09V/09VI (095/096) Nuclear Submarine Thread

[tphuang]

First Virginia took around 1 year and a half to be commissioned post launch while Seawolf took two years. So soonest we can except the first 09V to be comissioned in mid-2027 and latest some time in early 2028. Although that is just IOC, FOC will probably take a while longer.

if you look at 093, it took 3 years. I'd imagine similar time frame for 09V.

IMO the true bigger question is whether 09IIIB will be succeeded by say, a smaller diameter (10m esque) new SSN (which is more economical, lower performing, but similar technologically) to complement the 12.Xm 09V -- or if PLAN will be bold enough to eventually go all in on 09V family once 09IIIB finishes production.

The only rationale for that imo would be cost, but you sacrifice a lot of capabilities with that.

High low end of 09V & 041 makes more sense to me where the latter can replace all the SSKs eventually for missions within 2IC. And XLUUV replaces other SSK tasks.

Production of 09IIIB may continue until all earlier versions of 09III are replaced.
Initial batch of 09V may comprise just two boats followed by evaluation period, another reason for keeping the yard busy with more 09IIIB.

09IIIB production and 09III retirement are really not related. The former needs to happen until 09V is in mass production. once 09V reaches dumpling stage, I see no reason why 09IIIB needs to continue.

Even for Russian/Soviet, Victor III continued production into early 90s.

 

[Aspide]

09IIIB production and 09III retirement are really not related. The former needs to happen until 09V is in mass production. once 09V reaches dumpling stage, I see no reason why 09IIIB needs to continue.

Even for Russian/Soviet, Victor III continued production into early 90s.

Probably poor wording on my behalf. I was trying to say, that China needs numbers and to stay on the safe side 09IIIB may be produced until sufficient numbers are reached, allowing ample time for 09V to mature and enter mass production. Actually, VictorIII was produced for exactly the same reason as it was a VictorII using electronics and some weapons from Sierra and Akula.

 

[Blitzo]

Seems strange they'll go with a two tiered system especially when the lower end is already handled by SSKs leaving only high end missions to SSNs of which you'd probably want the best for those anyways.

Well, that's the thing we don't know what they would go with.
SSKs and SSNs of course are not even in the same category, so if it's a matter of looking at tiers of SSNs, I suspect the primary factor for being able to build "only 09Vs" (eventually) versus a mix of 09V and 09IIIB for a long time (or a mix of 09V and "future hypothetical 10m diameter SSN") would be cost.

Anyhow I don't see 09IIIB being in production for any longer than absolutely required, 688i level of noise has little place in future undersea combat.

I wouldn't say it has little place -- it all depends on other factors. But it is probably the minimum baseline ticket for entry.

Is there anything from the grapevine about this? I use the 052D/055 analogy in that I don't really see a single hull clean sheet successor to the 09IIIB much like we don't see a clean sheet destroyer in the 052D's weight class. I could see a 09IIIC or 09IIIB Pro Max that keeps the double hull architecture while iterating with improved technology from the 09V program (even fundamental tech like the reactor, much like the 052D is getting a new generation of gas turbines).

Not that I'm aware of tbh, but what do I know.
I would say that imo 09IIIB has probably maxed out its hullform (except for if they choose to lengthen it, but I can't see that being too desirable).

I don't want to derail the discussion too much about a "hypothetical next gen 10m diameter SSN" given 09V has barely even left the oven and we start thinking about cost optimization and fleet structure etc. For all we know 09V is just the new standard.

A basic layman's question: are there any rumors regarding whether the 09V uses a standard or shaft less pump jet propulsion?

I suppose we should assume it to be standard, given the conservative nature of the PLA, but one could hope...

There are no rumours that 09V uses a shaftless pumpjet.

About a decade ago there was a misperception that the "next gen nuclear submarine" would use a shaftless propeller (i.e.: rimdrive) but that was a mistake based on misreading an interview with Adm Ma.

Instead what he had said was that a "next gen nuclear submarine" would use electric drive (very different to shaftless/rimdrive propulsion).


As it stands, a shaftless/rimdrive propulsion is likely not considered feasible for a full size submarine.

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Something not mentioned enough is the UUVs. It's a system of submarines with the UUVs. So we have the 095, 093B, 041, 039, and various UUVs.

 

[tamsen_ikard]

Didn't you just say in your previous post 1682 that the sub is no longer important? did you change your mind?

