Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Number of China's ICBMs - Capability

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Number of China's ICBMs - Capability

    The power of nuclear weapons make it very easy to destroy any country in the world. The nuclear war strategy of all major powers is to ensure the mutual destruction. China is not excluded. Since US and Russia are so scared of that their nuclear arsenals will be knocked out by enemy's first strike, or in such a desire of initiating the first strike, they simply increase the nuclear weapon stock in desperation. And most of these weapons are not for attacking enemy directly, just make the number big so the leftover from the first strike can still kill the enemy.

    For Chinese, they are scared too, but they can't afford to join the nuclear race, due to technical and economic reasons. Chinese nuclear development started from Russian transfered, far less advanced technologies, although they made fast progress from that baseline. Russian didn't tell Chinese everything, so when they began to develop more advanced stuffs, they ran into difficulties. Assisstance is both magic and mistake, which will help you and mislead you at same time.

    From official sources, China tested its first missle in 1960, fired the first battle MRBM, DF-2 in 1964, first IRBM, DF-4 in 1971, and all of them were liquid fueled. The decision was made in Mar, 1965 to develop liquid fuel ICBM, but not succeeded until 1980, when DF-5 was tested successfully. The long time shows how many problems they encounted, part of reason was due to the chaos in Mao's last years. Their main problem in developing ICBM should be in missle guidance and vehicle re-entry areas, since the longer the range, the bigger the error and higher the speed. And they had to solve the problem themselves.

    China established the fire on warning mechanism in 1984, and in 1987 Deng declared that China obtained the second strike capability. This may be due to the tunnel networks were basically completed at this time and missles in service should be all liquid fuel based.

    As for solid fuel missle, from official sources we know the research began in 1956, and the official development started in 1962, there were no any help from Russia in this field. Chinese encounted lots of technical problems in propellant, but by 1966, they managed to cast a 5 foot diameter solid fuel engin and made it work. Decision was made in Mar, 1967 to develop the solid fuel strategic missles, but not one design even came onto the paper until 1978. After 1980, development accelerated fast, and technical breakthrough was achieved in 1984. Most technical difficulties in manufacture, storage, transporation, launch, quidance control were overcome and whole integrated system were tested in success in Apr/May of 1984. Due to the achievement, this year Chinese military decided all their future strategic nuclear missles should be solid fuel based.

    In May, 1985, China's first solid fuel mobile MRBM DF-21 was tested, improved version was tested in May, 1987. Same year in Sep, first solid fuel SLBM was tested successfully.

    Unofficial sources said DF31/DF41 series solid fuel ICBM started their development in 1986, which sounds reasonable, regarding the technology progress at that time. The first DF31 picture appeared from a US spy stellite photo in 1993(I saw it before), since then more and more photos emerged, and it came public in 1999. For China 10 year seems quite long to develop a solid fuel ICBM, because all the technologies were available. Maybe its development waited for the MIRV progress. China launched 3 satellites from a single rocket in 1981, and repeated it for many times later. It is said that its first MIRV test was performed in 1986, which is never confirmed. But we know China conducted may times small yield nuclear tests, their last one has the yield less than 5,000 ton TNT, which may prove their progress.

    From the above, we can conclude that China didn't have any ICBM before 1980. Since then to early 1990s, very limited number liquid fuel ICBMs may be deployed, because China's liquid fuel ICBM is a long due program. Shortly after China succedded in developing it, its solid fuel missle technology became muture, so it was quite unnecessary to deploy them in large-scale. In 1970s and 1980s, Soviet Union is China's main enemy, and Chinese DF3/DF4 can cover most of part of Soviet land, eliminated the need to make large number of DF5 family.

    10-30 is quite a reasonable number of Chinese deployed ICBMs before middle of 1990s. With the DF31 series development completed, this number will be increased quickly to meet China's nuclear war strategy.

  • #2
    I am writting a serial now:

    Chinese strategic nuclear arsenals - ICBM

    It's very hard to get accurate data regarding to Chinese strategic nuclear force. You have to take a guess work to estimate what kind of systems they have, let alone numbers. Since Chinese has a very different view from west on deterrence issue, they simply hide all the details.

