Chinese submarines thread
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
- Status
Re: Chinese sub thread
Dear TP:
In my own opinion, I regard the Song class as a modernized version of the older Mings, incorporating better sensors and electronics, hull-form (particularly from the sail going astern), more modern propulsion (the 7 bladed skewed propeller), and improved quieting.
The definitely deserve to be classified as a separate class, and were (until the Yuans' arrived) the most advanced conventional Chinese-built subs. The only real clue to my speculation was the closer hull-form forwards of the sail (a narrow bow rather than a spherical one) and the similar sonar placement to the Mings.
As the pictures released show, they are not yet internally as sophisticated as their Western counterparts (although they seem better equipped in this respect than their ex-Soviet Kilo counterparts). They seem to be a transition design for the PLAN, and definitely their displacement seems to be closer (though up to 50% greater) than the Mings than the Yuans.
The Yuans seem to be a Chinese counterpart to the Kilos, they share a very similar hull planform (especially in the hump decking), a similar size and displacement, and apparently mission, as they seem to be true ocean-going (at least 50% larger) rather than sea-going boats like the Ming/Song class; but utilize the planform of the Song astern of the sail. I would have to say that the stern and propulsion of the modern Chinese subs seem to more modern (or should I say "Western") than their Russian counterparts.
As no internal pictures of the Yuans have been released, we have no clue as to their internal electronics. I would venture to say that these are probably not inferior but definitely superior to their older Song cousins. Of course with a different mission they would have to be longer-ranged, lower-frequency sensors (active and passive sonars).
Even the older Mings remain effective in the choke-point ambush scenario - r(emember the surfacing of one in Japanese waters just outside an anti-submarine exercise exclusion zone the other year?) as do their Song successors.
The great differences in size and displacement indicate different missions, sea-going and ocean-going respectively. I think that the two subs will be procured in tandem together, with the Songs outnumbering their Yuan counterparts in the near term - as long as the PLAN remains nominally a defensive force, and more Yuans (or whatever successors may appear) being ordered in the future.
The appearance of the Yuan signals the PLANs desire for a true ocean-going conventional submarine force. After they reach a stage of commissioning and mass-production (like the Songs), PLAN submarine patrols to the Indian Ocean, Australia, New Zealand, Guam, Midway and even the Hawaiian islands are not too far off.
Just my 2 cents.
Best Regards,
Dusky Lim
Dear TP:
In my own opinion, I regard the Song class as a modernized version of the older Mings, incorporating better sensors and electronics, hull-form (particularly from the sail going astern), more modern propulsion (the 7 bladed skewed propeller), and improved quieting.
The definitely deserve to be classified as a separate class, and were (until the Yuans' arrived) the most advanced conventional Chinese-built subs. The only real clue to my speculation was the closer hull-form forwards of the sail (a narrow bow rather than a spherical one) and the similar sonar placement to the Mings.
As the pictures released show, they are not yet internally as sophisticated as their Western counterparts (although they seem better equipped in this respect than their ex-Soviet Kilo counterparts). They seem to be a transition design for the PLAN, and definitely their displacement seems to be closer (though up to 50% greater) than the Mings than the Yuans.
The Yuans seem to be a Chinese counterpart to the Kilos, they share a very similar hull planform (especially in the hump decking), a similar size and displacement, and apparently mission, as they seem to be true ocean-going (at least 50% larger) rather than sea-going boats like the Ming/Song class; but utilize the planform of the Song astern of the sail. I would have to say that the stern and propulsion of the modern Chinese subs seem to more modern (or should I say "Western") than their Russian counterparts.
As no internal pictures of the Yuans have been released, we have no clue as to their internal electronics. I would venture to say that these are probably not inferior but definitely superior to their older Song cousins. Of course with a different mission they would have to be longer-ranged, lower-frequency sensors (active and passive sonars).
Even the older Mings remain effective in the choke-point ambush scenario - r(emember the surfacing of one in Japanese waters just outside an anti-submarine exercise exclusion zone the other year?) as do their Song successors.
The great differences in size and displacement indicate different missions, sea-going and ocean-going respectively. I think that the two subs will be procured in tandem together, with the Songs outnumbering their Yuan counterparts in the near term - as long as the PLAN remains nominally a defensive force, and more Yuans (or whatever successors may appear) being ordered in the future.
The appearance of the Yuan signals the PLANs desire for a true ocean-going conventional submarine force. After they reach a stage of commissioning and mass-production (like the Songs), PLAN submarine patrols to the Indian Ocean, Australia, New Zealand, Guam, Midway and even the Hawaiian islands are not too far off.
Just my 2 cents.
Best Regards,
Dusky Lim
Re: Chinese sub thread
I think the Ming's tower is a little more back and it's got a chimney thing on the tower too...
I think the Ming's tower is a little more back and it's got a chimney thing on the tower too...
BLUEJACKET
Banned Idiot
- Status