China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread


gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
AFAIK the Chinese typically have at least one extra reload missile per missile tube in their brigades.
So the idea the thing is disposable seems bunk to me.
In fact a lot of what is said in the article seems like nonsense. Sure you need to know the coordinates of the launch site to compute a flight trajectory but there are more modern ways to do that than to use mechanical gyroscopes and inertial navigation. Heck, you can just use Beidou or even input the coordinates manually if need be. For all we know the transport truck might have a navigation system with builtin compact stellar and inertial navigation on it, much like a tank, and just communicates the launch site coordinates to the missile by wire or radio.
 
Last edited:

ougoah

Captain
Registered Member
Well we're all definitely speculating with incomplete information and incomplete knowledge of how ICBM brigades work. I think we're all done here. None of us know what alternatives, if any, are used if the Russian approach is not visually obvious. The article doesn't have good logic because it bases many arguments on extremely outdated information and incomplete information at that. The solid fuel theory is bunk and the idea that Chinese ICBMs cannot launch from random positions is also extreme bunk. Why? Just because photos of the cannister and TEL doesn't seem to include a Russian style gyro box at the same position as Russian ICBMs? Gimme a break. What sort of logic is this?

It's up to the person suggesting Chinese ICBMs cannot launch from random positions to prove that. And no, tunnels for ICBM doesn't prove this theory.

As for reloads. I gotta admit, I don't know the details. What are the details and how are they important? I'm assuming they need cranes to lift off the spent cannister before reloading. This could take an hour or more but what's carrying the reload? Why not just have another TEL then?
 

halflife3

Junior Member
Registered Member
Where did people ever came up with the "China has 300 nuclear warheads" figure. Let it be known that China is the only member of the 5 recognized nuclear weapons states to have NEVER DISCLOSED ITS NUCLEAR ARSENAL. I personally am puzzled how western analysts even got the 300 figure anyway. They have been saying that since the 1990s. There is no way I would believe China's nuclear arsenal remain unchanged for the past 30 years while it is adding thousands of new nuclear capable delivery systems, and China is not stopping there.

New systems like the brand new DF-41 that can field around 10 MIRVs, DF-17 hypersonic missile have already been showcased, indicating operational service. New Type 096 SSBN that can fire the new JL-3 SLBM(sucessfully test fired multiple times already) and nuclear capable H-20 stealth bombers will fielded in this decade. More hypersonic weapon systems are also being developed. This shows that China takes nuclear deterrence very seriously!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But these modernizations are also being noticed by the US. Recently, the US side has become increasingly worried about the pace of China's nuclear modernization, calling it a "crash buildup". According to US, China's rapid pace in nuclear modernization is making it increasingly inconsistent with China's official "no first use" and "minimal deterrence" policy. This has alarmed the US so much that they finally decided China needs to be included in a future nuclear arms control treaty along with Russia. This highlights China's strong and credible nuclear deterrent.

"They want the world to believe that they only have a few hundred nuclear weapons, and the question you have to ask them is: Why have they never admitted how many nuclear weapons they actually have today? Right? Fu Cong has said what you said. My question is: Why don’t we start with you telling us how many weapons you have and how many you plan to build?"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
August 18, 2020

Question: Thanks very much for doing this and for taking my question. I heard – Ambassador, I have a question regarding the United States’ assessment of China’s nuclear buildup. I remember that in this year’s annual China military power report there was – well, a forecast or a prediction that China’s nuclear arsenal would double in size with regards to the number of warheads, I think, over ten years. And, many of us were slightly surprised when that came out. Can you clarify how that number was arrived at, and what that means in the context of the security concerns that you’ve outlined earlier? Thank you.

Ambassador Billingslea: Kathrin, great question. A couple of important aspects of that report. First of all, the numbers ascribed by the United States to China are – is an estimate that – first of all, is an estimate that we would be comfortable releasing publicly. And it is with reference to the operational warheads of China only – not the total size of their arsenal, their stockpile, nor perhaps, at any level of granularity that we would be prepared to discuss, except in a public format.

Also, I would tell you that the estimates of what they intend to do – what we’ve said is that they intend to at least double. At least double. And again, I cannot get further into that with you today
, but I would very much recommend that we take note of a recent editorial run by the editor-in-chief of the Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece, the Global Times, where he publicly called for the deployment of a thousand warheads of the DF-41 ICBM alone.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
October 1, 2020

These are recent statements coming from Marshall Billingslea, chief negotiator for nuclear arms control representing the US. Let that sink in. Even the US do not believe China has just a "few hundred nuclear weapons".;)

To better put into perspective China's buildup from US Admiral Charles Richard:

"Again, don't shoot behind the duck, right? It's not where they are, it's where they're going, right? And when China sets its mind to something, they are very impressive in their ability to go accomplish it.

