China's nuclear warheads should match the US and Russia

[mDumb]

< The problem is that if China unveils the actual number of her nuclear arsenal then USA would likely go after China and forces her to sign the treaty of nuclear disarmament.>

China believes in nuclear weapon disarmament. It's the ******* US, Russia, Britain, and France believe in nuclear weapons.

**** China is confident to defend against any country without the use of nuclear weapons.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

< The problem is that if China unveils the actual number of her nuclear arsenal then USA would likely go after China and forces her to sign the treaty of nuclear disarmament.>

China believes in nuclear weapon disarmament. It's the ******* US, Russia, Britain, and France believe in nuclear weapons.

**** China is confident to defend against any country without the use of nuclear weapons.

Nope, here is the statement from the Major General Zhu Chenghu.

Zhu Chenghu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

General Zhu didn't take such statement lightly nor he made a personal statement, he was just transferred a message from CCP.

 

[Indian_Idol]

Sino-Nippon have strong cultural-historical-racial ties. Chances of brothers fighting is LOW, but chances of brothers nuking each other NEAR NON-EXISTENT. Chinese and Japanese do NOT share cultural, historical and most importantly racial ties with Americans ----> In other words we are not "brothers" with Americans, so chances we'll use nukes in retaliation are VERY PROBABLE. Hope you understand my underlying message.

India and Pakistan share the same cultural-historical-racial ties and they are thinking of nuking eachother.. so your point is not valid at this matter.

back to topic... matching with warheads is not a big deal but the delivery system matters... i dont think China has the capability to deliver it in the US soil in near future.. Ofcourse the US will play its cards very carefully and cunningly... Dragon has become more aggressive and some one has to hold its throat...

 

[below_freezing]

India and Pakistan share the same cultural-historical-racial ties and they are thinking of nuking eachother.. so your point is not valid at this matter.

back to topic... matching with warheads is not a big deal but the delivery system matters... i dont think China has the capability to deliver it in the US soil in near future.. Ofcourse the US will play its cards very carefully and cunningly... Dragon has become more aggressive and some one has to hold its throat...

we don't have the ability to deliver it to US soil in the near future.

we have the ability to do it RIGHT NOW with the DF-31, JL-2 and DF-5.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

China can hit US soil with a good number of megaton city busters.

 

[Martian2]

Here is a picture of China's road-mobile ICBMs.

China?s Nuclear Option | The Diplomat

"China’s Nuclear Option
April 26, 2010

By Richard Weitz

Chinese policymakers say the country’s rapidly modernizing nuclear force is nothing to fear. They could do more to prove it."

 

[new wave]

Guys, what can you possibly expected from someone stupid enough to use a "False Flag" as his/her avatar, thats truely speak volume of his/her intelligence level.

 

[applesauce]

we don't have the ability to deliver it to US soil in the near future.

we have the ability to do it RIGHT NOW with the DF-31, JL-2 and DF-5.

china has had the ability to do for the last 30-40 years

 

[Martian2]

back to topic... matching with warheads is not a big deal but the delivery system matters... i dont think China has the capability to deliver it in the US soil in near future.. Ofcourse the US will play its cards very carefully and cunningly... Dragon has become more aggressive and some one has to hold its throat...

china has had the ability to do for the last 30-40 years

I hate trolls, like Indian_Idol. They try to ruin threads.

 

[Gene]

Go on,make thousands of nuclear bombs,ICBMs.Fight with each other and perish from earth.

 

[chinapakistan]

Guys, what can you possibly expected from someone stupid enough to use a "False Flag" as his/her avatar, thats truely speak volume of his/her intelligence level.

Yeastoday I corrected one indian about using this fake pic is a dishonor to the american soldiers who fighted japanese, and today another one jumped out. I think it is needed to open a thread to tell some indian, what is this pic.

 

[mDumb]

<China believes in nuclear weapon disarmament. It's the ******* US, Russia, Britain, and France believe in nuclear weapons.

**** China is confident to defend against any country without the use of nuclear weapons.

Nope, here is the statement from the Major General Zhu Chenghu.

