Plan Type 095/096 Nuclear Submarine Thread

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

  1. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,230
    Likes Received:
    1,333
    I think if it is done right it is possible to share technology for the attack and strategic subs and thus reduce R&D costs.
    Just look at the Borei class. The first three boats were built using the hulls of Akulas which are attack subs.
    They use the same nuclear reactor, same frontal torpedo section, and other sections are similar too.
     
  2. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Yes. I do think China pays around $400M per boat, whereas the $625M price for Pakistan includes support and local production.

    If we compare the the Type-52/Type-55 versus the equivalent AEGIS destroyers from US/JP/KR - we can see Chinese ships have a significant cost advantage.

    That should carry over into the realm of submarine construction. So Chinese SSKs should be much cheaper than Japanese SSKs.
     
    schrage musik, Equation and plawolf like this.
  3. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Also remember that the first Yasen cost $1.6billion.

    Given lower production costs in China, and serial mass production, $1 Billion for a Chinese SSN could be feasible.
     
  4. Bhurki
    Offline

    Bhurki Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2018
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    93
    The $1.6 bn yasen (885, only 1 built) carries a lot of older technologies. Eg. Severodvinsk.
    It was basically built because Russians didnt want to dump the entire design because of financial issues. So they took their time building it, albeit with old tech.
    The current (885.m) with optimization of new tech costs around double of that eg. $3.5 bn for Kazan
     
    #474 Bhurki, Jun 23, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2019
    schrage musik likes this.
  5. Franklin
    Offline

    Franklin Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    2,237
    Likes Received:
    2,054
    It's said that the Type 095 is already in service. Is there any confirmation or pictures ?
     
  6. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Putin has publicly said that the $3.5 bn cost for the second Yasen is a joke.

    Also, look at the Royal Navy Astutes which are $1.8 Bn each, which is comparable to the $1.6 Bn for the 1st Yasen.

    And the CNO has been on record as saying the Astute is quieter than the Virginia SSN.

    So if China has lower costs (say 20%) and a higher production rate with long term stability (another 20% saving), that's why I think they can produce SSNs for around $1 Bn
     
    #476 AndrewS, Jun 23, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2019
  7. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,230
    Likes Received:
    1,333
    I have heard a lot of rumors for the added cost on the Yasen including that the later submarines were designed with a lot of imported technologies. Because of the devaluation of the ruble versus the dollar that might have inflated its cost. If that is true, then the answer is simple, they need to find other suppliers either inside Russia or somewhere cheaper like China. I would not be surprised if most of the cost was in electronics components. China shouldn't suffer from these sorts of issues. Russia had similar issues with the digital Su-30 radar until they replaced the chips with Russian produced ones.
     
  8. Biscuits
    Offline

    Biscuits Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    782
    Again PLA needs to provide support for their own submarines too, and probably to a higher standard.

    There are "tricks" state owned companies can use to drive down the per piece cost for their own hardware (such as filing much of the costs under another category, or taking pay directly from the state budget instead of marking it as part of a purchase). China can technically pay 0$ for everything since all of the military contractors are state owned, they would just have to shift all the bills as national spending. This doesn't fundamentally change the real cost of the item in question.

    Even if we arbitrarily shave off 225 million off the 041's price, it still won't be "much" cheaper than the Soryu, only marginally so. And it would still be more expansive than a Type 212.

    If that carries over to SSN pricing, it would mean either slightly more expensive or about the same. TBH I need to correct my last post because it's not going to cost 6 billion like the Seawolf, since that was apparently due to some mismanagement leading to runaway costs, but 3 billion + like the Virginia could be expected.

    An Astute is cheaper because it has no VLS. It's possible China could go all in on stealth and forgo the VLS, which could further bring down price to 1.5-2 billion.
     
    antiterror13 likes this.
  9. Viktor Jav
    Offline

    Viktor Jav Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2017
    Messages:
    883
    Likes Received:
    676
    There is also the PPP of each individual countries to consider. Taking into account that China PPP is technically stronger than the US while its currency's worth is still lower than the dollar, a 095 will all the bells and whistles just like the Virginia might cost less than the latter but might be even more expensive for China to produce in its own terms.
     
    antiterror13 likes this.
  10. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Let's focus on this part.

    The Astute (without a VLS) is $1.8 Bn. These are published figures.
    So how can a Chinese SSN (without VLS) still be in your $1.5-2 Bn range?

    The Astute has a small intermittant production run with boats produced every 2 years.

    Yet we can see that China has a production rate of 1 boat per year and guaranteed orders for the next 20 years.
    And the Pentagon has a rule of thumb that a doubling of the procurement rate results in a 20% cost saving.

    That immediately takes the cost of a Chinese SSN from $1.8 Bn to $1.44 Bn, which is already below your low estimate of $1.5 Bn.

    We also know that costs for materials, unskilled labour and skilled labour are lower in China (Bohai) than in the UK (Barrow)
    The Barrow Shipyard is located literally in the middle of nowhere, so doesn't have a local population nor industrial base to draw upon.
    In comparison, Bohai is located on the outskirts of a city with 3M people and also does commercial shipbuilding. That industrial base lowers costs further.

    So taking that all of this into account, if Bohai has another cost advantage of 20%, that takes the cost of a Chinese SSN to approx $1 Bn.
     
Loading...

Share This Page