China's Nuclear Strike Force

EagleOne

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
886
Likes
87
how far it will be helpfull by having a nuclear strike force -maintaning a NO FIRST USE policy
if they want to counter US or RUSSIA (second strike have no use since most of the stategic locations will be taken out in first strike )
 
Last edited:

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
China invests in mobile strategic nuclear forces that are difficult to find

how far it will be helpfull by having a nuclear strike force -maintaning a NO FIRST USE policy
if they want to counter US or RUSSIA (second strike have no use since most of the stategic locations will be taken out in first strike )
In this thread, I mentioned that China is focusing on the expansion of her nuclear strategic forces in road-mobile ICBMs and sea-based Jin-class Type 094 submarines. Both of these strategic nuclear platforms are specifically designed to be difficult to find and "taken out in a first strike."

For the road-mobile DF-31 units, they may be moved around and located anywhere on the entire continent of China.


Where is this camouflaged and off-road DF-31 ICBM in China? You don't know? Neither does the U.S.


The Pacific Ocean is a big place. Where is this Shang Type 093 submarine in the Pacific Ocean? Hard to say. Similarly, a Type 094 Jin-class boomer cruising slowly through the Pacific Ocean is difficult to find, by design.

If you read my original post, you will find that China is also expanding her rail-mobile ICBM arsenal. Once again, finding a single DF-31 ICBM on China's entire national rail network is a guessing game. Where is the needle in the haystack? Have you found all of the DF-31 "needles?" Good luck on the endeavor.

Also, China has built at least one 5,000 km "Underground Great Wall." What are the locations of the mobile DF-31s along those 5,000 km? No one outside China has the faintest idea.

What do road-mobile DF-31s, Julang 2s carried on Jin-class submarines, rail-mobile ICBMs, and the "Underground Great Wall" have in common? These are part of the response by Chinese strategic planners to preserve China's second-strike capability.
 
Last edited:

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
Liberty Times and Epoch Times are well-known tabloid China-hating publications

Don't know about its successful launches except one, but I do know...

Surface launch in 2004 = failure
First submerged launch in 2006 = failure
Test launch in 2008 = failure

And the latest

2010 launch = failure


China: SLBM Test Launch Failed (fell back to sub and almost sank it)


A few months ago in Yellow Sea, China conducted a secret test launch of Julang-2 SLBM, but failed, according to Jan. 25 report by Liberty Times of Taiwan.

The missile with the range of 8,000 km, which can strike U.S. mainland, was mounted on a Golf-class submarine, and launched from underwater. However, after breaking out of water, its booster failed to fire up, and fell back down on the submarine.

The submarine with 83 crews and displacement of 2,880 tons was hit by the missile weighing 10 tons, and was almost sunk. Still it managed to limp back to its base.

Ten years ago, PLAN developed Julang-2 by modifying Dongfeng-31 ICBM, and successfully conducted the surface launch, but a few attempt of underwater launch all failed.

As a result, Type 094(Jin-class) submarine, China's newest model, is so far unable to be equip itself with its own SLBM's, leaving a big hole in China's offensive nuclear capability, according to the newspaper.

They succeeded in the test launch of Julang-1 from Type 092(Xia-class) submarine, hitting a target in Taklamakan Desert, but its range is only 2,000 km and this class of submarine mostly moves within coastal waters, which is why they decided to develop Julang-2.

http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2010/new/jan/25/today-p8.htm
On my Google personal preference, I have blocked Liberty Times and Epoch Times. Both are tabloid publications that publish gossipy and many untrue stories about China. I believe the sensational headline, "China: SLBM Test Launch Failed (fell back to sub and almost sank it)," speaks for itself.

I have not seen a major American newspaper (e.g. New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Times, Washington Post, USA Today, etc.) independently report the alleged incident. I am disinclined to believe the sensational claim of "fell back to sub and almost sank it." I only read serious newspapers.
 
Last edited:

EagleOne

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
886
Likes
87
For the road-mobile DF-31 units, they may be moved around and located anywhere on the entire continent of China.
thanks , but i have few doubt
do all the mobile DF units are loaded with nuclear war heads and in ready to go state ?
and in case of of war is it difficult to find a DF on mobile launcher?? cant we find it with powerfull satillites(i.e some thing as google earth found aircraft carrier http://i35.tinypic.com/3038yfp.jpg) so that we can caluculate approxmatly the postion of it ..correct me if i am wrong
will DF will have some kind of protective shield to hide from the satellite ?
and in case of submarine launch the capability of they have only 4-5 nuclear ballistic submarines each with 12 bms .how many are at ready to fire with nuke ?

because ready to fire nukes number with there Blast yield is important...for counter strike capability -IMO
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Whatever you believe, it is clear the JL-2 is not operational as it has never been fired from Jin class SSBN, much less Jin ever running a patrol with missiles.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
26,473
Likes
29,791
Country flag
Martian do you have a credible link about one successful Chinese SLBM ICBM test?I have read Chinese are not using proper launch tubes do you know anything about this?
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
Martian do you have a credible link about one successful Chinese SLBM ICBM test?I have read Chinese are not using proper launch tubes do you know anything about this?
See post #18, Washington Times reported successful SLBM ICBM test. It was also reported by Associated Press, but the article is no longer available (because it was five years ago).

