Growing Asymmetries in the China-Japan Naval Balance
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
Su-34 said:
The PLAN needs more than just submarines to contend with the JMSDF on equal footing.
It needs to have more modern surface ships that can adequately defend themselves against air, surface, and subsurface attacks. Currently, the PLAN has 4 of these ships in service: 2 Sovs, 052B, and 052C. PLAN needs more.
The PLAN also needs to concentrate on development of ASW warfare. I don't think that the PLAN has the capability to prosecute an ultra quite diesel sub in littiral waters. Without this capability, JMSDF subs can lurk near PLAN bases and sink naval assets at their descretion.
Better ship based AAW missiles. The 052B, 052C are a step in the right direction but they still can't contend with the Aegis equipped Kongos in terms of capability to handle aerial threats. Add to the fact that South Korea is building its own Aegis Destroyers, the PLAN is well behind the tech curve on this. The S-300 is a good SAM but its capability to intercept sea skimming missiles is doubtful. CAn it intercept a salvo of 8 harpoons coming from every direction? China does not have a monopoly of saturation attacks.
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
8 harpoons fromone direction? actually, a kongo can only laucnh one harpoon at a time, from one direction. the s-300 has been proven to be able to intercept sea skimming missles just as well as a standard(frfom russian sources. besides, the chinese ships have ciws. china has two 52bs and 2 52cs, not one of each. and china will have two 51cs, and twoo more sovs in the very near future, not to mention the new 54s.
the plan is concentgrating on using submarine against submarine. a force of kilos will be more than adequate to guard chineseports against a japanese sub.
dont bring in the south koreans. the chinese have very good relations with south korea.
japan only has four kongos. thats not really a good number if it intends to be able to control its waters. and japanese aircraft pose nowhere near the same threat as a u.s cvbg. its mainly a self defence a2a force, with basic anti ship abilities.
the plan is concentgrating on using submarine against submarine. a force of kilos will be more than adequate to guard chineseports against a japanese sub.
dont bring in the south koreans. the chinese have very good relations with south korea.
japan only has four kongos. thats not really a good number if it intends to be able to control its waters. and japanese aircraft pose nowhere near the same threat as a u.s cvbg. its mainly a self defence a2a force, with basic anti ship abilities.
KlubMarcus
Banned Idiot
How good are China's air defenses over their bases? If Japan is threatened, they might go for a pre-emptive strike on China using planes and missiles. The best place to destroy an enemy ship is dockside.MIGleader said:
MIGleader said:
As for the harpoon shot, its called "time on target". While you are correct that a quad harpoon launcher can only launched one missile at a time, however modern block II Harpoons can be assigned way points on its flight path towards a target ship, assuming of course you have very good over the horizon targeting. Harpoons can fly a profile that goes around the axis of a target ship and hit it from a different direction. This is a standard tactic to prevent a "Snap shot", firing an anti-ship missile at the direction of a missile in hopes of hitting the other ship. It is not that hard to program 8 harpoon missiles to arrive at the same time from 8 different directions. Speed is not the only thing that makes an anti-ship missile survivable.
The S-300 has NOT been proven, nor has it hit a sea skimming target. If you have a link that proves otherwise I will be more than happy to read it. Standard 2 missile have consistently hit sea skimming missiles flying moskit type flight profiles.
Can the Kilo subs detect a modern Japanese SSK's in littoral waters? Does it have that good sonar that it can detect it from all that sound clutter? If the USN have a hard time detecting and tracking SSK's in these type of waters, what chance does a couple of Kilo subs has?
You are correct that Japan only has 4 Kongos, but its has one of the largest destroyer fleets in the world. These destroyers are more powerful than anything the PLAN has to offer (except the Sovs and the recent additions to the fleet). The JMSDF normally deploy on an 8:8 ratio, 8 ship with 8 helicopters. It is normally centered around one of the 4 Kongo's, 1 DDH for organic air support (OTH targetting, ASW, SAR), and 6 all purpose Destroyers for ASuW, ASW, and AAW warfare.
Does anyone know the routine PLAN deployment order of battle? Is it equal to the capability of the above JMSDF deployment fleet?
In any confrontation with JMSDF, PLAN will be in a significant disadvantage when it comes to the amount of quality ships that it can field. PLAN currently is still in its expansion stage, so I'm guessing the order of battle is a little messed up.
As for Rif-M, it does have a low altitude of 10 m, so it theoretically should be able to intercept sea-skimming missiles. The ship that will have trouble intercepting sea-skimming missile will be 052C. Another thing we need to consider is that frigates will be used to protect 052C/051C from sea-skimming missiles.
As for Yuan, I'd expect it to be slightly more advanced than 636. And Song is probably noisier than 873. No one knows really. Yuan has mostly been compared to Kilo and Amur (taking features from both). Song has mostly been compared to Aogsta 90B.
As for Rif-M, it does have a low altitude of 10 m, so it theoretically should be able to intercept sea-skimming missiles. The ship that will have trouble intercepting sea-skimming missile will be 052C. Another thing we need to consider is that frigates will be used to protect 052C/051C from sea-skimming missiles.
As for Yuan, I'd expect it to be slightly more advanced than 636. And Song is probably noisier than 873. No one knows really. Yuan has mostly been compared to Kilo and Amur (taking features from both). Song has mostly been compared to Aogsta 90B.
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
the s-300 has been tested by the russians since the 8-s to intercept aircraft and seaskimming missles. the pac 2 has never downed a moskit in real combat, only similar missles in tests. thus, both missles are about equally "proven".
the 52c is probably capable of handleing the harpoon. it must have been desinged with contering low flying taiwanese harpoon carryers in mind.
the japanese navy is almost undoubtedly suprior to the plan. im not denying it. but certain plan weapons just might be able to work on the japanese. for example, groups of fast moving facs can sneak around the japanese group, firing volleys of yj-83s. the japaese ships have nothing ot fight back, so a retreat would be ordered.
the 52c is probably capable of handleing the harpoon. it must have been desinged with contering low flying taiwanese harpoon carryers in mind.
the japanese navy is almost undoubtedly suprior to the plan. im not denying it. but certain plan weapons just might be able to work on the japanese. for example, groups of fast moving facs can sneak around the japanese group, firing volleys of yj-83s. the japaese ships have nothing ot fight back, so a retreat would be ordered.
MIGleader said:
Has the S-300 shot down anything that resembles the flight profile of a sea skimming missile? The Standard 2 has successfully shot down numerous sea skimming missiles.
Missile guidance is of the Track-Via-Missile (TVM) type with the FLAP LID guidance radar capable of engaging up to six targets simultaneously, with two missiles assigned per target to ensure a high kill probability. Maximum target velocity is stated as 4200 km/h with the battery capable of firing three missiles per second.
6 targets suimultaneously? A salvo of 8 Harpoons will overwhelm the ship.
I doubt the Chinese air defense has the ability to counter concentrated attacks. However, in the case that you noted, the 2+ harpoons that get through will still need to get through the 2 escorting FFGs equipped with FM-90 and CIWS 730.IDonT said:
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
IDonT said:
the naqval s-300 is capable of directing 12 missles on six targets. but theres also the fact missles can fire 3 seconds apart, so the missles can engage all 8 harpoons in rapid sucession rather than simutaneously. theres still the two 730s on board, and manpads carried by sailors.
the pac-2 has shot down many TEST sea skimming missles, as did the s-300.