PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

[delft]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Well, the Allies were able to hunt German sub tenders in both World Wars quite well. Which was why the Germans developed snorkeling to recharge their batteries, so that they no longer need tenders.

I once read that a Dutch submarine with snorkel escaped to England in 1940. It's snorkel was there removed and the German snorkeling subs were a surprise to the British.

 

[Yorkie]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

"I just had a bit of a crazy idea looking at the sub, could the top opening be to allow access to a removable battery/fuel cell unit?"

Not likely. Battery is heavy, and therefore is installed low in the boat for stability.

I don't think it makes sense that this is an SSB like some on this forum have suggested, either. Even with AIP the submerged duration is still simply too short. However it is possible (if not practical) if it were an SSG, carrying a few verically launched cruise missiles for covert land attack capabilities (pure speculation on my part).

 

[tphuang]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

this is no joke, Guangzhou shipyard has almost launched the 3rd unit of Type 926 submarine tender. I was actually pretty shocked to see how fast this came out. To be honest, Guangzhou looks to be really fast at building these large ships. I hope they get rewarded with more orders. The word is that they are building some huge replenishment ships right now. Waiting for those pictures to come out.

 

[cirvine11]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Why would be a ballistic missile testbed care about stealth shaping?

If its for testing, its best to test the system 'as is', so the best result would be if they just slapped a 2 cell ballistic missile VLS from the 094 class directly onto this sub. So what if it looks hideous, is draggy as hell and loud as a rock concert?

A ballistic missile test boat is not meant to see combat, its only purpose is to test ballistic missiles, so it would make sense that all other concerns come secondary.

The fact that they bothered to make the design stealthy and streamlined, and that there is no obvious recognizable missile hatches would make it unlikely that it is a SSB.

I remember when the 022 first came out, loads of people were suggesting that it was a scale model for a much larger boat.

I was sure that the 022 was an operational design for the same reasons I feel that this is one as well - too much attention has been paid to operationally relevant details for this to be a purely experimental exercise. You just don't waste the time, effort and money on such things unless you intend to use it operationally.

From the beginning of the Cold War on, it has been considered fairly orthodox to make SSBN's as quiet as possible. The lead up to armed conflict-assuming there is a steady rise in diplomatic tension-could/would probably see an attempt to locate and track enemy SSBN's. The USN became so good at it that the Soviets decided to 1) make SSBN safe havens using air, surface and subsurface forces (along with the thoughtful use of mines) and 2) sent clear messages through various channels that even in the event of armed conflict-any sinking of an SSBN would be considered a prelude to a nuclear strike... requiring a premptive attack.

The second point is one of the main reasons the US-and NATO navies-developed such good sound and data processing computers/software that were so far ahead of their time. Sub commanders were not allowed to sink an SSBN without a direct change in the rules of engagement from the National Command Authority. So, you could not fire unless you were SURE about what you were targeting.

US SSBN's were made as quiet as possible so they could disappear into the depths and not have to be escorted by friendly subs. They also had/have the ability to sink anything they encounter before being detected. But their first defense is to avoid anything and everything.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

In my opinion, SSBNs are an outdated concept. Too much eggs in one basket, and easy to find and destroy, if it is not an USN SSBN.

They just dont compensate the large amount of resources put into it.

100+ mobile ICBM are much better

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

In my opinion, SSBNs are an outdated concept. Too much eggs in one basket, and easy to find and destroy, if it is not an USN SSBN.

They just dont compensate the large amount of resources put into it.

100+ mobile ICBM are much better

If you have even a half dozen quiet SSBNs that can slip out to sea unnoticed each carrying 12 long ranged ballistic missiles... the ocean is a big place and you just need one submarine to threaten a country.

 

[no_name]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

A SSBN can pretend to be sent out while hiding somewhere near home port coastline and fire from there if necessary.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

If you have even a half dozen quiet SSBNs that can slip out to sea unnoticed each carrying 12 long ranged ballistic missiles... the ocean is a big place and you just need one submarine to threaten a country.

Thats harder than what it seems, specially if enemy navy is close to your shores/bases

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Thats harder than what it seems, specially if enemy navy is close to your shores/bases

i.e.: if you're the PLAN, right?
For the rest of the world SSBNs are the way to go and even the PLAN's SSBNs, if they can extend JL-2s range or make a JL-3, can threaten the US mainland from home waters.
And even then if you have a good number of SSBNs you can send them all out to patrol before hostilities build and chances are a few of them will survive out into the open ocean.

We'll see this decade if PLAN reveals their 094 follow on.

 

[noone536]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

this shows a step forward for the PLAn on the anti submarine capability which they seem to really lack