China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

weig2000

Captain
Fisher, the China military expert, said the sharp increase in warheads is prompting new questions about whether China is seeking nuclear parity with the United States or eventually will opt for nuclear superiority.

Also, a larger warhead arsenal may signal China’s plans to jettison its self-declared defensive nuclear posture, and could signal that Beijing will eventually agree to coordinating nuclear strike plans against the United States with Russia, Fisher said.

“With their continued rapid development of multiple types of intercontinental, intermediate, and medium range nuclear missiles, it is clear that China and Russia have no intention of adopting the Obama administration’s dreams of achieving ‘nuclear zero,’” Fisher said.

“It is also time for the United States to reverse such policies that amount to unilateral disarmament and build a larger and more modern nuclear arsenal sufficient to deter both China and Russia.”
Click to expand...

Rick Fisher's comments are usually predictable, but even so this idea of Russia and China develop joint nuclear strike plan against the US is unusually imaginative.
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Where did talk of df-31b come from? i don't really see it being distinguishable from df-41. even the alleged test came in the similar timeframe. what *good* sources are there to prove those are two different programmes?

And what can a restart of df31 production in its B variant bring over df-41?
 
Broccoli

Broccoli

Senior Member
To me it seems that for many the relatively small size of Chinese nuclear arsenal (bigger than French and UK arsenals) means that they personally have small penis and they would feel a lot bigger if they knew that China has 10.000 warheads. That's my take on all of this.

It's childish way of thinking but we see it all the time... like for another example what I can read very often in different forums and youtube comment section: "BMP-3 is the best IFV because it has 100mm gun and therefore it's better. Russia best we got biggest guns".


You can say that i'm making this all up but when you really think about it...
 
vincent

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Nuclear weapons are expensive to maintain and in the foreseeable future, have very limited use. There is very little point to have more than the minimal deterent to make sure the other dude will not nuke you because you sinked his carrier
 
shen

shen

Senior Member
Replying here instead of in the parade thread.

MwRYum said:
Displaying a liquid-fuelled, silo-based obsolete relic and flaunt it as the backbone of China's nuclear strike capability just won't do China any favours, but rather makes it irrelevant, if not a total laughing stock, in world's opinion.

In any case, the DF-41 is pretty much already out of the closet, and it's inside the TEL, by all account makes it superior candidate than the DF-5 relic.
Click to expand...

DF-41 may be know to people closely following Chinese military development. China may even be intentionally leaking some development of DF-41 program. But parading it publicly sends a whole different message. By parading the obsolete DF-5s, China is publicly saying that it intents to keep its minimal deterrent policy. What actually constitute minimal deterrent will depend on actions taken by the other side. Before the US unilaterally abrogated the ABM Treaty and started development of GBMD, DF-5 with solitary warhead was enough for achieve minimal deterrent. After the US have deployed up to 40 ABM interceptors, some DF-5 upgraded with MIRV became necessary in order to maintain minimal deterrent. Remember DF-41 was reported to have been cancelled in the late 1990's and restarted after 2002, after the abrogation of ABM Treaty. Should the US continue MIRV interception research and increase the number of interceptors, than China will have no choice but to deploy MIRV DF-41 in large number. But at the present, DF-5a is what is necessary and that's what's being parade.
 
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Broccoli said:
To me it seems that for many the relatively small size of Chinese nuclear arsenal (bigger than French and UK arsenals) means that they personally have small penis and they would feel a lot bigger if they knew that China has 10.000 warheads. That's my take on all of this.

It's childish way of thinking but we see it all the time... like for another example what I can read very often in different forums and youtube comment section: "BMP-3 is the best IFV because it has 100mm gun and therefore it's better. Russia best we got biggest guns".
You can say that i'm making this all up but when you really think about it...
Click to expand...

I am not sure whether you are making it up (as you said), but you can't really make the above assumptions based on your opinions which could be wrong. We just need to be open minded and respect other opinions even you don't agree. We just don't know really how big Chinese arsenal is! ... it's not the point, we here to discuss open mindedly and respect other opinions. Our discussions and opinions here WILL NOT change Chinese nuke policy!!!!

So, my advice to you ... just enjoy the discussions, no hard feeling. If you don't like it, just don't read it ... as simple as that
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
China Conducts Fifth Test of Hypersonic Glide Vehicle
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
China this week carried out another test of a new high-tech hypersonic glide vehicle, an ultra high-speed missile designed to deliver nuclear weapons and avoid defenses.

The latest test of what the Pentagon calls the Wu-14 hypersonic glide vehicle was carried out from the Wuzhai missile test range in central China. The test was judged successful, according to defense officials familiar with details of the event.

Additionally, officials said the glide vehicle, which travels along the edge of the earth’s atmosphere, demonstrated a new capability: evasive actions.

