None of Hendrik's posts state that 688 is analogous to F-18, or that Seawolf is analogous to F-22, or that anything that you said has any kind of support whatsoever, son, including how 688i's maintenance contracts are relevant to its tech level compared to any Chinese sub. It doesn't matter how many stints you did back in the 30's or whenever.
09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
I am just speechless you insist to ignore at all those previous posts by others that has better technical smarts than I do explaining the" Implied" reasoning behind it (of course nobody can tell you "directly" no one here works in PLA) Let's just end the discussion here I don't want to be argumentative over nothing here isn't Seinfeld and I am just here to chit chat I got a life and a girlfriend you're probably still a virgin that's why nobody can talk bad about your " Virginia"
Your infantile grade school level insults reveal you to be a child in the body of an old man, but it's all good. None of the posts previously have shed any direct light on the technological level of USN subs compared to Chinese subs, especially the as yet non-existent Type 095, but which you already seem to know the specs for LOL! You take for granted that shaftless rim drive is going to be deployed on the 095 and that this tech will propel the 095 past the Virginia class in acoustic level though there is no good evidence for either of these claims; in fact like many other fanbois you are willing to believe literally anything that makes the Chinese military look like a supadupapowa, whereas I prefer to see more evidence before I believe something, and the more extraordinary the claim the more I evidence I demand. This is how most normal people operate, but I guess not the fanbois.
Your reply just proved my last post, you keep insist on ignoring all those well explained previous post by other members. I am 1/2 Chinese so I m not all that good with my Mandarin but I think those previous post were about a superficial interview with Rear Admiral Ma and his wording were something like about "already applied" on the next gen submarine and has a lead on US about 10 years. Gee let me put the pieces together, USN already stated they are going to use the Rim-Drive on the next SSBN Columbia-Class of which will debut around 2030 of which is about 10 years away, hmmm you think about that, a technology lead Adm Ma stated 10 years away which is about from today that the US hasn't developed and stated it will be using on the next SSBN 10 years away from now. And of course no one will show you "direct evidence" of a sensitive military asset. You are sounding like those religious fanatics or climate change deniers unless a "direct evidence" is shown to you that either GOD do or do not exist. Get out of the basement or your room and breath some fresh air and use some common sense, it was a superficial news interview with a credible respected professor admiral he briefly replied a lead on a more advanced sub system component just because he didn't reveal the whole shenanigans doesn't mean he doesn't have it just means he is being professionally secretive about his job, you keep insist I prove the impossible , I m neither a spy nor I work for PLA. You are like those annoying child keep asking why continuously forever and thought somehow this will put the burden of prove on me. Quit bugging me with these stupid questions just go read the previous post by Superdog
Sure there is, as this is proclaimed to be a technology >10 years ahead of the rest of the world. Is this impossible for China? No, but it is certainly not the norm for China. It may well become the norm in the future, but for now China being more than a decade ahead of the rest of the world in a certain area of tech demands plenty of evidence. Ma could have been referring to the rim drive being used on surface ships (which is what is being developed now in other parts of the world), or that IEP is what is being used on the "next generation" of PLAN submarine (this would also not be totally unexpected), and without specifying which sub that is and without including the rim drive with the IEP. So what for you is some kind of slam dunk is for me an as yet unanswered question that will need more details in the months and years to come.
If you are unable to debate or answer questions on a forum and instead have to parrot somebody else's line, maybe you should just stop talking. Or I guess you can continue making your infantile virgin insults. Your choice really.
Lethe
Captain
The interpretation of "10 years ahead of the rest of the world" seems simple enough to me, given the the only designs we know to pursuing similar technologies, the next-generation American and British SSBNs, are not due to come online until 2030. That does not mean that China's grasp of the underlying technology is 10 years ahead of the rest of the world, but rather they are translating that technology into practice 10 years ahead of the rest of the world. The comparison with the Type 346/A AESA on 056C/D seems quite apt. Nobody would claim that China was 10 years ahead of USA in AESA technology, but nonetheless they were 10 years ahead in translating that technology to surface warships. It is as much about timelines for clean-sheet programs/projects as it is about the underlying technology.
The comparison with the Type 346/A is certainly not apt, since the first shipborne AESA was used in 1988 on the JMSDF Asagiri class on their FCRs. The first AESA MFR was the Thales-Nederland APAR in 2003, with Sampson following soon thereafter. The reason Burkes didn't use AESA was and is because the Flight IIA (with the PESA SPY-1) is still in series production and won't start on the Flight III (with the AESA SPY-6) until this year or next year. If you say that the PLAN is not 10 years ahead of the US in rim drive technology, why didn't the USN apply this tech to its latest block of Virginias, the block 4 builds? Or even the upcoming block 5, which only seems to be different from block 4 by the presence of the Virginia Payload Module? The timeline for the rim drive also does not seem to correlate. If in fact the 095 is slated to begin construction within the next year or two, its development would surely have started in the mid 2000s, which means that rim drive must have been already relatively mature by then, but in fact this technology apparently just finished developing in the last few years, or maybe even this year? How could this technology have made it onto the design sheets of the 095 back in the 2000s? This isn't some small module that can be swapped in or out for a more conventional design if it fails development. The entire sub, including the exterior features, would have to be designed around this propulsion system from the very beginning of the design process.
Already applied on a non-existent nuke sub like the 095? Good one. You're a sideshow at this point, good for a laugh and a kick to the side of the road.
