China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
This article quoting global time said that China has deploy 2nd brigade of DF41 in Heilongjiang near Russina border .
Assuming 1 brigade consists of min 12 launcher and they are mirved with 4 or 5 warhead. Just this 2 brigade already has 2X12X5= 120 Warhead. Now , 4 Submarine based JL2 with 12 missile assuming 2 warhead 4X12X2=96 warhead. NOt sure about DF5 with mirved warhead assuming they have 30DF5 that mean 30X5=150 warhead. Just quick calc show that they have 360 warhead
It show the absurdity of low balling estimate of 230 warhead as propagate by western media
My own speculation:
10 DF-5: 10 warheads
10 DF-5B: 30 warheads
48 JL-2: 144 warheads
15 DF-31: 15 warheads
15 DF-31A: 45 warheads
12 DF-41: 120 warheads
Total: 364 warheads, of which 205 could realistically reach significant portions of the continental US.
These are of course only the ICBM-range warheads and do not include SRBM, MRBM, IRBM, cruise missile, and air-dropped warheads. By way of comparison the US has about 1,400 ICBM-range warheads, and Russia about 1,800.

Future increases in ICBM-range warheads will come from more DF-41s built and probably a JL-3.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
I would put 24 DF-41 each with 5 warheads (so more range), also 45 DF-31A each with 5 smaller warheads. I believe all DF-5 have been converted to DF-5B and I believe 24 of them each with 3 BIG warheads ... the rest about right
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
@Hendrik_2000

I would be amazed if all of China's missiles have MIRVed warheads.

A lot of them will still only be Cold War era multi-megaton unitary warhead city busting beasties.

Also, we should not forget the breakthroughs China had been making in hypersonic vehicles in the last few years.

One of the low hanging fruit from such research would be nuclear delivery vehicles.

You don't need active seekers or that much control or precision to deliver nukes (as opposed to precision guided munitions), so a lot of the sensory and control problems associated with an anti ship hypersonic for example, wouldn't really apply if all you need is to deliver the payload within a mile of the intended target.

That could be a reason for the sluggish ICBM building - China would have known for some time that they are on the cusp of having an alternative global nuclear delivery system to traditional ICBMs, so could easily have been holding out for that to become available instead of committing massively to old systems that this new tech promises to massively improve on.
 

schenkus

Junior Member
Registered Member
My own speculation:
10 DF-5: 10 warheads
10 DF-5B: 30 warheads
48 JL-2: 144 warheads
15 DF-31: 15 warheads
15 DF-31A: 45 warheads
12 DF-41: 120 warheads
Total: 364 warheads, of which 205 could realistically reach significant portions of the continental US.
These are of course only the ICBM-range warheads and do not include SRBM, MRBM, IRBM, cruise missile, and air-dropped warheads. By way of comparison the US has about 1,400 ICBM-range warheads, and Russia about 1,800.

Future increases in ICBM-range warheads will come from more DF-41s built and probably a JL-3.

I'm very sceptical of rumours about the JL-2 and DF-31A having 3 MIRVed warheads and of the DF-41 having up to 10 MIRVed warheads. Considering the likely performance of these missiles the RVs including warhead and heat shields would need a weight less then 100kg.
Considering that China had its last nuclear test in 1996, these warheads would not have been tested but only simulated.

I think the DF-31A is just a longer ranged DF-31 and that the DF-41 might be MIRVed with a small number of warheads but a big number of decoys.

Here is an article about this topic:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Hyperwarp

Captain
Silo Only:
DF-5A - 10 (10 - warheads)
DF-5B - 10 (30 - warheads: up to 3x 1MT warheads but might carry 8x smaller warheads)

Mobile:
DF-31A - 24? (24 - warheads: 1x 1MT warhead with penetration aids)
DF-31B - ?? (?? - warheads: up to 3x 150KT warheads)
DF-41 - 12?? (120 warheads: up to 10x 150KT warheads)

We don't know how many DF-31B are in service. DF-31 is excluded due the its range limited to 8000km. Excluded all JL series SLBM. So Lets assume DF-41 will carry 3x to 5x MIRV and the rest will be pen-aids. That means 60x to 84x warhead on the mobile ICBMs alone. If we add silo based DF-5 series, total warheads that can cover most or all of the ConUS will be over 100x warheads with nearly half of them being large 1MT warheads.