Zhu Chenghu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

General Zhu didn't take such statement lightly nor he made a personal statement, he was just transferred a message from CCP.>

China's policy on nuclear weapons:
On the face of it, this negative security assurance through the said UNSC Resolution No.984 of 1995 would appear to be a very major step. However, a closer examination of the statements made by each of the P-5 NWS would reveal that, except for China, the so-called negative security assurance purportedly acceded to by USA, Russia, UK and France is completely hollow. This would be evident from comparing the statement made by China with those made by the other four P-5 NWS. In paras 1 & 2 of its statement vide S/1995/265 dated 06.04.1995, China gave the following assurances:

1. China undertakes not to be the first to use nuclear weapons at any time or under any circumstances.
2. China undertakes not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States or nuclear-weapon-free zones at any time or under any circumstances&#8230;.

Furthermore, in para 3 of the same statement, China submitted that:

3. China has always held that, pending the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons, all nuclear-weapon States should undertake not to be the first to use nuclear weapons and not to use or threaten to use such weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States and nuclear-weapon-free zones at any time or under any circumstances. China strongly calls for the early conclusion of an international convention on no-first-use of nuclear weapons as well as an international legal instrument assuring the non-nuclear weapon States and nuclear-weapon-free zones against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

 

[noksss]

Between the advanced Kongo-class Aegis destroyers intended to control a bubble of airspace and the advanced American fighters in the Japanese Air Self-Defense Force, I'm willing to bet on the better-equipped and better-trained Japanese to soundly defeat the Russians in a conventional battle for the Northern Territories/Kuril Islands.

Bulava Launch Failure and the Crisis of Russian Defense Industry
"Dec 18, 2009 ... The recent Bulava launch failure has implications for US-Russian arms .... that the Russian military industrial complex is falling apart. ..."

Iraqi defeat jolts Russian military / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

"Iraqi defeat jolts Russian military

Defense and policy experts said last week that modernizing the Army is a top priority.

By Fred Weir, Special to The Christian Science Monitor / April 16, 2003
MOSCOW

In the US's easy defeat of Saddam Hussein's army, Russia sees a lesson for its own conventional forces.

The Iraqi Army - which was cloned from the Red Army in the final decades of the Soviet Union - mounted only a feeble defense before falling apart.

"The key conclusion we must draw from the latest Gulf war is that the obsolete structure of the Russian armed forces has to be urgently changed," says Vladimir Dvorkin, head of the Russian Defense Ministry's official think tank on strategic nuclear policy. "The gap between our capabilities and those of the Americans has been revealed, and it is vast. We are very lucky that Russia has no major enemies at the moment, but the future is impossible to predict, and we must be ready."

The swift victory by mobile, high-tech American forces over heavily armored Iraqi troops dug in to defend large cities like Baghdad has jolted many Russian military planners. "The Iraqi Army was a replica of the Russian Army, and its defeat was not predicted by our generals," says Vitaly Shlykov, a former deputy defense minister of Russia.

Like its Soviet prototype, Iraq's Army was huge but made up mainly of young, poorly trained conscripts. Its battle tactics called for broad frontal warfare, with massed armor and artillery, and a highly centralized command structure. But those forces were trounced in a few days by relatively small numbers of US and British forces, who punched holes in the Iraqi front using precision weapons and seized the country's power centers more rapidly than traditional military thinkers could have imagined. "The military paradigm has changed, and luckily we didn't have to learn that lesson firsthand," says Yevgeny Pashentsev, author of a book on Russian military reform. "The Americans have rewritten the textbook, and every country had better take note."

Last week, the independent Council on Foreign and Defense Policy - a group of top Russian military experts and former policymakers, including Mr. Shlykov - met to assess the implications of the US triumph in Iraq for Russia. Their conclusion: The Kremlin must drop all post-Soviet pretense that Russia remains a superpower, and make rebuilding and redesigning the nation's military forces a top priority. "We cannot afford to postpone this any longer," Boris Nemtsov, head of the liberal Union of Right Forces, told the meeting.

