China test fires new long-range missile with the range of 8,699 miles

sam919

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
48
Likes
4
http://freebeacon.com/manchu-missile-launch/
BY: Bill Gertz
August 15, 2012 5:00 am

China's military conducted the first flight test of a new long-range intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that U.S. officials say will be Beijing's first strategic missile armed with multiple warheads.

The flight test of the DF-41 road-mobile ICBM occurred July 24 and is raising new concerns within the U.S. military and intelligence agencies over China's long-range missile threat, according to officials familiar with reports of the test.

The DF-41 missile is a first-strike nuclear capability, based on its mobility, estimated range, targeting precision, and multiple warheads.

In addition to shorter-range ICBMs known as the DF-31 and DF-31A, which are believed to target India and Russia, the new ICBM is said by U.S. officials to be designed to hit U.S. targets with multiple nuclear warheads.

China has claimed it will not be the first to use nuclear weapons and that its nuclear forces are designed for a counterstrike against a nuclear attack on its territory.

The DF-41 development has called into question the so-called no-first-use policy, officials said.

The test is also likely to renew debate within U.S. intelligence circles about whether China is seeking only a limited nuclear force, or is secretly building up its nuclear forces to challenge U.S. strategic power.

The new missile bolsters China's strategic forces, making them among the most diverse in the world, with a variety of short-, medium-, intermediate-, and intercontinental-range missiles.

China also has developed ground-launched anti-satellite missiles and a unique anti-ship ballistic missile with enough accuracy to hit U.S. aircraft carriers at sea.

Purported photos of China's DF-41

It is also believed that the DF-41 is part of efforts by China to develop missiles that can defeat U.S. strategic missile defenses. The Pentagon currently has a limited system capable of stopping a few North Korean ICBMs.

Former military intelligence official Larry Wortzel, a member of the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, said the DF-41"²s multiple warheads are expected to include special simulated warheads called "penetration aids" that are designed counter U.S. missile defense sensors.

The DF-41 "is mobile and will be very hard to detect and counter because of that mobility," Wortzel said. "The warhead array will most certainly include penetration aids."

A Pentagon spokeswoman declined to comment on the missile test.

Details of the flight test could not be learned.

However, past China flight tests of long-range missiles involved launches from the Wuzhai Space and Missile Test Center that flew west into the far western Chinese desert several thousand miles away. Analysts say such flight tests are often shortened by limiting the time the first stage fires in order to keep the missile within Chinese territory.

Purported photos of China's DF-41

"There are credible references to a DF-41 program in the Chinese literature," said Mark Stokes, a former Pentagon official and specialist on China's strategic nuclear systems.

"The system appears to incorporate a new, larger solid rocket motor than that used on the DF-31 series of delivery vehicles. Ground tests on the motor have been underway for a couple of years."

Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute, said the Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which is in charge of both strategic and non-nuclear missiles, is working to integrate the DF-41 into its operational inventory.

"Tentative indications exist that the Second Artillery force has established an operational test and evaluation unit in southern Henan Province," he said.

Stokes said it is not clear whether the current DF-41 program is similar to an earlier program in the 1990s that was believed to have been converted into the less-capable DF-31A missile, "but it looks real."

U.S. intelligence analysts suspect the DF-41 is based on Russia's long-range mobile missile known as the SS-27 and that Russian missile guidance technology—either purchased or stolen by Chinese spies—is part of the system.

Phillip Karber, a Georgetown University professor who has studied Chinese nuclear programs, said the DF-41 test could signal a major boost in estimates of China's strategic nuclear forces.

Purported photos of China's DF-41

Karber said it is likely the DF-41 will carry three warheads, and if the Chinese follow Russia's model of building three re-load missiles for each launcher, the number of Chinese strategic warheads could more than double from current levels.

A future DF-41 force of some 32 missiles with reloads and multiple warheads would be enough for China to target every U.S. city with a population over 50,000 people, Karber said.

"If the Chinese end up developing that kind of counter-value posture against American cities, and we do not build missile defenses against it, it spells the end of extended nuclear deterrence for Asia," Karber said. The result would be a likely nuclear arms race in Asia.

Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military affairs, said the DF-41 has been under development since 1986, but the U.S. government is only now recognizing it.

"Pentagon reticence to disclose information about this missile is further confused by the fact that Chinese Internet source images of the 18-wheel Transporter-Erector-Launcher (TEL) for this missile have been available since 2007," said Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center. "There are now four distinct images of this TEL that show it is a very large mobile ICBM, similar in size to modern Russian mobile ICBMs."