Now it is beginning to look like a proper Minimum Deterrence.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
I'm very sceptical of rumours about the JL-2 and DF-31A having 3 MIRVed warheads and of the DF-41 having up to 10 MIRVed warheads. Considering the likely performance of these missiles the RVs including warhead and heat shields would need a weight less then 100kg.
Considering that China had its last nuclear test in 1996, these warheads would not have been tested but only simulated.

I think the DF-31A is just a longer ranged DF-31 and that the DF-41 might be MIRVed with a small number of warheads but a big number of decoys.

Those concern scientist has been low balling Chinese nuclear arsenal for ages Their assumption is that China cannot make miniature warhead.

Which is wrong China has been testing experimenting and building A bomb since 1960 Uninterrupted by vicissitude of Chinese politic.It is priority item Mao famously said I rather go hungry than not developing A Bomb

They never publish the spec on their warhead So how the hell can the western scientist know their weight? It is once again their sense of superiority complex to mask their anxiety.The technology of mirved missile has been tested using satellite as proxy and it works.
The source of those 500kg weight estimate is Phd dissertation paper quoted an "ESTIMATE" by air intelligence A highly dubious source

China follow the world wide ban on live testing of nuclear warhead but the advanced of supercomputer and computer modelling make those test obsolete and unnecessary.
Most of what we see now in modern world are the result of simulation whether it is passenger airplane, car etc So simulation is an accepted and proven to work in real world!

JL2 should be counted in Chinese nuclear arsenal because they have confidence in it and the argument that Chinese submarine is noisy is nothing but propaganda and never been proven .The fact that 4 are built show that China has confidence in their submarine
A footnote JL2 had been tested 9 or 10 times . The last test they send a salvo of multitude JL2 to simulate real launch. DF41 has been tested 7 or 8 time The last one is April 2016
All of those test are successful. So it is definitely in operational stage right now . There are rumor of 3 brigade of DF41 because they are seen in 3 different province of Heilongjiang, Xinjiang and Hefei the last one I am not sure

JL 2 and DF31 are basically the same missile and we know they are mirved because we can see the blunted tip of the missile a necessary since they carry 3 warhead.JL 1 tip is sharp cone since it is single warhead
Here is the picture
More importantly, the Type 094A carries a new submarine-launched ballistic missile (speculated to be the JL-2A), which has a 11,200-kilometer range—a significant improvement from its predecessor missiles.

Provided the JL-2A has this kind of range, the new missile could reach virtually the entire United States without leaving the heavily defended Yulin Naval Base (itself complete with underground shelters and docks for submarines) in Hainan Island.

jl2c-1.jpg




DF5 is mirved according to pentagon report
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Pentagon Report: China Deploys MIRV Missile
DF-5silo.jpg

Posted on May.11, 2015 in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


By Hans M. Kristensen

The biggest surprise in the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Chinese military power is the claim that China’s ICBM force now includes the “multiple independently-targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV)-equipped Mod 3 (DF-5).”

This is (to my knowledge) the first time the US Intelligence Community has made a public claim that China has fielded a MIRVed missile system.

If so, China joins the club of four other nuclear-armed states that have deployed MIRV for decades: Britain, France, Russia and the United States.

For China to join the MIRV club strains China’s claim of having a minimum nuclear deterrent. It is another worrisome sign that China – like the other nuclear-armed states – are trapped in a dynamic technological nuclear arms competition.

A Little Chinese MIRV History
From Wiki
The first JL-2 at-sea launch occurred in 2001 from a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The program was delayed after a failed test in 2004.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Successful launches occurred in 2005 and 2008. The missile was successfully fired from a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the intended operational platform, for the first time in 2009.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
A series of test launches occurred in 2012.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Another test launch occurred in January 2015.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Range estimates have included 7,400 km (4,600 mi)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to 8,000 km (5,000 mi).
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Payload is a single
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
250–1000 kt warhead;
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
or 3 to 4 (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) 90 kt warheads,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
I'm very sceptical of rumours about the JL-2 and DF-31A having 3 MIRVed warheads and of the DF-41 having up to 10 MIRVed warheads. Considering the likely performance of these missiles the RVs including warhead and heat shields would need a weight less then 100kg.
Considering that China had its last nuclear test in 1996, these warheads would not have been tested but only simulated.

