Future PLAN developments - new escorts, subs, LPH, carriers, etc

[FuManChu]

Well the title should be fairly self-explanatory. Since there's so much discussion about current developments, why don't we have a discussion over where the PLAN should be going? Should it be focusing on:

Escorts?
Subs?

or building a first:

LPH?
Carrier?

Any other further comments are welcome. I'm just curious as to what you guys (n' gals?) think the priorities should be.

[bd popeye]

Well the title should be fairly self-explanatory. Since there's so much discussion about current developments, why don't we have a discussion over where the PLAN should be going? Should it be focusing on:

Escorts?
Subs?

or building a first:

LPH?
Carrier?

Any other further comments are welcome. I'm just curious as to what you guys (n' gals?) think the priorities should be.

This topic comes up now and again...Humm?? I like it.

The PLAN should continue to develop indeginous ships instead of relying on Russian shipbuilders for certian types. The PLAN is doing a good job of forging ahed with shipbuilding. DDG's and FFG types ships should be the first priorty not matter how much some of want to see a PLAN CV. Number two priorty should be the PLAN submarine program which is making good strides in recent times. I think the CV will be the Varyag before the 2008 Olymipcs. Perhaps not fully operational but it will be put to sea in some capacity in my opinion.

The PLAN should concentrate on building quality ships with well trained crews. Large numbers of ships mean nothing if the ships set in port not operating.

[KYli]

PLAN first priorty should be Subs, especially the 94 and Yuan should be most important. Number two priorty should be DDGs and FFGs, make a bigger version of the 52c with 96 instead 48 h9, and since 54a is coming out soon we will see what it got. I heard at least four is going to come out and have 32SAM16 and 730ciws. Varyag will be a stopover the new CV, and I think new CV will be coming out at around 2010.

I agreed with popeye that it is also very important for PLAN to concentrate building quality, and train the people as much as you should be.

[MIGleader]

Well the title should be fairly self-explanatory. Since there's so much discussion about current developments, why don't we have a discussion over where the PLAN should be going? Should it be focusing on:

Escorts?
Subs?

or building a first:

LPH?
Carrier?

Any other further comments are welcome. I'm just curious as to what you guys (n' gals?) think the priorities should be.

thare are no gals in this forum.

I think china chould continue it's current trend of developing a very quiet and capable diesel submarine force, with only a few ssn's and ssbn's. China has gained a very signifigant lead in this area compared with the rest of the nations and asia and the rest of the world, so china must do its best to keep it's edge.

As for destroyers and frigates, they must be built, but only in modest quantities. Building such ships are expensive, and china has no need to a fleet that can go around the world on call. Best focus on developing more and more advnaced models rather than mass produce a single model.

A carrier? certainly. But its not going to be varyag. China should opt to build it;s own carriers. Two types are needed:

A heavier type, roughly the size and tonnage of the Charles de gaulle(38,000 tons), and able to carry up to 40 j-10 and ka-28's. a ski jump shoudl be used if catapult technology proves too difficult. These carriers cna provide both fleet air cover and land and ship attakc abilities, giving the PLAN the ability to project on it's half of the pacific, and possibly the indian ocean. 2-3 of these carriers should be built. Building such ships, would of course, require building more DDG and FFG escorts.

A smaller model will serve as auxillary to the large carirers, or may serve to provide a degree of air cover for a group of ships, or ASW. these carriers should be closer in class the the RN invincible class. The ships may also feature som ddg weapons, such as SAMS and anti-ahip missles, making them more multi-role. up to 10 can be built.

LPH's...maybe. The tank landing ship is outdated.

[Gollevainen]

I think chinese navy will have to (and will) follow the path of its paternal policyes...
Superpower status needs (or at least it needed) nuclear deterence and past have shown that a force of minium of four boats of SSBNs could do it...But china should go on for least eigth as douple patrol...

Secondly, a carrier based navy for distant invertions and power projection as well as cover the rest of the naval force for air protection...and show some bigger penis to rest of the players..:p :p ...

varyag should be refitted emediatly and then go on for building bigger, Ulyanovsk size super carriers...or if the moneykeepers says no, a three ADS size carriers should go on for price of single CVF (british future carriers). But carriers, carriers and some more carriers...

...and offcourse a balanced surface force to escort them.

One thing that has got my eyes is that China sure makes capaple hulls but it needs to rely on imported engines and major systems. Only fileds were china truly is indegenious is pedestrial SSMs. What china needs is full covering domestical industry to provide the ships from keel to mast with chinese components. Expecially for engines and radars...

Reliance for submarine based defence navy should be left behind, its weaker opponents style...but china needs naval supermacy over Asia...subs doesent bring that.

