Chinese submarines thread

[crobato]

Originally Posted by Raptoreyes

I have heard that most Chinese conventional battery and fuel cell boats make more noise then then US Nuclear boats of the LA and SeaWolf class. Its my understanding that most Chinese conventional boats have a noise level relative to current US/British passive sonar detection similar to early model Sturgeon SSN's retired from the US inventory against sonar of the period it was considered contemporary However the source is one I can only rate as moderately reliable.

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats. While soviet subtech sometimes surpassed American subs in dive depth, and top speed the soviet never really made a boat that came very close in quieting and number of weapons reloads/weapons range. The Akula SSB Oscar SSGN and Sierra SSN boats are said to have closed the gap somewhat.

Given all that how much better do the Chinese expect to do then the Russians did? Have the Chinese borrowed enough technology from America to avoid having their boats taken out at an embarrassing kill ratio vs US Subs should a subtitle naval war erupt. Due to the nature of submarine warfare attrition is not a bennift to the Chinese as it just means the undersea portion of the USN has more to shoot at with the same risk factor per engagement.

I am going to ask you are you asking questions to provoke people here or not? If any of your sources is from Strategypage, consider it unreliable.

Now for the serious questions we don't know what the real noise levels of the subs are. In peacetime, you like to keep that from potential gatherers, so you will need to obscure your real signature, even if it has to use noise generators. Personally I don't think they are as quiet as the latest Western sub designs, but nonetheless they are featuring some modern quieting features such as closed limber holes, anecholic tiles and skewed propellers, so their technology level is right up to the LA-Akula class of boats. Personally I must also add that Chinese subs appeared to have improved rather late---2004 is the crucial year. That is why they are all of sudden in a major build surge starting only from that year. Previous to that year, their designs have been hit and miss, testbeds with issues that need working out. The discovery of the Yuan was a major surprise for everyone in that year, since it has become questionable that the production and movement of the subs can be tracked.

Soviet subs have some noise issues that come from design decisions the Chinese are not sharing. For example, many Soviet subs have twin reactors, while US and everyone else submarines, including the Chinese, only have one. (There is only US SSN ever to have two reactors). Many Soviet subs also have two propellers and still kept that arrangement when US subs have shifted from two propellers to a single one (despite Rickover's objection).

So when you have two reactors, two reduction gears, two driving shafts and two props, you will make at least double the noise compared to a set up where you only have one of each. The Chinese nuclear subs don't have these issues; they all use single reactors, single prop arrangements, even with the Han and Xia class. If it is true that the 093 and 094 class have turbine electric drive (an idea the French used with their nuclear subs), by all means expect to be a bit more quiet since they removed one noise making factor and that is the gearbox. Do note the considerable French flavor in the PLAN development in other fields.

Lets compare the Songs and the Yuans against the Kilos, for example. The Kilos, like many earlier and small conventional submarines, don't even passive low frequency flank sonars that are used for long range detection. But the Chinese had the foresight to add them to the Song and the Yuans. The Russians never had passive flank sonars on a conventional until the first Lada class came out, so the Chinese actually beat them to it. The latest Google Earth measurements put the Songs and Yuans right to the size levels of the Collins and Oyashio class, among the largest diesel boats built and size helps in making a sub quieter. Frankly there is not a lot of diesel boats with passive flank sonars, because of space issues, and usually it is the few bigger diesel boats in the world that do. You also need to put your diving planes in the sail so the planes won't interfere with the flank sonars, which is one reason the Kilo is a bad design to put a set of flank sonars.

In addition to that, by having more space in the Song and Yuans, there is more room for batteries, which means more electrical power for sensors and command centers, and more room for reloads.

There is also the fact that these subs are capable of firing AshMs underwater and now feature their own wire guided heavyweight torpedo, the YU-6.

To be honest, I am not perfectly satisfied with the current state of Chinese sub designs, but I am not a professional, only an amateur's opinion. In my opinion as it goes, PLAN crews need to train more in farther waters, and the Chinese sub designs still have room for improvement, compared to the latest sub designs were are seeing, but it does not make the current subs are something you can expect to walkover. The experience with the Song with the Kitty Hawk which has deeply surprised many and shook a deep fundamental nerve shows they cannot be underestimated.

