China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[ougoah]

I got a question. If we're at the point where the Chinese are trying to sink US aircraft carriers, then aren't all gloves off by that moment? Aircraft carriers have been described as floating cities. Sinking one is full-blown war, you can't really backtrack from that. Why wouldn't the Chinese just airburst a nuke over a CBG at that point? Seems a lot easier for the Chinese and more efficient.

But that's crossing the nuclear line.

It's also NOT the same as conventionally attacking a city because a carrier is a purely military target. In a war the US would also be targeting military sites.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

We already know CN is increasing its nuclear warfighting capacity. They are developing strategic early warning system from satellites to long range ballistic missile warning radars on the ground; MIRV ICBM & SLBM and ALBM being tested and even a TACAMO plane to provide survivable communications links in a nuclear warfare. The question is how many warhead are deployed now. For that we can look at PLA nuclear 'posture': They rely on camouflage, deception, caves, and ambiguous numbers to seek survivability which means the deployed nukes still low compared to US/Russia.

That is assuming Chinese leadership and military are dumb
It does not make sense because it cost more to build cave and tunnel for the last 60 years and still continuing. It is so much cheaper to built thousand of nuke if they want to since they have expanded their uranium processing facility that produce way more than their need for their civilian reactor. What for if they want to maintain low number of warhead. Out of 10 uranium processing only 1 is under surveillance of IAEC the rest is free todo whatever

No I think those tunnel has multifunction and provide shelter for civilian population in case of war

 

[windsclouds2030]

The French blogger, gosnold / @stromgade at the SatelliteObservation.net has several good articles on China's satellite systems, total of seven, trying to guess / grasp what their satellite systems can do, in particular about the tracking of the US CBG in the regions of the Chinese interests -- surely not all seas, but the Pacific region is a sure deal!

The Chinese Maritime Surveillance System

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China Completes The Yaogan-30 Constellation

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

All articles on China's satellite systems:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[EtherealSmoke]

Losing a US aircraft carrier would be the worst American disaster since WW2. Entire countries have been destroyed for less.

What's the thought process? China sinks the carrier, and the US backs off? The US retaliates by destroying mainland air defense networks, then degrading the Chinese nuclear deterrent by hunting down dual-use launchers like the one that just fired the ballistic missile that took out your ship?

I mean if you're making the decision to take out carriers, you're past the point of no return, or close to it. Surely nukes would be top of mind at that moment.

 

[ougoah]

Losing a US aircraft carrier would be the worst American disaster since WW2. Entire countries have been destroyed for less.

What's the thought process? China sinks the carrier, and the US backs off? The US retaliates by destroying mainland air defense networks, then degrading the Chinese nuclear deterrent by hunting down dual-use launchers like the one that just fired the ballistic missile that took out your ship?

I mean if you're making the decision to take out carriers, you're past the point of no return, or close to it. Surely nukes would be top of mind at that moment.

Not at all. If they use carriers in war, they are fair game. Why all the false equivalence? You realise US retaliating by destroying Chinese military sites is expected if a carrier is sunk right? That's fair game as well.

Attacking Chinese nuclear sites is as good as a nuclear attack because it IS the equivalent of removing a secondary strike capability so in response to attacks on Chinese nuclear sites, China can only treat as a nuclear attack and perform full scale nuclear retaliation. If China does not perform full scale nuclear retaliation, they will have no more nukes to retaliate with.

Striking carriers =/= striking civilians and cities

Sinking carriers =/= nuclear war although the reactor polluting the world's oceans will be a concern albeit separate.

China will not make moves on carriers without being in response to being attacked or extremely threatened by those carriers. If the US chooses to retaliate by attacking Chinese cities using whatever excuses they like to make, China can not retaliate against US cities without going nuclear. However the threat is there. If the US do enough damage, why would China hold back? So it's quite likely in this event, the US will restrict attacks to military sites only and suffer attacks only on its own military sites and equipment. Of course nuclear sites are different because reasons above.