[Roger604]

PLAN first priorty should be Subs, especially the 94 and Yuan should be most important. Number two priorty should be DDGs and FFGs, make a bigger version of the 52c with 96 instead 48 h9, and since 54a is coming out soon we will see what it got. I heard at least four is going to come out and have 32SAM16 and 730ciws. Varyag will be a stopover the new CV, and I think new CV will be coming out at around 2010.

I agreed with popeye that it is also very important for PLAN to concentrate building quality, and train the people as much as you should be.

I read the above posters and I agree with KYli the most.

The first island chain remains highly contentious. Whatever ambitions China has toward the blue water, it has to maintain solid control over the littorals. Diesel electrics are the key. Migleader is right in saying that China should maintain its lead this field. Not only technologically but also by mass production of Yuans/Songs (in the way it is doing so now).

I think SSBN's and SSN's are more important than Migleader gives them credit for. No blue water navy should be without them. China will definitely need a serious force of them by 2012. It looks like China is still very far behind in quieting technology right now. Type 093 is no quieter than a los angeles class sub. :( China needs to improve the 093/094 or come up with a new generation design that can be arguably world-class so it can field them in substantial numbers in the 2012-2015 time frame. Goll is right.... you need about 8 SSBN's.

Like Migleader, I like what the PLAN is doing now in terms of destroyers/frigates... just building improved variants 051C/D/E to gain technology and experience without mass production. Goll is right that China has to be able to build engines too. But the pace of improvement is pretty amazing. At this rate, China should be building world class surface combatants by about 2012.

Popeye and Migleader is right in saying that Varyag is probably just going to be for training platform. China should try to have an operational carrier by 2012 and hopefully around 6 battle groups by 2020. It needs to have the training platform asap (2008 is too far away).

But I think the future of carriers are limited. When the day comes when somebody comes up with a way to terminally guide ballistic missiles against mobile targets (big, flat, slow) carriers are going to be very vulnerable. I don't think that day is very far away.

I think smaller carriers are the way to go. [I.e. like the European carriers, not American carriers.] Instead, much of the firepower should be provided by 'arsenal ships' (like DDX-style ships). The challenge for China is to improve its shipbuilding industry so that it can make its own 'DD(X)' by the 2015-2020 timeframe.

[Jeff Head]

(big, flat, slow) carriers are going to be very vulnerable.Sorry, US nuclear carriers at least are anything but slow. They are among the fastest surface ships afloat when they want to be. Though they are listed at 30+ knots, people I know have indicated that they can top out at well over 45 for extended periods if they want to. This makes the ability to track and target them, much less hit them, much more difficult.

As to the rest...I too believe the Varyag is going to be operational to some degree. Too much time in the yards foir her not to come out of there under her own power in my opinion.

After making sure they have ships that can support the following logistically (meaning those logistics are really the 1st priority), I believe the priorities are subs, then DDGs, FFGs, then the carrier, then amphibs. All of them must be addressed and are all tied together for any projection and defense the PLAN wants to accomplish.

As a result of all of this, I still believe at some point in the next five years we will see something like the following at sea for the PLAN:

http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/sat_plan_cbg.jpg

[bd popeye]

Sorry, US nuclear carriers at least are anything but slow. They are among the fastest surface ships afloat when they want to be. Though they are listed at 30+ knots, people I know have indicated that they can top out at well over 45 for extended periods if they want to. This makes the ability to track and target them, much less hit them, much more difficult

This is an excellent thread. Great responses by all.:)

I think smaller carriers are the way to go. [I.e. like the European carriers, not American carriers.]

Roger could you please elaborate on this statement. thanks.

Roger, Jeff is correct in this statement above. Nothing at sea except a FAC or future USN LCS is as fast as a USN CVN. The below picture is of the Nimitz itself undergoing sea trials in November 1990 after a 1+ year re-fit. How do I know? I was on the Nimitz a month later and this picture graces the cruise book(year book) And I know sailors that were onboard during these high speed manuvers. It is known by all hands onboard that the ship was going in excess of 35 knots when it negoiated this turn. That day off the Northwest Pacific coast the Nimitz made some classified speeds and manuvers in the range of what Jeff posted. Because a Nimitz class nuclear powered it can remain at these high speeds indefentiely. A Nimitz class can "outrun" it's entire battle group. Fact. I know I was there.

http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/3863/carrier5gr.jpg

[crobato]

China appears to be mastering radar and C-31 systems quite well frankly. Whatever gaps they have on their indigenous designs, they have plugged by reverse engineering Russian designs like the Bandstand and Top Plate radars. The 052C arrays and its surface search radar (top of the mast) shows you how far gone China has gone into naval radars.

