Comments on: Chinese Submarine Patrols Rebound in 2007, but Remain Limited http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php Comments and analyses of important national and international security issues Fri, 25 May 2012 17:31:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Samuel Cole http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php/comment-page-1#comment-2623 Samuel Cole Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:04:56 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php#comment-2623 Maybe the Chinese government is still focusing on the one warhead mission. I haven't read too much about their MIRV capability. Don't they use high yield warheads in the one to ten megaton range? Don't mean to sound ignorant on these facts but you dont really hear too much about what the PRC is fielding or what is on the drawing board like we used to hear about the Soviets back in the seventies and eighties. <b>Reply: </b>You're correct that China appears to focus on the one warhead mission. The oldest are huge warheads in the 3-4 megaton range, but later systems (JL-1/DF-21) have smaller yields at 200-300 kilotons. There are a lot of rumors and claims out there about MIRV on Chinese missiles, but they tend to be unsubstantiated. Even Jane's lists MIRV on several Chinese systems. In stark contrast, the U.S. intelligence community attributes single warheads to all of China's missiles. China has been working on MRV and MIRV since the 1980s and probably could deploy it on its DF-5A if they felt it was necessary. The MIRV mission is only needed for destroying a lot of targets in one strike or to overcome missile defenses. China's nuclear policy does not fit the former, but the U.S. intelligence community has stated that they might deploy multiple warheads on the DF-5A if they feel the effectiveness of their deterrent is nuclear threatened by the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. But they could also chose decoys instead, which might be more effective. Besides, if China is worried about the vulnerability of its missiles, then why put a lot of warheads on a few? It would make more sense to deploy more single-warhead missiles. HK Maybe the Chinese government is still focusing on the one warhead mission. I haven’t read too much about their MIRV capability. Don’t they use high yield warheads in the one to ten megaton range? Don’t mean to sound ignorant on these facts but you dont really hear too much about what the PRC is fielding or what is on the drawing board like we used to hear about the Soviets back in the seventies and eighties.

Reply: You’re correct that China appears to focus on the one warhead mission. The oldest are huge warheads in the 3-4 megaton range, but later systems (JL-1/DF-21) have smaller yields at 200-300 kilotons. There are a lot of rumors and claims out there about MIRV on Chinese missiles, but they tend to be unsubstantiated. Even Jane’s lists MIRV on several Chinese systems. In stark contrast, the U.S. intelligence community attributes single warheads to all of China’s missiles. China has been working on MRV and MIRV since the 1980s and probably could deploy it on its DF-5A if they felt it was necessary. The MIRV mission is only needed for destroying a lot of targets in one strike or to overcome missile defenses. China’s nuclear policy does not fit the former, but the U.S. intelligence community has stated that they might deploy multiple warheads on the DF-5A if they feel the effectiveness of their deterrent is nuclear threatened by the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. But they could also chose decoys instead, which might be more effective. Besides, if China is worried about the vulnerability of its missiles, then why put a lot of warheads on a few? It would make more sense to deploy more single-warhead missiles. HK

]]> By: pat http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php/comment-page-1#comment-2543 pat Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:50:13 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php#comment-2543 <p>The number of patrols is adequate if Chinese planners are focusing on one way operations. There may be no expectation for the vessels to survive the first engagement.</p> The number of patrols is adequate if Chinese planners are focusing on one way operations. There may be no expectation for the vessels to survive the first engagement.

]]> By: Galrahn http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php/comment-page-1#comment-295 Galrahn Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:04:25 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php#comment-295 Galrahn: You have an opinion on that Type 39 mod photographed in Wuhan? <b>Reply: </b>Not really. <a href="http://www.informationdissemination.net/2008/01/photo-from-wuhan-shows-new-type39-mod.html" rel="nofollow">You</a> and <a href="http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2008/01/new-submarine.html" rel="nofollow">Feng</a> have already posted a lot, but so far there is little official information to base an opinion on. Keep digging! Galrahn: You have an opinion on that Type 39 mod photographed in Wuhan?

Reply: Not really. You and Feng have already posted a lot, but so far there is little official information to base an opinion on. Keep digging!

]]>