Chinese submarines thread

[tphuang]

Re: Chinese sub thread

I really hate having to show pictures this way, but the original poster had them like this since the Yuans are so hard to spot around everything else. Anyhow, this one looks like it's at the same location as the one we saw late September, so I'm assuming this is the same Yuan (even though I don't see much and more works seem to be done on this than the last picture). What's interesting is that in the preview, I can see rest of the photo, but when I open, it's mostly blocked, lol.

 

[crobato]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Yes, apparently a new Yuan being constructed.

 

[crobato]

Re: Chinese sub thread

I look back at this design (the one based on the model on the 092's designer's desk) and it seemed to me know this is more of a pre-092 concept design rather than a post 094 concept design. The missiles I believe are too small to be JL-2 and more of the JL-1 size and generation. One of the reasons why SSBNs of the second generation (e.g. Trident vs. Polaris) are much bigger than the previous types is because the missiles they are carrying is much bigger and heavier.

The sub looks to me that its not very big, and the screw on the tail is an old four bladed one, compared to the 7 to 8 bladed ones used in modern Chinese sub models.

 

[Roger604]

Re: Chinese sub thread

^ Yeah after we've seen the satellite pics of the two new SSBN, it's clear that the Jin-class looks similar to the Xia-class, but bigger and longer.

I'm surprised no one had mentioned this already. Look closely at the two Huludao subs. Notice the discolorations (round colored dark spots) on the hump of the subs. Those must indicate the missile tubes. Count them up... there are 12 on each sub.

About the ratio of SSBN to SSN. If the information given by the big shrimps is correct: in 2005, China had 3 Jin and 5 Shang. This suggests to me that prior to any Jin being built, 2 Shangs had been build and trialled.

So first two Shangs were built (possibly around 1999/2000), but they probably performed dismally, so major changed had to be made. Then a pair of modified Shangs and a pair of Jins were built (early 2000's), and tested.

Then by about 2004/2005, they finally settled on the design of Jin / Shang and started building the serial production version. So by 2005, we have 2 prototype Jin and one serial production Jin, 2 old prototype Shang, 2 new prototype Shang, and one serial production Shang.

If the information given by the big shrimps is correct, and China is only building 5 Jin's / 7 Shang's in total, that means two more of each was expected to be built following 2005. At a pace of one per year, this means one more of each in 2006 and one more of each in 2007.

So by the end of this year, the Type 093 / 094 classes would have been completed (5 / 7 ratio). Perhaps the 2 old prototype Shangs would be upgraded to the serial production standard.

This leaves one more sub unaccounted for. The 8th SSN is the Type 095. That means the Type 095 is expected to be launched by 2010. So there would be a two year gap in nuclear sub shipbuilding (2008, 2009). Maybe the shipyards are going to concentrate on diesel subs again during this time -- ramp up production on Yuan / Song and build two of the new SSK with the super-quiet propulsion system.

 

[crobato]

Re: Chinese sub thread

I think the ratio is 2:1 or 2 SSNs to 1 SSBN. The 3 Jins and 5 Shangs can only mean that one Shang is still being built, or a 091G may be taking its place. Its hard to conclude from existing numbers if these numbers do not represent final numbers.

 

[Roger604]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Here's one hypothesis:

5 Jin : 7 Shang + 4 Modified Han

About 2:1 with one extra Han left over. The two Xia's can also get turned into SSGN's.

If there were only 3 Jin's, that means they are all on Google Earth, which is somewhat unlikely. Most likely the figures given by the big shrimps are right.

 

[Violet Oboe]

Re: Chinese sub thread

The dynamic expansion of PLAN's subfleet will have a significant impact on ROCN's conflict planning since China's superiority is meanwhile outrightly overwhelming. (32 SSK + 5 SSN vs. 2 SSK, referring only modern types)

Perhaps the continuous delays in the procurement of Taiwan's 8 new SSK's are partly explicable by the slowly sinking in comprehension of ROCN's staff that those 8 subs will be simply too few, too late. (...of course political infighting between the factions in Taipeh is also responsible.)

Assumed that ROCN would get the first pair of her new SSK's in 2012 (rather optimistic timeframe, may be never) the daunting superiority of PLAN would have built up to ~50 SSK + 10-12 SSN vs. 4 SSK.

Correspondingly PLAN would have the capability to destroy the entire ROCN fleet without taking any significant risks. (...ROCN ASuW capacities are indeed significant but would be either destroyed or suppressed by PLAAF or overwhelmed since even the sinking of a couple of PLAN subs would cetainly not save the day for ROCN.)

The rapid built up of PLAN's subfleet is probably intended to meet three main objectives:

1. Deterring the US from intervention in a potential conflict with Taiwan.

2. Establishing an overwhelming position of strength versus taiwanese naval forces denying separatists any hope to fend off PLA on their own.

3.Creating a credible seabased nuclear deterrent (SSBN) complementing Second Artillery's forces (ICBM).

(...sequence does not imply ranking by strategic importance!)

 

[tphuang]

Re: Chinese sub thread

pictures of 093 and 094, I guess the previous SSBN picture that we saw is 092G.

 

[Roger604]

Re: Chinese sub thread

^ Nice pics!

Comparing the earlier photograph of the docked SSBN, it looks like this is the same model. But you imply they are different (92G versus 94). Where's the difference?

Notice those slots on the side of the hump. There are six of them. Are they some sort of vents for the JL-2 launch cannisters? If so, that means each 94 carries 12 missiles.

I wonder if the newly declassified status of 093 and 094 means they have finished building the last of them and have transferred assets to 095 and 096. It seems that way from the info given by the big shrimps on Chinese BBS.

 

[crolick]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Hello Gentelman,

correct me if I'm wrong but from your analysis it seems that there are:

number of sub / type / dates (launched / commisioned)
406 / 092 [Xia] SSBN / 30.04.1981 / 15.09.1988
A / 092G [Xia mod] SSBN / 2001? / 2005?

B / 093 [Jin] SSBN / 2004 / 26.12.2006
C / 093 [Jin] SSBN / 2005? / unknown
D / 093 [Jin] SSBN / 2006? / not yet

401 / 091 [Han] / 12.1970 / 08.1974 / decommisioned in 2005?
402 / 091 [Han] / 12.1977 / 12.1980 / decommisioned in 2005?
403 / 091G [Han upgraded] / 10.1983 / 09.1984
404 / 091G [Han upgraded] / 12.1985 / 12.1987
405 / 091G [Han upgraded] / 04.1990 / 12.1990

E / 093 [Shang] / 1999? / unknown
F / 093 [Shang] / 2000? / unknown
G / 093 G [Shang upgraded] / 2002? / unknown
H / 093 G [Shang upgraded] / 2003? / unknown
I / 093 G [Shang mod] / 2007? / not yet

So am I wrong in numbers and especially dates or close to the truth (in your opinion of course, since nobody knows anything for sure...)?! Any comments are greatly welcomed!