Few week ago someone was postulating that as many as 9 094s and 12 093s would be operational with another 5 093Bs fitting out, but there were some who were poo-pooing that. Well, seems that might actually be much closer to the truth. Due to their nature it is of course very difficult to count subs, especially boomers, but i think it will be very surprising if China does not have one or two 094s on patrol at any one time, so it's very unlikely the 6 seen simultaneously are all they got imo. Certainly from a deterrence point of view would be unwise and downright dangerous to have all your SSBNs at pier at the same time, inviting destruction of a significant part of your deterrent.
09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
I think those 12 tubes are definitely casting shadows as we can see the shadows extend outwards (to the starboard side of the boat in the image) -- but I also think they are probably sitting partially inside the tubes themselves, partially dropped in or something like that (there doesn't seem to be a crane or anything holding them up.
The fact that the 12 tubes are extending out of the cells explains why we can only see 9 of the 12 cells forward-most cells -- because they partially obscure 3 of the 12 cells.
I.e.: there are 24 cells, of which in that image:
- 12 of the rearmost cells are partially filled with tubes protruding from them
- 9 of the 12 forwardmost cells are visible
- 3 (rearmost) of the 12 forwardmost cells are obscured by the protruding tubes.
Last edited:
There is a crane there, but not over the boat.
One day we'll see how many hatches there are
until then, it's all guess guess guess
There is a crane there, but not over the boat.
One day we'll see how many hatches there are
I can't really agree with this (and i'm also going to move these posts to the 09III thread)
Well we can see the shadow of one crane there, but unless it is managing to haul all 12 tubes in together, I don't really see the relevance (not to mention based on where the shadow of the crane is, I can't see how it would hoist anything over the submarine itself at this angle).
It also doesn't change that all twelve tubes are all partially inserted into their requisite cells, which we can observe from the shadows of the height of the tubes extending out of the hull, rather than hanging "above" the hull.
Of course technically we are in a state where the existence of 24 cells is not yet 100% verified, but based on that image and its associated shadows, angles, I think the likelihood is pretty close to 100%.
That also happens to correspond with the art of 09IIIB back in 2022/23 showing 09IIIB with columns of 8 cells (which for 3 in a row also ends up with 24 -- at the time it was confusing given the 2022 model of 09IIIB showed 18 cells, but in retrospect perhaps that model was created much earlier than 2022 and they had revised the design at some point to add another 6 in).
This isn't a guess like we are flipping a coin; there's enough other corroborating indicators alongside this fairly definitive imagery for us to reach a likely conclusion.
Unless of course one had definitive imagery to indicate otherwise.
Last edited:
That's kind of what I meant, and wasn't disagreeing with you - it is not 100% verified yet. The hatches will confirm that.
The crane can reach boats from where it is, it is telescopic. And they must be loading in the subs singularly, which would be ok for that size crane.... but, who knows eh.
It's just not loading them in at the moment the image is taken - if that is what they use - and they've got to use something haven't they?
But if it's 24, it's 24.
Not sure what you mean about "partially inserted" though. They're either in there, or not. And if they're in there I'm not sure how they'd be creating a shadow as they should be lower than the hull, even with parts missing.
Anyway. Time will tell. There is literally no rush.....
Here's what I think is the crane working with a 094 btw. A few years ago mind you. They move them around for whatever task they're doing, and so that they can reach the appropriate area.
It's certainly interesting when you flip the imagery - which is the real way to work with images. You rotate it to the angle the sat collected it at.
You can see quite a lot of the tubes, and even that they are in a slight curve as per the hull. And they're considerably higher than the visible slots.
But, just a thought
It won't be much different to loading up single torp tubes - just further distance due to the floating barge at Huludao.
And they use the same style of crane down the river from me at BAe for the Type 26's construction (not my image - I don't have any with the crane in). They reach everywhere. And move them as required.