The engines is more of a question mark as they seem to be reliant in so called "imported" engines. I put the quotation marks because so called imported engines are actually made in China by foreign firms. This is especially with regards to diesel engines for subs and CODAGs for the larger ships.

Goll makes a good point on this one

Reliance for submarine based defence navy should be left behind, its weaker opponents style...but china needs naval supermacy over Asia...subs doesent bring that.

One does question however if the Teddy Roosevelt style of showing a big stick to all of China's Asian neighbors is of political benefit.

China as a policy seems much more interested in portraying itself as an underdog and a "peaceful" neighbor by always constantly understating its military. The best remains hidden, no roadmaps are ever given in public, kind of like a poker player hiding ace cards. The propaganda is useless because they only like to show people in parade and hardly ever new stuff---not like the monumental 1999 parade where the PLA actually revealed all sorts of new hardware like the ZTZ-98 tank for the first time. China appears to be very sensitive about criticisms of its miltary modernizations.

Having said this, the argument that it is now or never that China should learn to field a carrier. It is currently the only one in the UN security council without one. Was this because of a change in leadership? After much interest in carriers in the nineties, the pro sub faction in the PLAN took over, placed carrier studies into hiatus and concentrated on subs, albeit with much surface ship support. The so called phased expansion of the PLAN from green water to blue water navy envisioned in the nineties was tabled for a green navy with an underwater sucker punch. All that time, JZM seemed to be making that war with Taiwan was imminent.

Change of leadership again, and JZM is out of the CMC. That is a profound development for the entire PLA. The PLA now appears letting go of a myopic attitude of preparing for an imminent conflict with Taiwan in the near future, for longer term and more grandoise plans of developing its technological base. Back to the 1990s vision. But then with civilians and technocrats so much in charge, every new generation of Chinese leadership isn't going to have a militaristic worldview and of China's future, though they will insist they will do everything to protect China's homelands and prosperity.

This is always a tough loggerhead question as to why China should field a carrier. Many Chinese do not beleive China should do it, while others do. There is quite an opinion split here, and I bet it also reflects what is inside the CCP and PLA leaders too.

[tphuang]

shoot, this thing looks like it's going to flip over. Lol, the nuclear reactor on these things can probably power a couple of cities.

Back on topic:
What China needs:
1. ASW frigate/destroyer platform
2. AAW frigate
3. quieter SSKs
4. more LPDs (on top the current one still in construction)
5. better torpedo + sonar technology
6. continuously improve the "Chinese Aegis" software and build more such DDGs to create more of an integrated air defense system
7. domestic engines for DDGs and FFGs

btw Crobato, so 052C is not using band stand at all, but rather a domestic copy?

[crobato]

Yes, although originally I thought it was Bandstand, I am starting to think it is a domestic copy, or at least it is using a very similar radome to Bandstand. We simply don't know what is underneath the dome to say it is truly Bandstand or not. One should not conclude just from the looks of the radome alone. I think it is an indigenous radar that happens to be fitted with a radome similar to Bandstand's.

That Bandstand looking thing only provides fire control for the YJ-83/YJ-62. If you look at the top of the mast of the 052C, you will see a dome that is also fitted on the 051C. That I believe is the search radar for the YJ-62. It is not present on the 052B however, so I am inclined to conclude it has something to do with the YJ-62. When I first saw it on 051C, i theorized that the 051C might have the YJ-62 instead of the YJ-83 and this turned out be correct. Since you don't see this sort of collaboration at all with the real Bandstand on the Sovremannies, there is no reason to think the 052C ASM radars are Bandstand.

[tphuang]

Yes, although originally I thought it was Bandstand, I am starting to think it is a domestic copy, or at least it is using a very similar radome to Bandstand. We simply don't know what is underneath the dome to say it is truly Bandstand or not. One should not conclude just from the looks of the radome alone. I think it is an indigenous radar that happens to be fitted with a radome similar to Bandstand's.

That Bandstand looking thing only provides fire control for the YJ-83/YJ-62. If you look at the top of the mast of the 052C, you will see a dome that is also fitted on the 051C. That I believe is the search radar for the YJ-62. It is not present on the 052B however, so I am inclined to conclude it has something to do with the YJ-62. When I first saw it on 051C, i theorized that the 051C might have the YJ-62 instead of the YJ-83 and this turned out be correct. Since you don't see this sort of collaboration at all with the real Bandstand on the Sovremannies, there is no reason to think the 052C ASM radars are Bandstand.
actually, 051C has YJ-83 from the look at the YJ-83 cannisters on the recent photos. So, you are basically saying that the type 364 radar is the one that searches for the targets and bandstand simply provides the guidance for YJ series? Interesting, I guess that explains how it can have a 450 KM range. I wonder what the range of type 364 radar is against surface objects.

[crobato]

Based on the 'golden' model, the 051C appears to have YJ-62 cannisters. Yes, of course, we like to see it closer. So far for a large destroyer, we are only seeing the four cannister arrangement of the YJ-62 rather than the 8 cannister arrangement of the YJ-83. This is especially in the light that the 167 Luhai uses the 8 cannister arrangement. Can't see why the new 051C should have less ASM firepower than the 051B.

Yes, I think the Bandstand like radar provides tracking and command guidance for the ASMs. In order to get that much range, the search radar must be at the highest altitude in the ship. The fire control radar does not need to go as far because at one point, the ASM will go terminal and autonomous, and would not need the surface radar's support. The ASMs only need to be directed up to a point.

In the 052B, that search function was provided by the Fregat Top Plate. That is the way it works with the Sovremannies too. Sometimes I think the Bandstand like radar on the 052B might still be real Bandstand because it needs to work with the Fregat, which has to be the genuine article to work with the SA-N-12. Though I wonder how you can make the Bandstand work with the YJ-83, unless the YJ-83s are literally reading off the same datalink information as the Sunburns which is the original missile made to work for the Bandstand.

Working with the Type 364 radar, the Bandstand like radar on the 052C won't be the real Bandstand anymore, but an indigenously inspired version of it.

I will start a thread on the aviation forum about potential PLAN carrier aviation alternatives.

[KYli]

As much as I agreed there are changing perspection in the CCP, I still think subs will be first priorty.

It has to do with the way thing is going right now. PLAN always have the policy to build a pair of warships or subs before they mass produce them. That why they only build a pair of 52b, 52c, 51c, eventhrough these DDG are very powerful. They are still inferior to most Western new DDG, PLAN might not be fully satify. Because China has the ability to build something more powerful, I would rather think they will build something like 52D or ASW DDG before mass producing. Since we all know the shipyard is moving, it would be doubtful anything will come out before 2008/09. So it would be rather difficult to have any mass producing before 2010. I think the only major project now is the 54A, because the weapon and stucture are already testing. So PLAN will feel safe to build lot of them, since there are lot of frigates need to replace I would say there would be at least 12-20 new frigates are coming out in next few years.

Subs are complete different story. China have 2yuan, two 93 and 94(1or2), so let say the information is correct. If these subs are sucessful, I would rather think they will be mass produce. Because eventhrough these subs might not be the best, PLAN probaly couldn't build any significate better in near future. Since PLAN urgently need them to replace the old subs. I would guess they would mass produce with modification of 6-8 of ssbn, 4-6ssn and at least 12-16 yuan to replace them before next generation are coming out. All these could be done in around 2013-2015, so next generation subs will be coming out near 2015. xia and Han are just too obstacle, they sure do need something better. Six to eight 94 will give them great nuclear deterrance.

For many years PLAN only study CV, but never have intention to build one until Varyag. Since there are so many work done for Varyag, I would rather think China is seriously trying to make Varyag work. If everything go according of plan, Varyag should be operation some where in 08/09, and I think PLAN would use it as a major training ground for new CV. New CV should not be too distant away after Varyag is up and running, but I have doubt they will build lot of carriers. Because Carriers are never PLAN priorty, they do not need Carriers. One carriers cost a lot of money to build, and lot more money to maintain. Since they are more focus on Tawian, and they still consider themselve as defensive force. I would whether think they would only build copy new CV first.

Bottom line PLAN do not have any clear doctrine develop yet, they are trying to learn as much as they can and have as much options as they could. Before they decide what the future in PLAN. So Subs, Carriers and DDG would need to prove themselves effective, before the Leaders make anything concludsive and extensive decision to mass produce. Off course there are also many different factions in PLAN and Leaders, so it will be very difficult to perdict. But one thing we could guess, that is which one of them is the backbone.

What China needs.
1.ASW DDG/FFG
2.SSBN(quiet and modify)
3.SSN/SSK(quiet and modify)
4.Aegis DDG(better software&moreSAM)
5.indigenous engine
6.Carriers
7.LPH

What China decides
1.SSBN/SSN
2.SSK
3.Aegis DDG/AAWFFG
4.CV
5.ASW DDG
6.LPH
7.software/sonar/engine

One very stong indication of what PLAN consider more important, that is the secretcy of the project. We all know how much China tried to hide the j10, so what project we are lack of information now shoud be a strong indication for how important the PLAN consider it. SO SSBN and SSN are their first priorty.

[adeptitus]

I'd vote for SSBN's as first priority.

I don't believe the PRC today has effective "secondary strike" nuclear deterrance, with its limited number of ICBM's. The PLAN should follow British or French model and have at least 4 SSBN's to serve that role.

