PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

[articblast]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Virginia class has a curved flaring at the bottom of the front part of the sail, much like Seawolf class and even the upcoming Barracuda class. The sub here has a totally squared sail. For me it looks like an Ohio but without the hump. The US subs however have vertical stabilizers on the tips of the horizontal tail fins though, but Chinese subs don't.

The 093 video in the PLA 80th anniversary exhibit lacked any planes on the sail. We have never seen any other picture of that sub except for this one hazy picture. Plus this one model. Some people are calling this planeless 093 the 095, but for me it could be more like an 093G. If you look back at history, the early LA class had planes in the sail but the later ones changed to putting the planes in the bow.

I was looking at the picture at Hui Tongs site and it shows Plains on the sail.
Plus that first picture looks like a Kilo to me.

 

[crobato]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

That pic in Hui Tong's site is from a magazine. I speculate there might be two versions of the sub, one with planes on the sail and one without.

On the other pic, I thought it was a Kilo too, but after examining it closely, decided its not a Kilo due to the fact that the ridge making up the back is very different, something even noticeable with the blurry photograph. That line also probably makes up for the limber hole line.

 

[Delbert]

China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Since most of the US submarines are nuclear powered... Around 75, not quite sure...

I think with the new development of the Jin and Shang Class subs, China can start mass producing those submarines... Not a very high number, but a much larger number than 5 Hans and 1 Xia Class.

(12 Jin and 24 Shang?)"Don't accuse me of giving these numbers (Like asking me why? and so on), this is just a simple numbers to show that the number is larger than the previous total of 6 nuclear subs"

The purpose was to have greater military capability ASAP in case of a conflict across Asia Pacific Region.

Even though I do not support a very large number, since it is very important to develop even better ones in the future. But my only point currently, was to immediately have a capable submarine force ASAP within 5 years from now.

Who nows when a conflict will come right? Better be prepared during peaceful years, than start preparing when war comes, for it will be too late by that time.

What do you think about my suggestions? Reasonable right?

 

[RedMercury]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

No, money better spent on education and healthcare.

Besides, increasing production rates means buying more production lines, and you have to train the crews.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Since most of the US submarines are nuclear powered... Around 75, not quite sure...

I think with the new development of the Jin and Shang Class subs, China can start mass producing those submarines... Not a very high number, but a much larger number than 5 Hans and 1 Xia Class.

(12 Jin and 24 Shang?)"Don't accuse me of giving these numbers (Like asking me why? and so on), this is just a simple numbers to show that the number is larger than the previous total of 6 nuclear subs"

The purpose was to have greater military capability ASAP in case of a conflict across Asia Pacific Region.

Even though I do not support a very large number, since it is very important to develop even better ones in the future. But my only point currently, was to immediately have a capable submarine force ASAP within 5 years from now.

Who nows when a conflict will come right? Better be prepared during peaceful years, than start preparing when war comes, for it will be too late by that time.

What do you think about my suggestions? Reasonable right?

I believe the PLAN may/should procure 4-6 of the SSBNs and 10-12 of the SSNs to augment/protect their developing surface fleet operations and to protect their interests elsewhere.

But we shall see. To date it looks like two of the SSNs and one or two of the SSBNs.

 

[lilzz]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Not a good idea building so much subs. What if US find the weakness and signature of the 093, then the whole fleet would be cooked.

Better serve to have 2 093, 2 094, 2 095, 2 096 2 097...etc each type would have different signature. So US force would need to large database and continous update of each type of subs.. this way it would be alot harder... Don't put all eggs into 1 basket

btw, anybody heard anything on 096? I came across article on the chinese website, saying it would be ready for test trial soon.

The main key is continuing to build and upgrade the techs. no good to have massive number of the same thing, it destroys innovation.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Not a good idea building so much subs. What if US find the weakness and signature of the 093, then the whole fleet would be cooked.

Better serve to have 2 093, 2 094, 2 095, 2 096 2 097...etc each type would have different signature. So US force would need to large database and continous update of each type of subs.. this way it would be alot harder... Don't put all eggs into 1 basket

btw, anybody heard anything on 096? I came across article on the chinese website, saying it would be ready for test trial soon.

The main key is continuing to build and upgrade the techs. no good to have massive number of the same thing, it destroys innovation.

Today's data bases and computational capabilities eliminate the fact that they have 4 different types or 20 different types being a problem with modern digital technology.

Fact is, the US with is Virginia and Sea Wolf classes probably already has signatures of anything the PLAN ventures to sea with.

In addition, several different types becomes a logistical and training nightmare which would ultimately impact the PLANs capability to keep them at sea, particular during any hostilities.

No, the PLAN, IMHO, is best served to build quite a few of their newest and best and put them to sea, gaining operational expertise while they research a better class to replace them with 10 years down the road...and so forth and so on. This way they keep relatively modern vessels at sea at all times that they can service and that new crews can easily become familiar with...replacing them as major breakthroughs occur.

But that is simply my opinion.

 

[lilzz]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Today's data bases and computational Fact is, the US with is Virginia and Sea Wolf classes probably already has signatures of anything the PLAN ventures to sea with.

In addition, several different types becomes a logistical and training nightmare which would ultimately impact the PLANs capability to keep them at sea, particular during any hostilities.

I heard when 094 moved to haian, they were driven under the disguise of noisy surface ship, therefore masking their sig.
I doubt US has their sig figure out yet.

Yes, it's bit more hassle in terms of maintaince for different types but the advantage is getting the defense industry on its toes. Keep using the same old design would make them lazy. and not good for defense innvoation.

Besides, I see China's main goal of making of those weapons. 80% of chances the weapons would be selling in the international market. War is not really a likely possibility in the horizon.
especially war /w US. a remote possibility. China has more enough to take care of those lower countries try to compete China for the islands in the SCS.
Defense innovation is the key. Maintaince issue is secondary. Remember Chinese is always enterpreneur first and foremost. Economics first.. Selling weapons fall under this category. they want a bigger defense sector pie.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

I heard when 094 moved to haian, they were driven under the disguise of noisy surface ship, therefore masking their sig.
I doubt US has their sig figure out yet.

I believe they probably do.

Yes, it's bit more hassle in terms of maintaince for different types but the advantage is getting the defense industry on its toes. Keep using the same old design would make them lazy. and not good for defense innvoation.

It's not just a little hassle, it is a major consideration, hugely important for the ability for the PLAN to develop good operational plans and theory.

In addition, it need not slow down the production industry in the least or make it lazy.

By building a lot of vessels, the industry hones its skills and develops effective strategies, planning, and methodologies for economies of scale. And you need not have your research and development directly tied to prodiction except to enusre that designs that are developed can be built.

The US has operated under such a methodology for decades and this is what has allowed it to produce such advanced designs and then produce and maintain them so effectively...of course coupled with a strong economy and strong, free, public sector focused on education.

Besides, I see China's main goal of making of those weapons. 80% of chances the weapons would be selling in the international market. War is not really a likely possibility in the horizon.
Defense innovation is the key. Maintaince issue is secondary.

Maintenance is always a primary consideration. Whether you use it or a customer, it must be maintainable...or your own forces will suffer, or those of your customers...which means less customers.

 

[crobato]

Re: China's Needed submarine force (My own Suggestion)

Well put, Jeff.

We already have a discussion on submarines, so I am merging the threads.