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

[BoraTas]

Firstly, since I'm too lazy to type out the full term every single time, here're the abbreviations:
First Island Chain = FIC
Second Island Chain = SIC
Third Island Chain = TIC
North Sea Fleet = NSF
East Sea Fleet = ESF
South Sea Fleet = SSF


Despite as such, I believe that non-nuclear subs i.e. SSKs would still remain as a significant underwater arm for China for at least until the mid-21st century, even as the PLAN moves further towards the goal of becoming a true blue-water navy.

The main reason would be China's geographical and geopolitical situation (and thus, its submarine operational doctrine) is very different than the US and more similar to Russia.

Unlike the US who has neighbours with either a navy so weak that it couldn't even rival any one Chinese fleet (NSF/ESF/SSF) to the north, or a navy that is more like an anti-drug smuggling coast guard to the south - China has neighbours with considerably formidable navies to face against in the Westpac (Japan, South Korea, Australia, UK and possibly even India).

That means while the PLAN would deploy their SSNs deep into the Pacific for interdiction beyond the FIC, SSKs would remain within and around the FIC to patrol and guard against any attempted intrusions by enemy warships that has managed to bypass the screening of Chinese surface fleets around the FIC.

For starters, the publically available stat of the maximum range for the 039A/B/C-class is around 8000 nautical miles, or 14800 kilometers. For reference, 14800 kilometers is enough for a one-way trip from Ningbo to southern Mexico through the Miyako Strait.

Meanwhile, since submarines are not sent for one-way suicide missions, then the shortest possible navigable distances from:
1. Ningbo (ESF) to Guam - ~3000 kilometers;
2. Sanya (SSF) to Guam - ~3800 kilometers; and
3. Qinghai (NSF) to Guam - ~3600 kilometers.

Then, assume that a 039A/B/C SSK would spend half of its permissible range on station i.e. patrol in the Pacific, by my very rough estimation, that means the sub would:
1. Travel around 3000 kilometers between her home base and their designated patrol zone;
2. Conduct patrol around the designated zone for around 6000 kilometers, before;
3. Travelling another 3000 kilometers back to her home base
With 2800 kilometers of range of fuel to spare, and without any mid-sea refueling.

Therefore, I believe that theoractially and operationally-speaking, those 039A/B/C SSKs can roam freely within the FIC and as far as between the FIC and SIC.

Kindly refer to the map below..
View attachment 103500

The red, orange and lines would operate as something like "underwater island chains" (UIC) of sorts for China.

1. Firstly, any warships not from the Westpac region (i.e. Atlantic, Indian, Eastern Pacific, Arctic, Southern Oceans) would be facing the First UIC (green line), which is patrolled and guarded by PLAN SSNs (093/095) and extends as far as the nuclear reactors on those SSNs can allow.
2. If the enemy warships successfully crossed the First UIC, then they would be facing the Second UIC for China (red lines), which is patrolled and guarded by newer and more capable PLAN SSKs (039A/B/C) and extends along the middle region between the FIC and SIC.
4. If the enemy warships successfully crossed the Second UIC, then they would be facing the Third and Final UIC (orange lines), which is patrolled and guarded by older and less capable PLAN SSKs (035/039) and extends along the FIC.

If the PLAN can operate a substantial size of SSK fleets around China's coastlines, it would significantly reduce the burden of her SSN fleets WRT guarding seas closer to home shore. This would definitely help the PLAN a lot by stretching the interception network further away from Chinese shorelines. Of course, such strategy would be done as a compliment and support for PLAN surface warships and carriers against enemy warships, and less likely a submarine-independent-specific operation.

The US enacted their Island Chain Strategy to contain China. It's time that China turn that around and stopping the US from getting close to China.

I do understand that this post could veer out of this topic discussion, so if the moderators find my post unsuitable for this thread, feel free to move this post to the relevent thread.

The only problem with this is SSKs don't like long transits. It takes a long time. They also raise snorkel a lot of times during the transit. When they reach their destination, their patrol boxes are very small because of their low submerged endurance at anything above 6 knots. On top of these, they would be exposed to Japanese and American MPAs (or they have to end their patrol as soon as their AIP fuel runs out) and wouldn't be able to pursue ships offensively. So SSNs are better all around for anything beyond 1500 km. If China is concerned about area coverage, adopting a second smaller and cheaper SSN would be a better option.

I know conventional subs can project power. For example I can see a 039C transiting fast mostly at the surface at 12 knots until it is 1200 km away from mainland China (where it is relatively safe at the surface thanks to PLAAF and PLAN) and then dive. It could spend 3 more days transiting at 6 knots, then patrol for 15 days, and then return back for 3 days without raising a snorkel thanks to AIP. The problem is it can't deny much area even at the final location. Why bother with this when you can just send an SSN to transit, and patrol for 2 months at 16 knots without surfacing or raising a snorkel? It is simply a much better deal.

At a 4000 km distance, this becomes worse. Such a distance makes a ~3000 km submerged transit on battery a must. That is a lot of snorkeling.

 

[BoraTas]

What if sub get sufficiently long range aa out range anti submarine weapons? They can be above water, and if enemy use anti ship missile it can submerge to dodge it.

It is extremely easy to counter that. It would take less than 2 years for countries to introduce depth charge equipped anti-ship missiles. This is the same reason why armored ships are not viable in 2022. In theory missiles of today can't penetrate much armor. But that's because armored ships don't exist. If they existed we would see such warheads.

 

[Maikeru]

I think that is an unlikely prospect. Exposes the sub for no almost gains at all. Subs will get SAMs but such missiles will be for self-defense against helos that are about to find them. Helos are a huge problem for subs. Their dipping sonars are scary. And I think the capability is more common than we civilians know. It is exactly the type of capability you'd keep secret. Revising tactics and retraining ASW helicopter teams during a conflict after losing a few of such helos would be very frustrating.

