PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

[montyp165]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

The original reference I've read way back when was about 25 DF-5 ICBMs back in the early 90's, but even the warhead estimates earlier than that in the early 1980's were stating about 150 operational nuclear devices by the PRC, whereas now the PRC arsenal is only behind the US and Russia in useable warheads given the amount of new delivery vehicles available.

 

[clone7803]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Er... Assuming that China only had 20 ICBM, I believe that what Kristensen also meant that China had 20 warheads to fit those ICBM. In 2012, China tested 5 ICBM, but none of the test involved nuclear warhead being fitted on the body. I believe China could easily rebuilt those delivery system quickly, so really there is no problem here.

On a side note though, I do not believe China had less than 20 ICBM... but who knows since China kept all nuclear problem very very secretive.

Nobody really knows how many warheads or ICBMs China has,the point here is Kristensen is a very bad reference from his track record about the PRC's nuclear arsenal. I believe Kristensen underesimated( if not always )the PRC nuclear capability. I will put him on the same level as the magazine like Kanwa which is slightly trustable than the Chinese fan boys.

 

[rhino123]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Nobody really knows how many warheads or ICBMs China has,the point here is Kristensen is a very bad reference from his track record about the PRC's nuclear arsenal. I believe Kristensen underesimated( if not always )the PRC nuclear capability. I will put him on the same level as the magazine like Kanwa which is slightly trustable than the Chinese fan boys.

Actually... I have already say that I do not believe China only had that little ICBM in their arsenal. As to Kristensen's estimation, I think it is totally off... one simple way of knowing is... even if we don't count the land launch missiles, how many SSBN do China has - one? Two? Three? or Four? Each had around 12 silos and I believe all of them are loaded with missiles. There should be provision that all these missiles will be fitted with nuclear warhead. So... with that in light, it had already pass what Kristensen had stated.

What I meant in my post is... it is inaccurate in your previous comments on using the number of tests China had conducted in a year to state whether China had that little quantity of missiles or not. Because, do note that those tests make use of missiles delivery system... no warhead. And I believe it is easy to replace new missile delivery systems pretty fast.

Having said that, I do believe that Kristensen's prediction is inaccurate (see my first paragraph), but to use the number of test a year as an argument that Kristensen's prediction as being inaccurate is also wrong too.

 

[Broccoli]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

This guy Kristensen was also the pepole who said the PRC only has 20 ICBMs if I am not wrong.But in 2012 the PLA had already tested 5 ICBMs including a DF-5,two DF-31As,a JL-2A and a DF-41.It makes no sense a country wasted 1/4 of its nuclear capability in one year only for testing.

He says 50-75 ICBM's in PRC asenal and out of those 35-50 (DF-5, DF-31A) can reach most of US.

 

[Broccoli]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Actually... I have already say that I do not believe China only had that little ICBM in their arsenal. As to Kristensen's estimation, I think it is totally off... one simple way of knowing is... even if we don't count the land launch missiles, how many SSBN do China has - one? Two? Three? or Four? Each had around 12 silos and I believe all of them are loaded with missiles. There should be provision that all these missiles will be fitted with nuclear warhead. So... with that in light, it had already pass what Kristensen had stated.

Jin-class is not sailing because they do not have any JL-2's ready at moment, so they have to wait until the missiles goes to mass production. When it comes to Chinese arsenal he's writing that it's growing, but they still have some older missiles (DF-4) what need to be replaced.

Concerning sea-based nuclear forces, the NASIC report echoes the DOD report by saying that the JL-2 SLBM for the new Jin-class SSBN is not yet operational. The JL-2 is designated as CSS-NX-14, which I thought it was a typo in the 2009 report, as opposed to the CSS-NX-3 for the JL-1 (which is also not operational).

NASIC concludes that JL-2 “will, for the first time, allow Chinese SSBNs to target portions of the United States from operating areas located near the Chinese coast.” That is true for Guam and Alaska, but not for Hawaii and the continental United States. Moreover, like the DF-31, the JL-2 range estimate is lowered from 7,200+ km in the 2009 report to 7,000+ km in the new version. Earlier intelligence estimates had the range as high as 8,000+ km.


Overall, the stockpile appears to be increasing at a very slow and modest rate. The U.S. Intelligence Community has been predicting 100 ICBM warheads in 15 years for the past 15 years. Twelve years after the first projection was made, China right now has less than 50 ICBM launchers that can target the continental United States. So that number would have to more than double for the current projection of “well over 100 in the next 15 years” to come true. If you include JL-2 in that projection, then it looks a little more realistic. But it still doesn’t get to 100+ warheads and the JL-2 cannot target the continental United States from Chinese waters.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

That is likely an official model of the base Type 093 submarine; it implies that the Type 095 is almost near completion.

1. It is rumored that the base Type 093 is a second generation boat, while the Type 093B is a third generation boat, sporting a second generation reactor. These papers seem to confirm it:

2. The Type 094 is rumored to be built in two batches: the improved version will have modified missile tubes when compared to the old one, which partially might explain why the missile platform is closer to the conning tower and it will also include the new 10000 kilometer range JL-2A.

3. The Type 095 is rumored to have the following, reportedly based on a model seen at Wuxi Institute.
- possible pump jet propulsion
- possible x shaped rudder
- possibly vertical launch system

 

[Quickie]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

He says 50-75 ICBM's in PRC asenal and out of those 35-50 (DF-5, DF-31A) can reach most of US.

The question should be how many nuclear warheads does China has, because this depends on the availability of nuclear material in China. Going by the number of satellites launches in China, as much as the U.S. or slightly more in the last year or two, China can easily build 2 or 3 hundred ICBMs (not counting the warheads) in the 15 years or so. i.e. about 20 launchers per year, which is about the number of launchers China built in a year to launch satellites in the last 2 years.

 

[tphuang]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

The question should be how many nuclear warheads does China has, because this depends on the availability of nuclear material in China. Going by the number of satellites launches in China, as much as the U.S. or slightly more in the last year or two, China can easily build 2 or 3 hundred ICBMs (not counting the warheads) in the 15 years or so. i.e. about 20 launchers per year, which is about the number of launchers China built in a year to launch satellites in the last 2 years.

guys, this is a submarine thread. We do have a ballistic missile thread.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

guys, this is a submarine thread. We do have a ballistic missile thread.

Agreed 100%.

Back on topic then.

I read in the latest US-China Economic and Security Review Commission Backgrounder, dated August 26, 2013, "China's Naval Modernization and Implications for the US." that US Analysts are now calling the Type 095 an SSGN.

China is developing two new classes of nuclear submarines – the Type 095 guided-missile attack submarine (SSGN) and the Type 096 SSBN. China’s growing inventory of nuclear and conventional AIP submarines will significantly enhance China’s ability to strike opposing surface ships throughout the Western Pacific and to protect future SSBN/SLBM patrols and aircraft carrier task groups.

I had not heard the Type 095 referred to as an SSGN before, and personally believe that the designation is somewhat of a misnomer, though it may technically be true. In light of this, I believe that the PLAN will take the same route the Russians, and now the US Navy are taking in that regard.

With the Yasen class, the Russians have combined the SSN and SSGN role with a vessel that can do both. Later flights of the Virginia Class intend to add an "Payload Module" insert with a "Payload Modlue" that will contain two large vertical missile launchers that can each launch 7 Tomohawks for a totl of 14 more. This will be in addition to the 12 VLS cells they already have, meaning those new Virginias will remain state of the art, top line SSNs, but they will also now, in effect be SSGNs with up to a 26 VLS launched cruise missile capability.

So, I would expect that perhaps the Type 095 is going to be along those lines as opposed to a dedicated SSGN like the US Ohio conversions, or the Russian Oscars...both of which will not be built again.

 

[chuck731]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Since some cruise missiles can be fired out of torpedo tubes, at what point does a regular SSN become a SSGN?