    So we can only take a guess, based on the public resources:

    DF-5:

    This liquid fuel type ICBM is the only official confirmed one, first generation Chinese ICBM with single warhead, mega ton level yield, entering into service in middle 80s. Some of them sit in silos(I saw one photo before), some stored in tunnels. China has unique geographic condition, with 70% of land covered by huge rock mountains, so it's natural for them to take that advantage. The 80s offical source confirmed the initial tunnel network was completed in early 80s. Some semi-official source stated that China obtained the fire on warning capability in 1984, with 5 command centers. As for number, I think 20 around ICBMs at the end of 80s is credible, which is disclosed by one high ranking offical in 1990, who escaped to US. Since China's main enemy is Soviet Union before 90s, most of their nuclear arsenals were in middle range.

    DF-5A:

    The information of this type ICBM is circulated for quite a time, but never being confirmed by offical source, and no photos/evidences exist. DF-5A is said upgraded from DF-5 in range, and multiple warhead capability.

    DF-31:

    This solid fuel mobile type ICBM came into public in 1999, and there are quite a lot photo/evidence about it circulated around. Interesting thing is that China never confirms in public it is an ICBM, only indirect evidence proves it. Sources said this type of ICBM started its deployment from 1996, and completed in 2001.

    DF-31 in early development stage, the Chinese text indicats ICBM:
    http://member.netease.com/~rxj/pic/df31f.jpg

    This scanned photo shows DF-31 in launch practice:
    http://military.myrice.com/weapoon/missile/df31-03.jpg

    DF-31 spotted in the field:
    http://military.myrice.com/weapoon/missile/df31-04.jpg

    Does this photo captured from Chinese TV show its deployment?
    http://www.ndu.edu/nwc/nwcCLIPART/FO...ChineseDF3.jpg

    Also there are some DF-31 picutres captured in differenc places:

    DF-31 in parade, with labels on the vehicles:
    http://www.warchina.com/image/yb-df41a.jpg
    http://member.netease.com/~rxj/pic/df31.jpg
    http://www.sinodefence.com/nuclear/icbm/df31_1.jpg

    DF-31 spotted in the field, no labels on the vechicle:
    http://www.sinodefence.com/nuclear/icbm/df31_3.jpg
    http://pcwar.myrice.com/weapon/china/images/df31.jpg
    http://www.sinodefence.com/nuclear/icbm/df31_2.jpg
    http://www.wforum.com/will/images/df316.jpg

    claimed to be payload of the DF-31, not sure:
    http://member.netease.com/~rxj/pic/df31dt.jpg
    http://military.myrice.com/weapoon/missile/df31-02.jpg

    With these photos/evidence we can safely conclude that DF-31 has been in service, it not the Chinese tradition to put weapons not in service into public parade anyway.

    DF-31A/DF-41:

    There are some information around regarding these two types Chinese ICBMs, but never confirmed by the official like with DF31. DF-31A extends DF-31's range from 8000km to 12,000km. And DF-41 is a heavy type ICBM with a striking range to 14,000.

    There are tow pictures released to public, don't know from where. DF-31A, or DF-41? Looks qute similar to ss27.
    http://member.netease.com/~rxj/pic/df31a.jpg
    http://www.wforum.com/specials/upload/DF-41.jpg

    Comment


    • #3
      Number of China's ICBMs -- Tunnel Network

      From the previous post, we can clearly see that today China's ICBMs are mainly solid fuel DF-31s, or even more advanced DF-31A/DF-41s. DF-5 or DF-5A liquid fuel ICBMs will not be deployed in large-scale, since they can simply add more stage to DF-31 to extend its range and payload. There is not technology problem, DF-5 series are not road mobile ICBM anyway.

      How many ICBMs has China deployed? This is really a hard question, since China doesn't disclose its number and, spy satellites will not tell you that. Most Chinese ICBMs are hidden in the tunnel networks, with miles of rock mountain above them.

      The tunnel network project, code name "Great Wall", was confirmed by Chinese official through an article published in late 1980s. The project started from middle 1960s, at the time China had nuclear strike capability, completed in middle 1980s. Thousands of miles of tunnel were digged by PLA engineering units during 20 years. The article clearly stated that the project is for nuclear retaliation purpose, but no places mentioned, except "mountain areas". Well, 70% of China's land are covered by rock mountains.