I think USN was looking at an encapsulated AIM9X for precisely this purpose some years ago. Not sure what became of that program, not heard anything recently.

 

[tphuang]

The only problem with this is SSKs don't like long transits. It takes a long time. They also raise snorkel a lot of times during the transit. When they reach their destination, their patrol boxes are very small because of their low submerged endurance at anything above 6 knots. On top of these, they would be exposed to Japanese and American MPAs (or they have to end their patrol as soon as their AIP fuel runs out) and wouldn't be able to pursue ships offensively. So SSNs are better all around for anything beyond 1500 km. If China is concerned about area coverage, adopting a second smaller and cheaper SSN would be a better option.

I know conventional subs can project power. For example I can see a 039C transiting fast mostly at the surface at 12 knots until it is 1200 km away from mainland China (where it is relatively safe at the surface thanks to PLAAF and PLAN) and then dive. It could spend 3 more days transiting at 6 knots, then patrol for 15 days, and then return back for 3 days without raising a snorkel thanks to AIP. The problem is it can't deny much area even at the final location. Why bother with this when you can just send an SSN to transit, and patrol for 2 months at 16 knots without surfacing or raising a snorkel? It is simply a much better deal.

At a 4000 km distance, this becomes worse. Such a distance makes a ~3000 km submerged transit on battery a must. That is a lot of snorkeling.

Btw, diesel subs have to snorkel every couple of days for ventilation. That's why it's kind of useless against a side with air control and constant mpa presence.

At this point, I am beginning to question the wisdom of more 039c. You can add numbers with just more auvs and small diesel subs for this shallow waters. You don't really need something like yuan class since diesel subs are so operationally limited compared to nuclear subs.

 

[para80]

Its worth noting Yuan/039C production appears to trickle instead of pour. I suspect PLAN is of a similar mind and may only produce more hulls to compensate retiring some older boats, but putting a much larger emphasis on shifting personnel onto nukes. A guess of mine anyway.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Its worth noting Yuan/039C production appears to trickle instead of pour. I suspect PLAN is of a similar mind and may only produce more hulls to compensate retiring some older boats, but putting a much larger emphasis on shifting personnel onto nukes. A guess of mine anyway.

The PLAN has loads of old AF 035s and earlier 039s to replace.

Besides, recall the new developments of Chinese SSKs' propulsion systems WRT lithium battery technology:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Therefore, I doubt that the PLAN would miss out on opportunities to field as many SSKs with new lithium battery propulsion systems as possible, for at least the time being.

However, if the PLAN does put much bigger emphasis on SSN and SSBN procurement such that the need for newer SSKs has been largely eclipsed, then why would Wuchang built an even bigger shipyard across a new location in Wuhan and moved their operations and production facilities there?

Unless the PLAN wants to build SSNs and SSBNs (which is rather risky considering the depth, navigation and traffic of the Yangtze), then I don't think that they are going to let up the construction of SSKs so easily.

Except, say, PLAN wants Wuchang to focus their production lines on UUVs instead. Though, we would have no way of knowing that for the time being.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Unless Wuchang wants to build SSNs and SSBNs (which is rather risky considering the depth, navigation and traffic of the Yangtze), then I don't think that they are going to let up the construction of SSKs so easily.

Except, say, Wuchang wants to focus their production lines on UUVs instead? Though, we would have no way of knowing that for the time being.

"Wuchang wants" is not a semantically valid phrase. Wuchang doesn't get to want anything, Wuchang does what it's told.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

"Wuchang wants" is not a semantically valid phrase. Wuchang doesn't get to want anything, Wuchang does what it's told.

Alright, thanks for the correction

 

[kentchang]

Btw, diesel subs have to snorkel every couple of days for ventilation. That's why it's kind of useless against a side with air control and constant mpa presence.

At this point, I am beginning to question the wisdom of more 039c. You can add numbers with just more auvs and small diesel subs for this shallow waters. You don't really need something like yuan class since diesel subs are so operationally limited compared to nuclear subs.

All true BUT SSKs are still eminently useful against countries without air supremacy and without constant MPA presence which just about describes every country around China except the Seventh Fleet. Just like the J-10/J-20 mix, adds quantity and affordability. SSKs free up home-sea duties and match up nicely against Japanese and Korean boats and more exportable. The patrol range of SSKs can also be extended with a few well-positions AA ships.

In the longer term, I question how useful SSNs will be if hydrogen fuel can be synthesized from sea water or why not refueling by AUVs?

 

[para80]

However, if the PLAN does put much bigger emphasis on SSN and SSBN procurement such that the need for newer SSKs has been largely eclipsed, then why would Wuchang built an even bigger shipyard across a new location in Wuhan and moved their operations and production facilities there?

Unless the PLAN wants to build SSNs and SSBNs (which is rather risky considering the depth, navigation and traffic of the Yangtze), then I don't think that they are going to let up the construction of SSKs so easily.

Except, say, PLAN wants Wuchang to focus their production lines on UUVs instead. Though, we would have no way of knowing that for the time being.

The new production facilities at Huludao already confirm that PLAN wants to put a much larger emphasis on SSN/SSBN production. Their scale and estimated production output demonstrate this. Of course PLAN will want to replace legacy hulls _to some extent_ with new SSK, plus perhaps a larger emphasis on supporting USV. That said, if a stronger focus on nuclear powered submarines (and again, supporting evidence suggests as much) is to occur, the only way to enable such is to transition experienced crews from conventionally powered submarines. Expansion of overall personnel just wont cut it there.