 

[gelgoog]

... this is only surveillance satellite Nobody know how the actual cueing is done. One way is to release small satellite before entry and guide the ASBM as soon as it exit from plasma. Or the missile carry sensor that can search target even with plasma. But it has been tested twice and it work! All you need is 5 minute guidance from reentry to target!
The missile most likely carry inertial guidance system with update along the way. so most likely multiple guidance

Satellite position is known all along the flight path and all you need is powerful sensor be it radar or laser to fix the position of the ship

Just look at the Iranian anti-ship ballistic missiles. They basically have a seeker on the warhead which tracks the target for terminal guidance. Sure that's at way lower terminal speeds but I wouldn't be surprised if something similar was doable. Also I read a couple of NASA papers a couple of years back about communications with reentry vehicles. For one the reentry plasma is mostly focused on the nosecone of the reentry vehicle, so you can communicate a lot better with satellites in orbit via an antenna on the back of the reentry vehicle than with ground stations. For another there seems to be a radio frequency window which is mostly transparent to the plasma field. If you transmit in that frequency range you can still get communications to and from the reentry vehicle just fine. So the plasma isn't nearly as impenetrable as once thought to be.

With regards to methods other than satellites for tracking ships, the Chinese already have drones to do this like Soar Dragon. In 2019 one supposedly tailed the Ticonderoga-class cruiser "USS Antietam" in the Taiwan Strait.

I got a question. If we're at the point where the Chinese are trying to sink US aircraft carriers, then aren't all gloves off by that moment? Aircraft carriers have been described as floating cities. Sinking one is full-blown war, you can't really backtrack from that. Why wouldn't the Chinese just airburst a nuke over a CBG at that point? Seems a lot easier for the Chinese and more efficient.

That is exactly what the Soviets planned to do. It is also a lot more convenient in that with only one valid shot you sink most or all the carrier battle group together with the carrier. I think that the fact the Chinese are touting the DF-26 as an anti-ship platform gives plenty of pause since it can use either a conventional or nuclear warhead. i.e. there is no reason to think that is not the plan in case of actual conflict. The conventional capability is more there to be used a warning shot I think.

 

[W20]

"Deja vu all over again"

DF-26

the missile reaches the target in 10-15-20 minutes, from the beginning of the project speed has been sought to minimize the need to update the position, the target will have moved 7-8-10 nautical miles

it is not a ballistic missile except in its launch phase

and skeptics should explain which missiles escort ships are going to use above 40 km altitude and below 90 km

 

[styx]

if usa deploy intermediate range weapons in asia against china, china will deploy their in south and central america? In places like venezuela and cuba for example?

 

[Suetham]

Gee I am talking to a wall use your brain if satellite can track a plane take off with speed of 300 km/hr Why it cannot track a ship with 50km/hr?

You didn't even bother to read my post you just try to convince yourself that it does not work. I said there is relay satellite that tell the incoming satellite to focus on certain area and It take only half an hour from launch to target and the satellite can persistently observe 20 minute with photo But we might not use photo for cueing but something else in that case it almost cover 27 minute out of half an hour. I mean this is only surveillance satellite Nobody know how the actual cueing is done. One way is to release small satellite before entry and guide the ASBM as soon as it exit from plasma. Or the missile carry sensor that can search target even with plasma. But it has been tested twice and it work! All you need is 5 minute guidance from reentry to target!
The missile most likely carry inertial guidance system with update along the way. so most likely multiple guidance

Satellite position is known all along the flight path and all you need is powerful sensor be it radar or laser to fix the position of the ship

This comment of yours has no affirmation. Just stating that the target's illumination nobody knows how it is done, or pointing out inconclusive ways in China that it can only use satellites for targeting.

Forget everything we learned at ASuW. Patrol planes, AEW planes, patrol drones, ships with anti-ship missiles, submarines with anti-ship missiles ... China has made it all obsolete. Technology has reached a point where satellites see everything and know everything, simply push a button and ballistic missiles with a range of 1,500, 2,500, 3,500, 5,000, 10,000 km can hit a moving target anywhere in the ocean.

 

[Suetham]

And yet you use GPS to navigate the street every day with your google or Garmin

Yes. For use against fixed targets it is essential, however, for use against moving targets it is not an ideal platform for accurate accuracy.

You don't seem to know what you're talking about.