PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

It always amuses me when western sources boast about how amazingly their SSNs are and how wonderful their SSBNs are, not realising they are in effect construction the old Chinese 'spear and shield' paradox.

If western SSNs are so great and can find and sneak up on any enemy sub, while western SSBNs are so quiet no enemy has a chance of finding them, what exactly would happen if a western SSNs was pitted against western SSBN?

The point is that the much vaunted Ohio class is hardly a spring chicken these days, what happens when the PLAN attains that level of queting technology for nuke subs? Bet they would suddenly stop being 'holes in the ocean' pretty damn quick, and 'amazing' new applications of existing technology would suddenly, magically be able to find them. Just like how 'stealth' could suddenly be 'detected' using ASEA tech, whereas the idea would have been laughed at by the very same people championing the anti-stealth miracle tech before the J20 and T50 came out.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

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.

If the point is to launch from home waters, then why not launch it from land ? far more safe and less costly, allowing more missiles to be built.

what do you define by "good number" ? dozens? china is very far from that.

And yes, they are still too loud to survive.

what happens when the PLAN attains that level of queting technology for nuke subs? Bet they would suddenly stop being 'holes in the ocean' pretty damn quick, and 'amazing' new applications of existing technology would suddenly, magically be able to find them. Just like how 'stealth' could suddenly be 'detected' using ASEA tech, whereas the idea would have been laughed at by the very same people championing the anti-stealth miracle tech before the J20 and T50 came out.

when PLAN attains the present level of quieting tech for subs, then submarine detecting tech would have evolve a lot also.

And there is too much secrecy evolving AESA radars and stealth for us to say what can be detected and what not. J-20 and T-50 are certainly not as stealthy as F-22. And F-22 is 20 years older than this planes. What is the present level of US radars? But thats OT

Even in the cold war, the USN had no trouble finding the soviet SSBN. And things got to a point where the entire soviet naval strategy evolved protecting the SSBN bastions. And the soviet SSBN were more advanced than PLAN´s compared to USA technology of those days.

IMO right now PLAN SSBN (like the aircraft carrier program) is a prestige program, and will continue to be for a very long time.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

If the point is to launch from home waters, then why not launch it from land ? far more safe and less costly, allowing more missiles to be built.

what do you define by "good number" ? dozens? china is very far from that.

And yes, they are still too loud to survive.

Six is a good number, but I'd prefer something greater like ten or twelve once they get to a world class design. (I believe they should have 4 SSBNs at the moment?)

The thing is if they are in home waters they are still more hidden than land based ICBMs, and they are effectively "free agents" in that they are not limited by overly rough terrain and suitable launch location, as well as having anywhere from a dozen to two dozen ICBMs potentially ready to let go within a small amount of time.
Basically they are far more mobile, flexible and harder to find and destroy giving them greater survivability. Land based mobile ICBMs, while good can be crippled simply by blowing out a couple of tires or simply destroying the TEL (such as through SOF insertion or air strikes). Keeping multiple TELs alive will be far harder than keeping an SSBN alive.

As for the survivability of chinese SSBNs (and SSNs)... well I think it's clear we disagree on this.

----

Question -- would a typhoon effect the launch of an ICBM? If so, which phase/why?

 

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

I would imagine even a mild typhoon would massively screw an ICBM launch's assent stage as I seriously doubt any ICBM in the world is designed to handle anywhere close to the wind strength of a typhoon.

Even if somehow the missiles internal gyros can keep the missile from spinning off uncontrollable, even a variation of a fraction of a degree can greatly affect what orbit the missile achieves, and hence it's accuracy.

Unless you are launching through the eye of the storm, shooting ICBMs in a typhoon would be a pretty bad idea I would imagine.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

when PLAN attains the present level of quieting tech for subs, then submarine detecting tech would have evolve a lot also.

