The nuclear triad of China in the coming years will be equal to the Russian and American

47
The nuclear triad of China in the coming years will be equal to the Russian and American


China military strength report


China is building up its nuclear forces much faster than US officials predicted even a year or two ago. Washington emphasized, according to a Pentagon report released on November 3, 2021, that Beijing by mid-century would match or surpass US global power. A 2021 Defense Department report, commonly referred to as "China's Military Power Report," says the accelerating pace of its nuclear expansion will allow it to have up to 700 nuclear warheads by 2027. The PRC likely intends to have at least a thousand warheads by 2030.



For comparison: the United States today has 3 nuclear weapons in service and in the "active reserve". weapons, and they do not plan to increase this number in the near future.

Back in 2003, the total number of nuclear weapons in the United States was about 10 thousand units. US Defense Department officials have been saying for several years that China plans to at least double its stockpile of nuclear warheads in the next decade. But no details were given to the public to support this claim. Hans M. Christensen estimates that China's current stockpile is approximately 410 nuclear warheads.

Inventories are expected to increase significantly in the next decade. According to the 2022 Pentagon report to Congress, by 2030, China's nuclear arsenal "will have about 1000 operational nuclear warheads, most of which will be deployed on systems capable of controlling the continental United States" (U.S. Department of Defense).

If expansion continues at its current pace, the Pentagon predicts that China could deploy about 2035 nuclear warheads by 1 (US Department of Defense). These predictions, however, have not yet fully materialized. They depend on a variety of uncertain factors, including how many missile silos will be built, how many warheads each missile will carry, and assumptions about China's future production of fissile materials.

In the past, American estimates of China's nuclear weapons stockpiles have been proven wrong several times. Current US projections appear to simply apply the same rate of increase in new warheads added to the arsenal between 2019 and 2021 to subsequent years through 2035. The volume and rate of stockpile expansion will depend on China's stocks of plutonium, highly enriched uranium and tritium. Current stocks could easily double stocks, but production of more than 1 additional warheads would likely require production of additional materials.

There are currently several restrictions on China's ability to develop or acquire highly enriched uranium and tritium, and the Pentagon estimates that China is expanding and diversifying its tritium production capabilities (US Department of Defense). China could potentially be limited by its current stockpile of plutonium, as production of weapons-grade plutonium was reportedly discontinued in the mid-1980s. However, Beijing is merging its civilian technology and industrial sector with a military industrial base to use dual-use infrastructure (US Department of Defense).

Thus, it is technically possible for China to acquire significant stocks of plutonium using its civilian reactors, including two commercial sodium-cooled CFR-600 fast breeder reactors currently under construction at Xiapu in Fujian province, which are scheduled to become operational. and go online in 2023 and 2026. (Von Hippel; Jones; Zhang); however, due to the fact that the US and France have faced technical difficulties in the past in the development of fast neutron reactors, experts do not believe that the Chinese have managed to overcome them.

To recover plutonium from spent reactor fuel, China has nearly completed construction of the first civilian “demonstration” property takeover facility at the CNNC Gansu Nuclear Technology Industrial Park in Jingta, Gansu, which is expected to become operational in 2025. China has begun building a second plant in the same location, which should be up and running before the end of the decade (Zhang). These reprocessing plants and a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel production line, also located at Jintah, could meet the plutonium requirements of two CFR-600 reactors, although the first CFR-600 reactor will start to run on HEU rather than MOX due to pre-delivery, an agreement with Russia (Zhang).

Uncertainties about the types of Chinese warheads and the amount of fissile material needed to produce a particular type create a challenge for estimating how many nuclear weapons China can produce from its existing stockpiles of highly enriched uranium (HEU) and weapons-grade plutonium (Tellis). Once the new fast neutron reactors become operational, they have the potential to produce large amounts of plutonium and, by some estimates, allow China to acquire up to 330 kg of weapons-grade plutonium annually for the production of new warheads (Kobayashi).

Hundreds of new missile silos in China


In the summer of 2021, US non-governmental organizations reported the construction of hundreds of new missile silos in Central China. Not surprisingly, the reaction in the United States of hawks and proponents of nuclear arms control varies. Hawkish congressmen argue that China is becoming an even greater nuclear threat, requiring the US and its allies to further strengthen their military forces. The few doves in Congress claim that China is responding to US provocations and arms control is the only way forward.

The Chinese government has made no official public announcements about what it is building. The nature, extent and role of the proposed missile silos remain uncertain. Some experts even suggested that these were not mines, but wind turbines. But satellite images analyzed by the Americans, combined with official confirmation from US officials, show that mass construction of hundreds of missile silos is underway.

The latest Pentagon forecasts appear to suggest that China intends to deploy missiles capable of carrying MIRVs in the new silos. However, there are several unknowns.

First, how many new silos will be loaded with missiles?

China may build more silos than missiles to create a "rocket game" that makes it harder for an adversary to plan a counterforce missile attack.

Secondly, how many missiles will there be with MIRVs and with how many warheads?

Each DF-5 ICBM can carry up to five warheads, and the Pentagon estimates that a DF-41 ICBM is likely to carry no more than three MIRVs. The main goal of a massive mass silo construction program is likely to be to ensure China's ability to retaliate after a surprise first strike by US strategic nuclear forces, and the main goal of the MIRV program is probably to ensure guaranteed penetration through US missile defenses.

At the end of June, the Middlebury Institute discovered the first silo launcher under construction for missiles near the city of Yumen. The second field, near Hami, was discovered by the Federation of American Scientists at the end of July. The third field - near the city of Ordos (Hangin province) - was discovered by the military research unit of the Air University in mid-August.

Three large-scale objects are at different stages of readiness. Construction in Yumen began in March 2020 and appears to include 120 silos.

In Hami province, in February 2021, and may eventually include 110 silos.
A construction site near the town of Ordos was discovered by surveillance satellites in April or May 2021. It has a different layout and so far seems to include only about 40 silos (potentially the number could increase). It seems that each missile silo field includes a number of other facilities that may be launch control centers and support facilities.