I am not aware of problems with China's launch tubes.

From post #5:

"China began building its own nuclear arsenal after the country exploded its first atomic bomb in the deserts of northwestern China in 1964.

In 1971, the country became the fifth country in the world to launch a nuclear submarine.

China successfully tested a carrier rocket in 1980, shooting it from northwest China to the South Pacific to showcase its intercontinental strike capabilities.

It also conducted an underwater missile launch in 1982."

Here's the bottom line in my view:

Nuclear submarine technology in China is 39 years old. Underwater missile launch technology is 28 year-old technology. These are all roughly 30 to 40 year-old technologies. It's ancient stuff. If you want to raise questions about the technical capabilities of China's ASAT (e.g. success in 2007) or GBI (e.g. success in 2010) technologies, it is easier for me to understand because they are relatively new for China.

However, raising doubt about decades-old technology for underwater submarine launch is a puzzle to me. This is not a cutting-edge technology for China. They've been doing it for 28 to 39 years.

There is also nothing special about the engineering regarding the Julang 2. The Julang 2 is a modified version of the well-tested mobile land-based DF-31. Building on their experience with the Julang 1 and adapting the DF-31 to a sea-based platform, the result is the Julang 2. In my view, this is not a particularly noteworthy technological breakthrough for China. It is expected.
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
Very good questions

thanks , but i have few doubt
do all the mobile DF units are loaded with nuclear war heads and in ready to go state ?
and in case of of war is it difficult to find a DF on mobile launcher?? cant we find it with powerfull satillites(i.e some thing as google earth found aircraft carrier http://i35.tinypic.com/3038yfp.jpg) so that we can caluculate approxmatly the postion of it ..correct me if i am wrong
will DF will have some kind of protective shield to hide from the satellite ?
and in case of submarine launch the capability of they have only 4-5 nuclear ballistic submarines each with 12 bms .how many are at ready to fire with nuke ?

because ready to fire nukes number with there Blast yield is important...for counter strike capability -IMO
1) How many DF-31 road-mobile ICBMs are armed and on hair-trigger alert? Probably not too many. China is not as paranoid as the U.S. or Russia.

2) Is it difficult to find a road-mobile DF-31 launcher? Yes, the truck drives around. It has a camouflaged color paint-scheme; may have real tree branches on top of it; or could be hiding under a bridge, tunnel, or a cave. Just like Iraq or Serbia, there are probably many decoys prepared. Unlike Iraq or Serbia, the landmass of China is over 20 times larger than Iraq and over 100 times larger than Serbia. Good luck trying to find the DF-31 launchers.

3) Aircraft carriers are easy to find on the ocean. Firstly, they are not camouflaged. Secondly, a moving aircraft carrier leaves a giant wake. You have to be blind not to see it. Thirdly, a humongous aircraft carrier is 4 acres; it's a mobile airport. Fourthly, aircraft carrier engines are incredibly noisy. Using passive sonar, you can hear them from hundreds of miles away. Fifthly, aircraft carriers constantly launch non-stealthy airplanes. The non-stealthy F-18 Hornets can be seen on radar. Also, the heat emissions from the Hornets can be seen on infrared detectors. Basically, you can infer the position of an aircraft carrier by tracking the launches and landings of its F-18 Hornets. For all of the above reasons, no one bothers to hide an aircraft carrier. It's pointless.

All of the attributes, which make an aircraft carrier easy to track, do not apply to relatively tiny and camouflaged road-mobile trucks. Here is a few square kilometers of China's Yunnan forest. Let's pretend that you are an analyst. You decide whether you think there's a Chinese DF-31 hiding down there.


A tiny part of China's Yunnan forest

When you're finished deciding whether there's a camouflaged Chinese DF-31 in there, you only have another 9,600,000 square km of China's landmass to examine. By the way, while you were guessing whether a Chinese DF-31 was hiding in China's Yunnan forest, it might have driven off to somewhere else.

4) The DF-31 is camouflaged. Satellites will have a hard time trying to find it. A satellite with infrared detectors will easily detect a DF-31 launch. The rocket exhaust is extremely hot. Unfortunately, that means the DF-31 thermonuclear warhead is already on its way to its target. Good luck trying to stop an incoming ICBM warhead, which could be maneuverable (i.e. a MARV), in its terminal phase (e.g. Mach 10).