Fisher said the DF-41 test is probably the missile referenced briefly in the Pentagon's 2011 annual report on the Chinese military but omitted from this year's abbreviated report to Congress.

In addition to the DF-31 and DF-31A, "China may also be developing a new road-mobile ICBM, possibly capable of carrying a multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV)," the Pentagon report said.

The website missilethreat.com reported that the DF-41 can be armed with up to 10 MIRV warheads.

The DF-41 "is easily capable of striking the United States and will likely become the core of the PRC's nuclear strike force," Missilethreat.com stated in its assessment.

Its maximum range is estimated to be 8,699 miles, enough to reach targets throughout the United States from mobile launchers in eastern or northern China.

China, to date, has not been known to place multiple warheads on its missiles, but obtained technology from the United States in the 1990s for launching multiple satellites on a launcher that U.S. officials say provides a base for MIRV warheads.

China also obtained through espionage details of the U.S. W-88 small nuclear warhead in the 1990s, according to U.S. intelligence assessments. The W-88 is used on U.S. submarine-launched ballistic missiles and is considered suitable for multiple-warhead missiles.

China's total nuclear warhead force is unknown. U.S. intelligence agencies estimate there are between 300 and 400 warheads in the Chinese arsenal.

However, the actual number could be far higher, based on recent disclosures that China has built 3,000 miles of underground tunnels and nuclear facilities throughout the country.

Purported photos of China's DF-41

Fisher said he was told by a foreign military source in 2010 that the new long-range mobile missile could carry as many as 10 warheads, which means U.S. estimates of Chinese warhead stockpiles may be low.

"So if you assume that a PLA Second Artillery contains 18 ICBM size missiles, that could mean an increase of 180 warheads per deployed brigade," Fisher said.

"Judging from the PLA production rate for the DF-31A ICBM, it appears they could easily produce up to one new brigade per year. So if we assume that testing transitions to continuous production and deployment by 2015, then it is plausible that the DF-41 alone could account for up to 900 warheads by 2020."

China's warhead force for long-range missiles could be has high as 1,032, based on the number of submarines and mobile missile brigades China is deploying, Fisher said.

"These are plausible estimates; they may or may not happen, [but] the point is that we don't know for sure, and the PLA has made crystal clear that it does not want to talk to the U.S. government about its current or future nuclear missile capabilities," Fisher said.

In addition to China's refusal to hold strategic nuclear talks, Beijing also may be engaged in a "massive deception" that Fisher says is highlighted by the 3,000 miles of underground nuclear tunnels to support nuclear and military forces.

The flight test of the DF-41 also undermined the analysis of some specialists who have sought to play down China's nuclear ambitions.

For example, the Federation of American Scientists reported in 2008 that the DF-41 program was canceled.

The trade publication Jane's Strategic Weapons Systems reported in February that the DF-41 would replace China's older, silo-based strategic missiles, known as the DF-5 and DF-5A.

"The development for DF-41 is believed to be managed by the China Aerospace Sciences and Industry Corporation (CASIC), Beijing," Jane's stated in its report.

"The flight test program is managed by the Second Artillery Corps, based at the Wuzhai test center in Shanxi province. There was one reported ground test and a simulated cold launch in October 1999, but no test flights have been reported."

Initially, the DF-41 was described as a missile built from the first two stages of the DF-31 with a lengthened third stage.

"But it is now believed that this description referred to the DF-31A, and that the DF-41 is a new design," Jane's stated, noting that both road mobile launchers and railroad car launchers could be used.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
China claims to have the smallest arsenal in P5 But I think they may have close to a 1000 warheads already. They certainly don't have any peaceful intentions.
 

kickok1975

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,539
Likes
350
China claims to have the smallest arsenal in P5 But I think they may have close to a 1000 warheads already. They certainly don't have any peaceful intentions.
So what is the criteria of "Peaceful intention", with warheads in several thousand or tens of thousands like US and Russia?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
China claims to have the smallest arsenal in P5 But I think they may have close to a 1000 warheads already. They certainly don't have any peaceful intentions.
China has never had peaceful intentions.

The Peaceful Rise was a good ruse to disarm the world.

One can't totally blame China since that is the way the Chinese speak - high morality and so on and justify whatever they are doing.

The world knew exactly what China was doing, but they preferred to look the other way since the Chinese market and cheap labour was too much of a lure for the developed world to ignore.

The US has exported high tech technology as this US Govt Report suggests:

Technology Transfer to China

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The phenomenal economic growth witnessed in China since Deng Xiaoping first declared China's "A Open Door" policy in 1978 has led many to predict China's certain emergence as an economic superpower in the early 21st Century. Indeed, China has followed a structured path toward gradual market reform of its still largely state-owned industrial sector, which has been transfused with increasing amounts of foreign capital and technology.

