PLA Navy news, pics and videos

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
The whole point of this ship is that it can blend in with shipping freighters and the enemy would not know where they are. They can hide in plain sight and be extremely close when they fire off. That's what they were designed to do (ironically, an American official tauted the idea against China in a Taiwan conflict not thinking that China can build many more) otherwise, they'd be in military colors. If they are known, of course they would be targeted; they're military assets after all.

What about the radars and Gun CIWS, which makes it very obvious they are military?
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
What about the radars and Gun CIWS, which makes it very obvious they are military?
I'm assuming they're going to be covered or camouflaged in some other way. They can probably all be in shipping boxes and the boxes can be breakaway style for when they need to be unleashed. If they need to be used, then the ship's position is compromised and it's a final fight for survival from then on so the cat's out of the bag and it doesn't need to look like a shipping freighter anymore.
 

Blitzo

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I'm assuming they're going to be covered or camouflaged in some other way. They can probably all be in shipping boxes and the boxes can be breakaway style for when they need to be unleashed. If they need to be used, then the ship's position is compromised and it's a final fight for survival from then on so the cat's out of the bag and it doesn't need to look like a shipping freighter anymore.

There may be different configurations where they seek to hide/conceal their own identity to be a Q-ship of sorts, but as it stands this configuration we are seeing looks about as explicitly seeking to flag to everyone that they are a military vessel, as possible.

That is to say -- the whole purpose of this specific configuration is to not conceal that they are trying to be a freighter, but to make it obvious it is a commercial ship requisitioned for military use.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
A clip of Xiyazhou's livestreaming
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

so there might be a more crazier idea about this kind of ship:
These containers and ships are prepared for the world after a total nuclear exchange. They will be stored in bunkers and assembled by survived descendants of the Chinese nation, becoming the only navy in the post-doomsday world. This is the true meaning of "the maritime rejuvenation of the Chinese nation".
Okay yeah, that's pretty crazy, crazier than German auxiliary cruisers per Yankee for sure.

Yet it's very Chinese, like in Supernova Era there's that similar idea where PRC left its descendants a mega ICBM for when SHTF after the apocalypse.

If these are really for that use case then I suppose after these tests are done and proven to work start looking for those containers stored in those nuclear proof underground parking lots under shopping centres at costal cities.
 

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
Ayi said the reason for this thing was crazy and all our ideas for it have been extremely conservative, so I do buy the Armageddon theory.

My own “crazy” theory was that these would form a global constellation over the high seas.
If an arsenal ship can shoot 1000km missiles, how many would be required to cover the entire global oceans?
400 - 700.

To determine how many arsenal ships would be needed to cover the entire global oceans with a 1,000 km missile range, we need to consider both pure geometry and practical operational realities.

## Theoretical Geometric Minimum

**Key assumptions:**
- Global ocean area: ~361 million km²
- Missile range: 1,000 km (meaning a 1,000 km radius coverage area per ship)

**Coverage per ship:**
Each ship covers a circular area (spherical cap) of:
- Area = π × r² = π × (1,000 km)² ≈ **3.14 million km²**

**Accounting for overlap:**
Circles cannot tile a sphere without gaps or overlap. Using optimal hexagonal covering geometry (which minimizes overlap while ensuring complete coverage), we need approximately **1.21× more ships** than simple division suggests.

**Calculation:**
- Ships needed = (Total ocean area / Area per ship) × 1.21
- Ships needed = (361,000,000 / 3,140,000) × 1.21
- Ships needed ≈ 115 × 1.21 ≈ **139 ships**

**Result:** *A minimum of approximately 140 strategically positioned ships* could provide static coverage of all ocean areas.

## Operational Reality

In practice, you would need **far more** ships for sustained global coverage:

1. **Maintenance & Rotation**: Ships require refueling, resupply, repairs, and crew rest. Only ~1/3 would be on station at any given time.
2. **Redundancy**: Critical coverage gaps cannot be tolerated.
3. **Vulnerability**: Ships cannot be clustered; they need dispersion for survivability.
4. **Weather & Contingencies**: Systems must withstand adverse conditions and failures.
5. **Enemy Action**: Combat losses and the need for escort vessels.

**Realistic estimate:** Accounting for these factors, you would need **400-700 ships** to maintain continuous, reliable coverage of the global oceans.

---

**Bottom line:** While geometry suggests ~140 ships, real-world military operations would require **400-700 arsenal ships** to ensure sustained, redundant coverage of the entire global ocean system.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Ayi said the reason for this thing was crazy and all our ideas for it have been extremely conservative, so I do buy the Armageddon theory.

My own “crazy” theory was that these would form a global constellation over the high seas.
To be fair even in Xi Yazhou's video he said even though the reasoning behind the project was for a post-exchange world, it doesn't mean all the less wild use cases people have thought up this week are not valid. If there's a need for auxiliary cruiser PLAN can just go "aha we did an extreme 底线思维/bottom line thinking project similar to this and we can just reuse the hardware for that instead".

Xi Yazhou also had another good point: you can't wish for the other guy to be civilised and respect merchant shipping neutrality out of good of his heart. The threat of unrestricted submarine warfare has to be countered with something equally as disruptive. Only then, perhaps the two sides will realize how harmful it would be and don't resort to it in times of war. Reasoning about the harm diplomatically won't be convincing, only demonstrating a deterrence capability is convincing. A sort of Dark Forest of the ocean.
 

enroger

Senior Member
Registered Member
Why do people have to conjure up all sort of crazy theories for this? This thing makes great military and logistical sense, it is the best implementation of the so called distributed firepower concept.

Utilizing China's manufacturing prowess, anything that can be standardized and procured in large quantities is going to be extremely cost effective. God knows how much these missiles would cost if they're produced in automated fashion, those modules are going to be dirt cheap. That means you can deploy large number of those system anywhere you want.

This is uniquely China's superpower, even if US wants to copy the idea they can't even afford to fill those vls at scale.

Also these aren't regular warship, you can stockpile modules in peacetime, in wartime you use them to convert large number of cargo ships without the need to train new crews as these systems are going to be controlled via network. The crew just need to steer the ship. So you have combat ready forces that are essentially maintenance free and has no training requirement.

Any consideration of camouflaged surprised attacks with these is secondary at best, nice if they can pull it off but not important in overall picture.
 
Last edited:

00CuriousObserver

Senior Member
Registered Member
Edit: didn't see this was already posted oops

They put another 1130 CIWS on the container ship. It seems like a land-based variant (LD-3000)

Seems like the ship is quite experimental/developmental

JVq478b.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Top