The construction of the Yumen, Hami, and Ordos missile silos followed shortly after the start of construction of half a dozen silos at the PLARF missile base near Jilantai in Inner Mongolia, originally described in the September 2019 report and the February 2021 extended report.

In addition to these four projects, American experts noted in 2020 that China may also build a small additional number of silos at its missile base near Chetsunzhen (Sundian) in Henan province.

Overall, these estimates indicate that China could build 350 new missile silos. In April 2022, US Strategic Command Commander Admiral Charles Richard called China's expansion of its strategic and nuclear forces "breathtaking", later saying that China intends to build a "world-class military force by 2030 and a military capability to take over Taiwan by force if they choose to , by 2027" (US Strategic Command).

Missile silos are not new to China, which has been placing intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in silos since the early 80s. According to various estimates, China currently has about 20 silos for old (but modernized) liquid-fueled DF-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles.

However, the construction of new 350 silos is, of course, an extraordinary news. China is clearly building up its ground-based strategic nuclear forces by deploying three new Rocket Armies.

There is a reduction in the vulnerability of Chinese ICBMs from a first strike planned by Chinese military analysts. China is concerned that its nuclear deterrent is too vulnerable to a US surprise attack. The previous small number of fixed silos have long been considered particularly vulnerable. According to the CIA, China's decision to develop the advanced mobile ICBMs we see today was a reaction to the US Navy's deployment of Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines in the Pacific.

But mobile launchers are more vulnerable in modern conditions. Previously, this was a relevant and promising topic at that level of development of technical means of space and radio reconnaissance. It is naive to believe that today it is possible to reliably hide a mobile missile system, even for a short time, even in the vast expanses of our country.

A mobile launcher is primarily a metal object with a length of more than 24 meters, a width of about 3,5 meters and a height of almost 5 meters. It radiates a large amount of heat and is a source of electromagnetic radiation simultaneously in a dozen frequency ranges. It must be remembered that a mobile launcher is not protected even from conventional weapons.

"Compact group" in Beijing


The general construction plan, visible from space, is very reminiscent of one of the methods of basing American MX missiles in the second half of the 70s - the first half of the 80s. The Americans went through more than 20 basing methods in search of the most invulnerable SS-18 (P-36 M UTTKh) ICBMs from attacks by Soviet ICBMs. This method was approved by President Ronald Reagan on December 1, 1982. But he was also rejected.

The basing project received the name "compact group" Closely Spaced (Dense Pack). In the named method of basing, the main emphasis was placed on the so-called effect of mutual defeat of warheads (fratricide), in which the consequences of the explosion of the first warhead destroy, disable or divert other warheads flying at a certain distance from the epicenter.

The fact is that an ICBM warhead is capable of withstanding pressure in the front of the shock wave from a nuclear explosion of no more than 5 kg / sq. cm, missiles in silos are much better protected, able to withstand pressure two orders of magnitude higher. The essence of the “compact group” basing system was to place the MX missile silos side by side and make them super-fortified. 100 MX ICBMs in steel launch containers were supposed to be installed in 100 launch silos or, according to the American designation, “shelters”, located in a “column” two or three in a row at a distance of 550 meters from each other.

The length of this "column" is 22 kilometers, the width is 1 meters. Regardless of the power of the attacking warheads, the explosion of each of them had to destroy fewer launch silos than to "cover" from the defeat of neighboring warheads. Theoretically, this should have ensured the survival of more than 100 percent of ICBMs during a hypothetical attack.

Chinese analysts have drawn the right conclusions from 60 years of American and Soviet experience in owning and operating ICBM forces. By increasing the number of ICBMs deployed in silos, more ICBMs can potentially survive a surprise attack and be able to retaliate. This action-reaction dynamic is most likely a factor in China's current modernization.

The American silo LF-30G ICBM "Minuteman-3" has a degree of protection against the shock wave of a nuclear explosion of up to 1 psi. inch PSI (000 kg / sq. cm). Since December 70, 1986 LGM-3 Peacekeeper (MX) missiles have been deployed at the Minuteman-400 silo of the 50th Strategic Missile Squadron (Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming). At the same time, the silos were strengthened to the level of 118–2 psi. inch PSI (000-2 kg / sq. cm). In 200, the MX missiles were decommissioned. The silos are abandoned, and the 140th squadron has been disbanded.

The old Soviet silos are much more protected, for example, the silo 15P018 of the R-36M UTTKh missile was protected to a level of 300 kg / sq. cm, and more advanced ShPU 15P018M have a high level of security up to 500 kg / sq. see, just in them the R-36M2 is now located.

This level of protection made it possible to reliably hide the best Soviet missiles not only from W-62 / Mk-12 warheads (capacity - 170 kilotons, KVO - 270 meters), but also more powerful and accurate W-78 / Mk-12A (capacity - 350 kilotons , KVO - 220 meters) of the American Minuteman-3 rocket. In total, there are 58 such silos, 12 are occupied by UR-100N UTTKh ICBMs with the Avangard block, and the remaining 46 will house Sarmatians from next year.

American experts estimate the security level of silos being built in China at 7 psi. inch PSI (000 kg/sq. cm) or higher. The US Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) has published a new version of its widely publicized ballistic and cruise missile threat report. The agency usually releases an updated version of the report every four years. The previous version dates from 500.

The 2021 report contains information on developments in many countries, but is clearly focused on China, Iran, North Korea and Russia.

Underwater component of the nuclear triad


The biggest news in the Chinese section of the NASIC report is that the new JL-3 SLBM, which is armed with the next-generation Type 096 SSBNs, will have a MIRV with three 250-kiloton individually targetable warheads and a launch range of over 10 kilometers. . This is a significant increase in capability over the JL-2 SLBM currently deployed on the Jin (Type 094) class SSBNs. A total of 48 missiles are deployed on four SSBNs, and this is likely one of the reasons for predictions that China's nuclear arsenal could double over the next decade.