There have been numerous reports over the last several years, however, of US companies being "forced" to transfer technology to China in exchange for access to this enormous market. The purpose of his study is to assess the extent to which US commercial technology is being, in effect, "coerced" from US companies engaged in normal business practices and joint ventures in China in exchange for access to China's market. The cumulative effect these transfers may have on China's efforts to modernize its economy as well as its industrial and military base is also examined. Finally, this study addresses the impact of US technology transfers to China on the issues of long-term US global competitiveness and broad economic and national security interests.

PART 1:
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER - CHINESE POLICIES AND PROCESSES

The first section of this study addresses China's foreign investment and trade policies, regulations, and practices, which largely explain how and why US technology is being transferred to China. The answer lies in the underlying and stated objectives of China's foreign investment and trade policies, the goals of which are modernization and self-sufficiency of China's industrial and military sectors. The transfer of US and other Western technology plays an important role in these efforts. This section, therefore, describes China's policies regarding reform of its scientific and research and development institutions; China's ability to absorb, assimilate, and innovate transferred technology; as well as the emerging role of US high-tech firms in China's science, technology, and research efforts.

Key findings:

Science and Technology

China's large-scale science and technology development plans and projects are dependent upon indigenous research and technological advances as well as foreign investment, research, and technology. Comparative analysis of China's rules and regulations regarding domestic and foreign investment in these and other state-run programs reveals discriminatory provisions regarding the rights and obligations of foreign partners. As a result, US companies currently engaged in collaborative research under the aegis of these state plans risk losing the monetary and technological gains from their investments.
Research and Development

By 1993, more than half of China's large state-owned enterprises (SOEs) had established technical development centers, founded for the purpose of improving production efficiency as well as increased product quality and marketability. China's policies for industrial and commercial reforms continue to emphasize the need for cooperation among China's industrial, commercial, and research enterprises in an effort to bolster the revenues of China's state-owned enterprises and to modernize China's economy as a whole. This effort has achieved mixed results to date.
In an effort to spur domestic technological innovation and to diffuse applied technologies across government, industry, scientific, and academic communities, China has established numerous National Engineering Research Centers (NERCs) across the country. These centers play a key role in China's strategy to reform its science and technology research system and are likely to become more prominent over time. The highly regarded Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) has also established over 500 commercial enterprises in the high-tech sector as part of a government program to develop "technical enterprises" as subsidiaries of existing research institutes.
China's Ability to Absorb and Apply Technology

China has no shortage of well-trained scientists, engineers, mathematicians, or other technical experts, unlike the United States. Chinese scholars educated abroad over the last decade reportedly make up more than half of the top scientific researchers now working on key research projects and receiving priority in conducting this research. As China's economic reforms continue and older researchers retire before the turn of the century, there will be more opportunities for China's younger, Western-educated, science and technology-minded researchers and engineers. As a result, high-tech firms in the United States and the government of the PRC are competing in some cases today for the services of these same talented individuals.
China is increasingly attractive for highly skilled, Western-trained Chinese workers given the increased opportunities to work with US and other high-tech firms in China. This fact plus the benefits that accrue to the US firm as a result, make it likely that the trend toward US high-tech firms establishing joint ventures accompanied by R&D and training centers in China will continue for the foreseeable future.
Foreign Direct Investment

China's investment policies are explicit in the type of foreign investment that is "prohibited," "permitted," or "encouraged," with the latter category focusing on advanced technologies. Foreign investors in high-tech industries enjoy preferential treatment, such as tax rebates and lower tariff rates as incentive to transfer technology, but are at the same time subject to regulations not imposed on domestic competitors.
China's investment policies are geared toward shifting foreign investment into the central and Western parts of China. As this trend takes hold, US companies will have to carefully determine the end use or end-user of US high-tech, potentially dual-use goods. China's national laboratories and the majority of China's military/defense industrial enterprises are located in this region, some of which are involved in foreign joint ventures.
The amount of FDI coming into China reached a peak of $111,436 million and 83,437 new contracts in 1993. The greatest growth has been in the number and value of joint venture contracts, although the number of overall contracts has decreased since 1993. China's investment and industrial policies frequently include explicit provisions for technology transfers in the form of local content requirements, production export quotas, and/or collaboration in production, research or training.

China receives more foreign direct investment than any other developing nation and currently ranks second only the United States. In 1996, the US contribution to China's FDI inflow was almost $3 billion, much of which was invested in manufacturing enterprises. The US is among the top FDI contributors to China.

