maintenance is cheap compared to GDP and the cost of not maintaining that arsenal. But let's go with a bare minimum: Assuming their report is somewhat accurate, here's what I'd say the

**minimum **arsenal actually is. This does not counting even a single 'new' 300x silos, and assumes they're all empty:

DF5A: 10x, 1x warhead each. 10x total. No change from their estimate.

DF5B: 10x, 5x warhead each, 50x total. No change from their estimate.

**DF5C: 10x, 5x warhead each, 50x total. Replaces and recycles DF4, similar ratio as DF5A to B.**
DF21L: 40x, 1x warhead each, 40x total. No change from their estimate.

**DF26: 200x, **0.2x warhead each,

** 40x total. Replaces and recycles dumb bombs.**
DF31s: 78x, 1x warhead each, 78x total. No change from their estimate.

**DF41 (mobile): 24x, 4x warhead each, 96x total. 24x is from the estimated 2x TEL brigades in the report, pg. 445**

DF41 (silo): 16x, 4x warhead each, 64x total.
JL2: 72x, 1x warhead each, 72x total. No change from their estimate.

Total warheads: 500

Total intercontinental: 420

This is using their own sources as much as possible and is a

**minimum **estimate. Essentially everything is backed by their own sources. I didn't do any guesswork here up except the following reasonable assumptions:

1. DF41 has 4x warheads each. See

@Broccoli estimates above. This assumes no advance in design since the 90's.

2. DF41 is being actively deployed solely in the silos and TELs actively photographed and estimated from their sources.

3. DF5C has the exact same warhead numbers as DF5B, recycling DF4 materials at the same ratio as DF5A to DF5B.

4. DF26 uses official count of 200x, not their count of 100x, with same ratio as their estimate of 0.2x being non conventional.

5. DF4 and dumb bombs have been retired/recycled due to high maintenance cost and low capability, which they admit is likely.