What's new

China's Nuclear Strike Force

Thats why a Chinese is unable to use google,Facebook Twitter sitting in his own nation,he can not even watch foreign channels,because of high literacy and more freedom of thoughts

The people in China don't care about them which puzzles me why you do? The government wants to control terrorist and political dissidents and rather then spend billions monitoring them its decided to restrict it full stop. They calculated by restricting the use of them will not impact the real needs of the people, they made the companies who they felt could make an impact follow their rules. Blackberry was made to allow China to monitor their communication and in turn allow them access to the market. If Freedom is as open in India as you say why did your government follow suit? There is no such thing as full freedom get it? There is only the freedom that matters and the ones that don't.



definitely agreed, that always came from a land of great wall filled with 1000's of bodies of buried slaves their

Oh right so I guess the Pyramids, Taj Mahal, Old US railroads were constructed by machinery. Don't pull ancient history into this, might as well talked about then the dinosaurs ruled the earth.

They talk when they dont have food thats why the entire world know about,they dont have to hide in their closet here fearing an oppressive govt which can kill them for revealing this for compromising their super power status

What the??? :undecided:
 
is it the volunteers or the slaves of your own country who doesnot have any rights in their own country. those 300,000 slaves knows that if they say no to work this underground city will become their graveyard. thats how china treats their own people

10 post and already you're trolling, keep it up :tup:
 
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.

China Shows Seaborne Muscle | The Right Guy on The Left Coast at Hypocrisy.com

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

jl2sblm.jpg


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."

China advances missile program - Washington Times

"China advances missile program
By Bill Gertz
10:25 p.m., Tuesday, June 21, 2005

China has successfully flight-tested a submarine-launched missile that U.S. officials say marks a major advance in Beijing's long-range nuclear program.

"This is a significant milestone in their effort to develop strategic weapons," said a U.S. official familiar with reports of the test.

U.S. intelligence agencies monitored the flight test of a JL-2 missile about 10 days ago, officials said.

The missile was launched from a Chinese submarine near the port of Qingdao and was tracked to a desert impact point in western China several thousand miles away, the officials said.

The Air Force's National Air Intelligence Center reported that the JL-2 "will, for the first time, allow Chinese [missile submarines] to target portions of the United States from operating areas located near the Chinese coast."

The JL-2 is estimated to have a range of up to 6,000 miles, enough to hit targets in the United States.

A defense official said the missile test was a major step forward in China's strategic nuclear missile program and shows an improved capability to produce and launch submarine-launched missiles. "It was a successful test," this official said.

The JL-2 is a submarine version of the DF-31 land-based missile."

Here is on Youtube the launch of JL-2. Looks like it is a cold launch. Looks cool.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Still not enough, the US may intercept some of the missiles. If we have 20 missiles, and 90% of them are ready for launch, 90% of them survive a first strike, 90% of them are unintercepted and 90% of them hit their targets...

then only 11 missiles will make it.

China needs more missiles of all sorts (Short , Medium and Long range).
The missiles should be MIRVed.

China also need more Carrier Killer and Satellite Killer.

Pakistan also needs whatever China has to stop India from launching a sneak attack on China while China is at war with Japan or the USA.
 
Does China already possess an "AGM-129A class" stealth cruise missile?

The United States has retired its most advanced stealth cruise missile, the AGM-129A. The more interesting question is whether the Chinese have an equivalent stealth cruise missile in their arsenal.

I suspect the Chinese already possess a Chinese version of the AGM-129A nuclear-capable stealth cruise missile. A stealth cruise missile is much easier to design and build than a complex manned stealth fighter. Indeed, "the first [AGM-129A] test missile flew in July 1985." Five years later, the first flight of the YF-22 (i.e. F-22 Raptor stealth fighter prototype) was on September 29, 1990.

Using the American experience as a reference, an advanced stealth cruise missile tends to precede the more complex manned stealth fighter by five years. The first confirmed flight of China's J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter was on January 11, 2011. The Chinese should have the technological capability and may have developed an "AGM-129A class" stealth cruise missile in 2006.

At the 60th anniversary parade in 2009, China unveiled its DF-21D ASBM (i.e. anti-ship ballistic missile) as an asymmetric weapon. Also, we have seen China's successful anti-satellite shoot-down (i.e. ASAT test in 2007). I believe the Chinese version of the AGM-129A is another of China's "Assassin's Mace" weapons. "The US Navy has no known defense against these weapons."

jYuiK.jpg

America's stealthy AGM-129A, the "most modern cruise missile in the U.S. nuclear arsenal," in flight. The U.S. "Air Force acknowledged the retirement decision" of the AGM-129A under the "U.S.-Russia arms reduction deal signed in Moscow in May 2002."

USAF to scrap AGM-129 stealth cruise missile

"USAF to scrap AGM-129 stealth cruise missile
Seattlepi.com ^ | March 7, 2007 | ROBERT BURNS

Posted on Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:30:44 AM by sukhoi-30mki

Wednesday, March 7, 2007 · Last updated 7:15 p.m. PT

Air Force scraps stealth missile fleet

By ROBERT BURNS AP MILITARY WRITER

WASHINGTON -- The Air Force said Wednesday it will retire the most modern cruise missile in the U.S. nuclear arsenal, a "stealth" weapon developed in the 1980s with the ability to evade detection by Soviet radars.

Known as the Advanced Cruise Missile, the weapon is carried by the B-52 bomber and was designed to attack heavily defended sites. It is the most capable among a variety of air-launched nuclear weapons built during the Cold War that remain in the U.S. inventory even as the Pentagon is reducing its overall nuclear arms stockpile.

The Air Force had said as recently as February 2006 that it expected to keep the missile active until 2030.

If the retirement is carried out as planned, the Advanced Cruise Missile will be the first group of U.S. nuclear weapons to be scrapped since the last of the Air Force's 50 MX Peacekeeper land-based missiles was retired in September 2005.

The decision to retire the Advanced Cruise Missile fleet has not been publicly announced. It was brought to light by Hans M. Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists. He noticed that funds for the program were cut in the Air Force budget request for 2008, and that no money is budgeted for it beyond 2008; when he inquired, the Air Force acknowledged the retirement decision.

An Air Force spokeswoman, Maj. Morshe Araujo, confirmed it on Wednesday. She and other Air Force public affairs officials were unable to provide additional details, including the rationale for the decision.

Araujo indicated that the retirement was part of a "balanced force reduction" being carried out to reduce the number of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons to between 1,700 and 2,200 by Dec. 31, 2012, as required under a U.S.-Russia arms reduction deal signed in Moscow in May 2002.

The treaty does not require that any specific group of nuclear weapons be retired, only that the total number in the U.S. and Russian arsenals be cut to the prescribed range of 1,700-2,200. The Russians still have a nuclear-tipped cruise missile in active service, according to Robert S. Norris, an expert in American, Soviet and Chinese nuclear weapons.

The decision to get rid of the Advanced Cruise Missile comes amid U.S. efforts to modernize what remains of the nuclear arsenal, even as it presses Iran and North Korea to abandon their nuclear programs."

----------

IjIj5.gif

AGM-129A stealth design characteristics

K6ITo.jpg

AGM-129A manufactured at General Dynamics

DUhz0.jpg

Advanced Cruise Missile (AGM-129) mounted on B-52

nMjQ6.jpg

"The B-52H bomber can carry up to six AGM-129A missiles on each of two external pylons for a total of 12 per aircraft. Originally, an additional 8 ACMs could be carried internally in the B-52 on a Common Strategic Rotary Launcher, for a total of 20 per aircraft. The AGM-129A provides the bomber the ability to attack multiple targets without penetrating an air defense system."
 
China wants to reach parity with the US because it wants to have more leverage when it comes to political issues. The US threatened China openly multiple times with nuclear attack in the Cold War. It would only be sensible, bearing in mind the Chinese mindset and their experience left over from the Cold War, for China to increase its nuclear arsenal for these cases as well as to have more hand in political say.

People might think that these days every country has a fair and equal share in politics. Unfortunately, that is not true. It's still a dog-eat-cat world and it will remain that way. It's better to be at the top of the food chain than at the bottom.




Anyways, a few estimated points on Chinese delivery systems:

Nuclear submarines ((*) means under development):
- Type 096*: supposedly a new submarine with 24 missile launchers.
- Type 094: there are two variants (the Type 1 with 12 SLBMs, and the Type 2 with 16 SLBMs). Type 2 is supposedly to be launched very soon.
- Type 092: there have been rumors that more than 1 is in service, but that is unconfirmed. Type 092 can also fire JL-2s.

