What's new

Chinese test fired DF-41 ICBM?

Indian ones won't even take off from the ground. :rofl::rofl: Forget about your so called 2nd strike, first develop a workable N.bomb before lecturing china.....And oh, did your HAL tejaj took off from the ground yet? :undecided:
Here comes the Famous CC....Chinese Cheerleader......:lol:
 
.
I think there is no point in arguing with the indian cheerleading community about the strength of our weaponry. indians always think highly about themselves and habitually put down the abilities of Chinese and other South Asians! This mentality is in their dna despite their defeat in 1962. The bitterness is still hanging over there.

Let history repeat itself but his time around the indian causualties will be hundreds of thousands of times heavier and we will take back our land home with another glorious victory!

Here comes the Famous CC....Chinese Cheerleader......:lol:

cheerleader is a term which I use for indian trolls only.
 
.
Here comes the Famous CC....Chinese Cheerleader......:lol:

Some of your countrymen if not all will always refer to us as copycats or joking around that things made in China don't work. Many people don't seem to know that rocketry came from China in the first place, do you people hear us claiming the rest of the world are copycats or have stolen the idea from us? If an Indian created a formula which can be used in mathematics/physics or other scientific area and the rest of the world would apply it too would these Indian trolls refer them as copycats? Another example, the stealth drone that Iran acquired and is sharing it with Russia and China so we can reverse engineer it. Would they call Iran, Russia and China thieves? If Russia reverse engineer it would Indian trolls dare to scream they are copycats because in everyone's eyes they are innovative and would never steal or copy. By the end of the day it is Russia and China who can make the alternate version of the Sentinel while no other countries have such technology. We will be the ones to have the real laughs.
 
.
Hu songshan conveniently deleted my reply where I said I don't think that Indian weapon systems are better - how convenient. I stick by what I say - neither India, nor China is capable of engineering good defence products. This is not patriotic chest thumping or jingoism - this is reality. If I were to be defended in case of an invasion - I would much rather that my country's soldier have a European, American or Russian weapon at his disposal - not an Asian one. It could be manufactured anywhere under license - that is irrelevant.
 
.
Hu songshan conveniently deleted my reply where I said I don't think that Indian weapon systems are better - how convenient. I stick by what I say - neither India, nor China is capable of engineering good defence products. This is not patriotic chest thumping or jingoism - this is reality. If I were to be defended in case of an invasion - I would much rather that my country's soldier have a European, American or Russian weapon at his disposal - not an Asian one. It could be manufactured anywhere under license - that is irrelevant.

Can't really say! for instance Chinese tanks in the first gulf war based on the performance were considered "robust".

Yes! some nations are not convinced about quality of Chinese military equipment.
 
.
Dead Silence meets Chinese 10-MIRV-capable DF-41 ICBM test on July 24, 2012

The most interesting responses to China's 10-MIRV-capable DF-41 ICBM test on July 24, 2012:

1. "A Pentagon spokeswoman declined to comment on the missile test." The Pentagon does not discuss China's DF-41 ICBM test, 5,000km Underground Great Wall, JL-2 SLBM tests, or DF-21D "carrier killer" ASBM tests.

In other words, the Pentagon is useless to us for current information on the latest developments of Chinese military hardware.

2. All of the major American newspapers ignore the 10-MIRV-capable DF-41 ICBM test.

There is serious denial among the American media. China is transforming into a full-fledged thermonuclear power and the Western media pretend it's not happening.

I have to wonder if the timing of the DF-41 test is not accidental. It is possible China intentionally tested the DF-41 to warn the U.S. to stop meddling in the South China Sea. The message is: Don't make us build 500 DF-41 ICBMs and place 5,000 American cities and towns at risk.

Reference: http://freebeacon.com/manchu-missile-launch/




Yet, maybe you dont forsee that is exactly what the US wants China to do? Like you said, the US is miles ahead of China supposedly...who know what they have to counter you .......hhaha.......who knows all these classified leaks have been part of a strategy from day 1? haha...
 
.
Hu songshan conveniently deleted my reply where I said I don't think that Indian weapon systems are better - how convenient. I stick by what I say - neither India, nor China is capable of engineering good defence products. This is not patriotic chest thumping or jingoism - this is reality. If I were to be defended in case of an invasion - I would much rather that my country's soldier have a European, American or Russian weapon at his disposal - not an Asian one. It could be manufactured anywhere under license - that is irrelevant.

Indian military equipment is 25% functional

You are completely correct that Indian military equipment is total crap.

After 30 years of development, the indigenous Indian Nag anti-tank missile hit its target in only 1 out of 4 attempts (i.e. 25% success rate). (See DRDO's Nag missile fails in user trials - Indian Express)

----------

Chinese military equipment is 100% functional

In sharp contrast, Chinese military equipment is flawless (see citation below).

The Chinese PL-12/SD-10 air-to-air missiles hit all 7 of its targets in 7 attempts for a 100% success rate.

Advanced but Unproved Chinese BVR Medium Range Missile SD-10

"Its seven recent test firings all hit the targets.
...
Experts believe that domestic SD-10's performance has surpassed the U.S. AIM-120A/B, Russian R-77 and the French MICA (Missile d'Interception et de Combat Aerien), etc., and close to the AIM-120C."

[Note: PL-12/SD-10 refer to the same missile.]
 
.
In that case congratulations to China on another successful missile test, you may have to use this one day on one of our hostile neighbors.
 
.
Hu songshan conveniently deleted my reply where I said I don't think that Indian weapon systems are better - how convenient. I stick by what I say - neither India, nor China is capable of engineering good defence products. This is not patriotic chest thumping or jingoism - this is reality. If I were to be defended in case of an invasion - I would much rather that my country's soldier have a European, American or Russian weapon at his disposal - not an Asian one. It could be manufactured anywhere under license - that is irrelevant.

If this works, the ICBMs will also work.

Video: Chinese crew with first woman aboard launches to new space station - YouTube

India's time is almost up. :angel:
 
.
Indian military equipment is 25% functional

You are completely correct that Indian military equipment is total crap.

After 30 years of development, the indigenous Indian Nag anti-tank missile hit its target in only 1 out of 4 attempts (i.e. 25% success rate). (See DRDO's Nag missile fails in user trials - Indian Express)

----------

Chinese military equipment is 100% functional

In sharp contrast, Chinese military equipment is flawless (see citation below).

The Chinese PL-12/SD-10 air-to-air missiles hit all 7 of its targets in 7 attempts for a 100% success rate.

Advanced but Unproved Chinese BVR Medium Range Missile SD-10

"Its seven recent test firings all hit the targets.
...
Experts believe that domestic SD-10's performance has surpassed the U.S. AIM-120A/B, Russian R-77 and the French MICA (Missile d'Interception et de Combat Aerien), etc., and close to the AIM-120C."

[Note: PL-12/SD-10 refer to the same missile.]


You still don't get it. Nevermind.
 
.
Indian ones won't even take off from the ground. :rofl::rofl: Forget about your so called 2nd strike, first develop a workable N.bomb before lecturing china.....And oh, did your HAL tejaj took off from the ground yet? :undecided:
Old boot licking habits die hard, what?
kiss-boots-173.gif


And WTF is 'Tejaj? How can something take off when it doesn't exist in the first place?

Jeeez! The crap we have to put up with here. It sure is getting exasperating! :sick:
 
.
Any country's weapons from copying begins
Russia is such
 
.
A mere 32 DF-41 ICBMs can target EVERY American city with a population of 50,000 people

PLA test-fired multiple warhead ICBM in July: Jane's Defence Weekly

"PLA test-fired multiple warhead ICBM in July: Jane's Defence Week
Staff Reporter | 2012-08-22

An anonymous US official says a Chinese DF-41 ICBM with the range to strike any city in the United States was test-fired by the PLA's Second Artillery Corps for the first time on Jul. 24, according to Jane's Defence Weekly.

With many American observers believing the missile can carry multiple independently targetable warheads, the DF-41 is considered a serious threat to US national security. An analyst told Jane's Defence Weekly that the ICBM can carry around 10 nuclear warheads to strike at multiple targets in the continental United States.


An article by Bill Gertz published in the Washington Free Beacon on Aug. 15 said the test of the DF-41 was conducted by the Second Artillery Corps of the People's Liberation Army at Wuzhai missile and space test center in the eastern province of Shandong nearly a month ago. "The new missile bolsters China's strategic forces," Gertz said, "making them among the most diverse in the world, with a variety of short-, medium-, intermediate- and intercontinental-range missiles."

The United States is currently unable to intercept missiles which employ a MIRV system. "The DF-41's multiple warheads are expected to include special simulated warheads called 'penetration aids' that are designed to counter US missile defense sensors," said Larry Wortzel, a member of the congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

"The Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which is in charge of both strategic and non-nuclear missiles, is working to integrate the DF-41 into its operational inventory," said Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute. "The system appears to incorporate a new, larger solid rocket motor than that used on the DF-31 series of delivery vehicles. Ground tests on the motor have been underway for a couple of years."

Phillip Karber from Georgetown University said that China will be able to target every US city with a population over 50,000 people by just putting 32 DF-41 MIRV missiles into service."
 
.
Chinese Missile Tests Continue

China conducts third long-range missile test in 4 weeks

BY: Bill Gertz

August 23, 2012 5:00 am

China’s military continued its string of strategic missile flight tests on Monday by firing off a third intercontinental ballistic missile in four weeks, according to U.S. officials.

U.S. military sensors detected the latest flight test, which took place in the early morning hours at China’s Wuzhai Missile and Space Test Center, near the town of Wuzhai in northwestern Shanxi province, about 267 miles southwest of Beijing.

The missile was tracked to impact range in the western Chinese desert and was identified as a CSS-4 Mod 2 silo-based ICBM.

It followed the first flight test of a new road-mobile DF-41 multiple-warhead missile on July 24 and the test firing of a new submarine-launched ballistic missile, the JL-2, which is also assessed to be capable of carrying multiple warheads.

It could not be learned if the CSS-4, also called the DF-5A, was assessed to have tested or was configured for multiple warheads or dummy warheads used to fool missile defenses.

U.S. intelligence analysts have said that China is expected to field multiple warhead missiles in the near future. One reason for upgrading from single warhead missiles is China’s concern that U.S. missile defenses in the future could render the single-warhead arsenal impotent.

For example, a recently translated Chinese military report stated that U.S. plans to develop multiple kill vehicle anti-missile interceptors “poses a new threat to defense penetration by ballistic missiles.” The report called for increasing missile warhead penetration by using stealth warhead designs and adding warheads or dummy warheads that can confuse missile defense targeting sensors.

The Pentagon did not confirm the three flight tests publicly due to restrictions on discussing intelligence matters, a military spokesman said.

But a senior defense official said the tests aren’t “ringing alarm bells. And it’s not at all certain that … the Chinese have exactly perfected all of their missile technologies. That may explain some of the recent testing.”

It is not known if the three recent flight tests were successful, but officials said initial indications from sensors were that the missiles did not fail in flight.

A third U.S. official said the tests highlight China’s growing strategic missile arsenal, forces that remain shrouded in secrecy and appear to be moving in the direction of developing a “first strike” attack capability.

China officially has claimed its nuclear forces are mainly “second strike” weapons that would be used to respond to a nuclear attack on China.

China’s communist rulers have said China would not be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict.

However, that policy has been questioned by the Pentagon due to statements from Chinese military officials who have discussed the use of nuclear weapons against the United States that were not a response to a U.S. nuclear attack, such as long-range, precision, conventionally armed cruise missile strikes.

By contrast, defense officials have said unusual Air Force delays in conducting a U.S. strategic missile test is a sign that policy officials in the Obama administration may be putting off the missile tests for political, rather than technical, reasons.

A U.S. Minuteman III ICBM was set for earlier this year in California. But the test was delayed three times, ostensibly for technical and range safety concerns.

A defense official said political interference and concerns about Chinese and Russian reactions to the Minuteman test were behind the delays, not just the technical problems.

Spokesmen at the Air Force Global Strike Command, which is in charge of the Minuteman III test, disputed that political factors were behind the test delay and said technical and range safety issues were the reason. The missile test is now set for Nov. 14.

Russia, too, is building a new long-range missile and has not hesitated to carry out tests of both submarine-launched missiles, which have had problems, and a missile that Russian officials have said is designed to penetrate U.S. missile defenses.

The Chinese missile flight tests coincide with the visit to the Pentagon this week by Chinese Lt. Gen. Cai Yingting, deputy chief of the general staff of the Communist Party-controlled People’s Liberation Army, and four other generals. It could not be learned if Cai will be questioned on the missile tests during meetings with senior Army and defense leaders.

Analysts said the most recent ICBM test was significant.

“It is likely that a CSS-4 Mod 2 or DF-5 Mod 2 would be the same as the DF-5B, which was said to me in 2010 to be the multiple warhead version of the DF-5,” said Richard Fisher, a Chinese military affairs specialist.

“So it is possible that in just one month’s time the PLA has tested two new multiple warhead land-based ICBMs and one submarine launched SLBM that could eventually carry multiple warheads,” said Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center.

“At a minimum, the PLA wants to tell us that it will be pointing more nuclear warheads our way and faster.”

Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the private Federation of American Scientists, said the CSS-4 test indicates that the Chinese plan to keep their older, liquid-fueled missiles in the arsenal instead of replacing them with solid-fuel missiles that are more rapidly fired.

Kristensen also said the CSS-4 is a likely candidate for multiple warheads.

“The U.S. intelligence community has stated for more than a decade that China for years has had the capability to develop and deploy multiple warheads, if it decided to do so, and that the CSS-4 would be the most likely carrier,” he said.

“One of the factors that has the potential to trigger such a decision would be a U.S. missile defense system that, combined with advanced conventional strike capabilities, could weaken Chinese leaders confidence in the reliability of their retaliatory nuclear force,” Kristensen said.

China’s current deployment of mobile, more survivable DF-31 and DF-31A ICBMs “probably makes it less likely that China would see a need to deploy multiple warheads on their missiles, although deployment of penetration aids or decoys might be more likely,” he said.

http://freebeacon.com/chinese-missile-tests-continue/
 
.
Hu songshan conveniently deleted my reply where I said I don't think that Indian weapon systems are better - how convenient. I stick by what I say - neither India, nor China is capable of engineering good defence products. This is not patriotic chest thumping or jingoism - this is reality. If I were to be defended in case of an invasion - I would much rather that my country's soldier have a European, American or Russian weapon at his disposal - not an Asian one. It could be manufactured anywhere under license - that is irrelevant.


Why so doubtful about your indian "Greatness" and "Competentacy"? is it becos you guys have finally come to a realisation that these are the universal trademarks of india and indians?

BTW, you sounded like you have a chinese father also? LOLOL....

You still don't get it. Nevermind.

LOLOL... nevermind.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom