What's new

China Conducts Another Mobile ICBM Test

I think your guys' discussion was affected by the ambient animosity between Chinese and Indian posters.

I do not suffer from such biases ...because I deal and interact with Chinese everyday in Singapore ....and I had fantastic experience with them ....

I had been advocate of Asian unity , peace always and myself have rebuked fellow Indians engaging in mudslinging

Unfortunately ...if somebody attacks you ...you are forced to defend yourself ...more so when it's question of truth.

If I make mistake I am the first one to admit

For your information ...although I did not make any drastic racial comments ....yet I registered apology in same thread " Soviet Russia helped in China get Nuclear , missile, space technology"

You yourself can check thread and would know....on top of that they reported infraction ( that's the most funny part )

But some people just can't help fighting over misplaced pride . These guys despite all official documents from Chinese Foreign Ministry archives and other sources also won't accept the fact .

I am normally very nice guy, but I don't put up with such nonsense !

Just as I respect other countries , I also expect my country to be respected that's all ....
 
Again, you are trolling.

The DF-31A is a solid fuel ICBM, where most of Russia's ICBMs are liquid fuel.

Russia got the Topol M, but it is single warhead, while the DF-31A is multi warheads.

Russia got the RS-24 Yars, but it was deployed much later than the DF-31A, so the DF-31A couldn't be derived from it.

Only the TEL derived from the Soviet technology, but the missile is cleary not.
 
Again, you are trolling.

The DF-31A is a solid fuel ICBM, where most of Russia's ICBMs are liquid fuel.

Russia got the Topol M, but it is single warhead, while the DF-31A is multi warheads.

Russia got the RS-24 Yars, but it was deployed much later than the DF-31A, so the DF-31A couldn't be derived from it.

Only the TEL derived from the Soviet technology, but the missile is cleary not.

Just coz he read a few articles, this dimwitted indian thinks he is an expert on Sino-Soviet relationship and our nuclear and ICBM program.
 
Just coz he read a few articles, this dimwitted indian thinks he is an expert on Sino-Soviet relationship and our nuclear and ICBM program.

Today's Chinese weapons have cleary very little Russian influence, even by the outer appearance.

The weapons like Su-27 and Varyag are just a cheap substitute when China's own version is not ready yet.

China bought the Sovremenny DDG, but today's Chinese DDGs have very litte technology derived from it.

China never bought Sovremenny for its technology, but only to fill up the void of China's navy quantity back in the 1990s.

If China ever decides to buy the Su-35, then don't surprise by this political decision, and the Su-35 will mostly end up like the Sovremenny DDG in PLAAF, acting as an assistance force to the main J-20/J-31 strike force.
 
Today's Chinese weapons have cleary very little Russian influence, even by the outer appearance.

The weapons like Su-27 and Varyag are just a cheap substitute when China's own version is not ready yet.

China bought the Sovremenny DDG, but today's Chinese DDGs have very litte technology derived from it.

China never bought Sovremenny for its technology, but only to fill up the void of China's navy quantity back in the 1990s.

If China ever decides to buy the Su-35, then don't surprise by this political decision, and the Su-35 will mostly end up like the Sovremenny DDG in PLAAF, acting as an assistance force to the main J-20/J-31 strike force.

I'm not an expert, but I do know a little about our defense program. What I can't stand is some idiots trying to discredit our achievements.

I thought we already placed an order for Su-35 when Xi visited Russia. Indeed, it seemed like a political decision.
 
I'm not an expert, but I do know a little about our defense program. What I can't stand is some idiots trying to discredit our achievements.

I thought we already placed an order for Su-35 when Xi visited Russia. Indeed, it seemed like a political decision.

They are sending the Sovremenny DDGs to Russia for the refit, it is also a political decision.

In fact, PLAN has already suggested to get rid of these white elephants, since those Soviet era DDGs cannot even incorporate with the datalink that is commonly shared by the indigenous PLAN warships.
 
