China's 294 megatons of thermonuclear deterrence

[Figaro]

Even the table itself is very flawed:

How could the smallest possible nuke in China is still>200kT TNT?

China has neutron bombs decades ago, and no one could build a neutron bomb that has a yielding of 200kT TNT equalivent , so the lower limit of China's nukes could not be 200 kT.

The pathetic americans tried too hard to underestimate China's nuke power to the degree law of physics is not very respected among these nuclear phyisicists

To be fair, China is seen as a poster-child of "minimal deterrence" by FAS and Union of Concerned Scientists. These special interest groups want to see the US reduce its nuclear stockpile. so they deliberately underestimate China's (as evidence that 200 is enough ). I read somewhere that just because China stopped nuclear testing in 1996, they couldn't possibly have a more advanced warhead design ... the sheer stupidity! China has a military budget 3 times that of Russia's, so it doesn't make any sense why they cannot maintain a nuclear arsenal of around 800.

Minimal deterrence does not equal mutually assured destruction ...

 

[Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA]

People are realistic,you have the ability but you have not the nuke number and they would not believe you!

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

Why does China not increase its nuclear warheads to 2,000?
China is not lacking in economic strength and ability to manufacture nuclear warheads (whether it is an atomic bomb,neutron bomb or a hydrogen bomb. At present, China is the only nuclear power that reserves 30 hydrogen bombs thanks to YU Min model which makes them easier to maintain). It is clear that the only thing Americans fear is the number of Russian nuclear warheads. Why China does not increase its nukes number to 2000 or 5000 instead of 250 units smaller than France? I can not understand very well. . .

Chinese hydrogen bomb

Why build so many nuke when we don't have a good survivable delivery system: wait until next generation quiets subs and stealth bombers, than you will see Chinese Nukes will pup up like rabbit.

 

[Figaro]

Why build so many nuke when we don't have a good survivable delivery system: wait until next generation quiets subs and stealth bombers, than you will see Chinese Nukes will pup up like rabbit.

DF-41, DF-5 variants, DF-31A/AG, JL-2A/JL-3 are all very capable delivery systems. A stealth bomber surely cannot be as survivable as a ICBM. As for the next generation submarine, there is already the JL-2A and the JL-3 (currently in development) ... but we will have to wait for the 096.

 

[Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA]

 

[Beast]

It was the most advance bomb at that time. Weights less than a ton and yet yield 3 mega tons of explosion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_No._6

 

[Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA]

It was a fully functional, full-scale, three-stage hydrogen bomb, tested 32 months after China had made its first fission device.
The time between the U.S.'s first atomic test and its first hydrogen bomb test was 86 months, for the USSR it was 75 months, for the UK 66 months and later for France, 105 months.

CHINA= 32months!

It explains why CHINA can build a full scale aircraft carrier in 3.5 years now!

 

[Reichsmarschall]

View attachment 454566 View attachment 454567 View attachment 454568 View attachment 454569 View attachment 454570 View attachment 454571 View attachment 454572 View attachment 454573 View attachment 454574 View attachment 454575 View attachment 454576 View attachment 454577 View attachment 454578 View attachment 454579 View attachment 454580 View attachment 454581 View attachment 454582 View attachment 454583 View attachment 454584 View attachment 454585

its high time you give this beauty to your Friends in south

 

[Beast]

Russian Tsar was the most powerful H-bomb but it proves impossible to fit into ballistic missile warhead nor fit into a medium size bomber.

China H-bomb can easily modify and fit into a standard size ballistic missile or fit into a medium size fast bomber and used effective as deterrence or retaliation weapon.

Russia dare not used nuclear weapon on China 1969 border conflict not becos of US interference. But becos the reality of China able to hit back on Soviet Union with such advance weapon. Can Soviet Union afford just 3-4 of H-bomb 3 mega explosion on Soviet soil? No.

Worst case, 10-12 of such bomb could hit Soviet. Resulting all Soviet major cities destroyed. And US would have won. Soviet will never want that happen.

 

[Beast]

The American will just talk and BS and yet the American never dare to provoke Chine to real war. The US president know the actual China nuclear deterrence power. All those US small provocation is just for domestic consumption for increase his rating. US knows a real war with China is Armageddon.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

To be fair, China is seen as a poster-child of "minimal deterrence" by FAS and Union of Concerned Scientists. These special interest groups want to see the US reduce its nuclear stockpile. so they deliberately underestimate China's (as evidence that 200 is enough ). I read somewhere that just because China stopped nuclear testing in 1996, they couldn't possibly have a more advanced warhead design ... the sheer stupidity! China has a military budget 3 times that of Russia's, so it doesn't make any sense why they cannot maintain a nuclear arsenal of around 800.
Minn
Minimal deterrence does not equal mutually assured destruction ...

It is not only those organizations. I have heard even multiple Chinese analysts, and politicians refer to small figures of nukes.

Also, military budget doesn't equate to number of nukes, or Saudi Arabia would have had nukes almost equal to Russia.

No one is doubting China's capability to maintain a huge stock pile.

But the general consensus and even the stated policy seems to be that of "Minimum credible nuclear deterrance"

Also, from the stand point of deterrence, it would be wrong to not disclose a large arsenal. The whole purpose of deterrance is to let the adversary know that you can strike back with vengeance. But, deliberately sustaining a perception that you own less nukes doesn't work to your favor than.

 

[Beast]

It is not only those organizations. I have heard even multiple Chinese analysts, and politicians refer to small figures of nukes.

Also, military budget doesn't equate to number of nukes, or Saudi Arabia would have had nukes almost equal to Russia.

No one is doubting China's capability to maintain a huge stock pile.

But the general consensus and even the stated policy seems to be that of "Minimum credible nuclear deterrance"

Also, from the stand point of deterrence, it would be wrong to not disclose a large arsenal. The whole purpose of deterrance is to let the adversary know that you can strike back with vengeance. But, deliberately sustaining a perception that you own less nukes doesn't work to your favor than.

There is also flaw in your statement. China is the poster bad boy of western in terms of military threat but at the same time, China would want the western world to work with them in area of economic. By maintaining a less threatening tone of minimal deterrence of little nuke stockpile. Imagine China talk about having enough nuke to wipe out USA, Europe and rest of the world. The negative view and effect on working/trade with China looks more impossible.

There is every reason for China to maintain less threatening tone and under declared nuke power. It makes China more a trading power rather than a real foe compare to Russia. China has a huge trade to manage unlike Russia. You know why Russia is isolated by West? Becos Russia has enough stockpile to wipe them off. Nobody likes that. China is smart to under declared but will not hesitate to wipe off any countries dare threaten us with nuke.

 

[ozranger]

China H-bomb can easily modify and fit into a standard size ballistic missile or fit into a medium size fast bomber and used effective as deterrence or retaliation weapon

In fact, China successfully tested using tiny attacker plane Q-5 to throw war-ready H-bombs. It would be sort of suicide bombing for stopping massive Soviet tank invasion if such a real war happened.