Twelve years after the USSR's collapse, the most unreformed branch of Russian society remains its armed forces. Though its numbers have been halved to about 1.2 million personnel, and its annual budget has dropped to a mere $10 billion, the structure, weaponry, and doctrines of today's Russian military remain those of its Soviet predecessor. Each Russian defense minister since 1991 has pledged sweeping reform, yet more than half of the Army's combat forces remain ill-trained conscripts required to serve for two years for just 100 rubles ($3) a month. Aside from the strategic nuclear forces, no branch of the Russian military has acquired significant quantities of modern weaponry in more than a decade.

According to a Defense Ministry survey in early 2003, cited in the daily Izvestia, more than a third of Russian officers and their families live below the poverty line, and fewer than half of the officers want to remain in the service.

Critics say that military manpower must be at least halved again, and the draft abolished in order to make reform feasible. "We can afford an army comparable to those of France or Britain, but hard decisions must be made," says Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent defense expert. Adequate spending for equipment, training, and payment of professional troops is key, he says.

Others say that Russia also must define a clear post-Soviet security doctrine. "How can we reform our Army when we have not defined the threats it must deal with?" says Mr. Dvorkin. "We must first identify our national interests, then we'll know who our enemies might be."

As the US prepared to invade Iraq, many Russian military experts warned that American forces would come to grief in the streets of Iraqi cities. Some predicted the battle of Baghdad would resemble the Russian Army's two assaults on the Chechen capital of Grozny - in 1995 and again in 2000 - each of which lasted more than a month and cost hundreds of Russian casualties.

Early in the Iraq war, the Russian online newspaper Gazeta.ru reported that two retired Soviet generals may have played a key role in designing Iraq's defenses. The paper published photos of Vladimir Achalov, an expert in urban warfare, and Igor Maltsev, a specialist in air defenses, receiving medals from Iraq's defense minister two weeks before the war began. Russian TV later quoted General Maltsev as saying "the American invaders will be buried in the streets of Baghdad."

Some in Russia's military establishment still appear reluctant to accept the sweeping military verdict in Iraq. "I think American dollars won the war, it was not a military victory," says Gen. Makhmut Gareyev, president of the official Academy of Military Sciences in Moscow. "The Americans bought the Iraqi military leadership with dollars. One can only envy a state that is so rich."

But others are obviously shaken. "Thank God our public has finally begun to discuss the state of the Army," General Vladimir Shamanov, who commanded Russian troops in two Chechnya wars, told a Moscow radio station after the extent of the US-led triumph in Iraq became clear last week. "Maybe our strategic nuclear forces will protect the country for another decade, but then what? A strong Russia is impossible without a strong army."

One bright note for Moscow, however, is a report that Iraqi forces used Russian-made, laser-guided antitank missiles to destroy several Abrams tanks during the US attack. This could boost profits for Russian armsmakers, who are already receiving inquiries from Syria and Iran, according to Shlykov.

The US has complained that Russia supplied Iraq with defense equipment in violation of UN sanctions. "As a result of the Iraq war and accusations of illegal Russian arms deliveries, applications for Russian weapons have soared," Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said last week."

There is also one more story for the defeat of Saddam Hussein .He lost his first Gulf War with the US in 1991 even before it started because the American firm from which he had procured most of his communication hardware and software managed to paralyse them before the troops went in. The headquarters of Saddam's army in Baghdad was totally cut off from all communication with its units in other parts of the country. So when u are surrounded by a sophisticated army with all ur networks paralysed it doesnt matter which weapon u have u will be defeated

So i am not saying that the russian weapons is the not the reason for the defeat .But It is one of the reason

 

[Martian2]

The Type 094 submarine is capable of carrying 12 of the more modern JL-2s[5] with a range of approximately 14,000 km, and is capable of targeting all of the Western Hemisphere, from close to the Chinese coast. /QUOTE]

I thought JL-2 only has a range of 8000 km. Not even American SLBM has that range (Trident II - 11000-12000 km). Only land based ones.

rhino123's post:

"The basic variant of the JL-2 missile had a range of around 8000km to 8600km (max).

But there are two more variants, JL-2 "Jia" and JL-2 "Yi".

JL-2 "Jia"

NATO code: CSS-N-4ModI
Structure: 2 stages
Fuel: 1st: solid-fueled; 2nd: liquid-fueled
Operational range: 12,000 km
Mass: 23+ t
Warhead: Single or MIRV; 6~8 Nuclear 250 kt /thermo
Guidance system: Inertial + stellar update
Accuracy: 80+ CEP (with satellite guidance)
Platform: SSBN
Designer: The Second Research Institute of the Ministry of Aerospace Industry
Manufacturer: CASTC

JL-2 "Yi"

NATO code: CSS-N-4ModII
Structure: 2 stages
Fuel: 1st: solid-fueled; 2nd: liquid-fueled
Operational range: 14,000 km
Mass: 23+ t
Warhead: Single or MIRV; ~10 (max) Nuclear 250 kt /thermo
Guidance system: Inertial + stellar update
Accuracy: 40+ CEP (with satellite guidance)
Platform: SSBN
Designer: The Second Research Institute
Manufacturer: CASTC

One of them have 12000km range and the other had 14000km range.

Reference:

1) JL-2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2) &#215;&#202;&#193;&#207;&#163;&#186;&#161;&#176;&#190;&#222;&#192;&#203;2&#161;&#177;&#208;&#205;&#199;&#177;&#201;&#228;&#181;&#175;&#181;&#192;&#181;&#188;&#181;&#175;_&#208;&#194;&#192;&#203;&#190;&#252;&#202;&#194;_&#208;&#194;&#192;&#203;&#205;&#248;
3) &#203;&#209;&#186;&#252;&#190;&#252;&#202;&#194;&#215;&#202;&#193;&#207;&#191;&#226;"


rhino123's excellent post above contains the detailed technical information that you seek. The following is what I have previously written.

Estimated range of 14,000 km for the JL-2 is at the upper range of estimates, but it is still close to the 12,000 km range for the Trident II. The extra 2,000 km may be explained by a slightly bigger JL-2 missile or arming the missile with a smaller warhead to reduce the weight.

A third possible explanation is that, since the JL-2 was built 16 years after the Trident II, the JL-2 may have been designed with improved lightweight (e.g. composite) materials and/or been lavished with a lot more supercomputer time on its design.

A fourth possible explanation is that the JL-2 has only two stages, instead of the three stages for the Trident II. "Such design simplifies the structure of the missile and largely reduces missile's overall weight by reducing one stage." (See newslink below)

I selected Wikipedia as a source because I wanted to quote that two Type 094 submarines have been "confirmed to be launched" and the "United States government has expressed concern over these submarines, saying that the Chinese government has not been transparent enough about the program." Feel free to adjust the JL-2 range downward to "11000-12000 km" to match the Trident II's range.

JL-2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In late 1980s and 1990s, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering named Wang Zhenhua (&#29579;&#25391;&#21326 proposed a new theory typically for the JL-2 SLBM, called "(Free) Relaxation into Trajectory" (&#33258;&#30001;&#20837;&#36712.

Based on this theory, JL-2 only needs two stages to achieve its intercontinental status instead of three. Conventionally, any type of ICBMs has three phases to finish its flight: (i) the boost phase, (ii) the mid-course phase, and (iii) the terminal phase. Wang's idea is to combine the first and the second phases into one, the passive-boost phase (&#21161;&#25512;&#27573. Plus the final atmospheric reentry phase, therefore, in total the JL-2's trajectory only has two phases and two stages.

The first phase is based on the first solid-fueled rocket engine (first stage). The first stage passively launches the missile out of the atmosphere, and accelerates it into a speed in between the first (7.9 km/s) and second (11.2 km/s) escape velocities. When the missile is in this transition state, the first stage booster sheds off, and the missile automatically adapts its "free" trajectory and further reaches its maximium altitude (without a constant velocity); the dominating force here is just the earth's gravity. The second stage engine (liquid-fueled) then starts working.

Normally, SLBM has three stages. Such design simplifies the structure of the missile and largely reduces missile's overall weight by reducing one stage. Additionally, it increases the atmospheric reentry velocity, which leads to more difficult interception, such as, by the NMD."

I wrote the following in December of last year.

"Another launch of Russia&#8217;s Bulava missile ended with a failure." "Russia has held ten test launches of the Bulava rocket since 2003: five of them proved to be unsuccessful." "Experts say that several consecutive unsuccessful launches of the missile endanger the whole project." See Russia will not give up Bulava missile project despite yet another failed launch - Pravda.Ru

American publications believe the Julang 2 is comparable to the American Trident SLBM.

"The JL-2 is comparable in size and performance to the American Trident C-4 long-range multiple-warhead three-stage solid-fuel missile." See China hints at unveiling of new DF-41 ICBM - UPI.com or ANJA A THIRD EYE

"According to American experts, the JL-2, like China's intercontinental surface-to-surface Dongfeng-31 (DF-31), tested successfully this summer, is equipped with technology adapted from the Trident D-5." See China Prepares To Test New ICBM

http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesofthe...sile_detail.asp

"The Trident D-5 has a maximum range of 12,000 km (7,456 miles), similar to that of silo-based systems, and has a payload as large as 2,800 kg. Its payload carries a Post-Boost Vehicle (PBV) which can carry 8 to 12 Reentry Vehicles (RVs), though the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) limits the number to eight. These RVs can either be the Mk 4 with a W76 100 kT yield warhead or the Mk 5, which has a W88 475 kT yield warhead. The missile is almost certainly equipped with countermeasures. The system uses an inertial navigation system combined with a stellar reference system that provides an extremely high accuracy of 90 m CEP. The missile has a length of 13.42 m, a width of 2.11 m, and a launch weight of 59,090 kg. It uses a three-stage solid propellant engine."

China Prepares To Test New ICBM

"China Prepares To Test New ICBM

Beijing (AFP) December 7, 1999 - China will imminently test the Julang 2, an intercontinental sea-to-surface ballistic missile with an estimated range at least 9,000 kilometres (5580 miles) that will boost its nuclear deterent capability, foreign military experts in Beijing said Tuesday.

"The test is imminent," said an expert who asked to not be named, but added the missile, capable of hitting any city in the United States and Europe, could be equipped with a small nuclear warhead.

According to Monday's Washington Times newspaper, the transit of Chinese Golf class submarines from southern areas to the north of the country, carried out last month, signals the approach of the JL-2 test.

The newspaper also put the range of the Jl-2 at nearly 12,000 kilometres.

China's Foreign Ministry downplayed the report Tuesday, and said China was entitled to develop military programs for its own defence, dismissing talk of a "China threat"."

 

[Martian2]

JL-2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Propellant 2-stage
solid-fueled 1st stage
liquid-fueled 2nd stage

Operational range
8600 km (JL-2)[1][2]
12000 km (JMA)[1][2]
14000 km (JMB)[1][2]
...
History

The whole JL-2 project lasts roughly about one decade, till present. The original designation of the project was so-called "New DongFeng Goes Undersea" ("&#26032;&#19996;&#39118;&#19979;&#28023;"), by the COSTIND and CMC. The project was co-held by the First and Second Research Institutes of the Ministry of Aerospace Industry (defunct, see CNSA)

At 10:20 AM, 22nd Dec, 2002, the first ship of a new type of SSBN was formally launched by China in Huludao, which now is known as Type 094 (Jin-Class). But, its SLBM was, just as convention, lagging behind. JL-2 has three subtypes, the initial experimental one, the "Jia" (&#30002;, Chinese literally means "The First", or "I"), and the "Yi" (&#20057;, Chinese literally means "The Second", or "II"). The codes for "Jia" and "Yi" are JMA and JMB, respectively. The tests happened of JMA/B are listed like below:

* JMA: Land-based tests, 3 times; launched from a base in Shanxi, most likely the Taiyuan Satellite Launch Center or nearby; 2001; successful.
* JMB: Sea-based, 8 times; launched near Dalian, by the modified Golf-class diesel-powered ballistic missile submarine; 2002; successful.
...
JL-2 "Yi"

[1][2]

* NATO code: CSS-N-4ModII
* Structure: 2 stages
* Fuel: 1st: solid-fueled; 2nd: liquid-fueled
* Operational range: 14,000 km
* Mass: 23+ t
* Warhead: Single or MIRV; ~10 (max) Nuclear 250 kt /thermo
* Guidance system: Inertial + stellar update
* Accuracy: 40+ CEP (with satellite guidance)
* Platform: SSBN
* Designer: The Second Research Institute
* Manufacturer: CASTC"