5) Let's make a conservative estimate. Let's assume 3 Chinese Jin-class nuclear submarines are carrying 12 Julang-2 SLBMs per sub. 3 x 12 = 36. If China destroys the top 36 cities of a major country, the casualties will be in the tens of millions. Long ago, China demonstrated mastery of the technology to precisely place multiple satellites into different orbits from one launch. Instead of satellites, the same technology can be used to place warheads into different trajectories.

I have read different estimates of China's MIRV capability. The range is from 3 to 8, with most estimates falling between 3 to 6. If the Julang-2 is MIRVed with 3 warheads, the casualty is 36 x 3 = 108 cities. If 6 is the correct estimate then 36 x 6 = 216 cities.

It is important to remember that China's technology continues to improve over time. The number of cities targeted by China's Jin-class submarines will continue to increase until it eventually hits a plateau of roughly 12 MIRVed warheads per SLBM (e.g. match Trident II SLBM technology).

Whether it's 36, 108, or 216 cities, China's Jin-class submarines with Julang-2 SLBMs serve as an important deterrent.
 
Last edited:

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
For sure the number of missiles aiming Taiwan are same as the number of missiles India has in operational status
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,696
Likes
42,598
and they tested sub kiloton operational nukes in Pakistan and north Korea. Earth seismic records were not able to detect optima reading to declare them as something from the arsenal but dud.
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
MIRVed Julang 2 being launched

For Sinophiles, the good news is that the JL-2 has been successfully tested and its blunt nose is consistent with a MIRVed missile. The bad news is that there are no known reports in the public domain of the JL-2 tested to its maximum range. For Sinophobes, invert the good news and bad news.

http://richardcochrane.hypocrisy.com/2009/05/11/china-shows-seaborne-muscle/

"China Shows Seaborne Muscle
May 11th, 2009 "¢ Richard Cochrane



China's state-run television has broadcast the first images of the new JL-2 long-range submarine-launched ballistic missile to be deployed aboard the new Type 094 ballistic missile submarine.

The JL-2 photos were broadcast on CCTV in connection with the PLA Navy's anniversary, which included a massive show of naval forces including new submarines near Hainan Island in the South China Sea.

According to photo analyses, the JL-2 appeared to be launched from a Type 094 submarine based on its cold launch from an underwater tube. The distance from the missile and what appears to be periscope and antennae suggest that it is not what had previously been used for JL-2 test launches, a PLAN Golf class conventional missile submarine obtained from the former Soviet Union.

"What is interesting about this missile shape is the very blunt nose structure," said Richard Fisher, a China military analyst at the International Strategy and Assessment Center.

"This would be consistent with the carriage of multiple warheads. Previously, Asian military sources have commented that the JL-2 could carry three or four warheads. To extend its range, this missile likely uses an aerospike, as does the U.S. Trident SLBM," he said. The aerospike engine maintains its efficiency across a wide range of altitudes through the use of an altitude compensating nozzle.

Fisher said that so far there have been no reports indicating the JL-2 has been successfully launched to its full range, which may be between 7,000 and 8,000 kilometers.

"However, it appears that the PLA may seek to divide its early enlarged 'minimum' deterrent of about 120 missiles between the Navy and the Second Artillery. This will serve to focus even greater Chinese and U.S. attentions on the new PLAN SSBN base on Hainan Island, which may host most of the estimated five 094 SSBNs," he said."
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Another fake photo. It don't look nothing like a DF-31, from which it is derived.

 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
Another fake photo. It don't look nothing like a DF-31, from which it is derived.

The Julang-2 is not a DF-31. The Julang-2 is a MODIFIED DF-31. Look up the definition of "modified" in the dictionary and stop wasting everyone's time.

You're starting to annoy me with your ridiculousness. In one of my other threads, you claimed that China's spacewalk was fake. In a different thread, you made the absurd claim that China's high-speed-railroads were being built by hand. Now, you're doing it again.

Here are four pictures of DF-21 missiles. Each has a different nose-cone shape. The different nose-cones indicate a different modified-version of the missile. This is basic knowledge. To find the pictures and paste them to educate you, I have wasted ten minutes of my time. This is the last time that I will respond to a ridiculous post from you, Armand.


