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

[ismellcopium]

I would disagree with this prioritisation of the Type-095 to be used against equivalent SSNs in blue-water scenarios, as it is a difficult mission and there are better uses.

If they were to operate as SSGNs in the Eastern Pacific with a 1500km missile, they could now target:

1. The naval bases (and associated stationary ships) in Seattle and San Diego
2. The B-21 factory in California
3. The F-35 factory in Texas
4. The Panama Canal
etc etc

This has a far greater tactical and strategic payoff:

1. Ships in port are a much easier target
2. The US now has to consider the prospect of large-scale attacks on CONUS, if the US declares war on China
3. It forces the US to spend more on air defence and ballistic missile defence
4. It forces the US to deploy its SSNs and provide escorts in the Eastern Pacific, away from the Western Pacific.

---

Acting as SSGNs is also an easier tasking, considering that they are actively avoiding contact with any warship or submarine, rather than trying to approach a hostile contact.

SSGNs are still obviously terrible for homeland strikes for the same reason they would be against China... What's the total salvo depth they can offer, how many targets are there in CONUS and what effect can each missile achieve per target? Particularly for the kind of large scale industrial/broad purpose strikes you bring up, that's not their utility.

 

[Tomboy]

SSGNs are still obviously terrible for homeland strikes for the same reason they would be against China... What's the total salvo depth they can offer, how many targets are there in CONUS and what effect can each missile achieve per target? Particularly for the kind of large scale industrial/broad purpose strikes you bring up, that's not their utility.

Though realistically it's the only viable way for mass strike on CONUS. H-20 is unlikely capable of such strikes.

If PLAN builds a similar amount of SSGNs are planned Virginias with VPM, they could rotate these submarines off the coasts with almost constant presence and with each submarine capable of 64-80+ VLS you can do quite alot of damage, especially with HGV or HCM that are extremely difficult to intercept.

 

[bsdnf]

Though realistically it's the only viable way for mass strike on CONUS. H-20 is unlikely capable of such strikes.

If PLAN builds a similar amount of SSGNs are planned Virginias with VPM, they could rotate these submarines off the coasts with almost constant presence and with each submarine capable of 64-80+ VLS you can do quite alot of damage, especially with HGV or HCM that are extremely difficult to intercept.

yes, SSGN with YJ-17/YJ-XX HCM is a nightmare. We all know that HGV/HCM can sacrifice range to lower their flight altitude, which makes early warning and interception extremely difficult.

 

[mister unknown]

I would disagree with this prioritisation of the Type-095 to be used against equivalent SSNs in blue-water scenarios, as it is a difficult mission and there are better uses.

If they were to operate as SSGNs in the Eastern Pacific with a 1500km missile, they could now target:

1. The naval bases (and associated stationary ships) in Seattle and San Diego
2. The B-21 factory in California
3. The F-35 factory in Texas
4. The Panama Canal
etc etc

This has a far greater tactical and strategic payoff:

1. Ships in port are a much easier target
2. The US now has to consider the prospect of large-scale attacks on CONUS, if the US declares war on China
3. It forces the US to spend more on air defence and ballistic missile defence
4. It forces the US to deploy its SSNs and provide escorts in the Eastern Pacific, away from the Western Pacific.

---

Acting as SSGNs is also an easier tasking, considering that they are actively avoiding contact with any warship or submarine, rather than trying to approach a hostile contact.

As others mentioned, for strikes of that scale, we probably need a very large number of 09Vs, or better yet a larger, dedicated SSGN. That's a great long term aspiration, but probably not a feasible short term goal.

 

[mister unknown]

One more thought regarding the prospect of large scale SSGN strike missions vs the CONUS - I'm no submariner, but I would guess that this is the type of thing that requires more than just adequate quantity & quality of SSGNs.

If we're going to play hide & seek near CONUS home waters, I would assume need crews that are well experienced in long endurance missions, and also at least some degree of terrain knowledge (e.g. water temperatures, currents, underwater rock formations & mountains, US patrol patterns & underwater sensor locations, etc.), & other nuances that submariners can probably name off better than me.

This is the type of institutional & tribal knowledge that needs to be built up over a long period of multiple deployments by multiple boats.

I don't think none of us knows how long far out the PLAN has gone with its 09IIIs, but I would guess not enough to competently operate near CONUS home waters. Hawaii maybe? Anyone care to share any rumors they may have heard as to how far out PLAN SSNs might have patrolled up to now?

So again, great aspiration, but probably something we need to build up to over a long period of time unfortunately.

 

[Tomboy]

US continental shelf is only on average 200nmi out from the coast, beyond there a 09V can easily hide in the deep waters and be quiet enough to evade sensor networks. It would also be close enough for HCMs and HGVs to be in range of basically all major installations even inland ones.

 

[mister unknown]

US continental shelf is only on average 200nmi out from the coast, beyond there a 09V can easily hide in the deep waters and be quiet enough to evade sensor networks. It would also be close enough for HCMs and HGVs to be in range of basically all major installations even inland ones.

We probably still need to scope out the area & do some patrols beforehand right? Now granted if we had even longer ranged missiles (e.g. something like a DF-27 or CJ-1000) our geographic options increase dramatically, but then we're probably going to trade off salvo size.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Though realistically it's the only viable way for mass strike on CONUS. H-20 is unlikely capable of such strikes.

If PLAN builds a similar amount of SSGNs are planned Virginias with VPM, they could rotate these submarines off the coasts with almost constant presence and with each submarine capable of 64-80+ VLS you can do quite alot of damage, especially with HGV or HCM that are extremely difficult to intercept.

A few survivable bombers will easily bring same LACM salvo as SSGN. And will do it again and again.

 

[tphuang]

Though realistically it's the only viable way for mass strike on CONUS. H-20 is unlikely capable of such strikes.

If PLAN builds a similar amount of SSGNs are planned Virginias with VPM, they could rotate these submarines off the coasts with almost constant presence and with each submarine capable of 64-80+ VLS you can do quite alot of damage, especially with HGV or HCM that are extremely difficult to intercept.

093B should already be capable of strikes against CONUS. Of course, 095 would be better for that role. I don’t think SSGN is an immediate priority but longer term (say 2035), it makes a lot of sense for all the provided reasons.

 

[mister unknown]

US continental shelf is only on average 200nmi out from the coast, beyond there a 09V can easily hide in the deep waters and be quiet enough to evade sensor networks. It would also be close enough for HCMs and HGVs to be in range of basically all major installations even inland ones.

Hmmm, come to think of it, I wonder to what extent long range UUVs can accelerate the terrain & climate mapping process (especially if we build a nuclear powered one)... We'll just have to build in contingencies for when the US inevitably tries to jam the comms & hijack one of our drones.