However, despite the increased missile range, Type 096 SSBNs operating from the current SSBN base in the South China Sea will not be able to hit targets in the US mainland. To achieve its objectives here, SSBNs would have to launch their missiles from the Bohai Sea. This would bring nearly a third of the continental United States within reach. However, for missile attacks on Washington, the Type 096 SSBN will still have to go far into the Pacific Ocean.

China's new ICBMs


China has been deploying DF-5 silo "heavy" ICBMs and DF-31 mobile ICBMs for decades, which would be put on alert in a crisis with the intention of launching them before they are destroyed. Overall, US experts estimate that the People's Liberation Army Rocket Forces currently operate about 380 ground-based ballistic missile launchers capable of delivering nuclear warheads.

Of these missiles, about a third - about 130 - could reach the continental United States. Most of China's ballistic missile launchers are short-to-medium-range missiles designed for regional missions, and a large proportion of them are non-nuclear. According to American experts, about 75 nuclear warheads are deployed on short-range and medium-range missiles.

The latest DF-41 (CSS-20) ICBM has lost the "-X-" designation (CSS-X-20), indicating that NASIC believes that the development of the missile has been completed, deployment is now beginning. The missile was presented to the public at a military parade in honor of China's National Day on October 1, 2019. There are more than 16 mobile launchers in total, likely based on the number of mobile launchers on display at the 2019 parade in Beijing and those seen at the Jilantai training ground.

The ICBM is a solid-propellant, three-stage, launch weight of 80 tons, it is capable of delivering MIRVs to a target at a distance of 12 to 15 kilometers (according to the latest data) with three warheads with a capacity of 250 kilotons each. It was previously thought that the DF-41 could carry 6 to 10 warheads with a yield of 90 to 150 kilotons. Analysts at NASIC believe the missile is likely to carry only three warheads.

China currently has 24 DF-31A and DF-31AG mobile launchers deployed as part of two missile brigades. It is also interesting that the DF-31AG ICBM is listed in the NASIC report as UNK (unknown), equipped with MIRV or monoblock. The second most likely is a monoblock with a capacity of 700 kilotons. The DF-31A ICBM is initially listed as monobloc, suggesting that the AG version could potentially have a different payload. No other Western source lists the DF-31AG payload as a MIRV. The NASIC report's prediction of an increase in the number of Chinese ICBM nuclear warheads is inconsistent and controversial.

One section predicts: "The number of Chinese nuclear ICBM warheads capable of reaching the US will potentially increase to over 200 over the next five years." But another section of the report says: "The number of warheads on Chinese ICBMs capable of threatening the United States is expected to rise to more than 100 in the next five years." The "over 100" forecast was also listed in the 2017 report, while the "significantly over 200" forecast is the same as the forecast made in the US Department of Defense's China Military Developments Annual Report. So the NASIC authors may have simply forgotten to update the text.

NASIC estimates are very optimistic.

In reality, the United States will have big problems in five years. The total number of ground forces of China's ICBMs will reach 450 launchers, of which 400 are stationary-based (silos). The DF-5 is likely to be retired. The DF-41 (CSS-20) will become the basis of the ICBM ground forces, and the total number of charges deployed on them will reach a thousand units. In total with SLBMs and strategic aviation Chinese strategic forces in five years (by the beginning of 2027) will come close to the START-3 ceilings of 700/800/1.

In the words of the hero of the "Golden Calf", "an idiot's dream came true," ex-President Trump pushed China away from the START-3 Treaty. The general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party warned that this was a bad idea. It has long been noted that where Americans make the greatest efforts, they achieve the opposite results.
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    11 June 2023 04: 45
    first civilian "demonstration" installation on seizure of property at CNNC Gansu Nuclear Technology Industrial Park

    Poor computer translation without understanding the essence of what is written.
    1. +2
      11 June 2023 08: 39
      The construction of hundreds of mine installations is a very competent step, and if for every ten real missiles with nuclear warheads they produce nine indistinguishable dummies that they put in the mines and build 4 thousand such mines, then they will eventually place 400 missiles, while for the destruction of these mines, provided they are sufficient gains, you need to spend 4 thousand warheads. This is amazing math.
      With our vast territories, we also need to follow the same path, building mines is much cheaper than building SSBNs, which of course will not cancel the need to continue building SSBNs and developing NSNF.
      1. +2
        11 June 2023 11: 10
        Our SSBNs are locked in the Northern Fleet, Klimov wrote more than once that under the cap of NATO submarines the noise level is high, and the mace cannot shoot from under the ice, unlike the bark project, which could do this, but they relied on more cheap mace(
      2. 0
        11 June 2023 11: 18
        Models? Yes, just empty mines, with a margin, will be filled as missiles are produced.
      3. +1
        11 June 2023 11: 35
        Quote: ramzay21
        Building hundreds of mine installations is a very smart move.
        This is a very expensive step. Amers, at one time, did not pull it (there was one of the options for placing MX: for one rocket there were 10 shafts connected by a tunnel to move the rocket between them).
        1. +3
          11 June 2023 17: 50
          Quote: bk0010
          very expensive move. Amers, at one time, did not pull it (there was one of the options for placing MX: for one rocket there were 10 mines connected by a tunnel to move the rocket between them).

