To deal with torpedo or antisubmarine, 095 needs to be the J36 of submarine. It needs underwater loyalman to do the ISR.
In this age, I don't prefer submarine vs submarine.
09V/09VI (095/096) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
To deal with torpedo or antisubmarine, 095 needs to be the J36 of submarine. It needs underwater loyalman to do the ISR.
In this age, I don't prefer submarine vs submarine.
I am trying to understand how much of a game changer is the 095 in an actual US vs China warfare.
Anti-Sub warfare has advanced to the point where Subs can be detected using ASDIC, Drones, Helicopters, Petrol planes. I feel like situation is similar to the battle of the atlantic where German U-Boats were hunted down and destroyed thanks to Planes and Sonars.
Yes, a sub can probably get closer than a surface ship to the enemy carrier strike group and launch its anti-ship missiles, but how much of a difference does it make compared to a drone swarm attack or a mass hypersonic missiles attack from surface ships.
Is this just a matter of ticking the boxes at this point for China? US has it so we must have it too?
Anti-Sub warfare has advanced to the point where Subs can be detected using ASDIC, Drones, Helicopters, Petrol planes. I feel like situation is similar to the battle of the atlantic where German U-Boats were hunted down and destroyed thanks to Planes and Sonars.
Yes, a sub can probably get closer than a surface ship to the enemy carrier strike group and launch its anti-ship missiles, but how much of a difference does it make compared to a drone swarm attack or a mass hypersonic missiles attack from surface ships.
Is this just a matter of ticking the boxes at this point for China? US has it so we must have it too?
Well this would basically repeat what China had already done with 09II and 09IV. Both are simply stretched versions of their SSN counterparts (with minor adaptions to accommodate the modifications).
I'd say its not an unsound approach per se. But that very much depends on assumptions/requirements of the SLBM development pathway China intends to take. End of the day SSBNs are still designed around the payload they carry, not the other way around.
antiterror13
Brigadier
wowww, that interesting comments, especially from you
in short, without a sub, your navy is a sitting duck in open ocean
If the 092 and 094 SSBNs are stretched versions of their SSN counterparts, then the SSBNs are really reusing most of the existing SSN design, rather than the SSBN being designed around the payload.
---
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of Chinese SSBNs because I think that even if they are quieter than ocean background noise levels, they are still too vulnerable.
China doesn't have suitable bastion areas like Russia.
Nor does China have unrestricted access to a vast "friendly" ocean for the SSBN to hide, unlike the USA, France or UK.
So I think China should concentrate on land-based ICBMs over SLBMs.
---
Maybe they build another 4-6 SSBNs. But that will be far fewer than the number of SSNs we can expect.
So it is just easier to reuse the existing SSN design as much as possible.
NB. That assumes they don't have a new larger SSBN/SSGN design (20,000+ tonnes?) which has the numbers required to justify a new class.
Last edited:
I don't think so, a submarine's main weapon is concealment. What has happened in the last 30-40 years? We have had an absolute explosion of sensor technology, signal processing and AI based detection. In the foreseeble future, we will likely see underwater unmanned drone subs, underwater sensor networks, drone swarms with sunobuoys and magnetic detection systems.
If your only weapon of survival is concealment, your options are dwindling, cause sensors are advancing faster than submarine quieting technology.
Once a submarine is detected, its pretty much dead, cause its not fast enough to run away. It also does not have any kind of interception capability that surface ships have.
Overall, the trend is towards more transparency on the battlefield, not less, and submarines are not a good candidate to survive such a battlefield.
I don't want to put all eggs in one basket saying submarine is 100% game changer. Submarine is 50% needed, and drone swarm is the other 50%.
I have posted a video link on the US military. Unmanned Torpedo launching drones.
No, because the rationale of Project 09 was to develop a sea-based deterrent, and the SSN (then Type 09I) was a risk reduction measure for developing the SSBN platform. There's lengthy documented discussions involving Mao, Deng and others in that regard.
What China had done in the 1990s was basically a repeat of that approach. The SSN was never the objective then, it was a support measure for the SSBN effort.
What PRC officials are thinking now in terms of new developments I cannot say, obviously.
It’s a matter of having high leverage and surgical options in your tactical toolkit. Try to think about weapons systems less as magical wunderkind do everything bullets and more as tools in a toolkit. Maybe a flat head screw driver is less useful in a more complex technical context but would you want to have a toolbox with no flatheads? Of course not. The point of any single kind of weapons platform is to exploit situational advantage.
Last edited:
Sail 20m from bow? That doesn't seem too far back like it does in satellite imagery. It looks to me around 30m back but I haven't measured.
This is a 15m Sail 20m from Bow vs Sail 30m from Bow. Model is 110m Long.
Last edited: