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

Maikeru

Maikeru

Major
Registered Member
HI Sutton is now claiming on Twitter that the May 2022 boat was an older 09III in for repairs, but he did not explain why he thought that, at least that I saw. To me it looks like it has shrouded propulsor at least, maybe VLS and matches timelines from seeing modules so likely new build 093B.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
tphuang said:
I think plan by 2035 will have more ssn than usn. That's assuming the first 2 093s and possibly 1 093a retire.
Click to expand...

I think that's a huge call lol. I think we can be reasonable in projecting out 3-4 years in terms of PLAN SSN construction, but beyond that there are a whole heap of factors we can't control for.

At least we know how many SSNs the USN will have by 2035, but IMO on this side of 2030 we can't guess what the PLAN's SSN fleet by 2035 will be. By early 2030s we'd have a much better idea.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
MarKoz81 said:
I really don't see the need for building 10 submarines annually. The bottleneck will always be crew training. With currently just 9 boats in service there's no way to reliably add more than 2-3 boats per year. Any additional submarines above this number are a waste of resources. As the size of the fleet increases 4-5 might become possible by the end of the decade but we should remember that new SSNs will also be tasked with more extensive missions as the fleet grows and subs become more capable.
Click to expand...

I think training is less than a constraint than you think.

Instead of just looking at existing SSNs in service, I would add the fleet of 60 SSKs into consideration, as there is a lot of overlap in terms of skills and experience. That's a total of 70 submarines to draw upon.

From a training perspective, I would split it into technical personnel who maintain the submarine and then command personnel who use the submarine.

The technical personnel can conduct much of the training onshore. And you can just have conversion training for existing experienced submariners.

For the command (tactical) staff, you can promote the best Captains, Executive Officers, etc from the existing fleet. The only way they can really train on a new submarine class is to actually get real-life experience with its capabilities across the oceans.

If China were to add say 6 submarines per year, they would only have to promote the best 10% from the existing fleet of 70 submarines and do conversion training, before they're ready to go.
 
TK3600

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
Personally I am far more excited for expanded sub construction than carriers. Carriers are mostly for force projection and takes a long time to prepare. It is kind of a win more thing. Submarines are far faster to build and pay for itself in a peer conflict faster. Ramping up submarine production signals rapid growth in capability in peer wars. China is getting ready and fast!
 
A

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
TK3600 said:
Personally I am far more excited for expanded sub construction than carriers. Carriers are mostly for force projection and takes a long time to prepare. It is kind of a win more thing. Submarines are far faster to build and pay for itself in a peer conflict faster. Ramping up submarine production signals rapid growth in capability in peer wars. China is getting ready and fast!
Click to expand...
Carriers need SSNs. SSNs need carriers. Both are important. Both are complex and expencive to build.
 
A

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
I think training is less than a constraint than you think.

Instead of just looking at existing SSNs in service, I would add the fleet of 60 SSKs into consideration, as there is a lot of overlap in terms of skills and experience. That's a total of 70 submarines to draw upon.

From a training perspective, I would split it into technical personnel who maintain the submarine and then command personnel who use the submarine.

The technical personnel can conduct much of the training onshore. And you can just have conversion training for existing experienced submariners.

For the command (tactical) staff, you can promote the best Captains, Executive Officers, etc from the existing fleet. The only way they can really train on a new submarine class is to actually get real-life experience with its capabilities across the oceans.

If China were to add say 6 submarines per year, they would only have to promote the best 10% from the existing fleet of 70 submarines and do conversion training, before they're ready to go.
Click to expand...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Being an commander, XO or just a officer on a SSN is not the same thing like being that on a SSK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top