PLA Navy news, pics and videos

Jura The idiot · May 28, 2017

Insignius said:
Distributed lethality still does not address the problem of getting a large number of missiles into striking distance of a CSG via a survivable platform.

in short, the point is not all 'nodes' get through, but it would be war-gamed what to do next

here:

Insignius said:
In Chinese case, how many small midget SSG, each armed with maybe 4 YJ-18s, China needs to build to be able to get a volley size of 200 AShMs into the direction of the enemy carrier fleet? Not to mention, how to get this huge swarm of small subs ...

you misunderstood; what I meant was an SAG comprising Type 055, Type 052D, and anti-shipping variants of a Frigate and of a Corvette (am not sure about designations here)

here:

Insignius said:
Distributed lethality is a bad concept for China. The US can pull that off because they have so much maneuvering space , the entirety of the Pacific,

I actually think the opposite: the smaller the battle area, the bigger would be the advantage of distributing the forces around an incoming CVBG

here:

Insignius said:
to disperse and hide their small lethal assets. ...

I don't mean to nitpick but I don't believe anything can be hidden at sea anymore; there should be nothing 'surprising' about the naval action, just the probabilities of kill should be in play (of course assuming the previous drills etc.)

Insignius said:
When China breaks out of the West Pacific, then I would agree with you.

really? LOL!

Insignius said:
But first, the this requires the USN to join the reefs.

pardon me?

Orthan · May 28, 2017

Im amused by some of the things that are said here. If china wants to compete with the USN, it needs good submarines and good planes. Thats the reality. ASBMs wont do it.

However, why does china wants to fight the USN i dont know. Its the strongest element of US armed forces. Better to get ICBM´s for defence, like russia does. In fact, didnt china just show off DF-41 after trump went to office?

In fact, sometimes i think the true reason that the chinese top leadership is building up the navy at the cost of other branches is for prestige. No nation has a great power prestige without a strong navy. And the chinese leadership just LOVES prestige.

Insignius · May 28, 2017

055 and 052Ds are all vulnerable and wont be able to sink a CSG on their own. Think about it. They need SAM to defend themselves - the similiar amount of SAM, in fact, as the LRASMs that they expect the USN CSG will launch at them. The US has launched 60 Tomahawks against an undefended Syrian Airbase alone and 190+ against Lybia with its non-existing air-defense: How many LRASMs do you think they will launch against a Chinese SAG comprised of two 055s and 052Ds protecting the Liaoning or Shandong? In the end, the Chinese SAGs will turn out to be SAM-only, because the enemy LRASM swarm launched against them will be so large that no vessel will have space to spare for YJ-18s anymore.

And here comes the submerged arsenal ship. This ship doesnt need to fear enemy AShMs since it simply dives away when they approach. This means that it doesnt need to spare any of its perhaps 200+ VLS cells for HQ-9/HQ-16 anymore, but it will be a pure YJ-18/YJ-12/Hypersonic AShM loadout mix. It will be the damage dealer of any PLAN SAG that it accompanies and this is where this sort of ship will have the best synergy with.

This is the only sort of distributed lethality that China can attempt.

Im amused by some of the things that are said here. If china wants to compete with the USN, it needs good submarines and good planes. Thats the reality. ASBMs wont do it.

Symmetrical warfare against the USN? Are you mad?

There is no way China can build 70 advanced Virginia-level SSNs or 1000 F-22/F-35 level fighters. Even trying to beat the US at their own game that they have half a century more experience in is a thing of madness.

US strength need to be offset. Asymmetic and unconventional warfare is still the best answer. In everything, except nuclear weapons, where China seriously needs to achieve parity with the US, since this is the bedrock of everything.

Jura The idiot · May 28, 2017

only after:

Insignius said:
... How many LRASMs do you think they will launch against a Chinese SAG comprised of two 055s and 052Ds protecting the Liaoning or Shandong? ...

I see I should've used plural form 55 minutes ago in

Jura said:
... what I meant was an SAG comprising Type 055, Type 052D, and anti-shipping variants of a Frigate and of a Corvette (am not sure about designations here)
...

but I hadn't, so I quit

another thing I see is during this Naval Debate I assumed (but didn't say, which was my next mistake) the time-frame when your 'submersible arsenal ship' would be operational (twenty years from now??), and at that time perhaps two dozen of Type 055 and many dozen smaller, modern ships with AShMs should be in service ... so now anybody can say I'm changing my goal post or something OK so let's say I lost today

thanks for arguing

latenlazy · May 28, 2017

Orthan said:
Im amused by some of the things that are said here. If china wants to compete with the USN, it needs good submarines and good planes. Thats the reality. ASBMs wont do it.

However, why does china wants to fight the USN i dont know. Its the strongest element of US armed forces. Better to get ICBM´s for defence, like russia does. In fact, didnt china just show off DF-41 after trump went to office?

In fact, sometimes i think the true reason that the chinese top leadership is building up the navy at the cost of other branches is for prestige. No nation has a great power prestige without a strong navy. And the chinese leadership just LOVES prestige.

If China had bases all around the US and the US didn't have much naval strength, pretty sure the US would invest a lot in naval power too.

FORBIN · May 28, 2017

Insignius said:
055 and 052Ds are all vulnerable and wont be able to sink a CSG on their own. Think about it. They need SAM to defend themselves - the similiar amount of SAM, in fact, as the LRASMs that they expect the USN CSG will launch at them. The US has launched 60 Tomahawks against an undefended Syrian Airbase alone and 190+ against Lybia with its non-existing air-defense: How many LRASMs do you think they will launch against a Chinese SAG comprised of two 055s and 052Ds protecting the Liaoning or Shandong? In the end, the Chinese SAGs will turn out to be SAM-only, because the enemy LRASM swarm launched against them will be so large that no vessel will have space to spare for YJ-18s anymore.

And here comes the submerged arsenal ship. This ship doesnt need to fear enemy AShMs since it simply dives away when they approach. This means that it doesnt need to spare any of its perhaps 200+ VLS cells for HQ-9/HQ-16 anymore, but it will be a pure YJ-18/YJ-12/Hypersonic AShM loadout mix. It will be the damage dealer of any PLAN SAG that it accompanies and this is where this sort of ship will have the best synergy with.

This is the only sort of distributed lethality that China can attempt.

Symmetrical warfare against the USN? Are you mad?

There is no way China can build 70 advanced Virginia-level SSNs or 1000 F-22/F-35 level fighters. Even trying to beat the US at their own game that they have half a century more experience in is a thing of madness.

US strength need to be offset. Asymmetic and unconventional warfare is still the best answer. In everything, except nuclear weapons, where China seriously needs to achieve parity with the US, since this is the bedrock of everything.

So much in unreal things that you end up losing yourself Insignius

Insignius · May 28, 2017

Unreal as in the French attempt in WWII of building "submarine cruisers" and most recently, the SMX-25?

Insignius · May 28, 2017

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Even on his deathbed, Prof. Dong Wen-Cai was working in this semi-submersible.

Iron Man · May 28, 2017

Bltizo said:
There are some indications that the Navy might have decided to procure or may even be in some stage of building a fairly unique (~20,000 ton?) semi-submersible arsenal ship.

This is still in the fairly early stages of rumour + speculation, but there are a few articles and supposedly there have been a few vague references by big shrimps over the years to something like this but wasn't taken that seriously until recently.
But not much about this is really known at this stage, not even designation, not propulsion or even its real configuration or likely payload. It has been referred to on the grapevine as "常潜式海洋攻搜作战平台"...

Far too early to say this thing is real, but the way some of the rumours and info are unfolding makes me think this should be a space to carefully watch if anything comes of it.

a few relevant links below

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Speculative CGIs below.

View attachment 39005 View attachment 39006

Take an arsenal ship design and then triple or quadruple or quintuple the costs. That's basically what this ship is. While I can see the merits of an arsenal ship for the PLAN, this thing is just absolutely unnecessary. A semi-submersible ship won't be protected from sea-skimming missiles if they can attack top-down and is equally if not more vulnerable to torpedoes. Plus I don't see how it would be any more stealthy than a catamaran or even trimaran-based arsenal ship with highly sloped sides, something like a larger version of the Sea Shadow, which I would personally prefer to see.

Blitzo · May 28, 2017

Iron Man said:
Take an arsenal ship design and then triple or quadruple or quintuple the costs. That's basically what this ship is. While I can see the merits of an arsenal ship for the PLAN, this thing is just absolutely unnecessary. A semi-submersible ship won't be protected from sea-skimming missiles if they can attack top-down and is equally if not more vulnerable to torpedoes. Plus I don't see how it would be any more stealthy than a catamaran or even trimaran-based arsenal ship with highly sloped sides, something like a larger version of the Sea Shadow, which I would personally prefer to see.

View attachment 39087

If they've gone for a semi submersible route rather than a cat or trimaran (which I think are more conventional and less advanced hullforms and not exactly ones which China has little experience with), I think there must be some sensible reason for it.

PLA Navy news, pics and videos

Jura The idiot

General

Orthan

Senior Member

Insignius

Junior Member

Jura The idiot

General

latenlazy

Brigadier

FORBIN

Lieutenant General

Insignius

Junior Member

Insignius

Junior Member

Iron Man

Major

Blitzo

Lieutenant General