They're -- and you've got to be careful about mirror imaging. They're not put together the same way that we are. But one of my favorite examples, and I think I have it here because it -- I want to get the numbers right -- you know, China just established a Coast Guard in 2013, right? And again, they've had other forces but they -- they decided they wanted a Coast Guard and in 2013 -- they have 255 ships today -- or I'm sorry, 255. In seven years, they go build 255, on -- on top of all of the other ships they're building. I just think that their strategic forces are next on their to-do list, right, and I'm trying to posture us for the threat that we're going to face, not the one that we have today."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Orthan

Junior Member
I suspect the Chinese approach offers better results
It cant offer better results because replacing the canister with a crane demands a heavier cannister which affects the performance of the TEL.

you can just use Beidou or even input the coordinates manually if need be. For all we know the transport truck might have a navigation system with builtin compact stellar and inertial navigation on it, much like a tank, and just communicates the launch site coordinates to the missile by wire or radio.
You cant use beidou if its jammed, and input the coordinates manually without them having been previously marked (a pre-defined launch point). You must know more than i do, but what exactly is this navigation system that the tanks use?

the idea that Chinese ICBMs cannot launch from random positions is also extreme bunk. Why? Just because photos of the cannister and TEL doesn't seem to include a Russian style gyro box at the same position as Russian ICBMs?
Give an alternative explanation to the arguments that have been made based on the evidence that has been presented, not just saying no because you dont believe it.

Why not just have another TEL then?
Perhabs because they are expensive?

It's not an interesting question because it's based on the false premise that the ridiculous article the troll @Orthan posted has anything to do with reality. This is like discussing the merits of the idea that the moon is made of green cheese because a troll posted an article by a know-nothing which made that claim.
You dont have nothing to debate the information that i posted, and instead resort to name calling. Nice poster that you are.
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
You cant use beidou if its jammed, and input the coordinates manually without them having been previously marked (a pre-defined launch point). You must know more than i do, but what exactly is this navigation system that the tanks use?
UAV position is known all the time or else how can they navigate the sky? So adding a laser designator that measure the position of launcher in respect to the UAV will fix the position of the launcher Once you know that, you fix the position of preplanned target or over radio give the target designation Then generate the flight planned Shoot and the laser gyro track the flight plan until it hit the target

I assume UAV use Beidou but I am sure they also have laser gyro as backup system in case they lost the Beidou for some reason Assuming they can communicate with the launcher But that has been proven with latest experiment !

Please don't spout nonsense on this forum based on your well known bias to post questionable article by unknown poster with dubious qualification ! And call it as truth It is nothing but HUBRIS of A Russian that is well known to diss out any Chinese progress out of jealously and sense of superiority complex China is way more advance than 60's.

As to China completely lost Navigation system by satellite it is nonsense since they are prepare for it with small cheap KZ 11 (Kuaizhou) rocket and micro satellite that can be launched at moment notice !
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
AFAIK the Chinese typically have at least one extra reload missile per missile tube in their brigades.
So the idea the thing is disposable seems bunk to me.
In fact a lot of what is said in the article seems like nonsense. Sure you need to know the coordinates of the launch site to compute a flight trajectory but there are more modern ways to do that than to use mechanical gyroscopes and inertial navigation. Heck, you can just use Beidou or even input the coordinates manually if need be. For all we know the transport truck might have a navigation system with builtin compact stellar and inertial navigation on it, much like a tank, and just communicates the launch site coordinates to the missile by wire or radio.
The Russian ICBM TELs has a built in antenna/navigation system module, at the end of the launch canister.

Logically, after erection it is the highest point of the truck, so the antenna needs to be installed there.

It most likely a composition of several independent orientation system, GLONASS/ surface radio/optical / solar/ celestial.

If you can't see the antennas/ box modules at the end of the missiles on the Chinese TELs then it doesn't have navigation system.


There can be independent truck to feed the launch coordinates/ time to the TEL, but that needs to have a mast as high as the erected missile (otherwise it could give inferior data compared to that if they install it at the end of the missile) , and it needs to be next to the launcher, or the distance/ angle between the car and the TEL needs to be calculated.
So , it would be inferior ,more expensive and less robust than if you simply put it at the end of the missile.

UAV position is known all the time or else how can they navigate the sky? So adding a laser designator that measure the position of launcher in respect to the UAV will fix the position of the launcher Once you know that, you fix the position of preplanned target or over radio give the target designation Then generate the flight planned Shoot and the laser gyro track the flight plan until it hit the target
To generate a location from airborne objects you need at least 4 of them visible (having good signal) from the receiver.

Preferably not bounced signal, but straight.

Exactly the same equation like using satellites for positioning purposes - you need to see at least four of them.
 

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
Are Chinese submarines also limited where they can only launch at a certain place in the ocean since both SLBMs are based on the DF-31 and DF-41? What's the point of having a submarine again?
Not the missile miss a function, but the TEL.

The submarine could use way more expensive equipment, it needs one for 16+ missile.
 

Top