Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Confirms New Generation of ICBM

Posted by Unknown on from the live-fast-die-young-bomb-may-drop-tomorrow dept.

Taco Cowboy (5327) writes with news of the Chinese military's latest toy, an ICBM capable of delivering multiple warheads across the Pacific. From the article: The DF-41 is designed to have a range of 12,000 kilometers (7,500 miles), according to a report by Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems, putting it among the world's longest-range missiles. ... It is "possibly capable of carrying multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles", the U.S. Defense Department said in a report in June, referring to a payload of several nuclear warheads. It also quoted a Chinese military analyst as saying: "As the U.S. continues to strengthen its missile defense system, developing third generation nuclear weapons capable of carrying multiple warheads is the trend." China's previous longest range missile was the DF-5A, which can carry a single warhead as far as 12,000 km, according to Jane's.

24 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, hi there, threat of extinction by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    I thought you were moving out, after those last couple "incidents" with the island. No, don't get angry, it's just that you never pay your rent, and you break everything.

    I know, we depended on you a lot during that whole spat we had with USSR, but come on, you never do any chores, you just sit there threatening us until one of us decides it's easier to do it than put up with your shit.

    1. Re:Oh, hi there, threat of extinction by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think we are quite there yet... China still only has enough nukes to ward off any hawks.

      Well, how many nukes does it take, exactly, to destroy a country? Realistically, all anyone has is enough nukes to ensure MAD....it's not like the US is able to bomb Russia without retribution. Estimates of China's stockpile vary, up to 3000 warheads. China is secretive and everyone is just guessing what they actually have. Any number you see is just a guess.

      In any case, it's pointless to talk about arms-reduction without being aware that one important country is aiming for arms-increase.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Oh, hi there, threat of extinction by Archtech · · Score: 2

      "China is secretive..."

      Although not quite as secretive as Israel, which (rather cleverly) denies having any nuclear weapons while relying heavily on the fact that everyone knows it does. Reminds me of Raymond Smullyan's celebrated book on logic, entitled "What is the name of this book?"

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    3. Re:Oh, hi there, threat of extinction by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Referencing the Daily Mail in an internet forum is the forum equivalent of a nuclear first strike.

      Seriously, these guys lie like hell every day. Anything they publish is likely to be complete horseshit.

      In this case the root reference for numbers of Chinese warheads over a couple of hundred is known to be an extremely unlikely rant by a Singaporean graduate student in a 1990's vintage Usenet message.

      If you see someone citing a number like that either they are trying to foment alarm or are just asshats. In the case of the Daily Mail both are very likely.

  2. Known since forever by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Informative

    This missile development effort has been known of since forever. Pictures of the TEL has even showed up. What has not been made public is if the missile is fully operational and deployed or not. The Chinese have also not displayed DF-41 in the National Day parade either.

    This article brings nothing new as there is still no official report of it being operational.

    1. Re:Known since forever by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Informative

      The newness in the DF-41 is that it would be the first solid fuel Chinese ICBM with the ability to hit the entire Continental US. Plus it would be mobile since it is supposed to be launched from a truck mounted TEL. The only system the Chinese currently which can hit the entire CONUS is the DF-5A which is a hypergolic liquid fuel missile which is so damned big it can only be launched from silos. Supposedly the Chinese dug an mountain up in order to have make these silos decades ago but they are still vulnerable to first strike. Unlike the US, UK, France, Russia, the Chinese nuclear submarine force is pathetic so they can hardly count on the submarines as a viable deterrent either.

      This would basically put the Chinese up with the Russians in terms of land missile capability. Ahead of the US too since the only land based missiles are silo based like the Minuteman. The US did have a project for a road mobile ICBM called the Midgetman at one point but it was cancelled.

    2. Re:Known since forever by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Informative

      The US doesn't really need road-mobile ICBMs. We've got the best ballistic missile subs in the world, and a lot of them, not to mention our worldwide network of airbases, capable of launching nuclear strikes with stealth aircraft and cruise missiles if we so desire.

      I'll give you the subs. The US boomers are plentiful and scary as shit. But stealth aircraft are very slow, and do not carry high yield MIRVs. They can carry up to 16 B83 bombs These are variable yield, up to 1.2 Megaton dumb bombs. So they have to be dropped, not fired like a missile. Additionally, I don't think a B2 attack on China or Russia would be very effective. Especially if it came after they already launched a first strike, and presentably the US had already retaliated with land and sub based ICBM's

      Currently the boomer fleet is the biggest deterrent there is. As far as we know, there is no reliable way of finding them, and one Ohio class sub can carry 16 Trident-2 SLBM's. With up to 8 of which can be MIRVed With Mk-4 reentry vehicles carrying up to 4 W88 warheads. The W88 is estimated to be a little under a half a megaton yield. The other 8 Trident-2 missiles are single warhead. Granted, many, if not most of the MIRVs are dummy warheads, but no one knows for sure outside of those who "need to know". So there is the potential of 40 half megaton warheads on each of the 14 SSBN Ohio class subs.

      As far as I remember the W80 warhead for the Tomahawk cruise missile has been retired. So the Los Angles, Virginia, and Seawolf class subs can no longer carry nuclear warheads. If I'm mistake, then that's another 50 or so subs that can launch a nuclear strike via a Tomahawk

  3. No worries by MRe_nl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All current missile defense shields are kind of useless.
    China felt the need to achieve military parity.
    Developing ICBM technology comes with Rocketry and is simply a prerequisite for Space Flight.

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    1. Re:No worries by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. All space programs need MiRVs. It has nothing to do with military power.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    2. Re:No worries by MRe_nl · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.civfanatics.com/ima...

