09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread

[Jeff Head]

The speed of sound under water is about five times the speed of sound in the air.

Yes...I understand this, that is why I specifically compared it to air speed for perspective. After all, with supercavitation, you are talking about the vessel, in essence, moving though an air bubble at speed...not the water.

No matter what medium, 4,000 miles per hour is still 4,000 miles per hour, and it is very arguable that attaining and maintaining that supercavitation in a sea water medium is far more difficult to do than flying through straight air.

 

[no_name]

According to pop3, in the recent incident the P-8 was there for more than looking for nuclear submarines that may be around. It was likened to a shark that smelled blood and went there for a very specific and important occurrence that he said cannot be revealed because it is classified. The sensitive nature of the mission is also reason for the stronger than usual response from the Chinese jets.

 

[nemo]

The puzzling thing about that ONI report was that the Chinese SSKs were pretty quiet, even the old Mings.

At as for that ONI SSN chart on China and Russia, it begs the question, at what speeds, depth and other ocean conditions?

Making a semi-educated guess:

A Type 093 SSN is probably pretty darn quiet, maybe even the same as an Akula, at speeds of say 10 knots per hour under water, but it'll probably be pretty darn noisy at 20-30 knots per hour (the Chinese seem to be pretty good at mounting acoustic quieting measures and machining precision parts as shown by the SSKs, but the Type 093's reactor could be a major problem since the sorry state of Chinese metallurgy in the 1990s would probably mean that the reactor parts like pump machinery probably will start to deform due to the high stress of high power requirements for a sustained 30 knot per hour speed. In that case, the degradation of reactor components would at least cause the Type 093 to become noisier over time and lead to the eventual breakdown of the machinery).

*If you can only expect your SSN to operate quietly at slow speeds of less than, say 10 knots, you're better off using that money to buy two SSKs with AIP for now and maintain a few SSNs to keep a cadre of nuclear power experienced sailors for if and even you can build fast AND quiet SSNs.

That make sense. If that were the case, then the difference is probably in bearing and the power density.

It's well known that Chinese are well behind on bearing. Unevenness of the bearing translate into vibration, which becomes noise. If Chinese can get magnetic bearings to work, then you may see a large drop in noise level.

An additional factor is power density. American subs deliberately lower power density so it can turn off the pump at low speed by relying on natural circulation. Russian subs uses two reactors -- have effectively more material to soak heat and effectively doubles coolant flow rate so the pump speed can be lowered. It's no accident that both American and Russian nuke subs are larger than the Chinese nuke subs.

 

[Air Force Brat]

According to pop3, in the recent incident the P-8 was there for more than looking for nuclear submarines that may be around. It was likened to a shark that smelled blood and went there for a very specific and important occurrence that he said cannot be revealed because it is classified. The sensitive nature of the mission is also reason for the stronger than usual response from the Chinese jets.

"Give me a Ping, Vasili. One PING only, please." Capt. Ramius

 

[rhino123]

One should never tell the opposing force how noisy their subs are. Before the John Walker spy scandal, the Soviets didn't know their subs were noisy. After the spy scandal the Soviets realized their sub were too noisy, and began to make quieter subs.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You actually think that the Chinese doesn't know that their sub is noisier than the Americans and that the Americans have no trouble sniffing out their sub even before the American mentioned about the noise of Chinese submarines?

 

[Lethe]

I agree that there's no reason the PLAN won't have as many submarines overall compared to the USN, considering the PLAN is heavily skewed to SSKs while the USN is a wholly SSN fleet. I think the answer was in the context of PLAN matching USN SSN/SSBN numbers, whcih would be folly and needless.

I also think that once contractors are able to develop a modern design (whenever that is), the PLAN should not hesitate to invest heavily in such vessels, even possibly at the expense of a slight decrease in surface combatant commissioning rate; that said I expect by that time, the PLAN's surface fleet will be almost wholly modernized anyway.

Regarding SSBNs, I'm not sure that it would be excessive to match USN's planned dozen boats, given the proliferation of SAM and other air defence systems with anti-ABM capabilities that we can anticipate in the coming decades.

Regarding your point about PLAN investing in nuclear submarines in larger numbers once they have brought technology up to par (as with 052D), it is for this reason I am surprised that PLAN has reportedly already built up to five 094 SSBNs. By all accounts these vessels are limited both in terms of noise level and the range of their missiles meaning they have to range far into the Pacific to place the continental United States at risk. Even if these vessels are given accelerated retirements in future (say 20yr lifespan) that's still a lot of resources and crew to tie up in the present, reducing funds available for R&D.

 

[Blitzo]

Regarding SSBNs, I'm not sure that it would be excessive to match USN's planned dozen boats, given the proliferation of SAM and other air defence systems with anti-ABM capabilities that we can anticipate in the coming decades.

True, I suppose SSBNs might be something the PLAN can seek to match USN on -- but even a mature PLAN SSBN would probably be smaller than a USN SSBN in terms of displacement and missile count.

Regarding your point about PLAN investing in nuclear submarines in larger numbers once they have brought technology up to par (as with 052D), it is for this reason I am surprised that PLAN has reportedly already built up to five 094 SSBNs. By all accounts these vessels are limited both in terms of noise level and the range of their missiles meaning they have to range far into the Pacific to place the continental United States at risk. Even if these vessels are given accelerated retirements in future (say 20yr lifespan) that's still a lot of resources and crew to tie up in the present, reducing funds available for R&D.

One reason is probably because PLAN knows some nuclear deterrence at sea is better than none. There's also the fact that they need experienced crews for future SSBNs and it's better to start now, even if it is on less-than-optimal platforms.

Another reason, is regarding the JL-2's range. A few months ago there were a few CCTV interviews and write ups from a few state media outlets that JL-2 might actually have a longer range than we thought, with range more akin to 10,000 km than 7000-8000 km. That would obviously be enough to hit the western contus from within Chinese territorial waters. That is to say, 094 with long range SLBMs would be a valid deterrent. The key question is what JL-2's actual range is. The fact that PLAN is committing itself with a decent number of 094s says to me that those SSBNs are either carrying missiles that can realistically reach CONTUS while in safe waters, or that they have been future proofed so SLBMs developed in the near future with sufficient range are able to reach CONTUS.
We know a JL-2A project of some kind exists from the plaque describing 032's test missions a year or so ago. JL-2 is based off DF-31, so I suspect JL-2A could leverage DF-31A technology to increase its range as well.

Edit: just checked the original post over on CDF. The plaque itself didn't mention JL-2A but associated text when the picture was first posted on chinese BBS mentioned it. Either way, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe a longer range version of JL-2 is under development, or that JL-2 itself may have longer range than commonly circulated

Edit 2: yeah the original 10,000 km thing was from an interview with rear admiral yin zhou, saying that Chinese standards for ICBMs were missiles with ranges greater that 8,000 km, while "long range missiles" were considered 3,000-8,000 km, with the insinuation that JL-2 or a JL-2 mod has a range at least greater than 8,000 km and a suggestion it has a range of 10,000 km. Take it for what its worth.

 

[ludasmatyi]

Closeup of Boat 403

 

[AeroEngineer]

View attachment 10719

Closeup of Boat 403

093 is the the LA SSN of China.

 

[SinoSoldier]

093 is the the LA SSN of China.

Alright, let more information be shed regarding these two boats before drawing such rash (and ill-supported) conclusions.