Plan Type 095/096 Nuclear Submarine Thread

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Hendrik_2000, Nov 27, 2017.

  1. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,055
    Likes Received:
    8,003
    question is does China really need such a rate of SSBN and SSN construction ?
     
  2. Hyperwarp
    Offline

    Hyperwarp Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,346
    Likes Received:
    4,252
    Most certainly yes! A new class of SSN couldn't come sooner.
     
    antiterror13 and weig2000 like this.
  3. weig2000
    Online

    weig2000 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    1,688
    Too bad, I can't up-vote you 10 times! It's been taking too long for the next-generation SSN. The good news is that it appears 095 is either already under construction or ready to start. By all means, China needs to build 30+ 095 and its improved versions by the early '30s. They need to build 2-3 095 a year at least.
     
  4. Dante80
    Offline

    Dante80 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2018
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    35
    It's not only about the rate itself, it is about the a priori capability to have it if/when you need to scale up production.

    To give a fast example, Lanzhou and Haikou were launched in 2003. It took almost 7 years of trials - and tribulations - for PLAN to thoroughly test the ships, their integrated weapon systems and come up with a plan to both improve them and make more of them efficiently. Then, from 2011 since today we have seen another 20 of their brethren - including the upgraded Kunming class - roll out of the shipyard. With another 8 on the way, and 8 more of the larger Renhai class coming too.

    If Dalian and Jiangnan didn't have (or attain via upgrading) the capability and capacity to speed up production, things would be a lot different today.

    Now, you could argue that China does not EVER need to have said capability for SSN and SSBN construction. Judging from the apparent requirement though for a strong 2nd strike cap according to their NFU nuclear posture, as well as the need to field a proper SSN for CVBG escort, hunter and defensive duties, I think that it is more plausible that PLAN does not share said argument.
     
    N00813, antiterror13 and Hendrik_2000 like this.
  5. Broccoli
    Offline

    Broccoli Junior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    508
    Chinese Navy certainly needs increase construction because they are lacking behind both US and Russia due entering later on the boomer game. Russia has currently ten active boomers (Delta III, Delta IV's, and Boreis) while adding four more Borei before 2025 and i'm thinking China is targeting similar numbers.
     
  6. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    6,695
    Likes Received:
    22,503
    Type 95 will be generational leap compare to her predecessor better power plant, quieter hull, more potent weapon, better communication
    Chinese scientists make progress on nuclear submarine communication
    • Researchers conduct test transmission of real-time data between deep ocean transponders and Beidou navigation satellite system in western Pacific
    • Analysts say it could benefit China’s fledgling nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine fleet
    PUBLISHED : Saturday, 02 February, 2019, 9:03pm

    [​IMG]


    1 Feb 2019
    China’s nuclear submarines may be stealthier and better able to communicate in the deep ocean after progress was made on key technology, according to state media.

    People’s Daily reported on Friday that a successful test transmission of real-time high-capacity data between deep ocean transponders and the Beidou navigation satellite system had been carried out.

    Marine research ship Kexue, or “Science”, conducted the test in the western Pacific along with several other missions on a 74-day trip before returning to its home base of Qingdao, Shandong on Thursday.

    Next stop Guam? China shows off its next generation DF-41 and DF-26 ballistic missiles
    Wang Fan, one of the marine scientists aboard the vessel, told the state newspaper important progress had been made.

    “This technology … significantly increases the safety, independence and reliability of deep ocean data transmission,” Wang said, adding that using China’s Beidou system meant the submarines no longer had to rely on foreign satellites for such communication.

    “The transponder with Beidou, at a depth of 6,000 metres, has been safely in operation for more than a month now and it is working well,” Wang said.

    [​IMG]


    Real-time underwater transmission of temperature, salinity and currents data at the 6,000 metres depth – with transponders relaying signals every 100 or 500 metres – was “another big breakthrough” for the team, Wang added.

    They did this using a combination of inductive coupling and underwater acoustic communication technologies, the scientist said.

    China makes ‘big progress’ on nuclear strike range with new submarine-launched missile
    Although the report did not give details on data size or quality of the transmission, the technology – when fully developed – could be useful to China’s submarines, especially its fledgling nuclear-powered ballistic missile-carrying (SSBN) fleet, according to analysts.

    Transmitting information from the depths of the vast ocean is difficult, especially through the electromagnetic waves typically used in communication systems. Command and control of ballistic-missile submarines is done from land using very low or extremely low frequency communications, but the amount of data that can be transmitted is limited and can only go one way.

