I didn’t have your intimate socialization with bureaucratic decorum, but my sense on this is the same. Not all CCTV programs are the same. You can tell them apart by whether the show does more color commentary or weather it does more straight stick to the facts uncoloured reporting (often with interviews of actual industry people and active officials).
09V/09VI (095/096) Nuclear Submarine Thread
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
broadsword
Brigadier
Don't forget about the SU-35 saga. Enough OT.
So, I noticed some changes at the potential Bohai SSN/BN complex.
Last year an article on The National Interest by Chris Carlson correctly said a 6m wall between rails to drydock prevents transfer of subs from the rails into the drydock itself
…
But latest satellite images seem to show the wall's gone+rail tracks are at drydock edge:
IMO this is photo confirmation that major renovation is a possibility at the site, and modification to the slipway/drydock is not out of the question, and Henri K's articles over the last year or so about the new facility should be taken very very seriously and I am now a firm believer that the new big building at BSIC is likely for constructing SSNs and SSBNs
Last year an article on The National Interest by Chris Carlson correctly said a 6m wall between rails to drydock prevents transfer of subs from the rails into the drydock itself
…
But latest satellite images seem to show the wall's gone+rail tracks are at drydock edge:
IMO this is photo confirmation that major renovation is a possibility at the site, and modification to the slipway/drydock is not out of the question, and Henri K's articles over the last year or so about the new facility should be taken very very seriously and I am now a firm believer that the new big building at BSIC is likely for constructing SSNs and SSBNs
Yes, the images I posted were dated last June and September. It took a while for GE to update (or at least it's taken me a little while to check lol)
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Can anyone identify those 7 humps of Nuclear submarines at Sanya?
I have no clue about submarine identification although I could try
I have no clue about submarine identification although I could try
by78
General
Not sure if when this study was published or if it applies to PLAN's next-gen nuclear submarines. Nonetheless, I thought it'd be helpful to post it here.
The study is an exploration of a novel pressure hull design that reconciles the size of nuclear reactor and pressure hull diameter. Traditionally, on a nuclear submarine, the reactor is wholly contained within the pressure hull of the reactor compartment (), which in turn determines the maximum overall diameter of pressure hull. This necessitates a trade-off between power output (larger the reactor, greater the power generation) and hull cross-sectional size (larger cross-section increases overall hull size and degrades hydrodynamic performance).
The novel design calls for the reactor compartment pressure hull to conform to the containment vessel, thereby allowing it to protrude from the rest of the pressure hull, meaning a larger reactor can be installed without increasing cross-sectional size.
Note the following graphic is for illustration purposes only and does not mean that a nuclear reactor is to be install so closely to the sail.
The study is an exploration of a novel pressure hull design that reconciles the size of nuclear reactor and pressure hull diameter. Traditionally, on a nuclear submarine, the reactor is wholly contained within the pressure hull of the reactor compartment (), which in turn determines the maximum overall diameter of pressure hull. This necessitates a trade-off between power output (larger the reactor, greater the power generation) and hull cross-sectional size (larger cross-section increases overall hull size and degrades hydrodynamic performance).
The novel design calls for the reactor compartment pressure hull to conform to the containment vessel, thereby allowing it to protrude from the rest of the pressure hull, meaning a larger reactor can be installed without increasing cross-sectional size.
Note the following graphic is for illustration purposes only and does not mean that a nuclear reactor is to be install so closely to the sail.
Last edited:
by78
General
Last batch...
The study concludes that the novel design meets all preliminary requirements (for up to 600m dive depth?). However, the design remains conceptual and more refinements are needed, and many real-world challenges remain (fabrication, physical testing, etc.). Moreover, some areas remain unexplored, such as hull hydrodynamic stability and seakeeping characterics (?) and so on.
My Chinese is limited, so feel free to translate further, make your own additions, and of course point out any errors in my summary.
The study concludes that the novel design meets all preliminary requirements (for up to 600m dive depth?). However, the design remains conceptual and more refinements are needed, and many real-world challenges remain (fabrication, physical testing, etc.). Moreover, some areas remain unexplored, such as hull hydrodynamic stability and seakeeping characterics (?) and so on.
My Chinese is limited, so feel free to translate further, make your own additions, and of course point out any errors in my summary.
Last edited:
Last batch...
The study concludes that the novel design meets all preliminary requirements (for up to 600m dive depth?). However, the design remains conceptual and more refinements are needed, and many real-world challenges remain (fabrication, physical testing, etc.). Moreover, some areas remain unexplored, such as hull hydrodynamic stability and seakeeping characterics (?) and so on.
My Chinese is limited, so feel free to translate further, make your own additions, and of course point out any errors in my summary.
Thanks for the post, very informative. Your translation of the conclusion is accurate except one thing, see the red underline.
I believe you translated the red underlined texts as "hull hydrodynamic stability and seakeeping characterics". It should have been "dynamic characteristics of the structure". The "dynamic" here is not hydrodynamic but "mechanical dynamic". The author stated the premises of the study being static pressure of 600 meters. The subject is the hull being still under that pressure. The "missing" part is the understanding of the force, pressure and stress on the hull when it is moving and turning.
Also, remember the Chinese is most likely going for double hull design, the hydrodynamic performance would be the concern of the outer hull, not the pressure hull in this article.
Another thing that worth to mention is that this study is aimed to address the size (tall) issue of "natural circulation reactor".