Well it really depends when that is, right? As plawolf (I believe) stated a while ago, it's ridiculous to believe China's development in this area (and others, generally) will be at the same rate as the west develops new in new ground.
J-20's flown this year and the USAF are only starting to field their F-35 and will take many years to even start to develop a real F-22 follow on, and China is narrowly closing if not, has nearly closed the gap in avionics and radar between the two countries.
I'm not prophesising a similar deal with submarines, but hey I wouldn't be surprised.

And there is too much secrecy evolving AESA radars and stealth for us to say what can be detected and what not. J-20 and T-50 are certainly not as stealthy as F-22. And F-22 is 20 years older than this planes. What is the present level of US radars? But thats OT

Yes that is OT because plawolf wasn't questioning the actual potential of detection but rather once a country nears what the west has been trumpeting as an exceptional example of military superiority (stealth, SSBN, even "long range" UCAVs have been called a counter to China's AShBMs lol).

Even in the cold war, the USN had no trouble finding the soviet SSBN. And things got to a point where the entire soviet naval strategy evolved protecting the SSBN bastions. And the soviet SSBN were more advanced than PLAN´s compared to USA technology of those days.

Are you kidding me? I'm not a major expert in submarine acoustics but one of the widely circulated reasons the soviets were able to develop quieter submarines later on in the cold war was due to improved industrial base able to manufacture more precise components (some were said to be imported from japan? the details escape me).

China right now is an industrial and economic power house, more so than the USSR ever was. They have experience in building large submarines, they have lengthy experience in nuclear power, and with massively increased industrial strength and quality in the last decade we can expect this gap to shrink considerably.

IMO right now PLAN SSBN (like the aircraft carrier program) is a prestige program, and will continue to be for a very long time.

Yes because we've just seen so much of the PLAN's SSBNs right? The 094s really are getting a lot of limelight in the last few years.

If you think the carrier program is for prestige I don't think we can really have a serious conversation.


---

Just as a general aside;

The 093's construction started ~1995 and launched 2002. 094 started 1999, launched 2004. Considering chinese industrial capability at the time was pretty weak it isn't a massive stretch to believe the first few boats were not super quiet. People have speculated around ~6 093s have been produced and more than 2 094s have definitely been produced. With increased industrial capability in those inbetween years there should've been significant improvements in acoustics, like new "blocks" between a class.

With the PRC's industrial and technological strength at where it is now/a few years ago, and assuming they are in the advanced process of building or developing a new class of SSN and SSBN I think we can finally expect a world class product.
(I think I read somewhere about 093/094 being part of the last 5 year plans and follow ons to be part of the current 12th one? Possible same deal with destroyers)

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

The thing is if they are in home waters they are still more hidden than land based ICBMs, and they are effectively "free agents" in that they are not limited by overly rough terrain and suitable launch location, as well as having anywhere from a dozen to two dozen ICBMs potentially ready to let go within a small amount of time.
Basically they are far more mobile, flexible and harder to find and destroy giving them greater survivability. Land based mobile ICBMs, while good can be crippled simply by blowing out a couple of tires or simply destroying the TEL (such as through SOF insertion or air strikes). Keeping multiple TELs alive will be far harder than keeping an SSBN alive.

As for the survivability of chinese SSBNs (and SSNs)... well I think it's clear we disagree on this.

----

Question -- would a typhoon effect the launch of an ICBM? If so, which phase/why?

totally wrong. all-terrain ICBM TELs (like the ones TOPOL uses) arent restricted by rough terrain, or "suitable" launch locations. They can launch anywhere in wartime. In crisis times, they are dispersed. Good luck trying to find 200 trucks in a country as vast as china, with high density population, tunnels, even buildings, etc. China isnt Iran. Its not that easy to insert an SOF deep in its territory, or launch airstrikes. And how can they kill all those trucks in one blow? it would take a long time to do it.


They are as a whole, much more survivable than an SSBN. Far more flexible. You lose a truck, you lose 1 ICBM. You lose a SSBN, you lose 12 SLBM. Not good. You lose 50 trucks, you lose 25% of your force. You lose 10 SSBN, you lose 100% of your force. Terrible.