The crane can reach boats from where it is, it is telescopic. And they must be loading in the subs singularly, which would be ok for that size crane.... but, who knows eh.
It's just not loading them in at the moment the image is taken - if that is what they use - and they've got to use something haven't they?
But if it's 24, it's 24.
Not sure what you mean about "partially inserted" though. They're either in there, or not. And if they're in there I'm not sure how they'd be creating a shadow as they should be lower than the hull, even with parts missing.
Anyway. Time will tell. There is literally no rush.....
Here's what I think is the crane working with a 094 btw. A few years ago mind you. They move them around for whatever task they're doing, and so that they can reach the appropriate area.
It's certainly interesting when you flip the imagery - which is the real way to work with images. You rotate it to the angle the sat collected it at.
You can see quite a lot of the tubes, and even that they are in a slight curve as per the hull. And they're considerably higher than the visible slots.
But, just a thought
It won't be much different to loading up single torp tubes - just further distance due to the floating barge at Huludao.
And they use the same style of crane down the river from me at BAe for the Type 26's construction (not my image - I don't have any with the crane in). They reach everywhere. And move them as required.
The debate a few weeks ago was about boats operational with PLAN, not new construction since 2024. The latter was also hinted at in speculative fashion in the 2024 and (AFAIK) even in the 2023 CMPR. The former not so much, and counting hull numbers has repeatedly resulted in double ups in that regard.
As for deterrence theory, at least the American POV, and from what I can tell, also among analysts is that for PLAN CASD is a relatively recent phenomenon, if it indeed is practiced in the full meaning of the term. But PLAN also moves around 09IVs a lot, so counting hulls in imagery is not conclusive either way.
Actually, that is still very much poo-pooed, because you didn't seem to read the original rubbish article carefully.
The prior idea was that there were up to 32-34 nuclear submarines in service with the PLAN overall, as it was based on an idea that there were:
9x 09III/A SSNs in service
16x 09IIIBs counted as in service (with "8-16 in build" conflated as if they were all in service)
9x 09IV/A SSBNs
Needless to say, this was grossly inaccurate because they counted 16x 09IIIBs as all "in service" when in reality at most 2-3 09IIIBs are in service (with 4-5 in fitting out at present, and additional boats rumoured to be ordered but not yet launched to our knowledge), which means that count immediately reduces by 14 or 13 boats.
Additionally, 9x 09III/A boats is an overestimate of the number of those class that were said to be built, with a total number closer to 6 rather than 9
As for 9x 09IV/A SSBNs, again, in terms of active service 09IV/As I think there are very few people who would make that claim, and 6+ active 09IV/As is a much more reasonable number. Considering the 09IV/As photographed by IISS, 6 as a floor minimum (considering number at dock and number at shipyard, it's reasonable to guess 1x maybe max 2x were at sea, for 7-8 09IV/As at most), which is also entirely consistent with the prior refutation of the "34 active nuclear submarines idea".
So that IISS analysis actually is quite consistent with the "poo-pooing" of that original ridiculous claim of 34 operational/in service nuclear submarines, because the original ridiculous claim was based on somewhat overcounting the 09III/A and 09IV/A boats, as well as massively incorrectly counting all of the fitting out+rumoured ordered 09IIIBs as if they were "in service".
Using previously publicly available imagery, based on two different photos of different events, IMO we can see a bank of 12 VLS tubes or plug-ins for the rearmost 12 cells (boxed in yellow), and we can see an immediate forward bank of 9 visible cells (but likely in actuality 12 cells) with their hatches open (boxed in blue; in the open bank image and also illustrated in the other image where the forward 12 hatches are closed):
Of course, there are some minor discrepancies; I believe the photo on the bottom (with the 12 open forward hatches) is sitting a bit lower in the water, causing a minor length discrepancy but all of the other parts of the boat correspond with each other so the VLS cell positions should as well.