          In the late USSR, such a positional area was created for Molodets missiles. Unfortunately, he remained in / on, like the enterprise, and the design bureau that created these missiles. And yes, it's very expensive.
          If the protection class of the silos of the Chinese is as assumed in the United States, then they are unlikely to be able to cause critical damage to the Trident-2 warheads when launched along an inclined trajectory. China, on the other hand, can scale up its strategic nuclear forces, since it is not bound by any contractual restrictions, technical and financial difficulties.
        2. 0
          11 June 2023 23: 59
          Only not 10, but 23 mines for each of the 200 MX missiles, the so-called "Hippodrome basing method". In 1979, Jimmy Carter approved this method. Then Ronald Reagan abandoned it. It was supposed to build 4600 mines in the states of Utah and Nevada. between which 200 transporters with missiles would move. at night, missiles would be reloaded from one shaft to another and supposedly the Russians could not know where the missiles were and would be forced to extinguish all mines, both with missiles and empty, and thus the Strategic Missile Forces would be left without missiles, a kind of "nuclear sponge" . By today's standards, it's naive. the way that the Chinese copy Closely Spaced (Dense Pack) is more reliable.
          1. -2
            12 June 2023 22: 50
            Quote from sergeyketonov
            It was supposed to build 4600 mines in the states of Utah and Nevada. between which 200 transporters with missiles would move. at night, missiles would be reloaded from one mine to another and allegedly the Russians could not know where the rockets were and would be forced to extinguish all the mines,

            recourse
            Why "transport"?
            what is the meaning (reasonable) in this?
            Neither specific reconnaissance (over the territory of the United States belay), nor satellite, to determine (for that time exactly) whether the ICBM was placed in the mine or not.
            If someone is very smart about the background from the nuclear warhead, then it is easily imitated by a bookmark that glows like the original.
            The main thing is to clean snow (sand) from all 100500 ICBM mines and imitate the track of transport.
            "overload at night" is outright stupidity
            Quote from sergeyketonov
            the so-called "Hippodrome basing method"

            do not be misled, there were no "hippodromes"
            Preservation of Location Uncertainty (PLU)
            PLU is about ensuring that the observed characteristics of missiles and decoys are so identical that an outside observer would not be able to tell them apart. This project entails an important new engineering challenge, due to the high sensitivity of current and future sensors and the many observable signs of the presence of a missile. As an example of a PLU design, a missile decoy may contain an appropriate amount and distribution of highly permeable metal to make it impossible to distinguish the missile from decoys with a metal detector.

            This design envisages the deceptive deployment of 200 MX missiles in 4,600 hardened concrete shelters. If thes could not know which shelters contained the actual MX missiles and which contained
            missile decoys, they would have to target all 4,600 shelters in order to attack all 200 missiles. The baseline system would be located in the Great Basin area of ​​Nevada and Utah and could be expanded by building additional shelters, additional missiles, or both.
            Each of the 200 missiles will be based in separate groups of 23 shelters. Missiles could be transported inside each cluster (shelter), but they couldn't move from one cluster to another without dismantling large earthen barriers. Each hideout would have been like a garage or a loading bay; a truck carrying the missile or decoy would back up to the hideout's entrance and set the missile or decoy horizontally. Thus, each group will contain 1 MX missile, 22 decoys, 23 hideouts, 1 large transport truck and 1 maintenance facility.
            However, this is what China does (and very reasonably)

            At 119 almost identical construction sites, there are elements that mimic those seen on existing launchers destined for China's arsenal of nuclear-tipped missiles.
            Here, try to determine: in this positional area there are 3 ICBMs, or 30, or maybe all 119?
            And there are many position areas

            Quote: author
            Overall, these estimates indicate that China could build 350 new missile silos.

            Mines will be able to build, missiles, in such quantities, no. The USSR planed by 1980 > 40 warheads, but no missiles.
            Quote: author
            According to the 2022 Pentagon report to Congress, by 2030 China's nuclear arsenal "will have about 1000 active nuclear warheads.

            The Pentagon is exaggerating. There is no technological and economic possibility for this. China is not the USSR, they (already) cannot live like in North Korea
            Quote: author
            In the words of the hero of the "Golden Calf", "an idiot's dream came true", ex-President Trump pushed China away from the START-3 Treaty.

            can be more?
            - START 3 is reaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, New START
            Which side and where is the PRC here (in the treaty)?
            Myth: The New START Treaty allows the People's Republic of China (PRC) to continue its unrestricted nuclear buildup

            The projected significant growth of China's nuclear arsenal remains a key concern for the United States, its allies and partners. China's continued resistance to engaging in a meaningful dialogue on nuclear weapons and risk reduction is destabilizing the situation and calling into question its intentions. To prevent unbridled nuclear arms competition and promote stability, the world will need nuclear arms control, which includes the PRC. The United States does not lose sight of this goal.
            However, if the START III Treaty is allowed to expire, this will not bring the PRC to the negotiating table and will not limit its nuclear buildup. The PRC has demanded that the United States and the Russian Federation extend the START III treaty to rebuff calls for its participation in nuclear weapons talks. Now that the US and Russia have agreed to extend START III, the United States expects China to engage in dialogue.
            Myth: Nuclear arms control with the Russian Federation only serves US interests if it also includes the PRC

            Arms control agreements and arrangements must be adapted to the security problems they are designed to address. While there may be opportunities for the United States and the Russian Federation to begin negotiations with the PRC in a trilateral forum, the US does not believe that all future arms control efforts with the Russian Federation should include the PRC.
            The PRC is the least transparent member of the five nuclear powers and appears to be moving away from its longtime minimalist nuclear force policy, with its nuclear stockpile set to more than double in this decade. We are ready to engage in dialogue with China on nuclear risk reduction and arms control.

            https://www.state.gov/new-start-treaty-mythbusters/
            China called the condition for joining START-3, signed by Russia and the United States, which was announced by Fu Cong, Director of the Arms Control Department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry:
            At the same time, we don't think it's enough because even after the START 3 extension, the US and Russia together possess more than 90 percent of the existing nuclear weapons on Earth"He added.