Early model DF-21


DF-21C with a Pershing II-type nose-cone


DF-21 modified-version; Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (i.e. ASBM or "Carrier Killer")


"Although the exact name of the missile is not known, sources mentioned a KT-1/SC-19 system described as being based on a modified DF-21 medium-range ballistic missile or its commercial derivative, the KT-2, with a kinetic kill vehicle mounted. The 11-meter DF-21 missile weighs 15 metric tons." (See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2430931/posts)

Here is the bottom line: The external shell of missiles (e.g. early-model DF-21, DF-21C, ASBM, or ASAT) in a family may look different. However, internally, the missiles share many components. Everyone knows this because it happens in the civilian sector as well. For example, the early model Lexus 250 was based on the chassis of the Toyota Camry. Externally, the Lexus and Toyota looked completely different. Everyone knows this and yet, Armand is determined to keep polluting my threads.
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
It is not only the wrong shape to be JL-2 but the wrong size. Your photos prove that well enough.
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
It is not only the wrong shape to be JL-2 but the wrong size. Your photos prove that well enough.
Get lost troll. You've wasted enough of everyone's time. The analysis by the respected Richard Fisher is important and relevant. Your comments fail on both criteria.

Richard Fisher is worth reading. Armand, you are not. Now, go annoy someone else.

From the article in post #32:

""What is interesting about this missile shape is the very blunt nose structure," said Richard Fisher, a China military analyst at the International Strategy and Assessment Center."
 
Last edited:

EagleOne

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
886
Likes
87
5) Let's make a conservative estimate. Let's assume 3 Chinese Jin-class nuclear submarines are carrying 12 Julang-2 SLBMs per sub. 3 x 12 = 36. If China destroys the top 36 cities of any country, the casualties are in the tens of millions. Long ago, China demonstrated mastery of the technology to precisely place multiple satellites into different orbits from one launch. Instead of satellites, the same technology can be used to place warheads into different trajectories.
I have read different estimates of China's MIRV capability. The range is from 3 to 8, with most estimates falling between 3 to 6. If the Julang-2 is MIRVed with 3 warheads, the casualty is 36 x 3 = 108 cities. If 6 is the correct estimate then 36 x 6 = 216 cities.
in this case will all the missile are loaded with nuclear war head ?
if present estimates of china nuclear arsenal is right they have less then 500 nuclear war heads -
so in this case how many possible nuclear war heads are in ready to fire state with julang-2 /df-31 may be less then 10%
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
Common guys, pics may be right or wrong. Basic thing matters is the number of missiles China has and which countries are they pointed at.
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
417
in this case will all the missile are loaded with nuclear war head ?
if present estimates of china nuclear arsenal is right they have less then 500 nuclear war heads -
so in this case how many possible nuclear war heads are in ready to fire state with julang-2 /df-31 may be less then 10%
Technically, you are correct. The Julang 2 can be armed with either a conventional or nuclear warhead. However, no one seriously believes that China spent decades and invested untold billions of dollars to develop strategic nuclear-capable weapons and instead, armed them with conventional warheads.

You won't get any argument from me that China doesn't have enough nuclear warheads. The big puzzle is why haven't they built more. I can readily think of five different explanations.

Firstly, they don't think the world situation is that dangerous and hence, there is no urgency to building more thermonuclear weapons. Secondly, China does have plenty of nuclear weapons in its "Underground Great Wall." Hypothetically, there could be hundreds of MIRVed DF-31 ICBMs hidden under the 5,000 km mountain range. Similarly, there could also be hundred of rail-mobile MIRVed DF-31 ICBMs hidden in railcars on China's massive rail network.

Thirdly, China has intentionally chosen to prioritize economic development over macho nuclear brinkmanship. Fourthly, China is relying on strategic nuclear ambiguity to create doubt and uncertainty in the minds of her opponents (e.g. since the other side doesn't know how many thermonuclear weapons that we have, they will never step to the edge of nuclear war). Fifthly, in the worst-case scenario, China will nuke the Russians (with plentiful nuclear SRBMs and IRBMs) and "borrow" the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal against the U.S. The Russians will be backed into a corner. Do the Americans get to laugh at the extinct Chinese and Russians or do all three countries perish together?

Unfortunately, I don't have any confidence in the five explanations that I proffered. I need proof and it is in short supply. In conclusion, I agree with you that China appears to have a significant lack of thermonuclear warheads. The obstacle is not technology, financial resources, or industrial capacity. I would be interested if someone could make a persuasive case to explain the conundrum.
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,645
Country flag
Get lost troll. You've wasted enough of everyone's time. The analysis by the respected Richard Fisher is important and relevant. Your comments fail on both criteria.

Richard Fisher is worth reading. Armand, you are not. Now, go annoy someone else.

From the article in post #32:

""What is interesting about this missile shape is the very blunt nose structure," said Richard Fisher, a China military analyst at the International Strategy and Assessment Center."
It is the cold launch canister used for pop-up tests. It isn't a missile at all. No one would be that close to a missile launch filled with combustible fuel.



Now this is a REAL SLBM ...

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top