[PrOeLiTeZ]

Originally Posted by Raptoreyes

I have heard that most Chinese conventional battery and fuel cell boats make more noise then then US Nuclear boats of the LA and SeaWolf class. Its my understanding that most Chinese conventional boats have a noise level relative to current US/British passive sonar detection similar to early model Sturgeon SSN's retired from the US inventory against sonar of the period it was considered contemporary However the source is one I can only rate as moderately reliable.

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats. While soviet subtech sometimes surpassed American subs in dive depth, and top speed the soviet never really made a boat that came very close in quieting and number of weapons reloads/weapons range. The Akula SSB Oscar SSGN and Sierra SSN boats are said to have closed the gap somewhat.

Given all that how much better do the Chinese expect to do then the Russians did? Have the Chinese borrowed enough technology from America to avoid having their boats taken out at an embarrassing kill ratio vs US Subs should a subtitle naval war erupt. Due to the nature of submarine warfare attrition is not a bennift to the Chinese as it just means the undersea portion of the USN has more to shoot at with the same risk factor per engagement.

Seems to me that this post that you sent, is indicating that China submarine fleet is a push over in battle. What is impressive is how the the PLAN is jumping technology so quick, being equipped with single SSBN and couple SSN that are refurbished old era nuclear first generation subs. To second generation much much improved nuclear subs with minimal estimates at moment of 2 SSBN and 2 SSN.

As to diesel subs from being equipped to old era Soviet subs Ming, Romeo to larger more capable domestic Yuan, Song subs. As to crobato post #976 with more room it gives room for more batteries, equipment, operating area and also which I think is important for the crew is less strain mentally if it was more confined with smaller subs. Early generation Soviet subs mentally strained some of the Soviet operators, due to their confined operating space.

[Roger604]

Originally Posted by Raptoreyes

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats.

In the past few months or so, enough information has appeared about the current generation of Chinese nuke subs -- Type 093 and Type 094 -- that earlier estimates had to be completely revised.

Before the semi-official unveiling of Type 093, estimates of Type 093 quieting dated back to the late 90's, early 2000's level, which was something like Victor III. Even estimates of the quieting level in 2003/2004 were around early LA class levels.

But given the serial production of this model, and the confidence the navy has shown, the current best estimates are that it's a match for late model LA class or Akula class. Anything worse than that, the PLAN would not consider adequate to fully commit too.

The same applies to Type 094. It's probably around the same technology level as the early Ohios, but a bit noisier since it's not as big.

Originally Posted by Raptoreyes

If your captain of a conventional sub your only possible means of survival AFTER launch would be to fire just above a strong thermal layer launch a noise maker and then duck under the layer within seconds of firing your ordinance. If your a Chinese boat trying to use your Vertical launch Tubes, then this option does not work most of the time but for torpedo's I would give this sort of attack run a 5-10% chance at the most for the firing conventional sub to escape. (assuming they the sub fires at an American surface group but better odds if they fire at commerse and avoid military vessels)

Chinese subs can fire anti-ship missiles with ranges around 300 km. As long as it knows the approximate location of its target, it's in no danger at all from this far away.


The Chinese have successfully led on the US about its sub capabilities for a while. Like crobato said, the Yuan, Shang and Jin were developed, put into service and serial produced all without other countries knowing about them.

[Pointblank]

Originally Posted by Roger604

Chinese subs can fire anti-ship missiles with ranges around 300 km. As long as it knows the approximate location of its target, it's in no danger at all from this far away.

But the hit probability is decreased immensely. The farther you fire out, the less the probability you will hit your target. Especially when your missile does not have mid course correction capability.

[crobato]

Originally Posted by Pointblank

But the hit probability is decreased immensely. The farther you fire out, the less the probability you will hit your target. Especially when your missile does not have mid course correction capability.

Figure out why there are Y-8s (High New) are carrying the H-6H's surface search radars with a Light Bulb datalink on the back on the tail. The PLAN had long figured out they needed such a datalink infrastructure in the first place, to support the YJ-83s launched from 022s to upgraded old ships that don't have OTH targeting radars.