An ICBM TEL has 8 axis. 1 or 2 blowed tires wont affect it too much.

And why do you ask about typhoons? because the US will use typhoons against china? a new secret weapon

China right now is an industrial and economic power house, more so than the USSR ever was. They have experience in building large submarines, they have lengthy experience in nuclear power, and with massively increased industrial strength and quality in the last decade we can expect this gap to shrink considerably.

Im talking about military-industrial complex. USSR had an military-industrial complex which china can only wet dream. And much of china´s industrial power base is foreign-based, with foreign tech, unlike USSR.

 

[franco-russe]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

I totally agree with kroko's assessment of mobile ICBM's vs. SSBN's.

 

[cirvine11]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

It always amuses me when western sources boast about how amazingly their SSNs are and how wonderful their SSBNs are, not realising they are in effect construction the old Chinese 'spear and shield' paradox.

If western SSNs are so great and can find and sneak up on any enemy sub, while western SSBNs are so quiet no enemy has a chance of finding them, what exactly would happen if a western SSNs was pitted against western SSBN?

The point is that the much vaunted Ohio class is hardly a spring chicken these days, what happens when the PLAN attains that level of queting technology for nuke subs? Bet they would suddenly stop being 'holes in the ocean' pretty damn quick, and 'amazing' new applications of existing technology would suddenly, magically be able to find them. Just like how 'stealth' could suddenly be 'detected' using ASEA tech, whereas the idea would have been laughed at by the very same people championing the anti-stealth miracle tech before the J20 and T50 came out.

My response can also asnwer another posters question about why SSBN don't just stay close to their bases. No SSBN commander assumes they are undectable. In fact, he goes on the assumption that he is detectable... therefore... they use the expanse of the seas and knowledge of the depths to make the ASW search for them much much harder.

No weapons system or platform stands the test of time and advancement. If the opposite were true-we'd still be using sharp rocks and branches. However some weapons systems and platforms last longer than others. Take sailing ships and cannons. They lasted for many hundreds of years. Sometimes new tech breakthoughs happen quickly... and sometimes not. It depends on so many factors.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

totally wrong. all-terrain ICBM TELs (like the ones TOPOL uses) arent restricted by rough terrain, or "suitable" launch locations. They can launch anywhere in wartime. In crisis times, they are dispersed. Good luck trying to find 200 trucks in a country as vast as china, with high density population, tunnels, even buildings, etc. China isnt Iran. Its not that easy to insert an SOF deep in its territory, or launch airstrikes. And how can they kill all those trucks in one blow? it would take a long time to do it.


They are as a whole, much more survivable than an SSBN. Far more flexible. You lose a truck, you lose 1 ICBM. You lose a SSBN, you lose 12 SLBM. Not good. You lose 50 trucks, you lose 25% of your force. You lose 10 SSBN, you lose 100% of your force. Terrible.

An ICBM TEL has 8 axis. 1 or 2 blowed tires wont affect it too much.

I suppose it depends how many TEL's you want to get.
The chance of 2nd arty fielding 200 TELs with DF-31A compared fielding 10 SSBNs with JL-2 in the near future... imo the former is quite a bit smaller.

Though I will concede if you have 200 TELs they would be more survivable... in certain conditions.

And why do you ask about typhoons? because the US will use typhoons against china? a new secret weapon

I mention it more as a way of talking about the advancements the soviets made in noise reducing tech due to the export of precision milling equipment by toshiba allowing them to make better propellers.

Im talking about military-industrial complex. USSR had an military-industrial complex which china can only wet dream. And much of china´s industrial power base is foreign-based, with foreign tech, unlike USSR.

... Like I said, I think it's clear we disagree here. We'll see in a few years.

 

[no_name]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Unless you are launching through the eye of the storm, shooting ICBMs in a typhoon would be a pretty bad idea I would imagine.

Shooting through the eye of a typhoon though, may well mask the launch and asent stage of an missile.