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    3. Re:No worries by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Iron Dome is useless for intercepting ICBMs. The name of the Israeli system for intercepting ICBMs is the Arrow missile.

    4. Re:No worries by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh, no. MIRV, and solid rockets are very different from space flight, esp. when none of their 'civilian' rockets are solid based.
      And trying to hide what you are up, combined with working to be able to take out spying and comm links at once, is NOT about achieving parity.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:No worries by Dishevel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You believe that China is only in it for space? Good for you. Do not let history or current events get in the way of your fantasy.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    6. Re:No worries by arse+maker · · Score: 2

      Sure, just like america is.

    7. Re:No worries by AnOnyxMouseCoward · · Score: 2

      Yes because historically China has always been an imperial force seeking domination, and not the country that got shat on repeatedly in the 19th/20th century.

      Hint: Almost all of China's wars were internal (or at least in the territory of current China). The Opium war and the invasion by Japan led the country to decide they need to play the game others are playing, which is what they've been doing since then.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_wars_and_battles

      It totally is about military power now, but I find it hard to not understand them, due to the history.

    8. Re:No worries by Dishevel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      History says that when a powerful country can not feed its people and is growing faster than their natural resources will allow they will take what they need to continue their growth.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    9. Re:No worries by AnOnyxMouseCoward · · Score: 2

      Totally agree, it wasn't always "China", and there are many, many different tribes currently included in "Chinese". In fact, the current dominant ethic Han were not always the emperors, but I digress.

      Here, let me google that for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

      There's an amazing animated map on the right. The entire east/south of China has been "China" ever since, roughly, 300 BC (yep, that's 2300 years ago). The west (which, must I remind you, is nowhere as populated as the east, and certainly was even less populated before "modern China") was entirely conquered, or at least considered China, for the first time in roughly 1200 (800 years ago). Some fragments had been conquered and then lost previous to that, but whatever. In 1892, China occupied also all of current Mongolia, too, apparently.

      Basically China as we know it is maybe new, but there has been mingling of population and wars over _thousands of years_. You could argue it belonged to.. different warring factions, or city-states, back in the days, but that's like saying the Italians had a bunch of city-states. As a whole though? The concept of "China" has been in the region considered China now for a long, long, long time. You can argue about Tibet, though it was conquered by Mongols in the 13th century, along with China and a lot of the Middle-East, and by the Qing in the early 18th century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tibet#Manchurian_Qing_Dynasty). I mean... I don't know man, what do you want me to say? Those ethnic tribes considered "Chinese" have been sharing this territory for a couple hundred/thousands of years, and they've had a lot of wars, for sure, but that's no different than most old civilizations...

      The point is, the current China has now joined the Western world's game of Diplomacy, and people are just unhappy at a new player. There is no historical reason to believe they would use their ICBMs more than the US or anyone else, and I can't blame them for wanting to play the game because they got screwed not playing it for the past hundred years.

  4. WOPR by TheDarkener · · Score: 5, Funny

    Herro, Professor Farken. Would you rike to pray a game?

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  5. Angry Proliferation Game by Scot+Seese · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nuclear proliferation is becoming to sound like the plot to some absurdist classic Star Trek episode.

    The leaders of all the planets' nations sit in a room, arrayed in a circle. The room is white and completely bare, except for their chairs, and in the center of the room a single gleaming, chromed post rising from the floor about 3 feet tall. Atop the shiny post is a single large, tennis-ball sized red button.

    It is widely accepted among all the leaders that pressing the button activates a mechanism that destroys the planet. Yet this doesn't stop them from rising from their chairs, and arguing - yelling, taunting even - other leaders around the circle, so enraging them that at times several of them are close to snapping, rushing forward and pounding the red button.

    Because at the end of the day, the leaders are all flawed human beings, driven by the psychological baggage of behavioral evolutionary holdovers, cultural and religious constructs, and overwhelmingly the inability to view the other participants in the room as peers equally deserving of resources as the tribes represented by the leaders.

    Sooner or later, someone - in a moment of hubris, misplaced confidence in their own technology or military, or religious zeal - is going to dash out of their chair and smack that button.

    --
    THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    1. Re:Angry Proliferation Game by cyberchondriac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet in nearly 7 decades of MAD, no one has ever done so. What's the alternative, trust that others will actually do what they say and remove all nuclear capability? Every country would see that as a golden opportunity to keep some hidden by hook, nook, or crook, so that then they're the only ones in the world with nukes.. win!
      Or more likely, every country would do that, so we're right back where we're started, albeit with lower numbers of warheads.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  6. Almost by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Not only must it include CHina, but their allies. In particular, North Korea, Burma, Iran, and Venezuela.
    Basically, China is in the process of building their own NATO with a quiet spread out system.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  7. Re:All ready coming by Sentrion · · Score: 2

    Busy dismantling "big government" space programs with the expectation that the free market will supply the slingshots and parachutes to get in and out of orbit.

  8. Re:All ready coming by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Not at all. The neo-cons/tea* are hard are work trying to kill off SpaceX, SNC, while keep alive Boeing, L-Mart and ULA, even though the later costs us almost 300% more.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  9. "I don't want to set the world on fire..." by AtomicSymphonic · · Score: 2

    The video game franchise "Fallout" is all I'm thinking when seeing news like this. In the Fallout universe, nuclear war breaks out in the year 2077 between USA and China (in this universe, the USSR still exists and is an ally to China) as the Earth's non-renewable resources like fossil fuels run out.

    In our world, it just seems to be purely over who controls the World Order: the East or the West? I'm sure there are many factors I'm unaware of right now, but this buildup of military forces in the Pacific has me concerned for the future.

    For more info on what I'm referring to, here's the Fallout Wiki's article on the "Great War" aka WWIII.
    http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/...