China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[taxiya]

Why do I see this report and its subsequent news coverage (China training pilot to strike US, Reuters, CNN and BBC) as more of a budge demanding act rather than professional report?

The condensed line goes like this, China is increasing airborne nuclear strike capability (true triad), so we need money for B-21. The audience is clearly the congressmen who are into capability and expense rather than accuracy of the report.

 

[Blitzo]

does anyone else also get annoyed by the combination of "DF" and "CSS" prefixes that they use? Seriously, just stick with one type so everyone knows what's going on. PLA designations aren't that difficult and they're the ones that are used most often in media and discussions here as well. I'm not sure why they're so insistent on keeping "CSS"

/rantover

 

[latenlazy]

does anyone else also get annoyed by the combination of "DF" and "CSS" prefixes that they use? Seriously, just stick with one type so everyone knows what's going on. PLA designations aren't that difficult and they're the ones that are used most often in media and discussions here as well. I'm not sure why they're so insistent on keeping "CSS"

/rantover

Tbh the confusing missile designations in English is why I was put off from getting deeper into China’s missile programs for the longest time...

Edit: Just for the sake of discussion, I think this riff about missile designations underscores just how disorganized and unstructured the Pentagon and the US Natsec community has generally been on their documentation and understanding of the modern PLA.

 

[Blitzo]

Tbh the confusing missile designations in English is why I was put off from getting deeper into China’s missile programs for the longest time...

Edit: Just for the sake of discussion, I think this riff about missile designations underscores just how disorganized and unstructured the Pentagon and the US Natsec community has generally been on their documentation and understanding of the modern PLA.

also annoying is that some reports have even used "F" prefixes for PLA fighters lol, it's just ridiculous why they'd feel the need for that considering the J prefix system is perfectly logical

The English class names for PLAN vessels are also weird as well but slightly less irritating.

 

[PanAsian]

Why do I see this report and its subsequent news coverage (China training pilot to strike US, Reuters, CNN and BBC) as more of a budge demanding act rather than professional report?

The condensed line goes like this, China is increasing airborne nuclear strike capability (true triad), so we need money for B-21. The audience is clearly the congressmen who are into capability and expense rather than accuracy of the report.

It's also a propaganda guide for non-military types to quote a supposedly authoritative source.

 

[nicky]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

OPEN SILOS
by

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

| August 22, 2018 |

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Great job!
She found a new silo in Wuzhai.
Probably DF-41 associated.
Appr. one meter smaller in diameter than for DF-5.
With an apron for probable missile downloading from mobile platform.
Underground access from two directions.
Driver training area rebuilt for bigger vehicles.
What else?

 

[Totoro]

Where does it in her article say new silo is one meter less in diameter?

The silo on the image on the left, the df-5 one, is visible on GE, and is roughly 8 meters in diameter. (the black circle part).

Trying to measure the hole on the other image is difficult to do accurately, due to poor resolution. There are some buildings there for reference, which can be measured in GE then measured how many pixels they have in the image on the right, then sized up to the hole, but it's hard to say just how big that hole is. I tried to do that but resolution is lacking. I got numbers ranging anything from 7-9 meters across, for that hole.

 

[nicky]

above just my thoughts re original material.
no need to complicate the process, used ge-pro for measurement: old is roughly 4.5, new 3.5.
both pix adjusted to the scale.

since no-one added any thoughts:
so far solid missiles were downloaded with a gantry crane.
this time they switch to a standart (but new) approach using transporter-erector.
expect new silos on flat terrain? west?
fairly soon they will test fire - almost fun to see
slightly different silo orientation.

afterthought:
probably four underground access directions one with two (!) tunnels.
pretty chineese approch!

 

[Totoro]

That is really weird then. Not only does my GE pro not show the 2018 image of the new silo site, so i don't have anything to measure there directly, but the image of the df-5 silo nearby shows 8 meter in diameter for the black circle. That's a huge difference from your 4.5 meters, too much to be error in measurement...

Not sure about likelihood of other structures also being silos. That'd be too close to put them one to another, just 100 meters. US minuteman III silos are several kilometers apart.

 

[nicky]

right, we just misunderstood each other
radius, sure;
like the df-5 silo, the new one has underground tunnel access, this time from four directions.
df-5 transported horizontally thru such tunnels and then, elevated underground. required huge underground space.
it was easier to roll-out and erect in the open. the site is next to the old silo .
chinees scientists calculated minimum distance between silos 5 km.