Realistcally, it's near impossible for the PRC to match either Russia or US in terms of nuclear arms. However if the PRC can field an effective secondary strike force, it'd be sufficient for nuclear deterrance. Otherwise the PRC may find itself in a position where another country could strike it with nuclear arms without fear of effective retaliation (through missile defense systems).

Whatever the political situation is today, is not indicative of the future. If nuclear arms is supposed to deter another from doing you harm, then it should be effective, otherwise it's useless and you mind as well not have it and hope being a "nuclear-free" state would somehow protect you.

A/C's are nice to look at, but expensive to maintain. The money needed to pay for an A/C group is probably better spent on satellites, guided missile boats/SSK's, and better/stealthy long-range missiles. Looking toward the future, control of space/orbit will probably become more critical than control of the seas.

[Fairthought]

Procurement should follow strategy.

There is no good reason for China to have 3, 6, or even 8 carriers unless they have a purpose for every one of them. What is the plan? A big penis contest is a very bad plan.

Can someone explain why China needs eight carriers to take Taiwan?

Can someone explain why China needs eight carriers for power projection?

Where is China going to power project to, anyways? And how urgent is this for China?

Furthermore, no one should be surprised by the speed of an aircraft carrier. I blame computer games and hollywood movies for dumbing people into thinking carriers and battleships are slow. The speed of a ship is limited to the speed of its bow wave (hydro-planing is an exception). Bigger waves move faster than smaller waves. A ship that displaces alot of water produces bigger bow waves. Putting one and one and one together and the mystery of the fast carrier disappears. There is no fancy technology involved, this is just simple physics.

Quite frankly, size matters.

However, speed does not imply agility. Carriers take time to accelerate and time to slow down and its fast turns are very wide.

Since procurement follows strategy, and China's immediate strategy is to reclaim Taiwan, it follows China immediately needs the naval power to to blockade Taiwan. The fastest and most efficient way to do this is with submarines.

[SampanViking]

Hi Fairthought

I think your tunnel vision in referencing everything towards Taiwan is creating the very difficulties you are trying to answer.

Personally I do not believe war with Taiwan figures very highly in PLAN medium to long term strategy, as it is a situation likely to resolve itself in a satisfactory and peaceful manner within the next few years.

I can think of two main reasons why the PLAN may wish to develop a number of operational Carrier Groups:

i) Protecting China's interests with its increasing overseas trade links and subsequent supply lanes.

ii) Creating an effective second Sea Front against any potential Sea Borne aggressor. This would include not only an ability to strike at any enemy Task Force from Multiple Directions, but also removing any notion of safe zone away from the Chinese Coast. In addition any enemies supply routes and en-route supply facilites would also be vulnerable to counter action action.

In short, Carriers prevent a Sea Borne adversary from concentrating their naval forces in an attack position off the East or South China Seas.

[KYli]

Sampanviking,

I agreed of what you said, but China do not have what it take to protect their carriers. Maybe twenty years later, but now even China builded six or eight Carriers they could not control the trade lane. And no way China could cut off supply line with enemy force. If China has conflict with the US, USA will control the sea, and these would not change in near future. Whether, China could try to contol their coastline, and subs are better job on that. If you are talking about Japan, Russia, French, india and British, I would rather think DDG, FFG and subs will do better job of carriers. China would need to build few new CV as stopover to Great carriers groups in future, but should not relay not carriers.

[SampanViking]

Hi KYli

China do not have what it take to protect their carriers. Maybe twenty years later, but now even China builded six or eight Carriers they could not control the trade lane.

Oh Absolutely, when I said at the beginning of my last post medium to long term that really means 15 to 20 years time. The forums favourite old salt B D Popeye is quite right when he talks about the time needed to train sufficient sailors in the art of effective Carrier Group Tactics and Operation etc.

In the meantime, next ten years, I think China should produce some operational small Carriers for Helicopters and VTOL planes. This is what the Americans call I beleive Amphibeous Support Ships. If China follows the Soviet designation system, perhapse these ships would be called something unobvious (not even classed as Carriers per se) so may even be under construction as we speak. Maybe Gollevainen and the other Soviet watchers would be able to shed some light on this area.

Irrespective I can see two roles for such Amphib/Small Cariers:

i) Anti Piracy operations in the South China Seas, Straits of Malaccha and the Indian Ocean and African Coast (Niger Delta region).

ii) The other - perhasp as an extension of the first would be more participation in International Peacekeeping. I know i have talked about both of these before, but as China gets richer (probably 4th biggest economy today, maybe 3rd by the end of the year and 2nd in ten years time, if current rates persist) it will come under greater pressure to pick up its share of the cost and responsibility for these duties.

If until recently some nations would have preferred Chinese forces to have stayed at home, this has probably changed recently, with the hope that future TV pictures of Chinese Peacekeepers abusing developing world detainees would firmly end the honeymoon with China and the developing world, whilst making the troops of some more developed nations look not too bad.

Sorry if that was a bit:off , but I think it does help illustrate the rationale behind my assessment.

[bd popeye]

i) Anti Piracy operations in the South China Seas, Straits of Malaccha and the Indian Ocean and African Coast (Niger Delta region).

ii) The other - perhasp as an extension of the first would be more participation in International Peacekeeping. I know i have talked about both of these before, but as China gets richer (probably 4th biggest economy today, maybe 3rd by the end of the year and 2nd in ten years time, if current rates persist) it will come under greater pressure to pick up its share of the cost and responsibility for these duties.

Thanks for the eairler comment...I am an old salt!:)

I think that if the PLAN had a couple of amphip groups one of the missions could be humanitarian assistance. Imangine if you will the PLAN mustering it's forces to help victims of the Dec. 26, 2004 Boxing Day Tsunami. That would have been awesome for the PRC. The PRC would have been emerged as the hero nation gaining even more favor with it's Asian neighbors and the World.:china:

Anti-piracy patrols is honestly something the PLAN could do right now if it so desired. I don't think a LPH type ship is needed for this type of service.

[KYli]

Irrespective I can see two roles for such Amphib/Small Cariers:

i) Anti Piracy operations in the South China Seas, Straits of Malaccha and the Indian Ocean and African Coast (Niger Delta region).

ii) The other - perhasp as an extension of the first would be more participation in International Peacekeeping. I know i have talked about both of these before, but as China gets richer (probably 4th biggest economy today, maybe 3rd by the end of the year and 2nd in ten years time, if current rates persist) it will come under greater pressure to pick up its share of the cost and responsibility for these duties.

Ok, I get what you mean. Here is what I think.
:off
1. Anti-piracy operations is great priorty in many countries, but also a lot of tension create from it. Especially in the south China Seas, many countries tried to limit other nations from patrol near their sea line. I know US and many countries have join together to anti-piracy operations, but indosnisa and malaysia aren't happy the way things go. I have some doubt what China willing to deploy to anticipate this kind of missions, or much less cooperation between US. It might look as a big bully and a small bully come together to kick little countries butt. There are a lot of disputes area, so every one should be careful. If China ever participate into this kind of missions, they would probaly send something less threating.

2. China definite will begin more active in peacekeeping, but you have to remember Chinese policy of not interfere with other countries internal affair since Deng. Even China will do more, doesn't mean they will be taking charge or doing in big numbers. I would whether think China will getting involve with more missions, but not in lead, numbers and some countries. I don't think China needs to send DDG or something more powerful to acheive these kind of missions.

3. Humanitarian assistance will be great way to use amphip, but if China amphip or warships show up in indonesia. They would not be welcome like US did in Tsunami, many south east Asia countries still do not trust China. Also China are content with sending Doctors, aids and equipments now, maybe later China could do more.

My assetment of future PLAN developments are Amphip will not be priorty, but carriers like Varyag would be more likely.

[jackbh]

I think it would be still optimistic for china to have a well train, well developed carrier force by 2020. I have read some where that carrier won't last beyone 2050, so I think China should just by-pass this carrier phase of naval war fare all together. China should move into an agile and fast striking naval force for the future.

[darth sidious]

Sampanviking,
I agreed of what you said, but China do not have what it take to protect their carriers. Maybe twenty years later, but now even China builded six or eight Carriers they could not control the trade lane. And no way China could cut off supply line with enemy force. If China has conflict with the US, USA will control the sea, and these would not change in near future. Whether, China could try to contol their coastline, and subs are better job on that. If you are talking about Japan, Russia, French, india and British, I would rather think DDG, FFG and subs will do better job of carriers. China would need to build few new CV as stopover to Great carriers groups in future, but should not relay not carriers.

I china wants to stop trade lines of her enemy then all she needs if to lok at the german example 50 subs at sea nearly starve out britian now days its alot easier SSM and airsupport

conveying is also impossible now thanls to growth in ship size. China can surive in a war with out the sea but most of her rivials cant especialy japan right now they have supplies for 3 moneth.subs plus a modest number of advanced destroyer is the way to go

[Roger604]

Roger could you please elaborate on this statement. thanks.

Roger, Jeff is correct in this statement above. Nothing at sea except a FAC or future USN LCS is as fast as a USN CVN.

You persuaded me that carriers are fast relative to other surface combatants. But what I'm saying is that future developments in terminal guidance of ballistic missiles may make any target travelling at realistic speeds for a ship (i.e. not supersonic) very vulnerable, especially if said ship is big, flat, expensive, densely staffed and generates a lot of electromagnetic radiation.

