US scientist predicts China's actual nuclear stockpile is 3600

[Whazzup]

China's defense information are closed and speculations are more the reality, but Nuclear devices number may vary because 200-400 couldn't be actual number of nuclear devices of China.

200-400 why not ? sir the reason why Russia and US is having so many nukes is because they were having a nuke race during cold war
I don't think china is facing that amount of danger

 

[Aramsogo]

What heck is your probelm why the hell do you want to derail a thread regarding your own nukes just because a guy posted a pic from a movie.[/QUOTE]

What the heck is your problem for defending that dummy. First he's called out and in typical fashion lashes out with insults when he's proven clearly wrong.

No one outside China knows the true number of Chinese nukes. This is intentional, the rest is mental masturbation.

 

[Martian2]

The prediction by the U.S. scientist of 3,600 Chinese nuclear warheads is consistent with my earlier calculations.

Did General Zhu Chenghu blurt out China's nuclear secret in 2005? Analysis.

China's DF-5 ICBM launch

I doubt that China will ever disclose the size of its nuclear arsenal. China wants to have it both ways. It wants to appear non-threatening. This is good for its corporate image.

On the other hand, it wants to keep the United States guessing and reap the benefit of deterrence. Also, China cannot reveal the actual size of its nuclear arsenal. Otherwise, it would have just volunteered to join U.S.-Russian disarmament talks.

However, it is possible to reach reasonable conclusions based on an analysis of open-source materials and obtain a sense of the size of China's nuclear arsenal. Let's take a close look at General Zhu Chenghu's outburst. Did he reveal China's nuclear secret in a moment of anger?

In July 2005, "a Chinese general has threatened to launch nuclear missiles at the United States, warning that hundreds of American cities could be destroyed." (See Chinese general threatens nuclear attack on US in war of words - Telegraph) Is it plausible that China had the capability to destroy hundreds of American cities in 2005 or was General Zhu completely nuts?

In 1998, Richard D. Fisher Jr. (see International Assessment and Strategy Center > Scholars > Richard Fisher, Jr.) was working "as Asian Studies Director at the Heritage Foundation" and he reported:

"Congress should question the confidence that the Clinton Administration and the defense intelligence community place on their own assessments of China's current missile force. Some reports that appeared in 1996 suggest the United States may be underestimating China's missile force. For example, during the 30th anniversary celebration of China's Second Artillery (its specialized missile force) in 1996, China's military press reported the completion of a decade-long project to build what is speculated to be a large missile base inside a mountain range.[27] A curious report that also appeared in 1996 estimates that China may have over 120 to 150 DF-5 missiles, which could be modified to carry as many as six one-megaton nuclear warheads.[28] If China is concealing ICBMs in a mountain base, then even marginal improvements to its ICBMs derived from U.S. technical know-how would contribute to a greater potential missile threat." (See Commercial Space Cooperation | The Heritage Foundation)

If Richard Fisher is correct about the 1996 reports, China had approximately 150 DF-5 ICBMs hidden in the 5,000 km Underground Great Wall. This makes sense. No one would spend a fortune and ten years to build a massive 3,000-mile ICBM complex under a mountain range to hide only a small handful of ICBMs. (See The Jamestown Foundation: single[tt_news]=35846&tx_ttnews[backPid]=459&no_cache=1 or China’s nuclear missiles hidden “underground maze” | WAREYE)

Nine years elapsed between Richard Fisher's reference to the 1996 estimate of 150 DF-5s and General Zhu's 2005 warning. Let's use a conservative estimate and say China built one new brigade each year, which is twelve DF-5 missiles. After nine years, China would have accumulated another 108 DF-5s by 2005.

General Zhu may have been referring to a total of 258 DF-5s hidden under thousands of miles of a Chinese mountain range. General Zhu may have been accurate in "warning that hundreds of American cities could be destroyed." While General Zhu's July 2005 outburst is useful for open-source analysis, he was unprofessional and deserved his public demotion in December 2005 (for possibly revealing a state secret). (See Shakeup of Top Chinese Military Command)

Anyway, it's now 2011 and the DF-5 ICBM story has taken another unexpected turn. In 1998, Richard Fisher wrote: "A curious report that also appeared in 1996 estimates that China may have over 120 to 150 DF-5 missiles, which could be modified to carry as many as six one-megaton nuclear warheads." (See Commercial Space Cooperation | The Heritage Foundation)

In September 2010, Richard Fisher reported: "This analyst has been told by Asian military sources that the DF-31A already carries three warheads and that one deployed DF-5B carries five or six warheads." (See China and START. Missile buildup may surpass U.S., Russia as they denuclearize)

From 2005 to 2011, China probably built another 66 DF-5 ICBMs. China's current total inventory of DF-5s is probably around 324 (e.g. 258 + 66 = 324). 324 DF-5s with each missile carrying "six one-megaton nuclear warheads" provide a nuclear deterrent of 1,944 one-megaton warheads.

In conclusion, it doesn't really matter how many more DF-31As (with 3 MIRVs) or DF-41s (with up to 10 MIRVs) that China builds. The Chinese most likely have had a substantial nuclear deterrent by 1996 or 2005.

 

[Martian2]

1,944 one-megaton warheads from DF-5s and another 126 from DF-31As amount to 2,070. I will include the DF-31 warheads that can strike Alaska, Hawaii, and Northwestern United States later. Also, I will add the JL-2 SLBMs for a grand total.

China's DF-31As deter 126 cities

China's DF-31A launch

Let's do the math to see if China's DF-31A mobile ICBM retaliatory force is sufficient to provide a nuclear deterrent.

"Britain`s International Institute of Strategic Studies notes" there are "24 DF-31A ICBMs, indicating a possible increase of one new brigade from 2008 to 2009." China is increasing her DF-31A ICBM force by approximately 12 missiles/one brigade a year.

We will add 12 more missiles from 2009 to 2010 and six more missiles from 2010 to middle of 2011. A reasonable estimate of China's DF-31A force is 42 ICBMs (e.g. 24 at end of 2009, 12 more for 2010, and six more for 2011).

If Richard Fisher's information is correct and China's DF-31A is MIRVed with three warheads then that means the 42 DF-31As are armed with a total of 126 warheads (e.g. 42 DF-31As x 3 MIRVed warheads = 126 warheads).

We know China possesses the technology for a W-88 class warhead with a yield of 475 kilotons. The conclusion is that China's DF-31A nuclear force is capable of retaliating against 126 cities. That does seem to be a formidable second-strike capability.

----------

China and START. Missile buildup may surpass U.S., Russia as they denuclearize

"China and START
By Richard D. Fisher Jr.,
The Washington Times,
20 September 2010
...
In its latest report to the Congress on China`s military released on Aug. 16, the Pentagon says there are less than 10 DF-31 and "10-15" DF-31A ICBMs, up to five more than reported in the previous year`s report, covering 2008. However, in the 2010 issue of "Military Balance," Britain`s International Institute of Strategic Studies notes there is one brigade of 12 DF-31s and two brigades or 24 DF-31A ICBMs, indicating a possible increase of one new brigade from 2008 to 2009.
...
This analyst has been told by Asian military sources that the DF-31A already carries three warheads and that one deployed DF-5B carries five or six warheads."

----------

The most interesting and controversial debate regarding China's reverse-engineering was the development of China's W-88 class miniaturized thermonuclear warhead. The U.S. claims China appropriated the designs and reverse-engineered the W-88 warhead. China says that isn't true.

China says this is a case of convergent engineering. For example, an airplane must have two wings to provide lift and an engine to provide thrust in the rear. Another example of convergent engineering is all rockets are long and thin. In other words, form must follow function. There is only a very limited way to create a massive thermonuclear explosion using a compact warhead.

Here is the crux of the problem. "U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs." The Chinese nuclear tests data are "similar," but not identical to U.S. nuclear tests on the W-88.

W88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The W88 is a United States thermonuclear warhead, with an estimated yield of 475 kiloton (kt), and is small enough to fit on MIRVed missiles. The W88 was designed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1970s. In 1999 the director of Los Alamos who had presided over its design described it as "The most advanced U.S. nuclear warhead."[1]

The Trident II SLBM can be armed with up to 8 W88 (475 kt) warheads (Mark 5) or 8 W76 (100 kt) warheads (Mark 4), but it is limited to 4 warheads under SORT."

NTI: Research Library: Country Profiles: China

"...According to the Cox Committee Report, suspicion of China's nuclear espionage started after the U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs. This similarity, combined with other information derived from classified sources, led the Cox Committee to claim that China had stolen several bomb designs, including the U.S.' most advanced W-88 design and a design for an enhanced radiation weapon (neutron bomb). Yet, the Cox Report has been severely criticized by both experts and officials in the United States as a political document that has several technical inaccuracies."

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

China is super power US is a problem maker country , I mean why would the us scientist care

 

[pmukherjee]

According to General Daokou, China is also prepared to be the last survivor in the possible coming nuclear winter.