            The diplomat said that Russia and the United States should continue to reduce their nuclear arsenals. Moreover, Moscow and Washington should legally commit themselves to not only reducing but also irreversibly destroying such weapons.
            he clarified that if Russia and the United States reduce their nuclear arsenal to the level of China's, Beijing will be happy to join START-3.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. -1
                12 June 2023 23: 14
                In real time, from the inside - this somehow needs to be explained.?
              2. +1
                12 June 2023 23: 34
                The photo from the "Bulletin" that you cite just says that the Chinese are copying the Closely Spaced (Dense Pack) system. and not "Hippodrome", at the Hippodrome, the distance between the mines is not 500 meters, but tens of kilometers, in any case, kilometers for sure. Otherwise, the whole idea is down the drain.
                1. -2
                  13 June 2023 01: 33
                  Quote from sergeyketonov
                  Otherwise, the whole idea is down the drain.

                  well, well, yes, given your advanced (albeit imagined) age, these punctures are acceptable.
                  - a cat with a tail, like "hippodromes" has nothing to do with
                  - carefully Peak Overpressure From 1-MT Burs
                  (this is another 1 MT, not 380 kT, however there are a lot of them (research)). less words, more evidence

                  I hope there are no "strange" words, and you can master the schedule?
                  "tens of kilometers" smoothly turn into hundreds of meters.
                  Py.Sy. Soviet and missiles did not give out such accuracy.
                  It is understandable, any student knows

                  I hope you know what quv is and how this value is related to q,
                  1. 0
                    13 June 2023 01: 47
                    At the time when the Hippodrome method of the KVO of Soviet ICBMs was created against which this method was created, and this is the R-36M UTTKh, or as the amers called them SS-18 Mod 3/4, it was 500 meters, the warhead power was 550 kt, neither any 1 Mt nor 380 kt in the strategic forces of the USSR there were no such charges.
                    1. -1
                      13 June 2023 01: 53
                      There was my article in the military-industrial complex in 2012 with my calculations on the shock wave just for 500 kt charges from 100 meters to 1 km everything is clear in numbers, the formula is very similar
                      1. -1
                        13 June 2023 01: 58
                        The order of numbers in your formula is not correct - 1,07 and not 105, 4,2, and not 410, 14, and not 1370. if you want to get kilograms per square cm at the output.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
              3. The comment was deleted.
                1. -1
                  13 June 2023 01: 25
                  First - no one offends you or your parents, do not invent, I just wanted to emphasize that I am older than you and most likely it is, because my parents are older than yours. And yes, they also did not go to school during the war. this misfortune of the entire Soviet people is common, and not just your parents or specifically you.
                  Secondly, in no Soviet design bureaus either closed or top-secret did they study the methods of basing MX ICBMs - these are your inventions.
                  Third - And you yourself opened this document, the cover of which you published, I advise you - open it, everything is written in English in black and white.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                2. -1
                  13 June 2023 01: 32
                  And as of 1986, there were 32000 nuclear charges in the Soviet arsenals, of which 10 were strategic, and the rest were non-strategic. Your thinking is too linear out of 150 Soviet ICBMs deployed in silos in 1398 - 1986 had breeding units on their platforms - 818 warheads. Then continue or the mind is enough to calculate how the warheads were distributed. Most Soviet missiles by that time were not monoblock. 6500 is a ridiculous number. Hans' inventions. he is a visionary.
                3. 0
                  13 June 2023 11: 11
                  As I understand it, from the raspaltsovka that you bred here. It just blew in the 90s: - "And you know Vasya Pitersky, but A Lech Cherny." As I understand it, you worked in the Royal Design Bureau. So it has nothing to do with military rocket science for 60 years. So your interest is optional. To put it bluntly - amateurish. Formula, still all right. In principle, if after the calculations the result is divided by 100 (remove two zeros), then it will be close to reality. I was more interested in the schedule - it's generally a masterpiece. Barbara Levy and Mark Shakit - ordinary journalists, it is extremely stupid to use their drawings in calculations on the survival of silos from nuclear strikes. Judge for yourself, if you believe this graph, with an explosion with a power of 20 Mt at a distance of 250 meters from the LF-30G mine of the Minuteman-3 ICBM, it will survive with a probability of 50%. Are you serious????? Try to use your formula, just do not forget to subtract two zeros from the result. Let me remind you Kyu uv. this is half kyu, don't forget to convert the power from Mt to kg, otherwise it won't work. So I’ll tell you right away the result will stun you with pressure in the front of the shock wave under 2 tons per square meter. see. Only 150 tons of radioactive cement dust will remain from the silo, plus the steel cover of the mine another 45 tons of molecular iron in the form of ionized gas. I understand that this is an optional hobby for you. But honestly - do not dishonor the memory of Sergei Palych - quit the design bureau and look for a simpler job. You will bring more benefit both to the Motherland and to yourself.
            2. 0
              12 June 2023 23: 42
              You contradict yourself - one true silo with a rocket, sprinkled with earth and 22 false ones, and so on forever, but why then a conveyor, for beauty or for furniture. I did not write that every night the rocket was transported from mine to mine, but if this is done, for example, once a month, then it is quite logical what the conveyor is for.
    2. +3
      11 June 2023 12: 03
      Amateur, unfortunately I have no one to write off. usually they write me off. What you call "bad computer translation" is my own article published in the Weapons magazine, only slightly supplemented. Instead of talking nonsense, they would ask questions if something is not clear.
      1. +5
        11 June 2023 14: 32
        Can you explain what this means?
        installations for the seizure of property
  2. +4
    11 June 2023 04: 54
    The ground part of the triad was dismantled in more detail, the sea part was a little bit, but not a word about air carriers at all, and China is still not very good with this, to put it mildly. Not a triad, but some kind of tandem.
  3. +4
    11 June 2023 05: 01
    At present, the PRC has adopted the doctrine of "delayed retaliation", while most of the mobile soil complexes are located in protected tunnels and cannot be destroyed by a sudden strike. As soon as they are ready, these PGRKs should come out of hiding and launch missiles at the enemy.
    As for this publication, without loss of quality, it could have been made half as long and the machine translation could have been edited.
  4. +1
    11 June 2023 07: 53
    The nuclear triad of China in the coming years will be equal to the Russian and American

    In terms of quantity - maybe, maybe, but not in quality, before that, the Chinese still have thirty years to go ...
    1. +4
      11 June 2023 14: 51
      The Chinese will build these hundreds of silos with a degree of protection of up to 500 kg per sq. cm in a couple of years. And we have 58 silos that the communists built 50 years ago. and there is nothing else and will not be if we do not return to a planned economy, but the Chinese have just Gosplan. don't worry about them. Both in terms of quality and quantity, China has long surpassed Russia. It's good that the communists from 1978 to 1980 managed to re-lay the entire railway network on reinforced concrete sleepers, otherwise we would now be sitting in shit like Americans.
      1. +3
        11 June 2023 16: 11
        In 1970-1980, the USSR produced 200 ICBMs of the 4th generation SS-17, SS-18, SS-19, and 50 SS-20 ICBMs per year, for the Chinese quite realizable figures, for us - 20 ICBMs - the limit for our the current socio-political and economic system.
        1. +5
          11 June 2023 16: 24
          Mr. Timokhin is thinking about something. that if the Poseidon program is closed, then the production of tanks and UAVs can be increased. Unfortunately. this is wrong. In peacetime (in the 1980s) the Soviet Union produced 3000 tanks a year. Before the SVO, Russia produced - 31 tanks per year (battalion kit). The plant is currently operating in three shifts. anyway, oh how far to Soviet indicators. Isn't it clear that the market economy is disastrous for Russia, we have no other choice but to return to the planned system. we have already lost so much time and are far behind.
          1. 0
            11 June 2023 18: 22
            Dear author, so with the air component, if we are talking about the triad. TU-16 - our everything?
            1. 0
              12 June 2023 00: 14
              All nuclear triads began with an air component. without exception, the USA and the USSR and England and France and the PRC and even Israel, India and Pakistan, only the last two are medium-range weapons. Aviation, as the simplest form, appeared first. And why the Tu-16 does not suit you - a good aircraft is no worse than others, with new engines and the range has become larger from 2500 to 3000-3500 km, as a carrier of TFR and ASBM - an ideal platform. And that the B-52 is better, but the United States does not refuse it, after remotorization and equipping with new radars with active headlights, they will serve for another 30 years. But the B-1B will be written off in the near future. An interesting fact - initially the resource of the B-52 airframe is 5000 hours, and they have already flown - 500 hours, the aircraft are all produced in 000. But the B-1962B initially had a resource - 1 hours and were produced in 13500-1984 and are decommissioned due to cracks in the power elements and skin. This is how it happens, there are legendary successful and flying aircraft like the Tu-1988 and B-16, and there is shit like the original B-52B. So in vain you are talking about "Carcass" like that. And then there on the approach of the H-1.
  5. +6
    11 June 2023 08: 27
    "civilian "demonstration" installation for the seizure of property"?? belay I would like to look at this industrial unit for total robbery .. what

    In general, I have no doubt that if the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the People's Republic of China makes such a decision, then there will be 15000 warheads .. Because this is the Communist Party. She is definitely not going to deal with empty projects for a quarter of a century and will definitely not deal with loud promises ..

    1. +1
      11 June 2023 23: 17
      Exactly !!! am
      And yes, the comment is not surprising in length ... tongue
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. +3
    11 June 2023 11: 52
    Asians, for all their cunning, live simply. Good is not confused with evil, thieves and traitors are destroyed, their ancestors, all workers and useful to society are respected .....

    Directly according to Scripture: "be simple as children ..." And you will have many of your children and rockets and everything, everything ....
  8. +2
    11 June 2023 14: 29
    Former President Trump pushed China away from the START-3 Treaty.

    China never intended to participate in it. This is a bilateral agreement
    It was Trump who wanted to make it trilateral, taking into account tactical nuclear weapons.
    1. +2
      11 June 2023 16: 49
      And I did not say that China is on fire to participate in START, on the contrary. It was Trump who tried to drag China into the treaty. I am amazed at the naivety of the American elite, to take into account the French and English arsenals, they do not want NATO members on their side, and they want to add the Chinese arsenal to the Russian one on the other side of the scale.
  9. 0
    11 June 2023 16: 00
    China believes that with the improvement of the missile attack warning system, we can ensure that all missiles in the mines will be directed towards enemy soil, like Katyushas, ​​even before their warheads arrive. It doesn't matter what happens next.
  10. 0
    11 June 2023 16: 38
    China has already achieved nuclear parity with the US. Americans have a habit of manipulating numbers for their own benefit.
    The volume and rate of stockpile expansion will depend on China's stocks of plutonium, highly enriched uranium and tritium.

    Those. in the last century, the USSR and the USA had enough of everything, but the PRC with modern technologies and industry lacks?
    A 2021 Defense Department report, commonly referred to as "China's Military Power Report," says the accelerating pace of its nuclear expansion will allow it to have up to 700 nuclear warheads by 2027.

    Since 1945, the US has produced 66,5 atomic bombs and nuclear warheads. China has the necessary nuclear technology and the most powerful industry in the world and by 2027 will be able to have 700 nuclear warheads?
    Complete nonsense.
  11. 0
    11 June 2023 21: 07
    Former USSR Kazakhstan, a place called Zhangiz-Tobe, the town of Solnechny (as all the military towns of the Strategic Missile Forces) were called in the USSR After the collapse and departure Of the 6 mines for missiles, Only one was filled with concrete, don’t worry at all, the rest were simply blown up and covered up, which, however, did not prevent Kazakh miners extract some copper.
  12. +1
    13 June 2023 04: 52
    It makes sense to pay attention to this.

    Americans started doing weakened missile warheads. Part of the existing W76 (100kt) from 2019 began to be converted into W76-2 (5kt). And at the same time - to reduce the CVO, increase accuracy, introduce a "smart detonation" system, etc. ...

    It was not even particularly hidden that the purpose of the converted warheads was to defeat silos. And it makes sense to do so only in the first blow.

    This may weaken the fratricidal effect and negate the idea of ​​a "compact group".
    1. 0
      14 June 2023 16: 20
      Jan. Good afternoon. Well, finally, on the fourth day, serious experts on the topic went. You are absolutely right. for the Americans, this is a way out and they certainly see it. So far, according to Hans Christensen, and in terms of quantity, he always gives exact numbers. there are only 20 such warheads. But there is no problem to increase it to 1000 or more. The Chinese have seriously taken up the "tight package" and I think the Americans have already understood this. The trick of the "tight package". as you correctly noted in the power of attacking warheads. The larger it is, the worse it is for the attacking side.
      1. +1
        15 June 2023 07: 12
        On the other hand, there is also a positive moment. A compact group requires many weakened warheads to defeat it. If the Americans want to strike first, then they will have to redo lots of warheads in such weakened. And this means that ... they will become almost useless against other targets (not silos). This will greatly reduce the potential reciprocal strike from the United States (if they themselves fall under someone's first strike).

        In principle, this could be countered by the development of new warheads with variable charge power. But so far, the Americans are not itching in this direction. And it’s not a fact that a reverse conversion of the W76-2 into full-fledged W-76 is possible.
        1. +1
          15 June 2023 14: 45
          Not very many, there are about 330 new mines in the "dense package" style. W-76-0 along with reserve - 1600, half of them are used on missiles of 4 or 5. for each. Without any problems, they dismantle the secondary module for 330 reserve warheads, bring it to the W-76-2 level and return it to the arsenal. In general, "Trident-2", the breeding block platform, when fully loaded, can accommodate up to 12 W-76 / Mk4 warheads
          1. +1
            15 June 2023 16: 35
            It seems that they had calculations that for a confident (at least 90% probability) defeat of the silo, 2 warheads had to be aimed at it, moreover, from different carriers. Probably from different missiles. Or maybe they meant different carrier boats.

            I find it difficult to say whether they redid these calculations in relation to the W76-2. I suspect not. So, we need 660 warheads. And this is only for the new Chinese compact groups. Some more will be needed for other nuclear arsenals (although conventional full-weight warheads may be better suited there).

            When loading 4 warheads per missile (such a limit is set by START-3), 165 missiles will be needed. However, recently, the campaign, START-3 ordered a long life (and it remains to be seen whether this order will be carried out). So with 12 warheads per missile, 55 missiles will suffice. These are 3 loaded "nuts" to the eyeballs. Out of 24 mines, only 20 remained in operation because of the same START-3. Moreover, Klimov and Timokhin believe that the re-commissioning of mothballed mines carries too high a technical risk, and it is doubtful that the Americans will do this. Most likely, the "nuts" will serve the rest of the service (until 2040) with 20 mines. The new "Columbia" mines have only 16 ...

            In addition, with an increase in the thrown weight, the range of the rocket decreases. These three boats will have to come closer to China. Well, how closer ... At least to the longitude of Hawaii. This is half of the Pacific Ocean. To reduce flight time - you can even closer.

            However, three boats will only have to be singled out against Chinese compact groups. Moreover, now they have 14 missile-carrying boats (of which 7-9 should be at sea at any time), and according to the plan, their number should be reduced to 20 by the turn of the 30-12s or even temporarily drop to 11 ... Three boats - this is already a fairly significant part, which is diverted to the Chinese "nuclear sponge". And since the MRNU is being prepared for China, then a few more boats with "conventional" warheads will have to be plowed against other components of the Chinese nuclear arsenal.

            And yes. MRNA for China is an invitation for the Russian Federation to apply the same for the United States. Although there is no formal military alliance between the Russian Federation and China (yet?), each of these players understands that if the Americans knock out the other, then you yourself will become the next one. And while their nuclear arsenal is depleted, we must strike ourselves. And there is even a moral justification: to eliminate the threat to the World - the criminal regime, which was the first to use WMD. Americans understand this. This means that they will have to detach part of the boats to contain the Russian Federation. These boats should not participate in the attack on China. And then the question is - will there be enough boats? Especially considering that some of them still have to be under scheduled repair / maintenance.

            And further. Boats. They have 75-80% of the retaliatory strike potential - this is an underwater component (whereas we have 25-30%). Figuratively speaking, they have a small number of baskets, each of which is chock-full of eggs. The loss of even one boat can greatly shake the balance. And W76 warheads are only good for boats.
            1. +1
              15 June 2023 17: 18
              Jan, you are absolutely right. "Ohio" 4 mines are stupidly filled with concrete. the cables to them are cut off, they would have to be removed and new ones installed, but everything is pointless. the boats have served their purpose, and even with such a KOH (0,76). they were even limited to the maximum depth for the remaining 12 years - no more than 210 meters. Will wait for Colombia. At the expense of "two for one", two warheads for one target. I'm not sure that there is such a need now. Even when the W-76 / Mk4 were on the old "Trident-1" with KVO - 380-450 meters, and even two might not be enough to hit the Soviet silo, especially the 4th generation, on the "Trident-2" seems to be brought to 120 meters, although it is doubtful, but the W-88 / Mk5 is certainly more accurate up to 90 meters, but as for the W-76 / Mk4, I'm not sure that it was possible to significantly increase the accuracy. They therefore started the W-93/Mk7 program. this power -340-360 kt. one can get by with one.
      2. 0
        28 July 2023 22: 48
        So far, according to Hans Christensen, and in terms of quantity, he always gives exact numbers. there are only 20 such warheads.


        Are you being so original?
        How can you even trust this character Hans Christensen? He who? Scientist? Scout? Nuclear scientist? Gunsmith? An expert maybe? Have you seen his biography?

        In fact, the Chinese nuclear arsenal is being assessed in the media by a self-taught expert from a supposedly non-governmental organization called the FAS (Federation of American Scientists). Hans is never a scientist or an American. He is a Danish functionary from Greenpeace, with a very murky biography: he was born in Denmark in 1961, he has been living in the USA since 1991, he has no academic degree, no scientific qualifications, he has a certificate from an ordinary Danish gymnasium (college) from 1981 (mathematics, biology). In 1982-86 he was the Danish coordinator for the disarmament campaign. Then, until 1991, he coordinated Greenpeace projects, first in Britain, then throughout Scandinavia (regional coordinator). In 1991 he became a researcher in the military information department of the international headquarters of Greenpeace International in Washington. In 1997, he was again in Denmark, but already a special adviser to the defense commission in the Danish Ministry of Defense (!). From 1998 to 2002, researcher at the murky supposedly non-state Nautilus Institute in Berkeley, USA. How can such a "cadre" evaluate anything in the nuclear military sphere ??

