This is an English forum, use English (you can just use some translator).
Also, you talking about the rumours about some old one, or newer?
China IRBM/SRBM (and non-ICBM/SLBM) thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Also, you talking about the rumours about some old one, or newer?
Not sure where to post this, but if folks are interested, I break down the planning process behind how the PLA would target adversary forces with long-range missiles like the DF-21 and DF-26. I pull from PLA grey literature and Chinese language sources to show the Operations Research (OR) methods used by PLA planners and targeting systems to find targets, allocate weapons, and phase strikes over time.
Very interesting read. There's so many Chinese papers describing techniques along the lines of what you've described in the post though that I wonder how many of them are actually used in practice.
No need for skepticism...
These systems have been operational for years – nothing strange about it. The RAND Corporation was teaching China how to use such frameworks last century. Since the early 2000s, China has been building this architecture. This is just part of network-centric warfare and systemic confrontation. The intelligence perception, analysis, and decision-making systems in network-centric warfare aren’t just for tactical engagements – they’re equally applied to strategic-level confrontations. It’s all one unified system making decisions based on standardized data sources (though that description has flaws), displaying information to relevant command levels for operational visualization and decision-making. Isn’t this exactly how America’s systems operate too?
Look at the performance of Chinese weapon systems (especially systemic warfare capabilities) in recent India-Pakistan conflicts. Look at the J-36 and J-50. Then compare them to the F-47 and F-55.
China long ago took America’s strategic-tactical theories and PowerPoint-concept “advanced weapons,” then actually developed and deployed them.
Western arrogance persists in believing “if we haven’t done it, China can’t.” You’ll find almost no one here providing the “evidence” you demand – because any evidence could be dismissed. If I told you I personally know retired senior officers from China’s Strategic Weapons Force, would you believe me? How would you verify I’m not lying? I’m just illustrating the point – don’t take it literally.
The Tortoise and the Hare fable perfectly describes today’s reality – the West is that complacent rabbit.
Finally, here’s common knowledge many have heard but few truly grasp: After the Gulf War, America proposed the network-centric warfare concept (today’s “systemic warfare”) in the late 20th century, originally planning full military transformation by 2030. China immediately began parallel research and maintained its timeline. Between 2005-2008, China identified systemic flaws in America’s weapons R&D system – tracing back to the 1980s-90s when countless advanced U.S. weapons programs faced cancellations and failures. Basic statistical analysis of congressional reports and hearings reveals this pattern.
Today, America’s network-centric warfare milestones are slipping, while China’s progress remains steady. The reality likely is: China’s capabilities in these fields now at minimum match America’s, with high probability of having surpassed them.
Are you sure you're replying to the right post
I think this should be posted in the self-propelled gun/rocket artillery thread instead.
I'm sorry
It's okay. Just wanna point out that the 750mm Fire Dragon-480 is still considered to be a multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS) instead of a proper ballistic missile (BM), despite having strike ranges befitting a TBM.
How powerful is df-17 compared to Russian zircon or oreshnik