I think the DF-31A is just a longer ranged DF-31 and that the DF-41 might be MIRVed with a small number of warheads but a big number of decoys.

Here is an article about this topic:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
That entire article hinges on the author's claim that China is unwilling or unable to develop a smaller (sub-500kg) warhead using supercomputing alone rather than live testing. IMO this is a ludicrously fallacious view that I seriously doubt either the Pentagon or the Kremlin holds.

BTW, the DF-41's mass is ~80 tons, very similar to that of the now-retired Peacekeeper missile at 88 tons. That missile could throw 12 W-87 MIRVs each weighing 200-270kg or 10 W-88 MIRVs each weighing 360kg out to a distance of 14,000km. If China has managed to miniaturize its warheads to ~300kg, I think a DF-41 could easily launch them to a similar range as well. There is no need at all for a "100kg" warhead. Even a 500kg warhead would still allow China to install 6 or 7 of them on the DF-41.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Yeah those FAS and Concern scientist contradict themselves. Isn't it big news back in 90? When someone supposed to be double agent throw a drawing or schematic of Chinese nuclear warhead at some american embassy in Europe
Turn out those warhead look suspiciously like W88 Schematic

The ensuing witch hunt in Nuclear Lab all across US end up with prosecution of Wen Holee and the subsequent abortive trial due to lack of evidence.
So in that Case China already has the miniature warhead


In 1999, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
reported that the W88 had an egg-shaped primary and a spherical secondary, which were together inside a radiation case known as the "peanut" for its shape.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The case is filled with a lightweight foam material, believed to be an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
known as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Four months later,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
reported that in 1995 a supposed
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
delivered information indicating that China knew these details about the W88 warhead as well, supposedly through espionage (this line of investigation eventually resulted in the abortive trial of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
). If these stories are true, it would indicate a variation of the Teller-Ulam design which would allow for the miniaturization required for small MIRVed warheads.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The value of an egg-shaped primary lies apparently in the fact that a MIRV warhead is limited by the diameter of the primary — if an egg-shaped primary can be made to work properly, then the MIRV warhead can be made considerably smaller yet still deliver a high-yield explosion — a W88 warhead manages to yield up to 475 kt with a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
68.9 in (1.75 m) long, with a maximum diameter of 21.8 in (0.55 m), and weighing probably less than 800 lb (360 kg).
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The smaller warhead allows more of them to fit onto a single missile and improves basic flight properties such as speed and range.
500px-W-88_warhead_detail.png


Here is the report from New York times
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The group looked more closely at a clue provided by the Chinese spy, who described the size of the bomb's atomic core with an analogy to a common household object, officials said in a new disclosure. Working from that, the scientists calculated a more precise size and Dr. Henson and Dr. Richter went through the American stockpile of nuclear arms, looking up measurements to see if any matched.

The atomic trigger of the W-88, they discovered, was close enough in size to raise suspicions.

The Energy Department held meetings in which the Los Alamos team was joined by analysts from the C.I.A. and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Federal officials now say the intelligence agencies were skeptical, reasoning that too much was being made of a foreigner's rough analogy. But the Energy Department and the Los Alamos team felt the evidence was provocative.

The breakthrough came in 1995, as has been previously disclosed, when a Chinese Government official sent a package of secret Chinese documents to American officials.

Mr. Trulock said the most revealing document, dated 1988, laid out China's nuclear modernization plans for Beijing's First Ministry of Machine Building, which, among other things, made missiles and nose cones. It not only described China's plans but compared them to the nuclear arms of the American arsenal.

Relatively crude hand drawings sketched out the nose cones enveloping the W-88, the W-87, the W-78, the W-76, the W-62 and the W-56 -- warheads of the Trident, MX and Minuteman missiles -- and also gave their overall weights and dimensions.

In itself, these were not damning. Though still officially classified secret in some cases, such information by then was widely available in many unclassified American papers and articles.