U.S. intelligence agencies have been tracking the Wu-14 since for over a year and have gained valuable insights into the weapon, the officials said. No additional details were provided on the maneuvering activities of the Wu-14. However, the evasive actions bolstered suspicions that China is building the missile with capabilities designed to defeat U.S. defenses.

Current U.S. defenses are designed to track missiles that travel in predictable flight paths and are unable to counter maneuvering warheads and glide vehicles. The latest Wu-14 test took place Wednesday. It was the fifth test of the glide vehicle and the second since June.

The weapon is launched as the last stage of a missile that reaches speeds of around Mach 10, or 10 times the speed of sound—around 7,680 miles per hour. Military analysts said the Chinese test schedule indicates that China may be close to deploying the high priority weapon.

Earlier flight tests took place this year on June 7 and last year on Jan. 9, Aug. 7 and Dec. 2. The weapon system and tests were first reported by the Free Beacon. Asked about the test, Pentagon spokesman Cmdr. Bill Urban said: “We do not comment on PRC weapons tests but we do monitor Chinese military modernization carefully.”

A defense official, however, said the Wu-14 is viewed as a serious emerging strategic threat that could complicate U.S. nuclear deterrent efforts.

“At a minimum this latest test indicates China is likely succeeding in achieving a key design objective: building a warhead capable of withstanding the very high stress of hypersonic maneuvering,” said Rick Fisher, a China military expert. “It is likely that the test vehicle will form the basis for a missile launched weapon.”

“The advent of a Chinese hypersonic weapon may pose the greatest early threat to large U.S. Navy ships,” said Fisher, a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center. “The best prospect for a defensive response would be to greatly accelerate railgun development.”

Lora Saalman, an expert on hypersonic technology and former research associate at Carnegie-Tsinghua in Beijing, said the two most recent Wu-14 flights coming within two months are “unprecedented in terms of pace and frequency,” and suggest “a form of qualitative arms racing vis-a-vis the United States.”
“If the intent is for the Wu-14 to be a longer-range system for delivering conventional payloads, then it is likely an effort to extend the range and flexibility of China’s [anti-access, area denial] capabilities beyond that of the DF-21D missile,” she said.
“If this conventional system is mounted to reach an intercontinental range, then it could represent an effort to catch up with or even beat the United States to the punch on its own Conventional Prompt Global Strike aspirations,” Saalman added.
A nuclear-armed Wu-14 is likely intended to defeat U.S. missile defenses, Saalman said. “The difficulty is that each of these eventualities and aims are not necessarily mutually independent, nor are they distinguishable without more technical details on the most recent test,” she said.
Adm. Cecil Haney, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, warned in a speech last month that hypersonic glide vehicles are new technology weapons that pose an emerging threat. The command is in charge of nuclear forces and missile defenses.

Asked to elaborate on the hypersonic threat, Haney said: “As I look at that threat, clearly the mobility, the flight profile, those kinds of things are things we have to keep in mind and be able to address across that full kill chain,” Haney said. The kill chain is the military term for the process used in targeting and attacking enemy missiles.

Outgoing Strategic Command Deputy Commander Air Force Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, said hypersonic weapon technology “certainly offers a number of advantages to a state,”

“It offers a number of different ways to overcome defenses, whether those are conventional, or if someone would decide to use a nuclear warhead, I think gives it an even more complicated dimension,” Kowalski said during the same conference in Omaha.

Kowalski said so far no hypersonic weapons have been fielded by the Chinese or Russians but “it remains something that concerns us and may be an area of discussion in the future.”

A congressional Chinese commission stated in its annual report last year that China’s hypersonic missile “could render existing U.S. missile defense systems less effective and potentially obsolete.”

China, Russia, and the United States appear engaged in a quiet hypersonic arms race. Russia tested a hypersonic missile in February. The Pentagon also is conducting research and development on hypersonic arms, including an Army missile and a glide vehicle and a scramjet-powered hypersonic weapon.

The current version of the House defense authorization bill contains funding and language aimed at pressing the Pentagon to counter hypersonic threats. One provision calls for adding $291 million for development of a long-range variant of the Army Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD.

Bryan Clark and Mark Gunzinger of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimate that the United States and Russia are “very close” to having hypersonic arms. China’s glide vehicle appears to be part of anti-access, area denial strategies.

“While ‘boost-glide’ weapons will have long ranges and be highly survivable, but they will also be very expensive,” they told the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. “China could use them as a ‘silver bullet’ weapon to hit high-value targets, or do so in conjunction with less-expensive weapons that reduce the defender’s capacity first.”

Clark and Gunzinger also say that China could use air-launched hypersonic weapons to attack U.S. and allied bases protected by missile defenses.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top