      Last year, one tunnel netwrok of the project, code name 816, were transfered by PLA to the local civil government for commercial development. And some details are released regarding to the project.

      The "816" consists of 20kms of networked tunnels, located near Chongqing, a big city in Sichuan province. The structure was built from 1965 to 1984, to hide a whole nuclear power plant fuel production factory, which was not finished in installation and never put into operation, due to situation change. There were 60,000 PLA solidiers taking part in its construction during 20 years, with 1.5 million cubic meters of rock digged out. The tunnel network can stand mega ton level H-bomb hit.

      Since the facility is only used to produce power generator fuel, not purified material for weaopns, it not hard to image how much effort will be put into weapon production factories, and nuclear retailation delivery facilities, "to ensure absolute second strike capability", just like the article said.

      So even you cann't get the official data, and see them from satellites, you still can estimate the China's ICBM number, from their nuclear war strategy.

      Comment


      • #4
        A WHOLE LOAD OF HORSE CRAP!!!!!!!

        Unevaluated pieces of news articles with no background in military intelligence nor engineering background.

        1) The Great Wall essay is a piece of crap. The author is not even an engineer. To carry out such a project would put the real Great Wall, the Pyramids, the Hoover Dam, Handrian Wall, the Three Gorges Dam, Mount Rushmore COMBINED too shame.

        THOUSANDS OF KILOMETRES OF TUNNELS? DEEP ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND A NUKE BLAST ANYWHERE?

        If you think you can hide such a project, then you've got some real heavy good weed.

        2) Chinese soldiers didn't crap and piss before 1990? Trucks didn't need oil changes before 1990? Liquid fuel rockets didn't need maintenance before 1990? If you think Chinese nuclear forces didn't produce garbage before 1990, then, kid, I suggest you save your bullcrap for the cows who would believe you.

        3) We KNOW ALOT about Chinese nuclear forces. And I'm not even going into the secured military sources that I'm privy to. The DF-31 has NOT been confirmed to be deployed. The only suggestion has been carried out by internet wannabes such as yourself.

        Consider these facts.

        A - We know ALL the road networks in China
        B - We know where ALL the missile factories are

        If you can't put A and B together, then I ain't bothering to put the rest of your article to shame.

        Incidently, since the transfer of non-nuclear forces over to the Army, the 2nd Artillery Corps is now organized into three components - Land elements - Batteries. Air - Regiments. Sea - Boats (aka SSBN)

        So, be very careful when putting your views on the line where they can be viewed by someone who knows you are full of crap.
        Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 26 Jun 04,, 06:02.

        Comment


        • #5
          Nice to cya OOE:-D

          Comment


          • #6
            back with a bang, nice to see you Colonel! :)
            A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
              A WHOLE LOAD OF HORSE CRAP!!!!!!!

              Unevaluated pieces of news articles with no background in military intelligence nor engineering background.
              I have a higher university engineering degree and more experienced than you, I am pretty sure.

              1) The Great Wall essay is a piece of crap. The author is not even an engineer. To carry out such a project would put the real Great Wall, the Pyramids, the Hoover Dam, Handrian Wall, the Three Gorges Dam, Mount Rushmore COMBINED too shame.

              THOUSANDS OF KILOMETRES OF TUNNELS? DEEP ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND A NUKE BLAST ANYWHERE?

              If you think you can hide such a project, then you've got some real heavy good weed.
              The Gread Wall project is not from an essay, it is from the official Chinese article, anybody releasing these kind of information must get authority from their militry. Chinese official source confirmed it takes about 30 years to construct the project, and you can look at 816 tunnel network about their scope, all the data are from official article, which says the tunnel can stand mega ton level blast.

              China's land covered mostly by mountains, the moutains are so high that Alps and Rockies are worthless to mention if they were in China. Tunnel through these rock mountains means you have miles of rock above it, you can calculate how much mega tons of TNT needed to destroy it, if you are really an engineer.

              2) Chinese soldiers didn't crap and piss before 1990? Trucks didn't need oil changes before 1990? Liquid fuel rockets didn't need maintenance before 1990? If you think Chinese nuclear forces didn't produce garbage before 1990, then, kid, I suggest you save your bullcrap for the cows who would believe you.
              Mind you that operating an missle doesn't a lot of manpower. Besides the Chinese tunnel networks are distributed system, not centrialized. US can't even track the Iraq missle launchers during the first Gulf war not very long ago, and how big is China? how complicated is China's geographic condition?