[Pointblank]

Originally Posted by crobato

Figure out why there are Y-8s (High New) are carrying the H-6H's surface search radars with a Light Bulb datalink on the back on the tail. The PLAN had long figured out they needed such a datalink infrastructure in the first place, to support the YJ-83s launched from 022s to upgraded old ships that don't have OTH targeting radars.

Assuming they don't get shot down by the CAP...

[Raptoreyes]

Originally Posted by Pointblank

Assuming they don't get shot down by the CAP...

Their is also the little matter of having enough VLT conventional subs in one area to overload a carrier battle groups defenses. I can see the Chinese SSK's overloading carrier defenses if they had support from land based missiles otherwise pointed at Taiwan but overloading a CBG out away from land based missiles with sub lanched missiles alone is a long shot.

Keeping the aircraft guidance up long enough as the last poster said is unlikely with a decently handled CAP.

[crobato]

Originally Posted by Pointblank

Assuming they don't get shot down by the CAP...

Assuming the CAP isn't busy fighting off another CAP...

But then again, AshMs can also be set on a search pattern mode. Given the size of a ship, the size of the seeker array, the potential acquisition range is only limited by the radar horizon. A seeker envelope of a radius of 40 to 50km is quite possible.

The acoustic signature of a ship can be picked up far away by a submarine, and these rough coordinates can be fed to que the AshM before launch to head to the general area.

[maozedong]

I don't think chinese SSk away from land based missiles with sub lanched missiles alone is a long shot.C-602,C-803 range 200km,3M54E club range 300km.
the SSKs just need sea and air support,disrupted the CBG anti-sub capability. as they like wolves, they can any time enter the aircraft carrier 200 km-300km area.
But I want to know the missiles can perforated rigid hull of carrier?-- club and YJ system.

[tphuang]

Stay away from politics in this thread. Any further discussion on political stuff will be deleted.

[Thery]

Although I believe that the recent PLAN development is mainly because Taiwan issue, but I do not think this going be the future plan. China sure already realized the needs for a blue water navy to protect her oversea interest to sustain her economic growth. Therefore, I believe PLAN sub program should slowly focus toward SSN instead SSK. They may continue produce SSK but I believe the size of SSK will shrink to increase their effectiveness under littoral water.

Editted: Removed the political part

[PrOeLiTeZ]

??? Why is politics involved in a submarine thread??? Any news or articles that gives hint about 093 and 094 nuclear reactor powerplant?

[Thery]

Originally Posted by PrOeLiTeZ

??? Why is politics involved in a submarine thread??? Any news or articles that gives hint about 093 and 094 nuclear reactor powerplant?

From what I read 093 and 094 are likely using Pressurized water reactor (PWR). Although some people do clam that they are using High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR), however already have people pointing out HTGR require way more space compare to PWR which is limited to SSN and SSBN. Moreover Russia has matured PWR technology, if 093 and 094 really receive help from Russia, then PWR is more possible.

[maozedong]

093/94 British Jane's Defense Weekly in 1997, 1998, a succession of reports. It is Russia and China can learn from CIII-class SSN PW2G closed loop pressure-PWR technology products. At the same time basis for Jane's Defense Weekly reported that at that time, China also sent to Russia in batches of about 200 trainees.
PWS PWR type of muffler shielding ability. At present, China's nuclear power technologies that have already mastered, but now the 093/094 PWR used in accordance with the British Jane's Defense Weekly reports in the use of both the Russian part of the nuclear power technology. China's nuclear-powered submarines are accustomed to regarding themselves as the "final support" then for China's military might alone is very emotional can not be fully accepted.
PWS PWR type of muffler shielding ability. At present, China's nuclear power technologies that have already mastered, but now the 093/094 PWR used in accordance with the British Jane's Defense Weekly reports in the use of both the Russian part of the nuclear power technology. China's nuclear-powered submarines are accustomed to regarding themselves as the "final support" then for China's military might alone is very emotional can not be fully accepted.
093,094 is not too satisfied with the performance of the Chinese military requirements. For example, 093 front missile launch muzzles only one of the top vertical launch muzzle, HN-NX used to launch missiles. Transmit missile internal structure of a similar SLV-runner. Each combat posture can be fired only once.
rumoured China research 095 and 096

[crobato]

I think this thread is too long now. Better close it, stick it and start a new one.