        The FAS has much more advanced American scientists, nuclear scientists and military personnel who served as officers in the US Navy, including on nuclear submarines with ICBMs (for example: Charles D. Ferguson). Why don't they make assessments of Chinese nuclear potential instead of the under-education of Hans Christensen? Because they were reluctant to get dirty and give out to the public, in the media, this political order: obviously underestimated estimates of the number of China's warheads. Indeed, until the 1990s, the Chinese nuclear forces openly evaluated other US state military structures: DIA - Defense Intelligence Agency (Defense Intelligence Agency - an analogue of our GRU) and NSC - National Security Council (National Security Council). Then their assessments from the media suddenly disappeared and one FAS reigned there. Moreover, the FAS itself estimated the Chinese nuclear arsenal in 1991–1994 at 434 warheads (why not at 433 or 435 - their spies ran around China’s nuclear warehouses and counted up all the warheads to one ???), and then sharply at 230– 235 warheads from 2000 to 2006.

        How do our professionals evaluate China’s nuclear arsenal?
        Here is an article by retired Colonel-General Viktor Yesin, former Chief of the Main Staff of the Strategic Missile Forces, professor at the Academy of Military Sciences of the Russian Federation, “Third after the USA and Russia: On China’s nuclear potential without understatement or exaggeration,” published in the weekly Military Industrial Courier » dated May 2, 2012:

        https://vpk-news.ru/articles/8838 (вебсайт, увы, закрыли, но в библиотеках есть) и в интернете копия тоже имеется: https://web.archive.org/web/20120509000349/http://vpk-news.ru/articles/8838

        In it, he modestly estimates China's nuclear arsenal for 2012 at 1600-1800 nuclear warheads.
        Now ten years have passed since that moment. China has at least 2000 warheads.

        Back in 2016, I wrote my article about this misinformation with the number of Chinese warheads, which China NEVER voiced: https://www.sovsekretno.ru/articles/politika/yadernye-sekrety-podnebesnoy/
        He urged journalists to think a little with their heads and not to fall for this misinformation from the "expert" Hans Christensen ... It's useless. Pro-Western journalists are always blowing the tune "America is always right and never lies!" And to write to patriotic journalists in a bastard that China has thousands of warheads, because otherwise it has already overtaken Russia, well, let our readers at least feel the superiority of the Russian Federation over the PRC in this.
        Imaginary...
  13. 0
    14 June 2023 15: 21
    Quote: Orso
    Dear author, so with the air component, if we are talking about the triad. TU-16 - our everything?

    Now it is fashionable to talk about UAVs. Turning old planes into UAVs shouldn't be a big deal today. On the Tu-16 as an UAV, you can achieve a very long range.
  14. 0
    14 June 2023 15: 35
    The Americans began to make weakened warheads for missiles. Part of the existing W76 (100kt) from 2019 began to be converted into W76-2 (5kt). And at the same time - to reduce the CVO, increase accuracy, introduce a "smart detonation" system, etc. ...

    This will make "accurate" and "smart" warheads more vulnerable to active mine protection systems.
    For "deaf" mines, "accurate and smart" warheads are also useless.
  15. 0
    2 August 2023 22: 18
    Nonsense, they won’t be able to, another 3 decades if they tighten up, which is not particularly observed. For bioweapons, a couple more decades. Until now, the Chinese did not have and do not have intercontinental missiles. Those. there are no carriers before the USA. The United States has carte blanche, hence China's policy. What Russia can afford, China cannot afford, and this is for 10 years.
    1. 0
      22 August 2023 02: 48
      Professionals think differently, but their articles are erased: https://vpk-news.ru/articles/8838 - the entire website, alas, was closed (this magazine is only available in libraries, in paper form).
      But there is a copy on the Internet: https://web.archive.org/web/20120509000349/http://vpk-news.ru/articles/8838
      2012 - estimates are as follows:

      The 54th missile base is deployed in the Jinan military region. It consists of three missile brigades: the first is armed with a mine missile system with a two-stage liquid-propellant ICBM "Dongfeng-5A" (with firing range up to 12 kilometers), the second - a mine and ground-based missile system with a liquid-propellant IRBM "Dongfeng-4" (with a firing range of up to 5200 kilometers) and the third - a ground-based mobile missile system with a three-stage solid-propellant ICBM "Dongfeng-31" (with firing range to 8000 kilometers). In total - 24 launchers (6 with Dongfeng-5A ICBMs, 6 with Dongfeng-4 ICBMs and 12 with Dongfeng-31 ICBMs). Ammunition - up to 28 missiles and 28 nuclear warheads.

      The 55th Missile Base is deployed in the Guangzhou Military District, which includes two missile brigades armed with a silo missile system with ICBMs "Dongfeng-5A", and one missile brigade armed with a mine and ground missile system with the Dongfeng-4 IRBM. In total - 17 launchers (12 with Dongfeng-5A ICBMs and 5 with Dongfeng-4 IRBMs). Ammunition - up to 20 missiles and 20 nuclear warheads.

      The 56th missile base is deployed in the Lanzhou Military District, consisting of two missile brigades: one is armed with a ground mobile missile system with a Dongfeng-21A IRBM, the other is armed with a ground mobile missile system with a three-stage solid-propellant ICBM "Dongfeng-31A" (with firing range up to 12 kilometers). In total - 30 launchers (12 with Dongfeng-21A ICBMs and 18 with Dongfeng-31A ICBMs). Ammunition - 35 missiles and 35 nuclear warheads.


      10 years have passed since...