    “[A submarine] usually can’t transmit on its own unless it raises a communications mast or buoy to the surface,” said Collin Koh, a research fellow with the Maritime Security Programme at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

    But doing so increases the risk of the submarine being detected, so a satellite link makes for stealthier and more efficient communication.

    Adam Ni, a researcher with Macquarie University in Sydney, said the development was the latest in China’s drive to modernise its submarine fleet.

    “Along with advances in submarine stealth technology, strong surface fleet [to complement] infrastructure, and space-based information support, the latest breakthrough is another element of China’s modernising submarine power, especially its SSBN force, which is increasingly important for nuclear deterrence,” Ni said.

    Will China’s new laser satellite become the ‘Death Star’ for submarines?
    During its 12,000 nautical mile voyage, the Kexue also upgraded China’s observation network in the western Pacific, including 20 sets of deep ocean equipment, four large floating devices and more than 1,000 observation facilities that have been collecting information for five years, the report said.
     
    sangye and Equation like this.
  7. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,055
    Likes Received:
    8,003
    I don't necessarily agree since the cost of a single boomer is as much as a carrier itself

    1 x SSBN and 1-2 x SSN build rate per year would entail a astronomical cost, and I am talking 10s of billions and the cost of keeping in service 40-50 x SSN and 10+ x SSBN is enough to bankrupt even a economy like China, it would probably consume at least a quarter of the entire defence budget

    Nuclear Submarine race is what killed off the Soviet Union, China will not make that mistake

    The cost of a nuclear submarine programme is just so high but then why would China build a new facility for construction nuclear submarines in multiples ?

    So either way I guess
     
  8. Bhurki
    Offline

    Bhurki Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2018
    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    66
    o_O Not really... Boomers are certainly expensive but not to the tune of an aircraft carrier.
    A borei class(SSBN) ship costs about $1 bn. Both yasen and virginia (SSN)cost about $2 bn.
    Aircraft carriers, even the ones that are conventionally powered ( 001) are likely to cost about $4-5 bn( figure extrapolated from the fact IN spent more than $3 bn on a kiev class) let alone higher operational costs due to larger size.
    PLAN easily spends about $15 bn on capital acquisition for vessel and related items a year. It won't be hard to support the service of a fleet of 30 SSN with an average ship life of 30 years to be maintained even now(considering 1 mid life refit), not to mention the budget is only going to rise from here. Obviously we don't yet see the infrastructure required to maintain such a force, but that doesn't mean its not feasible.
     
    #368 Bhurki, Feb 2, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2019
  9. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    674
    Likes Received:
    617
    They need the rate provided by these facilities. The problem is they do not have proven leading edge nuclear submarine designs to manufacture yet.

    It depends on which submarines you build. The Soviet Union spent way too many resources on twin-hulled huge boats like the Typhoon-class submarines. But they only did it because their SLBM technology was obsolete and their missiles were huge. So they could not carry enough missiles on a single hull. The Chinese do not have this issue.
    It is possible to make the nuclear submarines cost effective if you use as many common components as possible between the attack submarine and strategic submarine classes and use common off the shelf electronics and other components. In the case of modern Russian submarines, the Borei-class and the Akula-class, use the same basic hull design for example. So it is possible to reduce costs significantly if the Chinese make the proper decisions.

    Typically a nuclear attack submarine costs a lot less than a carrier and it provides sea denial capabilities. Which the Chinese Navy will require since they are facing an enemy which has a lot more naval tonnage than they have themselves. Even if you discount the tonnage of their possible allies which is nothing to sneeze at either. Given the lack of Chinese bases the nuclear ship based strategy also makes more sense for them. Once the Chinese want to control the sea lanes all over to the Persian Gulf and to project power beyond the second island chain they will need these capabilities. However in the short term I think long range conventional submarines are more important.

    I think the French have more difference between both nuclear submarine classes but they use a common nuclear reactor design which is even shared with their nuclear carrier.

    So that would be how I would design the strategic arm of the navy. Make a common reactor design for the submarines and the carriers, like the French, which uses low-enriched nuclear fuel like the civilian nuclear reactors, make a common single hull design for attack and strategic submarines, like the Russians, and use conventional off the shelf electronics, like the Americans. Use modular construction like the British and Americans.
     
    #369 gelgoog, Feb 2, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2019
  10. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    6,695
    Likes Received:
    22,503
    They built factory for Submarine production So they must have a design or else why built factory?
    Just because the gestation period is long does not mean they don't have design . they aim to leapfrog the present design and that take time. A generational change just like J 20 from J 10
    Now that they have design they built factory to built that make more sense
     
Loading...

Share This Page