Rumoured "mini-nuke/diesel" Submarine SSK-N(?) thread

[W20]

You don't have to go that far to reach the silent patrol areas, three, four days, maybe five in the most remote areas if we assume 10 knots, and much less time to reach the areas to cover the flanks.

No frigate can approach them because the large fleet that will be behind with the 055 would destroy them with their tremendous anti-ship capacity.

The battery revolution is very striking, let's think for example that the addition of AIP + new batteries is already a surprising submarine for silent patrol, if we add deployment speed it is a game changer.

 

[tphuang]

UUV’s could be used to deliver provisions to SSK-N’s to extend their patrol times.

It might also be safe for these submarines to surface in areas that are protected by Type 055’s and Type 054B’s and be resupplied by UAV or USV, or even an AG-600 which could rotate an entire crew of 50 people at sea.

Against Guam these resupply and even crew rotation missions could occur deep in the Sulu, Celebes or South China Seas. Even if they are detected they are well protected in bubbles of air and sea dominance.

This is a serious question. How is UUV going to find a quiet mini nuke in the water between first and second island chain?

Here is the thing. mini nuke isn't going to move very fast. It can only go so far in 24 hours while keeping its noise down. So the longer it stays underwater (with minimal PD surfacing for xmit), the harder it is for adversary to figure out where it is. Why would you intentionally give away its location?

PLAN is going to know what missions they have in mind for a mini-nuke and design the size accordingly. I don't know the answer.

You don't have to go that far to reach the silent patrol areas, three, four days, maybe five in the most remote areas if we assume 10 knots, and much less time to reach the areas to cover the flanks.

No frigate can approach them because the large fleet that will be behind with the 055 would destroy them with their tremendous anti-ship capacity.

The battery revolution is very striking, let's think for example that the addition of AIP + new batteries is already a surprising submarine for silent patrol, if we add deployment speed it is a game changer.

again, 10 knots is in the very upper end of what the reactor provided power can do based on our previous calculations. Why does it need to sustain that type of speed for transiting?

The concern for mini nuke once you get past 1IC is not frigates, but SSNs

 

[Andy1974]

This is a serious question. How is UUV going to find a quiet mini nuke in the water between first and second island chain?

Here is the thing. mini nuke isn't going to move very fast. It can only go so far in 24 hours while keeping its noise down. So the longer it stays underwater (with minimal PD surfacing for xmit), the harder it is for adversary to figure out where it is. Why would you intentionally give away its location?

If you want to resupply by UUV only and without any communication at all then, for example, prior to departure the SSKN will be given a list of locations and times where the resupply UUV will be in approximately 30 days. It is then up to the SSKN to be there at one of those times. There is no need to find each other, just be at the same place at the same time.

I think it’s OK to surface in a safe location to resupply because you are doing it to resupply, not to get air like an SSK.

You are doing it once a month only and you can easily surface next to a friendly destroyer given a months notice. This isn’t exactly ”giving away your position” as you are in a safe zone, with full provisions and a destroyer escort.

 

[W20]

"The concern for mini nuke once you get past 1IC is not frigates, but SSNs"

just the opposite

mini nuke is the silent hunter once he is in his patrol zone

 

[TK3600]

I think we can expect SSKN endurance of at least 1 month, given what SSKs are typically capable of.

That would mean:

1 week to reach Guam at 10 knots
2 weeks patrol
1 week to return

I think that is workable, although more endurance would be better.

The bigger problem is that SSKNs currently would struggle to disengage after an attack and evade airborne patrol aircraft.
That will only change once China has something like air superiority in the Guam area.

Considering the difference in speed between any submarine and aircraft, does faster sub make a difference?

 

[W20]

"1 week to reach Guam at 10 knot"

It is not necessary to reach Guam, three days of sailing at 10 knots is enough to begin the silent patrol at the forefront of the large fleet formed by the 055 and two large aircraft carriers in charge of controlling the area between Taiwan and Guam.

 

[W20]

For example

a) three or four days at 10 knots

b) three or four days of silent patrol at 3 knots heading east

c) the electric mini nuke submarine turns north or south and continues its silent patrol

---
That is to say: the large nuclear submarines will be on one hand in front and on the other hand behind the mini nuke electric submarine that will form a silent patrol network

and this is how the circumstance of playing on one's own field is taken advantage of.

 

[plawolf]

No, not really. China didn't expand Huludao to have 4 times more construction bays for future PLAN SSNs than the US have with Newport News and Electric Boat combined just so they can procure more SSK-Ns than SSNs.

Despite the nuclear "addition" on the SSK-N, the difference in characteristics and capabilities of SSK-Ns (which should displace ~3000-4000+ tons submerged) versus SSNs (which typically displace twice as heavy or more, i.e. ~8000-10000+ tons submerged) is actually vast.

You could even say that the SSK-Ns are pretty much the pinnacle of the SSK-species development. That still wouldn't make the SSK-Ns as capable as (or even equivalent to) the SSNs that warrants replacing the SSNs for many combat and non-combat missions, however.

I think you are looking at this slightly wrong by making this a choice of SSN or SSK-N. The PLAN isn’t necessarily choosing between them as choosing both. And almost certainly large UUVs as well.

The reason is time and capacity.

China already have the full SSK production and operational infrastructure in place. More importantly, its SSK production base is distinct from its SSN production, so simultaneous production has almost no direct opportunity cost as one more SSK-N doesn’t have to mean one less SSN.

Yes, it’s wasteful, but in war, overkill is infinitely preferable to defeat.

The PLAN can rapidly replace its existing SSKs with SSK-Ns and be able to spin those up into combat capable units far faster than it can spin up additional SSN boats. That’s not just in terms of production timescale, but also crew training and experience.

I view the SSK-N as similar to the leap from a J11 to J16. It’s a quantum leap in capabilities, but you can still use a lot of existing legacy support facilities and pilots don’t need to learn a totally new way of fighting. Whereas SSNs are more like 5th gens that gives you an entirely different class of capabilities. And just like how the PLAAF is dual procuring legacy and 5th gens, there is every chance the PLAN will do the same with SSK-Ns and SSNs.

Once you move past the mental block of thinking of them as competitors meant to fill the same role and undertake the same missions, and instead see them as complementary assets, things start to make a lot more sense.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

I think you are looking at this slightly wrong by making this a choice of SSN or SSK-N. The PLAN isn’t necessarily choosing between them as choosing both. And almost certainly large UUVs as well.

The reason is time and capacity.

China already have the full SSK production and operational infrastructure in place. More importantly, its SSK production base is distinct from its SSN production, so simultaneous production has almost no direct opportunity cost as one more SSK-N doesn’t have to mean one less SSN.

Yes, it’s wasteful, but in war, overkill is infinitely preferable to defeat.

The PLAN can rapidly replace its existing SSKs with SSK-Ns and be able to spin those up into combat capable units far faster than it can spin up additional SSN boats. That’s not just in terms of production timescale, but also crew training and experience.

I view the SSK-N as similar to the leap from a J11 to J16. It’s a quantum leap in capabilities, but you can still use a lot of existing legacy support facilities and pilots don’t need to learn a totally new way of fighting. Whereas SSNs are more like 5th gens that gives you an entirely different class of capabilities. And just like how the PLAAF is dual procuring legacy and 5th gens, there is every chance the PLAN will do the same with SSK-Ns and SSNs.

Once you move past the mental block of thinking of them as competitors meant to fill the same role and undertake the same missions, and instead see them as complementary assets, things start to make a lot more sense.

Nowhere has I suggested that the PLAN would choose SSNs only for her future subsurface fleet and disregard SSK-Ns. Also nowhere has I suggested that the SSK-Ns will become potent competitors to the SSNs in the future.

In fact, I specifically mentioned the following:

You could even say that the SSK-Ns are pretty much the pinnacle of the SSK-species development. That still wouldn't make the SSK-Ns as capable as (or even equivalent to) the SSNs that warrants replacing the SSNs for many combat and non-combat missions, however.

Perhaps you've misunderstood my post?

 

[Tomboy]

China already have the full SSK production and operational infrastructure in place. More importantly, its SSK production base is distinct from its SSN production, so simultaneous production has almost no direct opportunity cost as one more SSK-N doesn’t have to mean one less SSN.

Would Wuchang be capable of producing nuclear powered submarines even though they are of similar size to the SSK they are already building? Since there don't seem to be any facilities for fueling the reactors right now or are there any plans for expansion that we can tell