The General is most welcome to his fantasies. However, there will be no nuclear winter. If there had to be a nuclear holocaust it would have happened long ago, while the USSR was still at its zenith and proving to be a far greater and a far more dangerous adversary of the US than China is or will be. While the USSR had a Zero economy but a 100% military might, China has matched its economy with its military power and therein lies the difference between the two communist party ruled nations. China is far too well integrated with the US economy in particular and the world economy in general. The other difference is that even at their worst, the Sino-US relations are at a far better level than what the Soviet-US relations were at their best. Basically, China has had a series of very wise and pragmatic leaders. They never had the likes of Nikita Khrushchevs or Leonid Brezhnevs who matched their American counterparts and even exceeded them in belligerence and war mongering. Having said that, it would appear that this tradition of pragmatism and prudence is in the process of being broken as evident from recent activities.

 

[a_chinese]

This kind of **** scares me. Can everyone with nukes just denuclearize

 

[below_freezing]

Someone was questioning the actual objective of maintaining a secret arsenal. It's easy: so there's no pressure to denuclearize and it maintains national "brand image". The US unfortunately spends billions of dollars on tarnishing China's brand image both directly and indirectly.

The US however has been underestimating China's arsenal in recent years. To maintain the strategy of strategic ambiguity, China exposed the 3000 km underground facility. It was DESIGNED to provoke the US, but amazingly, the Western media just completely dropped the story. This seems to be a very deliberate move by the US to paralyze its populace.

 

[SpArK]

US scientist predicts China's actual nuclear stockpile is 3600.

With that they can destroy the whole Earth, Mars, Venus, Saturn and some parts of Jupiter.

 

[below_freezing]

US scientist predicts China's actual nuclear stockpile is 3600.

With that they can destroy the whole Earth, Mars, Venus, Saturn and some parts of Jupiter.

1 6 megaton bomb can only destroy 1/3 of New Yorks' population even if dropped straight on the middle of NYC's Manhattan.

Maybe all nukes in the world can take out 40% of humanity total.

 

[SpArK]

1 6 megaton bomb can only destroy 1/3 of New Yorks' population even if dropped straight on the middle of NYC's Manhattan.

Maybe all nukes in the world can take out 40% of humanity total.

If so u guys need to increase the production and make a target of at-least 50000 by 2015.

 

[below_freezing]

If so u guys need to increase the production and make a target of at-least 50000 by 2015.

no need 3600 nukes is enough to reduce any country back into feudal times. its not about the amount of people killed its about the amount of industry destroyed.

 

[Faiez]

no need 3600 nukes is enough to reduce any country back into feudal times. its not about the amount of people killed its about the amount of industry destroyed.

There is NO real purpose of a nuclear weapon. Its a last resort for if everything else fails.

even a very small nuclear weapon can easily pollute entire mega cities and turn it into a desert. All agriculture is destroyed by radiation and that also hurts food supplies. Not to mention that if a city is attacked by a nuclear weapon, millions will be displaced. All these refugees will have to be re stationed some where and that would cost more resources since land and resource has already become scarcer due to nuke attack.

To cause max damage, a nuclear device should be detonated in the air and not on the surface. It should be in air and perhaps close to rivers or major water supplies to pollute all the water and nearby agricultural lands to make food as scarce as possible. That would cause the greatest damage. Thats why nukes are such a dangerous thing.

If i were to attack USA with nuclear weapons, i wouldnt use a missile etc. I would simply try to smuggle small nuclear devices or try to put together something within USA and detonate near critical areas which supply food/water to the population.
That breaks the economy's back bone...

 

[below_freezing]

There is NO real purpose of a nuclear weapon. Its a last resort for if everything else fails.

even a very small nuclear weapon can easily pollute entire mega cities and turn it into a desert. All agriculture is destroyed by radiation and that also hurts food supplies. Not to mention that if a city is attacked by a nuclear weapon, millions will be displaced. All these refugees will have to be re stationed some where and that would cost more resources since land and resource has already become scarcer due to nuke attack.

To cause max damage, a nuclear device should be detonated in the air and not on the surface. It should be in air and perhaps close to rivers or major water supplies to pollute all the water and nearby agricultural lands to make food as scarce as possible. That would cause the greatest damage. Thats why nukes are such a dangerous thing.

If i were to attack USA with nuclear weapons, i wouldnt use a missile etc. I would simply try to smuggle small nuclear devices or try to put together something within USA and detonate near critical areas which supply food/water to the population.
That breaks the economy's back bone...

All figures were done with the assumption that it is an air detonation at 100 meters for the maximum possible damage.

 

[Akasa]

How you intend to do that? when America has bunker busting bombs there is no where to hide for that

The bunker busting bombs would be destroyed in the retaliatory nuclear strike, and if they did survive, they would not be able to penetrate the hundred meter deep bunkers in the mountain.