I talked about how vulnerable submarines are themselves to modern technology advances when it comes to sensors and detection platforms proliferation. Submarines are less of a game changer as some people claim to be. US is the prime culprit on this, where plenty of US anti-China hawks claim they can easily beat China due to Virginia class.

But I do believe China overall will resemble US navy when it comes to platforms. So, it will slowly reduce its SSK count and focus on nuclear subs. Nuclear subs are clearly much more capable and superior than SSKs.

But how much money China should invest on acquiring these SSNs and how many they should have is a different discussion.

Every Yuan PLA spends on these expensive subs, could be spent on something else such as more aircraft carriers or more unmanned systems.

What I want to see from China is not just replicating US capabilities, but entirely new capabilities that changes warfare completely, a true game changer. Something that suits China's industrial strengths.

Manned submarines is probably not that game changer. Perhaps unmanned UUVs will be.

 

[mister unknown]

I talked about how vulnerable submarines are themselves to modern technology advances when it comes to sensors and detection platforms proliferation. Submarines are less of a game changer as some people claim to be. US is the prime culprit on this, where plenty of US anti-China hawks claim they can easily beat China due to Virginia class.

But I do believe China overall will resemble US navy when it comes to platforms. So, it will slowly reduce its SSK count and focus on nuclear subs. Nuclear subs are clearly much more capable and superior than SSKs.

But how much money China should invest on acquiring these SSNs and how many they should have is a different discussion.

Every Yuan PLA spends on these expensive subs, could be spent on something else such as more aircraft carriers or more unmanned systems.

What I want to see from China is not just replicating US capabilities, but entirely new capabilities that changes warfare completely, a true game changer. Something that suits China's industrial strengths.

Manned submarines is probably not that game changer. Perhaps unmanned UUVs will be.

If that's UUVs are the game changer, then we need some kind of platform that can effectively bring relatively small UUVs out to blue water environments, or we need to have small UUVs be blue water worthy.

 

[charles18]

I talked about how vulnerable submarines are themselves to modern technology advances when it comes to sensors and detection platforms proliferation. Submarines are less of a game changer as some people claim to be. US is the prime culprit on this, where plenty of US anti-China hawks claim they can easily beat China due to Virginia class.
...

I agree.
The major bottleneck of ASW is not the cost of putting a hydrophones or sonar buoys in the ocean but the cost of paying sonar men to interpret the signals. The cost of human labor is expensive. Once computer AI can perform this job satisfactorily at a fraction of current costs, what's to stop a navy from putting double, quadruple, or maybe 10 times as many sensors into the ocean?

How can a submarine hide when there is 10 times as many "ears" listening on its location?
I don't know if submarines will completely lose their military value and go the way of the battleship, but they will definitely be less important in the future.
That is a guarantee.

 

[Blitzo]

I think the discussion is deviating too much from the thread topic at this point.

Further posts on general ASW/UUVs will be deleted.

 

[AndrewS]

From a requirements perspective, I think there are 2 distinct operating environments, which argues for 2 submarine types.

1. Long-range deep waters, where friendly air support is not available. To be covered by the Type-095 SS(G)N

2. Nearby and shallow water operations, where there is friendly air support. To be covered by the Type-041 SSK(N)

So I don't see any utility in developing in a 10m diameter nuclear submarine anytime soon.

It wouldn't be that much cheaper in terms of unit cost, considering it would still be about 7000 tonnes compared to the 9000-10000 tonnes for the Type-095 SSN

Then add in all the development costs and the additional costs involved with producing and supporting 2 similar SSN designs. Plus it would inevitably delay the production ramp up of the Type-095.

---

Having said that, perhaps in 15 years, a 10m diameter 7000 tonne nuclear submarine might make sense, if:

1. there are enough Type-095 already in service
and
2. the Chinese Navy sees enough future demand for both the Type-095 and a smaller 10m diameter 7000 tonne nuclear submarine.

 

[Dante80]

If I could wager a guess, I'd say that 095 is intended to replace 093 in production.
When it will or whether it even will depends on a couple of factors.

1. Testing the 095 design in service.
2. Finishing the current batch of procured 093s.

I don't think PLAN wants to succeed 093 with a different clean sheet design for a smaller SSN, and have that run in parallel to the larger 095.

SSKs or possible SSK(N)s is a different category altogether, I don't think PLAN even views them as an either/or to SSNs.
For pretty obvious, but off-topic to analyze here reasons.