But the Chinese document, some 20 pages in translation, went on to give sensitive data about the W-88, Federal officials revealed. It accurately described the shape of the atomic trigger as not spherical and said it was situated in the nose cone's narrow forward end -- an arrangement used in some but not all American warheads. And it correctly described the hydrogen fuel, or secondary, as having a spherical shape.
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
My own speculation:
10 DF-5: 10 warheads
10 DF-5B: 30 warheads
48 JL-2: 144 warheads
15 DF-31: 15 warheads
15 DF-31A: 45 warheads
12 DF-41: 120 warheads
Total: 364 warheads, of which 205 could realistically reach significant portions of the continental US.
These are of course only the ICBM-range warheads and do not include SRBM, MRBM, IRBM, cruise missile, and air-dropped warheads. By way of comparison the US has about 1,400 ICBM-range warheads, and Russia about 1,800.

Future increases in ICBM-range warheads will come from more DF-41s built and probably a JL-3.
Make sense DF-41 replace DF-5A so 10 warheads in less hihi :D
And 8 DF-31 and 25 A in service Brigades of 6 TELs 6 equiped
DF-41 IOC for 2018 ?

DF-11/15/16 Bde : 36 TELs in 6 bat of 2 cies each 3 TELs
DF-21/26 Bde : 12 TEls in 6 Bat
DF-31 Bde : 6 TELs
DF-5 Bde : 5 silos, 20 ICBMs for 4 Brigades


CJ-10/DH-10 about 16 TELs
 
Last edited:

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Here it is why FAS, Concern scientist like to talk down Chinese warhead inventory. Because they make China the poster boy for minimal nuclear posture in order to drive their agenda of disarmament. They are quoting Mao dictum that Nuclear bomb is paper tiger. I am not sure if that is the present Chinese position. Seem like they have healthy respect for the destructiveness of Nuclear bomb and adjusting their posture accordingly. Jeffrey Lewis is wrong! and never trust their often quoted number of 200. Just rough calc show that they have at least 350 to 400 warhead Enough to maintain deterrence. Any thing more would be overkill

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

While U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin preen and compare the size of their nuclear arsenals, China has been quite modest on the subject. This macho dance doesn’t interest Beijing. Why? Isn’t bigger always better? For decades, when it comes to nuclear weapons, the answer from China has been a resounding no. The rest of the world would do well to consider their reasons why.

In his last defense speech of 2016, Putin
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that his country needed to “enhance the combat capability of strategic nuclear forces, primarily by strengthening missile complexes that will be guaranteed to penetrate existing and future missile defense systems.” It wasn’t clear from the speech whether Putin seeks to improve nuclear warhead delivery systems in order to confuse American missile defense, or whether he will seek to increase the number of weapons deployed to overwhelm them, or even deploy cyber-capabilities to weaken the ability to respond. Perhaps it’s a strategy, perhaps it’s just rhetoric. U.S. ballistic missile defense efforts — particularly in Europe and Asia — have been a sore spot for both Russia and China.

Not to be out done, within hours Trump tweeted: “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.” Like Putin, his intentions were not clear, and much
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. But like Putin, when questioned, he tends to double down. Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC asked him to clarify his tweet, and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
: “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass, and outlast them all.”

So why hasn’t Chinese leader Xi Jinping stripped off his shirt and flexed his strategic forces? Why not take to Twitter — or Weibo, at least — to brag about how long he can last in an arms race? Well, he doesn’t need to and he knows it. Decades of Chinese leaders have known it. The Chinese think about nuclear weapons in a fundamentally different way than their Western counterparts — one that could give China an edge in the contest to become the defining power of the 21st century.

As Jeffrey Lewis noted in his book
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, China has always maintained a small nuclear force
. From their first announcement of a successful nuclear test on Oct. 19, 1964, China officially advocated the complete prohibition and disarmament of nuclear weapons, and even went so far as to declare that Beijing would never be the first to use nuclear weapons, no matter the circumstances — a policy maintained to this day. Former Chinese leader Mao Zedong thought of nuclear weapons as appearing powerful, but nothing to be afraid of in reality — the eponymous paper tigers of Lewis’s title.