The rate of Chinese utilization of FDI (contracts or investments that are actually implemented or used) amounted in 1996 to over 50 percent, for the first time since 1990. This indicates that Chinese officials and enterprises are making better use of, and can better absorb, foreign capital and the technology that typically accompanies it.

Exports outnumber imports in China's top trading, coastal zones (except in the cities of Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin, where imports exceeded exports in 1996). According to Chinese statistics, the share of Chinese exports produced in foreign-invested plants (either joint ventures or wholly foreign owned enterprises) has grown significantly over the last decade, accounting for nearly half of all exports in 1996.

Import Policies

In the effort to develop indigenous high-tech industries, China's foreign import and investment policies have become increasingly selective and restrictive in the type of imports and investments that are allowed or officially encouraged. In particular, there has been an increased emphasis on industry-specific investment and high-technology imports.

The Chinese leadership has identified several industrial sectors as "pillar" industries, namely machinery, electronics, petrochemicals, automobiles and construction materials. The central government will provide more than $60 billion through the year 2000 to promote domestic capabilities in these industries. These pillar industries will be developed with preferential state support as the primary engines of continued economic growth in China.

Defense Conversion

China's economic and industrial development strategies and defense conversion programs are also intended to assist China's military development.
China's military capabilities are considered by Western and US analysts to be far behind in terms of Western models of military technology as well as in command, control, and force structure. However, the extent to which the commercial activities of China's civilian defense industrial complex are tied to the uniformed military departments (PLA) is not well understood in the West. More research is needed on this issue.
The Role of US Technology

One of the more common approaches to establishing a presence as well as goodwill in China is by donating equipment or funds for training or education in China. Numerous US high-tech firms have done so, often in connection with one of China's leading universities or research centers.

The most significant commercial offset and/or initiative put forward by US high-tech companies in seeking approval for joint venture manufacturing partnerships or facilities in China is the establishment of an institution, center, or lab devoted to joint research and development. This is a relatively recent trend and involves many US firms in several high-tech sectors in China. Compared to donations of equipment and scholarships as well as training for Chinese workers, the new R&D initiatives would appear to involve more technology transfer to China. The extent of collaboration and product development, however, is as yet unclear.

PART 2:
US PERSPECTIVES ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS TO CHINA

This section examines US investments in three key industry sectors in China: automotive, aerospace, electronics (including telecommunications). Each case study assesses the relationship between investment by high-tech US firms and provisions in China's investment or industrial policies, competition with China's state-owned or non-state sector enterprises, the effect of China's infrastructure on investment, and the current state of the industry in China. Also addressed are technological or potential military advances that could result from US commercial technology transfers. Trade statistics are included as a means of assessing the effect(s) of US high-tech investment in these areas. Finally, a brief examination is made with regard to the approaches to technology transfers taken by the European Union nations and Japan, and contrasting these to the prevailing US view.

U. S. Bureau of Industry and Security

Read more at:
U. S. Bureau of Industry and Security - Defense Market Research Reports: Technology Transfer to China
 

sam919

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
48
Likes
4
We,india as a potential superpower next decade, should and have to utilitize the "stuff" like this so that we can ensure our global interest and face the threat from any country in the world.
 

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,805
Country flag
How do you figure out that an ICBM has a range of 8699 miles.

Wonder what is the source of the report.
 

sam919

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
48
Likes
4
I truly hope that we can come up something like this next ten years like we did on A5. Developing a missile with capability of reaching the most of world is a must for India, and we cannot put limitation on our missle with range of 5000 kls since our missle should reach whereever our intersts extend.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,032
Likes
883
Country flag
How do you figure out that an ICBM has a range of 8699 miles.

Wonder what is the source of the report.
They are fudging the whole thing, including the data, Chinese military department has dismissed such report as nonsense.
 

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,805
Country flag
There is no other independent confirmation on this new missile launch which was supposed o have happened in July.

@Ray sir, you have been a China watcher for quite some time now. Is this confirmed news?
 

Jim Street

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
126
Country flag
Whats with the "99" in the end...is it some BATA offer....:laugh:....

if they could reach 8699 why can't they go the extra mile....
Actually the vehicle from which it will be fired from will be travelling higher than 1 mile per hour giving it initial velocity to cover that mile....:rofl:

Or may be its like the MRP of many things , Rs 1199 for a shirt....which actually means Rs 1200....:D

Other than that, a good explanation is needed than this ridiculous one...:May be it was based on KM which converted to Miles become this number....take your pick...
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
So what is the criteria of "Peaceful intention", with warheads in several thousand or tens of thousands like US and Russia?
The china has disputes with all it's neighbors. It knows that the US is te only thorn in its flesh to assimilate all these territories. So yes there is no peaceful rise or intention. Once it reaches a critical threshold where it knows it can challenge the US militarily, china will move in for the kill in south china sea knowing that the US will either not interfere or knows the US will not push too hard to oppose.