Ballistic missiles:
- DF-41: China's most powerful ballistic missile, with 14000 km in range and 12 warheads (with possible MaRV technology)
- DF-31A: China's standard road mobile ICBM, with 12000 km in range and 3 warheads (with possible MaRV technology)
- DF-23: medium range missile with 3 warheads
- DF-21: IRBM with 5 warheads
- DF-5A: silo based ICBM with 15000 km range and possible MIRV
- DF-4A: silo based ICBM with 10000 km range and possible MIRV
- DF-15: short range missile with 600 km range and 500 kt terminally guided warhead
- DF-11: short range missile with 825 km range
- B-611M: short range missile with 280 km range
- JL-2: SLBM with 14000 km range and 10 warheads (with possible MaRV technology)
- JL-1A: SLBM with 2500 km range

Cruise missiles:
- DH-10: cruise missile with 4000 km range
- CJ-10: cruise missile with 2200 km range (air launched)
- HN-3: cruise missile with 3000 km range
- HN-2: cruise missile with 1800 km range
- HN-1: cruise missile with 600 km range
- CF-2: cruise missile with 800 km range
- CF-1: cruise missile with 400 km range
 
China lacks a significant number of ICBMs that can cover all of USA. I think China needs up to 200 DF-31A ICBMs, all MIRV'ed. as well as new silo-based ICBMs solid-fuelled with less than 10 minutes launching time after notice with a range of 14,000-15,000kms. China also needs stealth bombers that can deliver nuclear-armed cruise missiles.
 
China lacks a significant number of ICBMs that can cover all of USA. I think China needs up to 200 DF-31A ICBMs, all MIRV'ed. as well as new silo-based ICBMs solid-fuelled with less than 10 minutes launching time after notice with a range of 14,000-15,000kms. China also needs stealth bombers that can deliver nuclear-armed cruise missiles.

Don't take those Western reports seriously, anyone who is a knowledgeable Chinese military fan knowing well that "China has totally 12 DF-31A or something" is totally BS.
 
Don't take those Western reports seriously, anyone who is a knowledgeable Chinese military fan knowing well that "China has totally 12 DF-31A or something" is totally BS.

I think I saw 12 DF-31As alone at China's 60th anniversary military parade in 2009. God knows how many more they have hidden. Also, everyone agrees that China is building more thermonuclear warheads and missiles each year. The 294 megatons of Chinese thermonuclear firepower is a bottom estimate and it was made years ago. No one really knows how many ICBMs that China possesses and whether they're MIRVed or not.

LGQ6P.jpg

"PLA DF-31A mobile ICBM TELs (via Chinese Internet)." [Source: Air Power Australia]

26CRa.jpg

A group of DF-31s in this picture

xMgwu.jpg

These are the 12 DF-31As that I remember from the 60th anniversary parade.
 
In the 1990s, China had only about 20 ICBMs which can hit the US soil.

Today, the number of ICBM has been increased more than 10 times according to some senior member from the CD forum.

BTW, this website claims that approximately 70-110 JL-2 missiles will be built, which makes a lot of more sense than some other idiotic reports.

http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.34/missile_detail.asp
 
first decide urself.
whether it will be through aid or by attacking with nukes(a country which is alread suffering)

YOU ARE REALLY ANNOYING, RELLY Don't wanna see your post any more, it seems you are capable of doing nothing but disparaging china.
the naive one is you.
more words for you would be a wast, not for your nationality, but for your words.
 
first decide urself.
whether it will be through aid or by attacking with nukes(a country which is alread suffering)


0912141314e05a2b1ac3c63b99.jpg


0912141314cf3647c71c796bd4.jpg


India’s SLBM :laugh::cheesy:An ingenious or imaginative contrivance:whistle:


ShaktiBomb340c15.jpg


Top experts warn India’s H-bomb a dud:cry:



Top experts warn India’s H-bomb a dud
December 21, 2009
By Saurabh Joshi





A group comprising some of India’s top defense and nuclear scientists have issued warnings of serious deficiencies in India’s thermonuclear weapons capability and have urged the government to urgently set up an expert panel to oversee measures to rectify these failings.