              3) We KNOW ALOT about Chinese nuclear forces. And I'm not even going into the secured military sources that I'm privy to. The DF-31 has NOT been confirmed to be deployed. The only suggestion has been carried out by internet wannabes such as yourself.
              The conclusion of DF31 deployment is based on those photo evidence, and also they are in public parade 5 years ago. I don't know what else evidence you used to deny it. And what else evidence do you need to confirm its existence in "military intelligence"? Your point 3 is direct against you point 2, since US military knows everything already and still its deployed or not "has NOT been confirmed". LOL

              Consider these facts.

              A - We know ALL the road networks in China
              B - We know where ALL the missile factories are
              A. You can't track all these factories/roads 24 hours, no one has the ability. Ddon't need an engineering degree to know that. And it is quite stupid if one claims it with an engineering degree.
              B. If you think the roads can tell you everything you are dead wrong. It may be surprisd for you to know that from center of Beijing, you can travel to the mountain area 100 kms away, without being seen by anybody. And that is true, you can do that totally in underground.

              Comment


              • #8
                Bachelor of Mathematics, Masters of Digital Communications, 17 years as a Combat Engineer, earning the rank as Lieutenant-Colonel of Engineers. Do you want to keep matching creditenitals?

                There is NO official document about the Great Wall project. The ONLY reference is from an essay by a Singapore University professor. I have been watching the PLA for over 12 years. How long have you've been watching.

                And if you think that we can't watch a road in and out of a missile factory 24/7/365, you've got some serious weeds.

                Do your own friggin math. From your own post, it took 20 years for 60,000 engineers to dig 20kms of tunnels. Do the math for thousands of kms. You've just exhausted every man in the PLA for the next 100 years.

                Let me educate you some things.

                1) You look for roads that go nowhere. Unless the PLA decides to park their nukes right in the cities or any other civie concentration where any Joe Farmer can watch and complain about the polution.

                2) Every battery would have at least ONE battalion guarding it.

                3) That means for every battery, there's at least 1000 people and if you think we can't find garbage for a 1000 people in the middle of nowhere, you seriously under-estimate our intel capabiliites.
                Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 28 Jun 04,, 21:17.

                Comment


                • #9
                  As for the DF-31, like the JL-12, we know the 2AC has tested it. We have yet to find out who got what, when, and where. All the existing batteries have NOT converted from their old stocks. And the 2AC has NOT expanded in size, meaning no new batteries.

                  Unless you have intel to counter this assertion, then, no, the DF-31 has NOT been confirmed to be deployed. They've made it. They've tested it. But they have NOT deployed it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
                    Bachelor of Mathematics, Masters of Digital Communications, 17 years as a Combat Engineer, earning the rank as Lieutenant-Colonel of Engineers. Do you want to keep matching creditenitals?
                    That proves I am right, I have a master degree in engineering, having a interest in military since I was 10.

                    There is NO official document about the Great Wall project. The ONLY reference is from an essay by a Singapore University professor. I have been watching the PLA for over 12 years. How long have you've been watching.
                    I READ it myself on People's Daily back at that time, through my own eyes.

                    And if you think that we can't watch a road in and out of a missile factory 24/7/365, you've got some serious weeds.
                    How? Dont tell me using satellites.

                    Do your own friggin math. From your own post, it took 20 years for 60,000 engineers to dig 20kms of tunnels. Do the math for thousands of kms. You've just exhausted every man in the PLA for the next 100 years.
                    That's total number of soldiers taking part in the project during 20 years. Not 60,000 people all the time.

                    Let me educate you some things.

                    1) You look for roads that go nowhere. Unless the PLA decides to park their nukes right in the cities or any other civie concentration where any Joe Farmer can watch and complain about the polution.

                    2) Every battery would have at least ONE battalion guarding it.

                    3) That means for every battery, there's at least 1000 people and if you think we can't find garbage for a 1000 people in the middle of nowhere, you seriously under-estimate our intel capabiliites.
                    Even in the US it doesn't work that way. The Chinese bases are constructed in the mountain areas, no regular people and you don't need a lot of soldiers to guard them.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
                      As for the DF-31, like the JL-12, we know the 2AC has tested it. We have yet to find out who got what, when, and where. All the existing batteries have NOT converted from their old stocks. And the 2AC has NOT expanded in size, meaning no new batteries.

                      Unless you have intel to counter this assertion, then, no, the DF-31 has NOT been confirmed to be deployed. They've made it. They've tested it. But they have NOT deployed it.
                      It's totally a joke. Which unit tested it?

                      You didn't see so you think it doesn't exist.

                      Have you ever seen a DF-5A missle photo before? Does it exist?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        "End of road" theory is totally a joke, only works on paper.

                        Every road has a lot of branchs which ends some where, eather a shop, a mall or a factory, or a house, or even pass some facilities.

                        You can't analysis all of them, no man power!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          As for the 2AC size, it's really pity all the western sources haven't updated their information for quite a while.

                          Take an example, I read a report from Taiwan today. 2AC has 7 army units, one of them, base 52 has 7 brigades now.

                          But you check all western sources, they still say 2AC has 6 division units, Base 52 has only 2 brigades.

                          For how many years already?

                          LOL

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Really,

                            What engineering? Electronic? Mechanical? Civil? Spell it out. I have my qualifications. Until you state your qualifications, your opinion ain't worth squat.

                            We know the DF-31 has been tested because we saw the launches. Amongst birds, there is HUMIT to watch those factories. And before you raise your point about the Kuwait Scud Hunts. We knew EXACTLY how many the Iraqis had and we knew EXACTLY where they were. We just didn't know where they went.

                            You ain't a civil engineer. Otherwise, you would've gotten my point. You look for roads that can support a heavy missile and then, you look for enough garbage for a 1000 people, then you start your heavy looking such as holes in the ground, maintenance shacks, guard towers, minefields, rapid reaction forces, etc.

                            We know the size of the 2AC by simple math. Take the official size of the PLA Subtract the Land Forces. Subtract the Navy. Subtract the Air Force. You've got the 2AC.

                            Taiwan sources? Eh? Next thing you're telling me that you read HK Fruity papers. Like I said, kid, I'm military. What I've given you is what's availbale publically. I ain't even going into the sources that I'm privy to.

                            Again, there is NO Official documentation concerning the Great Wall. We looked. We've requested it. Some, like Colonels Ken Allen and Denis Blasko who got direct personal contacts within the PLA never even got an acknowledgement that such a document, never mind the project, even existed. Colonel Denis Blasko was the American Military Attache in Beijing and to this day, his contacts don't even know what the Great Wall is.

                            Newspapers can be wrong also. And the People's Daily was NOT above lying.
                            Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 28 Jun 04,, 22:36.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
                              Really,
                              We know the DF-31 has been tested because we saw the launches. Amongst birds, there is HUMIT to watch those factories. And before you raise your point about the Kuwait Scud Hunts. We knew EXACTLY how many the Iraqis had and we knew EXACTLY where they were. We just didn't know where they went.
                              Yeah, DF-31s were already in parade and so many photo about them, and you can't see it.

                              You ain't a civil engineer. Otherwise, you would've gotten my point. You look for roads that can support a heavy missile and then, you look for enough garbage for a 1000 people, then you start your heavy looking such as holes in the ground, maintenance shacks, guard towers, minefields, rapid reaction forces, etc.
                              You don't need 1000 people to fire a missle, just let you know.

                              We know the size of the 2AC by simple math. Take the official size of the PLA Subtract the Land Forces. Subtract the Navy. Subtract the Air Force. You've got the 2AC.
                              Have you ever been in military before? I really doubt. How about they give you a fake number of Air force? Is that called military intelligence?

                              Again, there is NO Official documentation concerning the Great Wall. We looked. We've requested it. Some, like Colonels Ken Allen and Denis Blasko who got direct personal contacts within the PLA never even got an acknowledgement that such a document, never mind the project, even existed. Colonel Denis Blasko was the American Military Attache in Beijing and to this day, his contacts don't even know what the Great Wall is.
                              I read it myself, I started to track Chinese military since 1969.

                              Do you know why?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X