The US with all it's arsenal has not goons about proclaiming entire seas and oceans as its own though it has dominated them for such a long time.
 

H.A.

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2011
Messages
1,445
Likes
687
The china has disputes with all it's neighbors. It knows that the US is te only thorn in its flesh to assimilate all these territories. So yes there is no peaceful rise or intention. Once it reaches a critical threshold where it knows it can challenge the US militarily, china will move in for the kill in south china sea knowing that the US will either not interfere or knows the US will not push too hard to oppose.

The US with all it's arsenal has not goons about proclaiming entire seas and oceans as its own though it has dominated them for such a long time.
Add to that the back door entry that Chinese have to the US's military hardware....
 

Jim Street

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
126
Country flag
The china has disputes with all it's neighbors. It knows that the US is te only thorn in its flesh to assimilate all these territories. So yes there is no peaceful rise or intention. Once it reaches a critical threshold where it knows it can challenge the US militarily, china will move in for the kill in south china sea knowing that the US will either not interfere or knows the US will not push too hard to oppose.

The US with all it's arsenal has not goons about proclaiming entire seas and oceans as its own though it has dominated them for such a long time.
may be we have to keep in mind that US left Philipines in the middle and TIME magazine called it China's victory on US.

China don't have to go to war at all. If they move to oil exploration in disputed islands, they will do with sending their navy, and no other country will risk making first strike.

Only way to stop China from taking this art, is stand-off by navy of all the countries in dispute combined, and taking a stand together.and then backed by US. Otherwise no country can or will make any aggressive reaction on its own.

I think SCS countries are wasting valuable time and should take a collective stance now. If they can't have those islands, don't let China have it. Coz once China do, there will be no turning back and it will threaten the entire region more.

These missiles means nothing, just MAD, take the enemy out as you go down....
 

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
155
Country flag
may be we have to keep in mind that US left Philipines in the middle and TIME magazine called it China's victory on US.

China don't have to go to war at all. If they move to oil exploration in disputed islands, they will do with sending their navy, and no other country will risk making first strike.

Only way to stop China from taking this art, is stand-off by navy of all the countries in dispute combined, and taking a stand together.and then backed by US. Otherwise no country can or will make any aggressive reaction on its own.

I think SCS countries are wasting valuable time and should take a collective stance now. If they can't have those islands, don't let China have it. Coz once China do, there will be no turning back and it will threaten the entire region more.

These missiles means nothing, just MAD, take the enemy out as you go down....
for starter, within ASEAN country, only mala, vietnam, phillippine, burnei has claim over SCS. and they themself has overlapping claim with each other, so no one trust with each other. and only vietnam/phillippine has more intense dispute with china on SCS. so clearly most other ASEAN don't see any benefit for them to support vietnam/phillippine, which surely anger china.
 

cw2005

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
215
Likes
53
The china has disputes with all it's neighbors. It knows that the US is te only thorn in its flesh to assimilate all these territories. So yes there is no peaceful rise or intention. Once it reaches a critical threshold where it knows it can challenge the US militarily, china will move in for the kill in south china sea knowing that the US will either not interfere or knows the US will not push too hard to oppose.

The US with all it's arsenal has not goons about proclaiming entire seas and oceans as its own though it has dominated them for such a long time.
Japan has also disputed with all his neigbour. The only reason Indian do not mind Japan because they thught it is far away from India. This could not be said for Korean, Russian and Chinese. In American's heart, they fear the Japanese most, not the Chinese. China has a large area and rich in natural resource but not Japan. Sooner of later, when Japan becomes strong again, it will invade anyone including all its neigbour and might be India too. It had happened before and might happan again.
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
926
Country flag
Japan has also disputed with all his neigbour. The only reason Indian do not mind Japan because they thught it is far away from India. This could not be said for Korean, Russian and Chinese. In American's heart, they fear the Japanese most, not the Chinese. China has a large area and rich in natural resource but not Japan. Sooner of later, when Japan becomes strong again, it will invade anyone including all its neigbour and might be India too. It had happened before and might happan again.
History repeats if only We don't learn from them~ I think U.S has been building its Capacity.. so water test of Capabilities is a mere brain exercise! No conclusion--
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top