South Pacific Oceans from Chinese territory, effectively achieving near-global coverage.

Which is about DF-41 range.

 

[RoastGooseHKer]

You know it only take a few minutes to check how far 8,000km is on Google Earth
Hawaii is only 7,000km from mainland China, at 8,000km you're talking the entirety of Washington and Oregon State, plus the northern 3rd of California.
To the west 8,000km covers the entirety of Greenland, i.e. all sea lanes of communication between CONUS and Euroasia.
To the South East from Hainan 8,000km covers the entirety of Australia including Tasmania
8,000km is exactly what you want short of ICBM
With anti-ship capability we're basically talking a system that can blockade the Americas from rest of humanity.

Then you need to launch the weapon from Northeastern China. That is still a bit too close to Japan and South Korea. And who knows if the Russian would stab China in the back in a hypothetical US-China war over Taiwan. The safest place to hide and launch strategic weapons remains the old Third Front.

 

[Blitzo]

I don’t quite understand the logic behind the 8,000-km range. At first glance, it looks more like a weapon intended to target Russia, northern Australia (Darwin), and US bases in the Pacific (2nd and 3rd island chain), but even Hawaii is out of range. Is the limited range more of a voluntary restrain (by deliberately not targeting CONUS) on China’s behalf, or is it technological limitation.

Then you need to launch the weapon from Northeastern China. That is still a bit too close to Japan and South Korea. And who knows if the Russian would stab China in the back in a hypothetical US-China war over Taiwan. The safest place to hide and launch strategic weapons remains the old Third Front.

I don't quite understand your confusion.

You seem to be suggesting at a 8000km range is insufficient for certain target sets or if it is less desirable if launched from certain parts of the PRC mainland due to theoretical greater vulnerability/being less central.

However, isn't the more logical way to view the range as being a reflection that it has the flexibility to be viable for certain additional target sets depending on where it is launched, or that it has additional capability to take on evasive trajectories/lateral movements by virtue of a greater range as a glide vehicle?

Especially the case if this weapon gets an anti-ship capability as well, where the greater range would see benefit in


Not to mention it's about 7500km from the interior of Heilongjiang or Jilin to Hawaii, and it's not like the whole of the Chinese northeast is a particularly under defended theater.

 

[magmunta]

I am still suspicious of the 8000km ASBMs because ships constantly move. So, an attacker needs a near-constant surveillance of the target. It will be hard for china to track a moving object at 8000km off its shores. Likely, this kinda ASBMs are intended for functioning when Chinese future mega consolation of satellites come online. Even with not reliable today, it could may very well work in the next decade.

 

[AndrewS]

I am still suspicious of the 8000km ASBMs because ships constantly move. So, an attacker needs a near-constant surveillance of the target. It will be hard for china to track a moving object at 8000km off its shores. Likely, this kinda ASBMs are intended for functioning when Chinese future mega consolation of satellites come online. Even with not reliable today, it could may very well work in the next decade.

At a minimum, stationary airbases and naval bases can be hit

 

[AndrewS]

Then you need to launch the weapon from Northeastern China. That is still a bit too close to Japan and South Korea. And who knows if the Russian would stab China in the back in a hypothetical US-China war over Taiwan. The safest place to hide and launch strategic weapons remains the old Third Front.

IIRC, a DF-41 brigade is already stationed in Heilongjiang

 

[charles18]

Hawaii is only 7,000km from mainland China, at 8,000km you're talking the entirety of Washington and Oregon State, plus the northern 3rd of California.
To the west 8,000km covers the entirety of Greenland, i.e. all sea lanes of communication between CONUS and Euroasia.
To the South East from Hainan 8,000km covers the entirety of Australia including Tasmania
8,000km is exactly what you want short of ICBM

It looks like the DF-27 missile is going to become very useful.

With anti-ship capability we're basically talking a system that can blockade the Americas from rest of humanity.

China will charge the Americans a toll of $2million per ship!

 

[iewgnem]

Then you need to launch the weapon from Northeastern China. That is still a bit too close to Japan and South Korea. And who knows if the Russian would stab China in the back in a hypothetical US-China war over Taiwan. The safest place to hide and launch strategic weapons remains the old Third Front.

That's an interesting logic, but hey look on the bright side north east China is farthest and safest from the global superpower called India.
While we're at it you should tell the Japaneses to consider relocating their entire island to South America outside of DF-17 ranges.

I think you need to spend more time looking at a globe and get better sense of how big and small things are, because north east China is 3x the area of mainland Japan, China can hunt down every single threat in Japan long before Japan can threaten China's road mobile launchers