Current Nuclear Weapons Development

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-threatens-ballistic-missile-strikes-american-forces-can-hit-u-s-bases/
 
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/11/01/the_cost_of_the_us_nuclear_arsenal_not_scary_112569.html#
 
CBO: US nuclear forces to cost USD1.2 trillion over next 30 years

http://www.janes.com/article/75346/cbo-us-nuclear-forces-to-cost-usd1-2-trillion-over-next-30-years
 
https://breakingdefense.com/2017/11/the-new-u-s-nuclear-triad-will-be-a-bargain/?_ga=2.214377111.108833930.1510682399-1680168674.1510682399
 
FY18 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan

https://nnsa.energy.gov/ourmission/managingthestockpile/ssmp
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/17/satellite-images-suggest-north-korea-aggressive-work-ballistic/
 
Missile Dongfeng-41 Matures Considerably, Will Serve PLA within Months

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/188540/china-says-dongfeng_41-missile-to-enter-service-in-months.html
 
https://breakingdefense.com/2017/11/cbos-nuclear-weapons-cost-estimate-is-way-too-high-hint-bombers/
 
https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/chinas-evolving-approach-to-nuclear-war-fighting/
 
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/188743/china-expected-to-deploy-new-df_41-icbm-next-year.html

"“DF-41 is 4th-generation and China’s latest strategic missile,” said Yang, adding that the reliable missile is quick, mobile, and precise.

Public data shows that DF-41 is a rival of the 6th-generation missiles of some developed countries, such as the American LGM-30 Minuteman and the Russian RT-2PM2. The Chinese missile even has an edge with regard to some technologies.

The DF-41 has a range of 12,000 kilometers and a deviation of some one hundred meters. It can carry six to 10 multiple maneuverable warheads, which makes it difficult to be intercepted.

The missile is 16.5 meters in length with a diameter of 2.78 meters. It can be launched from road- and rail-mobile launcher platforms, as well as silo-based launchers.

“The missile can hit every corner of the earth, allowing China to counter a nuclear strike on the country,” Yang noted."

There seems to be a consistent conflation of km with miles with regards to this missile. In order to hit "every corner of the earth" it would need a range of 12,000 miles, not 12,000km. Also a CEP seems a bit low for maneuverable warheads. ??? Peacekeeper did better than that without guided warheads, as does D-5.
 
BBC reporting that North Korea has fired a ballistic missile. They are quoting South Korean reports.

In that article it’s described as a new ballistic missile.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227
 
IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. NR-401-17
Nov. 28, 2017
Statement by Pentagon Spokesman Col. Robert Manning on North Korea ICBM Launch

The U.S. Department of Defense detected and tracked a single North Korea missile launch today at about 1:17 p.m. EST. Initial assessment indicates that this missile was an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

The missile was launched from Sain Ni, North Korea, and traveled about 1000 km before splashing down in the Sea of Japan, within Japan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). We are working with our interagency partners on a more detailed assessment of the launch.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) determined the missile launch from North Korea did not pose a threat to North America, our territories or our allies.

Our commitment to the defense of our allies, including the Republic of Korea and Japan, in the face of these threats, remains ironclad. We remain prepared to defend ourselves and our allies from any attack or provocation.
 
North Korea Says Nuke Push Complete as Entire U.S. in Range

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-29/north-korea-says-nuclear-program-completed-after-new-icbm-test
 
Here’s some analysis of this latest launch.

This is always a good point to keep in mind.

We do not know how heavy a payload this missile carried, but given the increase in range it seems likely that it carried a very light mock warhead. If true, that means it would be incapable of carrying a nuclear warhead to this long distance, since such a warhead would be much heavier.
Click to expand...

http://allthingsnuclear.org/dwright/nk-longest-missile-test-yet
 
Good article on the new HS-15 ICBM that seemingly was used in the test flight the other day.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/11/30/north-korea-has-shown-us-its-new-missile-and-its-scarier-than-we-thought/?utm_term=.6b6d0bf8cc15
 
From Inside Defense

Bomb Buy

The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center on Nov. 21 published a sole-source contract notice for the first production lots of the B61-12 weapon, expecting to buy two lots between fiscal years 2019 to 2022. "The B61 Mod 12 [life-extension program tailkit assembly] division, in preparation for its first production run of B61 Mod 12 LEP TKA, is envisioned to award a sole-source contract for production B61-12 TKA trainers, low-rate initial production of the B61-12 TKA, full production B61-12 TKA and engineering and support services for the production contract," the Air Force wrote. Boeing is under contract for the engineering and manufacturing development phase of the B61 life-extension program.
 
North is destined to launch another ICBM, say experts

North Korea is destined to fire another intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), arms experts in Korea and around the world said Monday.

“North Korea already verified its technology through the first launch,” Kwon Yong-soo, former professor of Korea National Defense University, told the JoongAng Ilbo. “It will likely fire another to announce it will operationally deploy the Hwasong-15.”

The North fired a new ICBM, the Hwasong-15, on Nov. 29, which puts the whole U.S. mainland in range. The South Korean military later acknowledged that the Hwasong-15 missile was capable of striking targets more than 13,000 kilometers (8,078 miles) away.

“To demonstrate the design resilience of the Hwasong-15 ICBM, NK should test another one soon,” Tal Inbar, head of the Space and UAV Research Center at Israel’s Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies, wrote in a Twitter post. “Probable preparation time should be around 10-14 days at least. So, second test COULD be conducted around December 15-20.”
Click to expand...

http://mengnews.joins.com/view.aspx?aid=3041606
 
Comprehensive article covering the Hwasong-15 & the North Korean missile force in general.

https://thediplomat.com/2017/12/the-hwasong-15-the-anatomy-of-north-koreas-new-icbm/
 
"The KN22 did not feature a post-boost vehicle despite the larger payload fairing, which concealed a single reentry vehicle of an unknown weight."


More on topic. . .

Where Did the North Koreans Get Those Missile-Toting Trucks?

The huge eight-axle trucks supposedly carrying new intercontinental ballistic missiles (several sources think the big canisters were empty) are definitely Chinese, according to several articles I found. The Wanshan WS51200 chassis are 16x12s (eight axles, six of them driven), resembling (but not related to) Oshkosh heavy equipment transporters used by the American military. Wanshan sold the trucks to North Korea for hauling timber, and the North Koreans illegally converted them to military use, Reuters reports.

http://www.truckinginfo.com/blog/trailer-talk/story/2017/04/where-did-the-north-koreans-get-those-missile-toting-trucks.aspx
 
Reentry of North Korea’s Hwasong-15 Missile

Photos of the Hwasong-15 missile North Korea launched on its November 29 test suggest it is considerably more capable than the long-range missiles it tested in July. This missile’s length and diameter appear to be larger by about 10 percent than July’s Hwasong-14. It has a significantly larger second stage and a new engine in the first stage that appears to be much more powerful.

While we are still working through the details, this strongly implies that North Korea could use this missile to carry a nuclear warhead to cities throughout the United States. A final possible barrier people are discussing is whether Pyongyang has been able to develop a reentry vehicle that can successfully carry a warhead through the atmosphere to its target, while protecting the warhead from the very high stresses and heat of reentry.

Here are my general conclusions, which I discuss below:

North Korea has not yet demonstrated a working reentry vehicle (RV) on a trajectory that its missiles would fly if used against the United States.
However, there doesn’t appear to be a technical barrier to building a working RV, and doing so is not likely to be a significant challenge compared to what North Korea has already accomplished in its missile program.
From its lofted tests, North Korea can learn significant information needed for this development, if it is able to collect this information.
While the United States put very significant resources into developing sophisticated RVs and heatshields, as well as extensive monitoring equipment to test them, that effort was to develop highly accurate missiles, and is not indicative of the effort required by North Korea to develop an adequate RV to deliver a nuclear weapon to a city.
Click to expand...

http://allthingsnuclear.org/dwright/reentry-of-hwasong-15
 
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-sharply-expanding-nuclear-arsenal-upgrading-underground-facilities/

"Russia is aggressively building up its nuclear forces and is expected to deploy a total force of 8,000 warheads by 2026 along with modernizing deep underground bunkers, according to Pentagon officials.

The 8,000 warheads will include both large strategic warheads and thousands of new low-yield and very low-yield warheads to circumvent arms treaty limits and support Moscow's new doctrine of using nuclear arms early in any conflict."
 
http://www.atimes.com/article/south-korea-wants-nukes/

"It has been reported that Seoul may be looking into reviving its own nuclear program as Pyongyang has made no bones about the possibility of nuking the United States and its allies after it detonated a hydrogen bomb in September.

If South Korea is able to come up with its own H-bombs, then the security implications for China would be far more complex than the controversial installation of the US-supplied Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, Chinese military commentators have warned, pointing out that northern and northeastern China, including Beijing, might be well within the range of South Korean missiles equipped with nuclear warheads."
 
https://thediplomat.com/2017/12/the-great-leap-forward-chinas-pursuit-of-a-strategic-breakthrough/
 
Additional Russian Violations of Arms Control Agreements

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/18/additional_russian_violations_of_arms_control_agreements_112795.html
 
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-20/north-korea-begins-tests-to-load-anthrax-onto-icbms-asahi-says
 
https://news.usni.org/2017/12/21/electric-boat-awards-newport-news-shipbuilding-468m-to-begin-columbia-class-integrated-product-and-process-development
 
https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2017/12/21/US-and-UK-tap-Lockheed-for-Trident-II-support/1161513873330/?utm_source=sec&utm_campaign=sl&utm_medium=6
 
https://thediplomat.com/2017/12/introducing-the-df-17-chinas-newly-tested-ballistic-missile-armed-with-a-hypersonic-glide-vehicle/
 
How U.S. Intelligence Agencies Underestimated North Korea

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/06/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-missile-intelligence.html
 
US to loosen nuclear weapons constraints and develop more 'usable' warheads

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/us-to-loosen-nuclear-weapons-policy-and-develop-more-usable-warheads

This is regarding the first NPR in eight years. Including developing a new low yield Trident warhead. This latter development as it says in the article seems a bit pointless as the US already has low yield weapons and also why give away the position of your subs to use a low yield weapon anyway.
 
Flyaway said:
US to loosen nuclear weapons constraints and develop more 'usable' warheads

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/us-to-loosen-nuclear-weapons-policy-and-develop-more-usable-warheads

This is regarding the first NPR in eight years. Including developing a new low yield Trident warhead. This latter development as it says in the article seems a bit pointless as the US already has low yield weapons and also why give away the position of your subs to use a low yield weapon anyway.
Click to expand...
I’m assuming the D5 will have the same range (or greater if they use a single warhead configuration) so how is it more detectable am I missing something?

The bad news is removal of development of a nuclear hypersonic warhead China and Russia are building theirs now.
 
https://nnsa.energy.gov/blog/w88-alteration-370-program-successfully-moving-forward
 
Revisionist Russia Is the Most Nuclearized Power in the World

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2018/01/23/revisionist_russia_is_the_most_nuclearized_power_in_the_world_112949.html

"Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov declared at last week’s (January 18) special meeting of the United Nations Security Council that Russia had no intention of joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (a.k.a. the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty—NWBT). In his opinion, the NWBT “provokes deep contradictions in the international community” (RIA Novosti, January 19). This came as no surprise: Not one of the world’s nuclear powers and none of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) member states support this fledgling treaty, which has nevertheless been approved by many states, including Kazakhstan."
 
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/01/22/general-dynamics-firm-hires-as-it-preps-to-build-ballistic-missile-subs/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow


Draft NPR calls Navy plan for 12 Columbia-class submarines 'minimum' fleet size

The Trump administration could be opening the door to a larger fleet of Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines than the Defense Department has planned, according to a leaked draft of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which characterizes the current goal of building 12 new subs as a "minimum" fleet objective.
 
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2018/01/26/will_russia_build_8000_nuclear_weapons_by_2026_112963.html

Will Russia Build 8,000 Nuclear Weapons by 2026?

"The Russian Government has announced over twenty strategic nuclear modernization programs.[5] Even more significant in terms of how many nuclear weapons Russia is planning to build is the very large number of warheads that will be carried on each type of new or modernized strategic missiles. Most notable is the new Sarmat heavy ICBM which will carry, according to TASS, “at least 15 warheads.”[6] The new version of the Soviet legacy SS-N-23, the Sineva, reportedly can carry double the number of warheads for which the SS-N-23 was limited to under the START Treaty.[7] Not satisfied with this, Russia went on to develop, test and deploy a second new version of the SS-N-23, the Liner (sometimes translated as Layner) which, according to Russian press reports, can carry 10 warheads.[8] The new Bulava-30 SLBM was declared to carry six warheads under the START Treaty, but reports are quite common in Russia that it, and the new RS-24 Yars ICBM, will carry ten warheads.[9] (This would likely require a new smaller RV). Russia has gone in exactly the opposite direction as the U.S. which has downloaded its strategic missiles. It is simply impossible for Russia to deploy uniformly anywhere near these warhead numbers under any arms control regime, which suggests Russia is planning to deploy many nuclear warheads outside of arms control constraints by cheating or breakout."
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom