Rumoured "mini-nuke/diesel" Submarine SSK-N(?) thread
- Thread starter ACuriousPLAFan
- Start date
lol, see this part.
They are in for a surprise.
It would seem to me
I'm more willing to accept that this was a small mishap and that they moved it away relatively quickly afterward.
But reading on the bottom, this is just a regular nuclear electric sub that happens to be small. I mean all SSNs have diesel engines as backups. This is not exception.
"Hmm yes, China did just constructed several massive assembly halls with the number of submarine assembly bays that is FOUR TIMES that of ours - Combined - Just so that they can build a meager handful of newer SSNs in order to replace their older SSNs on a hull-to-hull basis. Yup, that certainly make sense to us."
If those top brasses in the Pentagon truly believe in that just like how those in the DIA/DOD believe China's present nuclear arsenal size, then good luck to them, LMAO.
Last edited:
To be fair, they were talking about the last 10-12 years. The SSN fleet indeed didn't grow. The SSK fleet shrunk. But also, I remember their remarks about the DDG fleet and VLO fighter fleet. They were expecting 200 J-20s by the end of the 2020s as late as the late-2010s. And their earlier assessment was no VLO aircraft until the mid-2020s. They also thought that China wouldn't build more than 10 "Aegis destroyers" (A term I dislike) for a foreseeable future around 2010. We are also seeing that their estimates about PLARF were wrong too both for the nuclear and conventional sides.
I was chatting with @tphuang about the SSKN. I don't think this sub could be considered a small SSN. In my opinion an SSN is a sub that can reach its top speed solely on reactor power. Therefore achieving infinite endurance at speeds above 20 knots... SSNs do have diesels and batteries for emergency. But those are only useful for restarting the reactor or limping back to the base (in single digit speeds) if that is not possible. In LA class for example, the emergency e-motor drives an extendable ducted prop. It only has a power of 325 hp. That should be good for 5-7 knots. Some SSNs have big e-motors powering their main shafts that the diesels can power while the snorkel is out if the reactor goes non-functional. If snorkeling is safe, they can limp back to the base faster.
I believe the SSKN is a numbers focused project that is intended for water between the first and second island chains. In ASW and USW numbers are very important for area coverage. Because submarines aren't like aircraft. They have low situational awareness. They can't be detected from long distances (from a few dozen kms with towed arrays in most conditions). They have low mobility. They need to go very near the enemy vessel to launch their torpedoes. After a point, going bigger doesn't benefit sonars much as seawater strongly absorbs and deflects the sound. So you need numbers.
SSKs are the cheapest. But they have major faults. Even AIP-equipped ones have to start to snorkel after 14-21 days in their patrol areas. And snorkeling is very dangerous against an enemy like the USA. A snorkeling sub isn't quiet at all, and the radar signature of the snorkel and its wake can be detected from hundreds of kilometers away. Modern AWACSes have relevant modes for that too in addition to ASW aircraft.
Also, SSKs patrol at 3 to 6 knots which forces a small patrol box. When they need to maneuver to avoid an ASW asset or to pursue an enemy vessel they have little endurance above 10 knots. That means more time in the danger zone. These are all liabilities for their survivability. Their transits happen at 6-10 knots and use a lot of snorkeling.
SSNs don't have these faults. They transit above 15 knots. They can maneuver at speeds above 30 knots. They have big patrol boxes. They don't snorkel. But they are expensive.
The SSKN with its small reactor would patrol like an SSN at 10-12 knots. It would transit much faster than an SSK at 10-12 knots without needing to snorkel. It would only use its battery to achieve high-speeds to maneuver. And the diesel engine would only be used when it is safe and to restore the capability to maneuver. While doing all of these it would stay cheaper than an SSN by limiting its reactor power to below 10 MW.
I made a table. The SSK here is quite high end. I looked at the KSS-III block 2.
| Attribute and type: | SSK (600 kW AIP + Li-Ion) | SSKN (reactor + Li-Ion) | SSN |
| Transit: | 6-10 knots | 10-12 knots | 15-25 knots |
| Patrol: | 3-7 knots | 10-12 knots | 10-15 knots (noise limited) |
| Maneuver: | 10-20 knots | 12-20 knots (with higher endurance) | 30+ knots unlimited |
| Snorkel: | Needed above 9 knots. Needed at all speeds after AIP runs out. | Only to rapidly recharge the battery after a sprint. Can be postponed. | Not used unless during a reactor failure emergency |
| Crew amenities: | Poor | Things like heated showers, fully-equipped kitchens and AC are easy. | Things like heated showers, fully-equipped kitchens and AC are easy. |
| Price: | Cheapest | In between two | Expensive |
| Pumpjet: | Not useful because of the efficiency problem | Feasible | Feasible |
| Sensor and computer power: | Low | High | High |
In the coming years, do you see the PLAN procuring more SSKNs than SSNs, or more SSNs than SSKNs, or largely similar numbers for both fleets? And if either of the former two applies, how big would the differences in fleet numbers be?
I think the construction in Huludao and all statements point out to institutional focus on SSNs. SSNs will make at least half of the fleet. SSKN, if it is indeed real, may end up getting procured at a similar number to SSNs. SSKs will go lower in prominence more and more as the years pass.
Also I am not convinced that the new sub isn't an SSK. I don't think they will build anything nuclear on Yangtze river. Wuchang doesn't even have the required facilities. And if they are installing the reactor elsewhere, it would be wasteful. I still think it is likelier that the entire thing is a US Govt disinfo. They lied about so many things before so I am not going to blindly trust their anonymous DoD officials.