While the number of nuclear weapons in the United States and the Soviet Union swelled to over 50,000 in the mid-1980s, and they produced warheads and delivery devices far deadlier than those used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, China was content to stick with dozens, not thousands, of warheads. Even today, the United States and Russia believe nuclear deterrence requires thousands of warheads each, and at least three ways to deliver them. But the truth of the matter is that you can annihilate your adversary (or the planet) only so many times. In fact, some in the U.S. Air Force have argued that
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the destructive power needed to incapacitate the Soviet Union by former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara’s count.


For China, it’s not the size of the arsenal that counts, it’s how you use it. About 200 nuclear warheads are “enough.” China’s primary goal has always been to prevent the use of nuclear weapons against them. Beijing figured out that you don’t need 30,000 nuclear warheads to achieve that end — you only need enough that the risk of losing a major city in retaliation holds your opponents back. They have enough for escalation control, they have enough for deterrence, and they only need to mate their warheads to delivery vehicles to signal.

So they keep their strategic forces small and agile. With about 200 weapons, you already have increased the cost of nuclear war enough that nobody wants to start one with you. You don’t even have to spend a fortune to keep those weapons ready to go at a moment’s notice, as Russia and the United States do with their arsenals. Instead, China can invest in its conventional and not-so- conventional weapons, including a growing naval force, hyper-glide vehicles,and systems for both cyberspace and outerspace. . Last, China is happy to sit back and wait until escalation is called for, so it keeps its warheads separated from the missiles it predominantly relies on as delivery systems.

Does this make them weak? No. In fact, while Trump is threatening to shower his enemies with a stream of destruction, China has already realized the limitations of nuclear weapons. First, they are not very useful. It’s not just the moral, economic, and environmental reasons that prevent states from using nuclear weapons — they are bad on the battlefield. Real military leaders don’t want more nukes. They want shiny new conventional weapons they can actually use. Officers’ careers stall when they are assigned to staffing the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Nuclear weapons are also expensive. Militaries can’t afford the next-generation conventional technology they want while footing the bill for nuclear weapons. It will cost the United States an estimated
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
trillion over the next 30 years to maintain the existing nuclear arsenal. Why is it so expensive? These weapons are special, and they come with special risks. You have to keep them safe and secure in addition to operational. These weapons are also old. Parts of these systems will simply age-out unless they are replaced. You need a very skilled workforce to keep them going, and there is a huge age gap as millennials are drawn to the snack bars and salaries of Silicon Valley instead of the dusty corridors of the nuclear arsenal. Other costs haven’t even been calculated yet. What is the cost of accidental use? We’ve had several close calls in the few decades that we’ve had these complex weapons. How much longer will we stay lucky? By keeping their numbers small, China reduces maintenance costs and the odds of an accident.


Finally, nuclear weapons, once the definitive weapon, are now out of date. Advances in remote sensing, unmanned vehicles, and cyber-capabilities hold nuclear weapons at risk. What use is the weapon if everyone knows where it is and can even disrupt its readiness? Biological weapons are becoming cheaper, and they are more feasible members of the weapons of mass destruction family for states and nonstate actors to obtain. New technology like artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons, and hypersonic boost-glide vehicles are making conventional weapons more attractive to militaries. Nuclear weapons are not going to disappear yet, but their role in strategic stability is declining.

China is thinking smart, not big. Though they are not impressed by the bravado of a large nuclear arsenal,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
do call for equally modern nuclear weapons and delivery systems so as not to lose their ability to retaliate in the face of U.S. conventional weapons and ballistic missile defenses. In 2015, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that China may have already added multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles to its intercontinental ballistic missiles.

With its smaller, more cost-effective arsenal, China has had the time and money to project greater sea power than ever before. Proudly launching its own aircraft carrier and multiple nuclear submarines, it is not above showing off. Beijing is also developing cutting-edge conventional technologies, such as anti-ballistic missile defenses, quantum satellites, drones, hyper-glide vehicles, and cyberweapons. After all, there is more than one way to make a conquest — which China may pull off while Trump and Putin are distracted by the size of each other’s nuclear arsenals.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top