The scientists, who make a literal who’s who of India’s nuclear and defense research establishment, have claimed in their statement that the the fusion device tested during Pokhran II on May 11, 1998 failed to create a crater and rendered a very low yield. “…the fusion device failed on many counts – very low yield, no crater etc,” they say, also adding, “A detailed report submitted by DRDO (Defense Research Development Organization) to the Government fully corroborated its original assessment ,viz. ,that, while the fission device worked successfully as expected, the fusion device did not.”

“The articles by K Santhanam and Ashok Parthasarathi in ‘The Hindu‘ (September 17 , 2009) and PK Iyengar in `Outlook’ (October 26, 2009) go into considerable technical detail and present a credible case, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the H – bomb tested on May 11, 1998 failed.”

This comes after a line of similar warnings issued recently by many in Indian defense and nuclear scientific community, with some even recommending that India carry out further testing to valid its thermonuclear devices.

“These findings are extremely serious for the security of the nation, particularly in the context of our pronouncement of being a nuclear weapon power, along with our enunciated doctrine of ‘no first use’ and our ‘unilateral voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing’. They strike at the root of our weaponisation capability and compromise our strategy of Credible Minimum Nuclear Deterrence,” say the experts, who are listed below as signatories.

They also urge measures to shore up India’s thermonuclear capabilities. “We are well aware of the nature, sources and scales of nuclear threats the nation faces. To meet that threat effectively, an in-depth analysis of our real capabilities in terms of: Command & control systems, nuclear weapon delivery systems and the types, character and numbers of nuclear weapons needing to constitute our nuclear arsenal and the keeping of that arsenal up-to-date, is essential – indeed acutely pressing,” they say.

They also prescribe a course of action, saying, “We therefore, strongly urge the government to immediately set up a high-level, independent, broad- Based Panel of Experts to define and monitor the implementation, on a continuing b sis, of an effective course of action, in the realm of thermonuclear weapons, so central to our national security.”

The experts apprehend renewed US pressure on India to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). “The renewed pressure from Obama on us in recent months to sign the CTBT is causing the issue of our signing the CTBT to be raised again. We strongly urge the present government to remain firm in its opposition to our doing so as the Prime Minister has publicly assured the nation more than once in recent months.

They also say that India was under tremendous pressure after the 1998 tests, to sign the CTBT, and almost succumbed. “Soon after the Pokhran-II tests, the then government almost succumbed to the western pressure to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) backing off only at the last moment due to an outcry in the country against doing so. The refusal of the US Senate to ratify the CTBT then released the pressure on the government.”

Signatories to the Statement

Dr. PK Iyengar, former Chairman Atomic Energy Commission, Director BARC and a key architect of the Pokhran I nuclear test of May 18, 1974.

Professor Ashok Parthasarathi, former Scientific Adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

Dr. AN Prasad, former Director, BARC (Bhabha Atomic Research Center) and Member (R&D) of the Atomic Energy Commission, a Senior Adviser to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna for many years and a key member of our original weapons grade plutonium extraction technology development dating back to 1960;

Dr. K Santhanam, Chief Adviser (Technologies), DRDO and Project Coordinator of the Pokhran II tests.

Dr. A Gopalakrishnan, a Technology Director in the Indian nuclear submarine project (Advanced Technology Vessel or ATV – INS Arihant) and former Chairman, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board.

Dr. CK Mathews, former head, Radio Chemistry Division, BARC and Director Chemistry Group, Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam.

Dr. Jaipal Mittal, Raja Ramana Fellow and former Director, Chemistry Group, BARC.

Dr. AD Damodaran, former Director, Special Materials Plant, Nuclear Fuel Complex and former Director, Regional Research Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram.

Dr. SR Valluri, former Director, National Aerospace Laboratory and first Director General of the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) (organization set up to design and develop the Light Combat Aircraft – Tejas).

Captain S Prabhala, Indian Navy, former Chairman & Managing Director Bharat Electronics Limited.

Rear Admiral JJ Baxi, Indian Navy, former Director, Weapons and Electronics Systems Organization, Ministry of Defense and Chairman & Managing Director Bharat Electronics Limited.

Brigadier MR Narayanan, Indian Army, former Director, Army Radio Engineering Network, Ministry of Defense

Dr. KS Jayaraman, formerly of the Nuclear Physics Division, BARC, Science Correspondent of the Press Trust of India, South Asian Science Correspondent the journal Nature and President, Indian Science Writers Association.

Top experts warn India’s H-bomb a dud | StratPost
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom