if seven more 093Bs have been launched, may be it can be presumed that there's no bottle neck anymore
09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
I've long suspected a lot of published data on the PLA in non=PRC media is actually sourced from this forum and related sources (e.g. X accounts). The launch dates are estimated from Sentinel imagery, generally. We only have clear imagery of the first 2 boats and more recently Tom Shughart got some hi-res images showing 3 at the fitting out pier and one on the launching barge.
This is not bad actually. Although, I suspect 4 per year is still below what they are capable of. After all, there are constraints like shipyard workers, supply chain, budget and submarine crew members that limit how many you can actually build per year.
Btw, he listed 6 launches of 093B so far, but @Maikeru posted 7. Which one did he miss?
Btw, he listed 6 launches of 093B so far, but @Maikeru posted 7. Which one did he miss?
The most recent one which was only last month and is still in the drydock as of 2nd September Sentinel image. Of course, this could be an earlier boat back in for work but that seems less likely than a new boat. Anyway that's why I said 7 "at most". Assuming all the SSNs in Tom Shughart's imagery were 093Bs, that's just 4 we can definitely confirm. But I think it's more - the first 2 boats likely on sea trials by the date of that imagery.
Hi,
what is the MLU timeline for these kind of submarine, and when MLU
is due usually what are the change in nuclear submarines or AIP
thank you
what is the MLU timeline for these kind of submarine, and when MLU
is due usually what are the change in nuclear submarines or AIP
thank you
Chinese nuclear reactors and precision manufacturing have come such a long way since the first 093s were launched that it is hard to describe. China is world leading in the former both qualitatively and quantitatively. Two totally different countries in two totally different stages of development... I don't see why they would have problems with building good naval reactors. I also expect a massive capability increase.
The article was probably written some time ago, so I wouldn't be surprised if a more recent launch was simply not incorporated due to the time when it was submitted for publication and the time of publication.
It has a couple of weird parts to it but overall it's quite an impressive summary, and makes me wonder where they've been reading to inform their output.
When was "miniaturization" of nuclear reactor technology specifically a bottleneck?
I assume you meant to write "nuclear propulsion" in general rather than specifically focusing on miniaturization.
China has modern integral reactor designs. Take the ACP100 for example.
That reactor has a similar power level to the RITM-400 the Russians designed to use in the Leader icebreaker and the nuclear carriers.
A reactor half that size with similar technology could be used in a nuclear submarine. They would just need to increase the refueling cycle to 10 years.
That reactor has a similar power level to the RITM-400 the Russians designed to use in the Leader icebreaker and the nuclear carriers.
A reactor half that size with similar technology could be used in a nuclear submarine. They would just need to increase the refueling cycle to 10 years.
Last edited:
antiterror13
Brigadier
Considering a very limited space on 093 and 094, is ACP100 suitable for those?, I read the ACP100 SMR and it seems the dimension is quite large, of course a lot smaller than ACP1400