PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
Quickie
Colonel
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
A doorway to a compression/decompressiom chamber that allows divers to embark or disembark the submarine underwater?
A doorway to a compression/decompressiom chamber that allows divers to embark or disembark the submarine underwater?
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
You don't need a hyperbaric chamber unless you plan on diving at below 50 meters. There are not many situations where you need divers out at that kind of depth, certainly not often enough to justify designing a sub especially for it.
Normally subs can sent and recover divers using the torpedo tubes or airlocks when submerged, there is no need for a custom made chamber to facilitate this.
I am also not too convinced by the SLBM testbed theory. If they are doing that, why mess around with a fancy new hinged opening device when they could have just lifted a JL2 silo or two straight off of the 094 and built the sail around that?
With an opening that big, you would expect them to want to launch something pretty big underwater, or lots of little things.
I have heard that all PLAN subs can be equipped with mine belts for long-range underwater mine laying, but has never seen one (if anyone has a picture or diagram, I would be most appreciative), but I would bet such mine belts would add a lot of drag and potentially also noise if the sub was moving fast.
The PLAN takes offensive mine warfare very seriously, and I would go as far as to say that it would be one of the primary tactics the PLAN might employ using its subs at the start of a major conflict. If I were to guess, I might wonder if this might be an underwater mine laying submarine, to allow the PLAN to more reliable and quickly deploy mines offensively a long war from home without being detected.
The other guess might be that it is a large airlock, but not a hyperbaric chamber, to allow special forces to deploy from subs with mini-submersibles similar to how the US SEALS operate. But that is far less likely in my view.
You don't need a hyperbaric chamber unless you plan on diving at below 50 meters. There are not many situations where you need divers out at that kind of depth, certainly not often enough to justify designing a sub especially for it.
Normally subs can sent and recover divers using the torpedo tubes or airlocks when submerged, there is no need for a custom made chamber to facilitate this.
I am also not too convinced by the SLBM testbed theory. If they are doing that, why mess around with a fancy new hinged opening device when they could have just lifted a JL2 silo or two straight off of the 094 and built the sail around that?
With an opening that big, you would expect them to want to launch something pretty big underwater, or lots of little things.
I have heard that all PLAN subs can be equipped with mine belts for long-range underwater mine laying, but has never seen one (if anyone has a picture or diagram, I would be most appreciative), but I would bet such mine belts would add a lot of drag and potentially also noise if the sub was moving fast.
The PLAN takes offensive mine warfare very seriously, and I would go as far as to say that it would be one of the primary tactics the PLAN might employ using its subs at the start of a major conflict. If I were to guess, I might wonder if this might be an underwater mine laying submarine, to allow the PLAN to more reliable and quickly deploy mines offensively a long war from home without being detected.
The other guess might be that it is a large airlock, but not a hyperbaric chamber, to allow special forces to deploy from subs with mini-submersibles similar to how the US SEALS operate. But that is far less likely in my view.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
Photos of PLA Navy Special Forces deploying from a submarine:
Unlike American submarines, Chinese submarines incorporate the cabin directly into their submarine instead of installing a capsule on top of it.
Photos of PLA Navy Special Forces deploying from a submarine:
Unlike American submarines, Chinese submarines incorporate the cabin directly into their submarine instead of installing a capsule on top of it.
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
I think they're just moving out of the torpedo tubes... In future if they plan on expanding this type of delivery they should install a dedicated lockout trunk like the USN did with those four ohios and are now doing with virginia ssns.
I think they're just moving out of the torpedo tubes... In future if they plan on expanding this type of delivery they should install a dedicated lockout trunk like the USN did with those four ohios and are now doing with virginia ssns.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
Adding a lockout trunk would increase the submarine's acoustic signature.
And you are deploying special forces; it's not like you are going to put out a whole battalion.
Adding a lockout trunk would increase the submarine's acoustic signature.
And you are deploying special forces; it's not like you are going to put out a whole battalion.
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
having special forces struggle to wriggle out of a torpedo tube is highly inefficient. I don't know enough about acoustics to make a real judgement, but if you want to send frogmen out of subs practically a lockout trunk is the safer, easier way to go.
Besides all it is is adding a hatch to a watertight compartment, you're not adding an additional nuclear reactor or anything. When the sub is running silent the effect of a trunk on stealth should be barely noticeable.
having special forces struggle to wriggle out of a torpedo tube is highly inefficient. I don't know enough about acoustics to make a real judgement, but if you want to send frogmen out of subs practically a lockout trunk is the safer, easier way to go.
Besides all it is is adding a hatch to a watertight compartment, you're not adding an additional nuclear reactor or anything. When the sub is running silent the effect of a trunk on stealth should be barely noticeable.
MwRYum
Major
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II
I'd agree the US system is more efficient in deploying divers, plus in the case of external capsule system, you can deploy SDV, thus the attack can be launched from deeper waters, expend the flexibility.
Or at the least try deploy from vertical tubes...just find a suitable sub design and modify it by inserting such a module.
I'd agree the US system is more efficient in deploying divers, plus in the case of external capsule system, you can deploy SDV, thus the attack can be launched from deeper waters, expend the flexibility.
Or at the least try deploy from vertical tubes...just find a suitable sub design and modify it by inserting such a module.