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

kriss

Junior Member
Registered Member
The French, Brits and I believe Russian think it's enough.

As far as I know, the first two definitely have no more than one boat out at any time. Not sure about Russia, but no more than three I believe.

Having your 12 largest cities annihilated is plenty credible to me.

In general, I think nuclear arsenals should be about minimally necessary deterrence.

Look at Russia: the nuclear arsenal was the only part of their forces they maintained, soft of, in the 90s. And they continued investing after 2010 when the economy got better. Sure did them a lot of good in the current war.

Conventional forces should be the priority.
French and Brits can't really afford more nor would they being secondary figure in their relationship with US.

Also if US can get out of their current debacle and secure their hegemony for another century for the cost of "only" 12 cities (which would not be entirely destroyed by one missile mind you), who are we to say there won't be a government in near future that would gladly take it?

In my opinion minimal deterrence would only work if you're only secondary enemy to a more powerful nuclear nation a.k.a it only works when Russia takes most of heat. If Russia also goes minimal deterrence that would leave US as the ONLY nuclear superpower who can win a nuclear exchange overwhelmingly against the rest of the world. They might as well extort everyone else into nuclear disarmament.
 

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
I disagree !!

It is very effective to have 096 SSBN patrol the west coast of the US ready to take out their silos and bomber airfield at the push of a button !!
You are aware that any Chinese SSBN going to sea from Mainland China will be tailed by US SSN or Japanese SSK?
 

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
Do you have any idea the ability of SSK to sustain even 8 knots? If you don't, then don't write such ignorant post.
Any why would they need more than that? SSBNs rarely go faster than 4-5 kts, and Chinese ones will probably go as slow as possible, if they know what is good for them.
 
Last edited:

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
You are aware that any Chinese SSBN going to sea from Mainland China will be tailed by US SSN or Japanese SSK?
And any US SSN stupid enough to come inside the first island chain would just get tailed and destroyed the moment it tried something. China's nuclear subs, especially the SSBN, are basically tech demonstrators to keep the technology alive, it would be an amazing trade to swap 1 091 or 094 for a Virginia.

Overall, China should focus on land and space based nukes, the only reason for SSBN was that old cold war era missiles had terrible launch times and bad range.

With modern technology, land based nukes accomplish everything sea based ones can, at a lower cost.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
And any US SSN stupid enough to come inside the first island chain would just get tailed and destroyed the moment it tried something. China's nuclear subs, especially the SSBN, are basically tech demonstrators to keep the technology alive, it would be an amazing trade to swap 1 091 or 094 for a Virginia.

Overall, China should focus on land and space based nukes, the only reason for SSBN was that old cold war era missiles had terrible launch times and bad range.

With modern technology, land based nukes accomplish everything sea based ones can, at a lower cost.

with much much lower cost and risk ... with mobile TEL and modern Silo with modern ICBM (i.e DF-41/45) ... basically would make SSBN much less attractive
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Any why would they need more than that? SSBNs rarely go faster than 4-5 kts, and Chinese ones will probably go as slow as possible, if they know what is good for them.
SSKs can't even sustain that. If you don't know anything, then please stop talking. SSKs have such low endurance and are so detectable when they are moving, that the idea of them trailing anything is laughable
 

snake65

Junior Member
VIP Professional
SSK has low endurance underwater on batteries, true, it's much better with AIP. This may change if the upgraded Lithium batteries work up to the expectations. And SSKs are in general more quiet and less detectable than SSNs. They are not supposed to outrun anyone, rather patrol an assigned station/position waiting for the prey to pass by and either engage by themselves or alert other assets.
 

abc123

Junior Member
Registered Member
SSKs can't even sustain that. If you don't know anything, then please stop talking. SSKs have such low endurance and are so detectable when they are moving, that the idea of them trailing anything is laughable
Allright, they can't for indefinite period of time, but 2-3 weeks isn't small period. And even if Japanese SSKs can't, USN SSNs can.

Also, if 90% of Chinese submarine fleet are SSKs, what's that saying about survivability of Chinese SSBNs?
 

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Allright, they can't for indefinite period of time, but 2-3 weeks isn't small period. And even if Japanese SSKs can't, USN SSNs can.

Also, if 90% of Chinese submarine fleet are SSKs, what's that saying about survivability of Chinese SSBNs?
The sub/underwater game isn't a one sided game though.

Chinese subs might get followed when they venture out into the pacific, but likewise, US/JP subs might get followed when they go into the SCS. Same for getting/saving noise signatures of each other etc.

In general, we really can't say that much, because sub warfare is a big secret of basically all militaries in the world.
 
Top