Next generation Japanese destroyers, what it means for PLAN

A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Gollevainen said:
Yeas, they are good benefit for PLAN coastal defences and sea denial....But as for escorting and protecting commercial shipping...Do you actually know anything about martime warfare?


With torbedoes and sub-harpoons. The weapons are irrelevant as Japan and China has both have weaponry that can destroy each others ships. The issue is in the platforms that deliver the weapons and how well they are protected and what are the either once capacity to seek and locate targets.
And PLANs most serious defiencies are that its ASW capacity is in the level early 70's at the best. But it completely lacs modern VDS and oceanic sonar suites. Its best suite is still French DUPV-23 from the mid sixties level....

It has really no change to figth against Japanese submarine force...



And as sinking, it most come as great relief to the PLAN captain that those bloody nips ships were made by US assistance?? Get real...
Weapon and platform capacities are what counts, not the orgins of it. If PLAN would have given help they migth be better....For example chinese currently chinenese are managing to produce only either enlarged variation of Soviet imidiate post-war pr.41 class hull with antique preassure-fire steam plant (wich japanese mastered in the early 40s) or severly underpowered gas-turbine combatants (which japanese mastered in the 60s....except they werent underpowerd:D )
Click to expand...

REMEMBER THE BEST ASW IS THE SUBMARINE ITSELF ... I think this is the approach of PLAN. You can see PLAN has got so many submarines, even Ming class submarine is better than any Japanese ASW
 
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Gollevainen said:
And bit for Oboe....

yeas in long term (and assuming the next chinese nuclear sub generation is a succes) PLAN will overcome Japanese, but thats still a long road. PLAN as now is in similar level (and if out clude the 052C and 054A) in relative and unfortuanetly directly as well....as the JMSDF was in the mid 60's....both just commisioned their first AAW destroyer classes and are seeking to incorporate the shipboard aviation capacity into next level....But Despite all the steps PLAN takes (and hats of to them by finally taking them) One cannot ignore the obsolence of its bulk forces in both tactical concept and by lack of crucial weaponry such as the mentioned ASW.

And as for the new guy just popped in (welcome and ect...) Chinese have good subs yeas, but the main role for subs are against enemy shipping and surface ships, and where as JMSF is one of the best in the world in field of ASW, PLAN in otherhand is clearly the worst of what comes to the major players.

And if we go on for tanks (in naval forum.....) I know my stance over ZTZ99, and I still believe its with a main gun of Russian ancestors, but the reality in that tank is that it still includes the carousel autoloader that is the main reason why T-72 is also declared as disaster...not just by some analyzist but a actual combat experience....
And what comes from PLZ-05 a nice thing it is, But hardly I would call it PZH2000 comparative...and even if it is, that weapon mostly rasises grin to my face as a finnish artillery man, but that would be too long story to tell....Lets just say that Artillery is 20% about the hard-iron in the fireposition and 80% about the guys in the battery and Battalion HQ, survey and fire directing....And in those important fields, PLA doesent really shine to my eye...

But If you want to continue the talk about Japanese army and chinese army, I suggest we find another arena for it....
Click to expand...


SAYING .... "PLAN as now is in similar level (and if out clude the 052C and 054A) in relative and unfortuanetly directly as well....as the JMSDF was in the mid 60's"

........... is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read, ..... just because PLAN just commisioned their first AAW destroyer classes in early 2000 doesn't mean PLAN level is the same as JMSDF in mid 60s.

If PLAN commisioned her first carrier in 2007, does it mean PLAN is the same level of USN in 1920s ?
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
antiterror13 said:
REMEMBER THE BEST ASW IS THE SUBMARINE ITSELF ... I think this is the approach of PLAN. You can see PLAN has got so many submarines, even Ming class submarine is better than any Japanese ASW
Click to expand...

No, the best sort of ASW is something like the P-3 Orion, because (amongst other things) there's no way for the target to fight back.
 
A

AmiGanguli

Junior Member
antiterror13 said:
SAYING .... "PLAN as now is in similar level (and if out clude the 052C and 054A) in relative and unfortuanetly directly as well....as the JMSDF was in the mid 60's"

........... is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read, ..... just because PLAN just commisioned their first AAW destroyer classes in early 2000 doesn't mean PLAN level is the same as JMSDF in mid 60s.

If PLAN commisioned her first carrier in 2007, does it mean PLAN is the same level of USN in 1920s ?
Click to expand...

:) This is Golly's theory of fixed-time research and development. If Golly's theory is true, then the British will forever be 570 years behind the Chinese in rocket technology.

... Ami.

(Obviously I'm just making fun of poor Golly, but for history lovers, my comment refers to 1232 and 1800 in this timeline:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
FuManChu said:
No, the best sort of ASW is something like the P-3 Orion, because (amongst other things) there's no way for the target to fight back.
Click to expand...
That's not true, submarines are always the best ASW assets. US SSNs are always going to be the most powerful ASW assets out there. You can say that aerial assets are good for striking submarines once they are detected, but a SSN equipped with powerful sonar should have the best chance of detecting really quiet SSKs like Collins and Oyashio.
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
tphuang said:
You can say that aerial assets are good for striking submarines once they are detected, but a SSN equipped with powerful sonar should have the best chance of detecting really quiet SSKs like Collins and Oyashio.
Click to expand...

Unless you're talking about the JMSDF's P-3C Orions tracking Chinese submarines, in which case they aren't as quiet as the SSKs you mentioned. That's why I mentioned them. After all any country that would want to track and attack the Collins or Oyashio doesn't have sufficient air-ASW capabilities (not sure about the Russians) to do the job effectively.

If you want to talk about elite SSNs like the Astute or Virginia classes then of course they excel at ASW.

Anyway, back to the original comments - a Ming-class submarine is better than any sort of Japanese ASW? You have to be kidding! China has a lot of submarines, but it is debatable how useful the majority are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
FuManChu said:
Unless you're talking about the JMSDF's P-3C Orions tracking Chinese submarines, in which case they aren't as quiet as the SSKs you mentioned. That's why I mentioned them. After all any country that would want to track the Collins or Oyashio doesn't have sufficient air-ASW capabilities (not sure about the Russians) to do the job.
Click to expand...

so your argument does not hold. The reason why P-3Cs would be effective against Chinese SSKs is because they are noisy, not because P-3Cs are better in ASW than advanced submarines.
 
S

Schumacher

Senior Member
antiterror13 said:
REMEMBER THE BEST ASW IS THE SUBMARINE ITSELF ... I think this is the approach of PLAN. You can see PLAN has got so many submarines, even Ming class submarine is better than any Japanese ASW
Click to expand...

That's what I've been suspecting for some time. Though I woundn't say Ming is better than any Japan ASW.
It's amazing some here keep stubbornly complaining of the lack of better ASW on PLAN ships, which is what I did too initially, without thinking deeper into the possible reasons because I think it's quite obvious PLAN is not putting too much emphasis on surface ship ASW for now.
Sometimes, it's good to know the limit of our understanding & try to see why PLAN or any other navies do what they do.
In the shallow waters of East China Sea, Japan's SSKs advantage in depth, speed & sonar over PLAN SSKs will likely be reduced. Japan's P-3C will be constantly threatened by PLAF aircraft or PLAN surface fleet unless they are escorted by USAF F-22s.

The fact that USN is restarting intensive training against SSKs & I believe Japan has some new research into new sonar & torpedo to face threat from PLAN SSKs show that they take PLAN SSKs seriously. Certainly more seriously than some who claim Japan subs can simply sink all PLAN fleet due to lack of what they consider to be the required ASW.

For me, I think PLAN will put more emphasis into ASW on surface ships when they decide to go forcefully into blue water and/or when their carrier is ready.
 
S

Schumacher

Senior Member
FuManChu said:
.........
Anyway, back to the original comments - a Ming-class submarine is better than any sort of Japanese ASW? You have to be kidding! China has a lot of submarines, but it is debatable how useful the majority are.
Click to expand...

And it's just as dumb to say any Japanese ASW can track Ming as it is Ming is better than any Japanese ASW. The effectiveness of subs, perhaps more so than other platforms, depend a lot on how & where they're used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top