Many people have been saying that carriers are becoming obsolete. I think smaller, cheaper carriers will be useful for a while. LPH and Euro-style carriers are probably more along the lines of what China should invest in.

One very stong indication of what PLAN consider more important, that is the secretcy of the project. We all know how much China tried to hide the j10, so what project we are lack of information now shoud be a strong indication for how important the PLAN consider it. SO SSBN and SSN are their first priorty.

Very good point. I agree whole-heartedly. But why do you think that there won't be significant improvements in SSN/SSBN's in the near future? Might 093/094 be a stepping stone just like the new destroyers/frigates? Or is there evidence that China has reached an intractable obstacle in nuclear sub design that it has not in surface combatants?

I don't believe the PRC today has effective "secondary strike" nuclear deterrance, with its limited number of ICBM's. The PLAN should follow British or French model and have at least 4 SSBN's to serve that role.

This is off-topic, but I think China can solve this problem with mobile ICBM's like the Russian Topol or Topol-M. The DF-31A (or DF-41) programs have been a total mystery for many years now. Nobody knows the true state of the ICBM modernization program.

I can think of two main reasons why the PLAN may wish to develop a number of operational Carrier Groups:

i) Protecting China's interests with its increasing overseas trade links and subsequent supply lanes.

ii) Creating an effective second Sea Front against any potential Sea Borne aggressor. This would include not only an ability to strike at any enemy Task Force from Multiple Directions, but also removing any notion of safe zone away from the Chinese Coast. In addition any enemies supply routes and en-route supply facilites would also be vulnerable to counter action action.

I think we can pretty much all agree this would be the goal for PLAN in the post 2020 timeframe.

[KYli]

Darth Sedious,

I agreed China could probaly surive without sea, but you could not use Subs blockade the Japan. Japan is world number one ASW country, China would be much better of using combine DDG/FFG and cruise missles+M9/m11. It would be much more effective. Well I would say only USA could make a full blockade to China, other countries will have hard time to acheive Sea superior.

Roger604,

What I mean is China had encounter great difficult to delevolp their own SSBN and SSN. Xia and Han were so bad that they never put into active serivice. Only after Russia assistance and much more experience for chinese scientists, Xia and Han problems are finally fix. That why I would think China are extremely careful about 93 and 94. They will take a lot of time to study the Subs first, after sucessful trial and test they will build each new pair of them with some modifaction. Yes, you could say 93 and 94 a stepover to next generation of subs, China will do it step by step for experience. After they had what they consider significant improvement and design, then they will develop and build the next generation subs. Well the good comparson will be ZTZ99, ZTZ99G, ZTZ99GG.

[bd popeye]

You persuaded me that carriers are fast relative to other surface combatants. But what I'm saying is that future developments in terminal guidance of ballistic missiles may make any target travelling at realistic speeds for a ship (i.e. not supersonic) very vulnerable, especially if said ship is big, flat, expensive, densely staffed and generates a lot of electromagnetic radiation.

Many people have been saying that carriers are becoming obsolete. I think smaller, cheaper carriers will be useful for a while. LPH and Euro-style carriers are probably more along the lines of what China should invest in.


Thanks for your response Roger.:) I agree, I stated this in other threads, that the PLAN should develop and put to sea it's own smaller type LPH. That type ship would suit the PLAN pourpose. 24-30 helos would be perfect.

If future ballistic missiles are able to track on target as you say. Almost any large war ship may be rendered useless.

[tphuang]

I almost wish I didn't post that ballistic missile article now. Guys, just realize that the article is a speculation for now. There is no reason to assume that it will come out any time soon. So, I guess my point is to not bring ASBM into arguments unless we get further evidences on this.

Anyhow, continuing on this, in order for China to actually have a semi-useful LPH, it would need to do something about the naval helicopter situation. Currently, all we got is Z-9C and some Z-8 (not enough firepower at all). Until I see a naval version of Z-10 coming out, this is likely a pipe dream.

[crobato]

That ballistic missile thing i placed it in my personal "I believe it when I see it" category. There is so many questions there that need to be answered. It also smells like a US election year ruse to get more ABM funding.

[Fairthought]

China's immediate military objective is the retaking of Taiwan. Sundry other goals exist, but it is most effective to pursue this one goal above all else -something akin to 'tunnel vision'.

I would definitely agree with the consensus on this thread that China needs an amphibious assault group or three. It would work well to power project into the south China sea (see Spratly Islands), as well as for sending into relief/rescue missions (eg. Tsunamis), yet still dovetails nicely into adding more material against Taiwan.

LPH's and LPD's are good things for China to have. But there still is no cogent argument on this thread for China to have an expensive, full-fledged aircraft carrier before 2020.

If and when China decides on a carrier, it needs to build a series of them. This is because there is only one purpose for them: challenging the combined American and Japanese fleets in the pacific protecting Taiwan. Until then, to build carriers for any other purpose is a pure waste of Chinese resources.

Any design on the scale of the Varyag is doomed. It needs to be big (80+ planes), and it needs dam good fighter technology -which China won't have until 2020.

People need to abandon this idea of making carriers 'on the cheap'.

[Su-34]

PLAN first priorty should be Subs, especially the 94 and Yuan should be most important. Number two priorty should be DDGs and FFGs, make a bigger version of the 52c with 96 instead 48 h9, and since 54a is coming out soon we will see what it got. I heard at least four is going to come out and have 32SAM16 and 730ciws. Varyag will be a stopover the new CV, and I think new CV will be coming out at around 2010.

I agreed with popeye that it is also very important for PLAN to concentrate building quality, and train the people as much as you should be.

How's the quality of PLAN submarine crews? Are the training for the crewmembers of the PLAN's Type 094 and Type 093s finished yet? Do any one here knows how many PRC citizens join the PLAN annually by average numbers?

[KYli]

How's the quality of PLAN submarine crews? Are the training for the crewmembers of the PLAN's Type 094 and Type 093s finished yet? Do any one here knows how many PRC citizens join the PLAN annually by average numbers?

Having been stuck with the obsolete Romeo and Ming class subs for years, PLAN is only now slowly modernizing its subs fleet. The introduction of Kilo and Song only around 1998, even by then the PLAN crewmen were still inexperience(there are a lot of rumors of problem of crewmenbers).

I would honorly say PLAN crewmen still is not match up to western standard yet. But since few years ago, PLAN put in urgently order for training. Every crewman will train a new crewman in the subs. These kind of training might have been overdone, because an incident of ming few years back is partly blame on too many crewmembers in the sub. But it also bring into question that PLAN urgent needed of experience crewmembers to operate all the new subs that are coming out. These kind of urgency training would likely to improve quality of subs crewmembers greatly.

Type 93 has been under sea trial around 2001/02, so I would think the basic training is complete. Type 94 only has been introducted around 2004, so it might still needed some more time to finish the basic training.

[Su-34]

Having been stuck with the obsolete Romeo and Ming class subs for years, PLAN is only now slowly modernizing its subs fleet. The introduction of Kilo and Song only around 1998, even by then the PLAN crewmen were still inexperience(there are a lot of rumors of problem of crewmenbers).

I would honorly say PLAN crewmen still is not match up to western standard yet. But since few years ago, PLAN put in urgently order for training. Every crewman will train a new crewman in the subs. These kind of training might have been overdone, because an incident of ming few years back is partly blame on too many crewmembers in the sub. But it also bring into question that PLAN urgent needed of experience crewmembers to operate all the new subs that are coming out. These kind of urgency training would likely to improve quality of subs crewmembers greatly.

Type 93 has been under sea trial around 2001/02, so I would think the basic training is complete. Type 94 only has been introducted around 2004, so it might still needed some more time to finish the basic training.

Well, i hope PLAN submariners are trained as well as US Navy submariners by 2008. After all, what's the use of the quietest submarine in the world if the quality of the crew operating it is low. However, do anyone of you here knows whether the PLAN has mastered usage of Kilo class SSKs? Maybe there is someone here that has some insider scoop on PLAN developments, perhaps?:p

[KYli]

Well, i hope PLAN submariners are trained as well as US Navy submariners by 2008. After all, what's the use of the quietest submarine in the world if the quality of the crew operating it is low. However, do anyone of you here knows whether the PLAN has mastered usage of Kilo class SSKs? Maybe there is someone here that has some insider scoop on PLAN developments, perhaps?:p

I don't know anyone here have any insider information, probably not:D . If you are looking for insider scoop on PLAN developments, you should visit DS, warsky,etc. But I could probably safe to say that PLAN has mastered usage of Kilo, they would not order another 8 subs before they are fully sastified. The people at DS and warsky are saying that training and quality of crewmembers have improved.

[Lavi]

Personal opinion is that China is trying to make sure they are part of the big players on the international stage, and in that case they need a true blue-water capability. By the Cuban Crisis of 1962 the Soviet Union was largely focusing on subs, however, the crisis prooved that subs in peacetime can't project power, which is one of the main reasons why USA won (if that is the correct term) the crisis. China soon will, if they have not already, that on the political agenda in peacetime a CVBG ranks higher than subs, although subs perhaps would give more for the same money in war. We still have to remember that the armed forces still are the instruments of the government.

Last I would say that one thing PLAN urgently needs is a vastly updated and increased ASW-capability, mainly in the form of frigates (and destroyers to some extent) and airborne assets.