I suppose the key point to clarify would be:
- are the "orange things" actually inserted inside open VLS hatches (i.e.: the orange things are displaying where VLS cells exist), or are they just placed atop or hanging overhead the submarine itself (i.e.: thus not necessarily indicative of any VLS cells at their position), and
- are the "dark dots" visible actually open VLS hatches, and are some of them partially obscured by the adjacent "orange things" -- i.e.: if they are VLS hatches, are there 9 (all visible from satellite) or 12 (9 visible, 3 obscured)
I certainly agree that satellite imagery (or indeed any form of imagery) can leave things still up for debate in theory, and if we were only looking at these photos in isolation that I'd agree much more that the number is up for much more debate.
But the fact we've had this mysterious painting of 09IIIB back in 2023 showing an 8 cell column (and thus implied 3 per row, for 24 total cells) far before we had satellite images of open VLS cells of any sort, and also this model a few years later showing an 8 cell column with 3 in a row, does make me tempted to view whatever satellite images we have in context of that -- especially as the photo of the "12 orange things and 9 visible black dots" photo seems to corroborate with it most closely.
However, I also acknowledge it's theoretically possible for all we know that there are multiple sub-flights/blocks of 09IIIB and it's possible some earlier hulls have fewer VLS cells than later hulls.
Edit, when I say "partially inserted" what I more mean is that I think the orange thingy (whatever it is meant to be) is partly protruding out from the hull on the dorsal side.
Basic spartan sketch representation (apologies for my lack of artistic skill):
I'll also note the IISS article misidentifies at least one of the Type 09Is in the imagery it discusses as an 09III. Its one of the MTS hulls at Jianggezhuang (1st submarine base, Qingdao). I dont mean to say that as tearing into the analysis. But I'm glad to see we can all make mistakes, and it needs to be considered before we deem any figures, on this topic or elsewhere as cast in stone.
What is that protruding from the side of the model? TAS dispenser?Using previously publicly available imagery, based on two different photos of different events, IMO we can see a bank of 12 VLS tubes or plug-ins for the rearmost 12 cells (boxed in yellow), and we can see an immediate forward bank of 9 visible cells (but likely in actuality 12 cells) with their hatches open (boxed in blue; in the open bank image and also illustrated in the other image where the forward 12 hatches are closed):
Of course, there are some minor discrepancies; I believe the photo on the bottom (with the 12 open forward hatches) is sitting a bit lower in the water, causing a minor length discrepancy but all of the other parts of the boat correspond with each other so the VLS cell positions should as well.
I suppose the key point to clarify would be:
- are the "orange things" actually inserted inside open VLS hatches (i.e.: the orange things are displaying where VLS cells exist), or are they just placed atop or hanging overhead the submarine itself (i.e.: thus not necessarily indicative of any VLS cells at their position), and
- are the "dark dots" visible actually open VLS hatches, and are some of them partially obscured by the adjacent "orange things" -- i.e.: if they are VLS hatches, are there 9 (all visible from satellite) or 12 (9 visible, 3 obscured)
I certainly agree that satellite imagery (or indeed any form of imagery) can leave things still up for debate in theory, and if we were only looking at these photos in isolation that I'd agree much more that the number is up for much more debate.
But the fact we've had this mysterious painting of 09IIIB back in 2023 showing an 8 cell column (and thus implied 3 per row, for 24 total cells) far before we had satellite images of open VLS cells of any sort, and also this model a few years later showing an 8 cell column with 3 in a row, does make me tempted to view whatever satellite images we have in context of that -- especially as the photo of the "12 orange things and 9 visible black dots" photo seems to corroborate with it most closely.
However, I also acknowledge it's theoretically possible for all we know that there are multiple sub-flights/blocks of 09IIIB and it's possible some earlier hulls have fewer VLS cells than later hulls.
Edit, when I say "partially inserted" what I more mean is that I think the orange thingy (whatever it is meant to be) is partly protruding out from the hull on the dorsal side.
Basic spartan sketch representation (apologies for my lack of artistic skill):