Yes, I had a few good discussions before him before. I did not dispute the fact that we got help from Russia, but to say that we owe everything to the Russia is as valid as saying Japan today owe everything to the American who assisted in their rebuilding after WW2.
So a tutor came to help a poor kid when he was in elementary school, but they parted way after a fight. The kid then went on to high school, university and got his Phd. According to him, everything that kid had achieved, he owed it to the tutor and he has to be eternally grateful??

This is what I'm taking issue with. Enough said, don;t mean to derail this thread.
The Chinese members here believes exactly that when it comes to the West. Everything from gunpowder to paper. There is a set of double standards. For the Chinese, there is an end to foreign contributions and a beginning where China accomplished everything indigenously. For others, they owe everything they accomplished to China.
 
The Chinese members here believes exactly that when it comes to the West. Everything from gunpowder to paper. There is a set of double standards. For the Chinese, there is an end to foreign contributions and a beginning where China accomplished everything indigenously. For others, they owe everything they accomplished to China.

I can't speak for every Chinese member here, but with regard to the topic, sino-soviet, I'm glad that you agree with my view.
 
Again, you are trolling.

The DF-31A is a solid fuel ICBM, where most of Russia's ICBMs are liquid fuel.

Russia got the Topol M, but it is single warhead, while the DF-31A is multi warheads.

Russia got the RS-24 Yars, but it was deployed much later than the DF-31A, so the DF-31A couldn't be derived from it.

Only the TEL derived from the Soviet technology, but the missile is cleary not.

Russian land based mobile ICBM's are solid fueled, and Topol series of ICBM's have been tested with MIRV's. There is no clear evidence if DF-31A carries MIRV's or not, but adding the payload shroud (DF-31 does not have it) could suggest that it can haul more than one RV.

DF-31A is quite short for ICBM (less than 16 m) and it's certainly more compact than 22,7 m Topol-M, so in propulsion and material technology side it should be ahead of Topol-M.

Unless we get clear evidence that DF-31A is armed with MIRV's people should stop arguing.
 
They are sending the Sovremenny DDGs to Russia for the refit, it is also a political decision.

In fact, PLAN has already suggested to get rid of these white elephants, since those Soviet era DDGs cannot even incorporate with the datalink that is commonly shared by the indigenous PLAN warships.

Russians cannot even produce anything larger than a frigate in the post-Communist era. It will be some time before they are launching destroyers, while at the same time China is already designing nuclear-powered super-carriers.
 
Looks like the prime of Russia is diminishing, while China's one is lighting up.
China's Type 041 is already in service, with 8 in service, while Russia's Lada class is still on test.
As for nuclear missiles, sure, Russia has many more than China's but China's missiles are mostly solid fuel and use MIRVs.
 
Despite worsening Sino-Soviet relations, Khrushchev authorised the sale in December 1959 of R-11 FM as well as the Golf submarine on which it could be deployed. It was the only Soviet missile capable of hitting targets in the United States. This was also the last major Soviet weapons system received by China

Source : John Wilson Lewis and Hua Di, op. cit., pp. 31-2
 
Again, you are trolling.

The DF-31A is a solid fuel ICBM, where most of Russia's ICBMs are liquid fuel.

Russia got the Topol M, but it is single warhead, while the DF-31A is multi warheads.

Russia got the RS-24 Yars, but it was deployed much later than the DF-31A, so the DF-31A couldn't be derived from it.

Only the TEL derived from the Soviet technology, but the missile is cleary not.



" Without Soviet assistance, it would not have been possible for China to make rapid progress in its nuclear and missile endeavours. Some senior Chinese still alive in 1985 blamed Mao for the collapse of the Sino-Soviet alliance. One military leader even admitted, "We should apologise to Moscow."
Marshal Nie Rongzhen acknowledged China's immense debt to the Soviet Union. According to him, the Russians provided China with prototypes of several kinds of guided missiles, aircraft, and other military equipment and relevant technical data."

Source : Lewis and Litai, op. cit., pp. 63-4.

Again, you are trolling.

The DF-31A is a solid fuel ICBM, where most of Russia's ICBMs are liquid fuel.

Russia got the Topol M, but it is single warhead, while the DF-31A is multi warheads.

Russia got the RS-24 Yars, but it was deployed much later than the DF-31A, so the DF-31A couldn't be derived from it.

Only the TEL derived from the Soviet technology, but the missile is cleary not.



" China also sought Soviet assistance in the development of missile technology. Under the New Defence Technical Accord of October 15, 1957, Khruschev sent an Army missile battalion with two R-2 missiles (code-named SS-2 in the West), with a range of 590 kilometres, and their associated launching equipment. The nuclear warhead China was then developing was heavier than R-2's throw-weight limit of 950 kilograms. Blueprints and technical documents in 10,151 volumes and missiles were also sent to China for manufacturing, testing, and launching purposes. Soviet missile engineers arrived in Beijing to help China set up its missile industry. China purchased 12 more R-2s. This marked the beginning of China's ballistic missile programme. The missile was now called 1059.

The Soviet Union refused to supply R-12 (its code name in the West was SS-4) because, as a rule, it did not transfer state-of-the-art weapons to allies before its own deployment of at least two more advanced systems. This did not deter the Chinese from obtaining the technology even if it had to be done in an underhand manner. Chinese students studying at the Aviation Institute, Moscow, had acquired a rudimentary knowledge of the missile. This provided the basis for the dongfeng (East Wind) DF-1 missile.

Those students learned more about R-5 because it was included in their courses and was displayed during the October 1957 parade in the Red Square. They copied restricted data and notes and questioned Soviet experts in order to extract vital information about the missile. It was not on the authorised list of sales to China because the Soviet Rocket Forces had deployed its follow-on model, the R-7 that had launched the Soviet Sputnik on October 4, 1957.

Source :
John Wilson Lewis and Hua Di, "China's Ballistic Missiles: Technologies, Strategies, Goals",
International Security, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 13-4.

For those who doubt veracity and authenticity of Source

Hua Di is one of the top-ranking Chinese missile scientists. With the blessings of the Chinese government, Hua began in the 1980s a long association with the Centre for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University. He left for a short visit to China on December 31,1997 and was arrested shortly after arrival in Beijing. Accused of revealing Chinese secrets, Hua was recently sentenced to 15 years in prison. ( Mike Moore, "The Kafkaesque case of Hua Di", Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November/December 1999, pp. 12-14 and Mike Moore "Hua Di convicted", Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January/February 2000, p.17.)
 
OH...!!!

MY...!!!

GOD...!!!

According to whose logic?

...

Incredible...:lol:

Who's whining again?

:lol:



" Without Soviet assistance, it would not have been possible for China to make rapid progress in its nuclear and missile endeavours.

…

Agree qualitatively.

But it is hard to estimate how many years China would lose without Soviet help or had gained with the help. Don’t forget hundreds, and perhaps thousands, Western educated Chinese who went back to China in that endeavor. For instance, this Chinese genius is particular well known: Qian Xuesen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Those are the true forces behind Chinese missile development.
 
Who's whining again?

:lol:





Agree qualitatively.

But it is hard to estimate how many years China would lose without Soviet help or had gained with the help. Don’t forget hundreds, and perhaps thousands, Western educated Chinese who went back to China in that endeavor. For instance, this Chinese genius is particular well known: Qian Xuesen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Those are the true forces behind Chinese missile development.


I absolutely do not want to belittle the efforts like of Qian Xuesen....and others !




The contention arouse when some people flatly denied soviet assistance . That's why I had post what I knew .




I have high regards for all those who strive hard for betterment of their motherland ....and number of generations of great Chinese scientists have made great sacrifices for same !

When we talk of truth - it has to be said as such as it is without blemishing or hiding !

Soviet assistance gave crucial head start , Chinese indigenous efforts along with military -industrial espionage of state of the art technology from Western powers as well as Russia all contributed greatly to current armamentarium of Chinese missiles ....exact quantum of contribution of each of these may never be known to common people like us although !

I admire Chinese nation for progress they have attained at all costs and by all means !!!
 
Back
Top Bottom