Plan Type 095/096 Nuclear Submarine Thread

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

  1. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    2,705
    A general question:

    Why is there a $1 Bn ($1000M) difference between the Astute ($1.8 Bn) and the non-VPM Virginia ($2.8 Bn)???

    Yes, the Astute doesn't have 12 VLS cells, but a VPM (with 28cells) only costs an extra $360M.
    That implies that a Astute with 12 VLS cells would be an extra $150-200M, for a total cost of $2 Bn.

    That is only a 10% difference between a VLS and non-VLS submarine.
     
    antiterror13 likes this.
  2. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    2,705
    Well, let's say a Chinese SSN is $1 Bn.

    Then at PPP, it is equivalent to about $1.8 Bn.

    That is the same as the Astute. And would demonstrate that PPP is a valid measure in this case.
     
  3. Biscuits
    Offline

    Biscuits Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    782
    Because that is assuming it has the exact same loadout as the Astute. The 041 doesn’t have the exact same stuff as the Soryu. Since it is slightly more expensive, it either means that some systems are higher quality or some systems are less efficient in production, or most likely a bit of both. That could apply to the case for the 095 as well.

    UK and China doesn’t build submarines after the same standards. If they did, your comparison would be valid, but they don’t. Both countries have different goals, techniques and requirements.

    Since the submarines haven’t arrived yet (afaik) it might be better to discuss when the costs are made public, or at least when the cost of the 093Bs are made public.
     
  4. Bhurki
    Offline

    Bhurki Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2018
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    93
    Putin is a politician, its his duty to subvert attention from his state's inabilities( in this case, MIC not being efficient). I'd rather believe the tab provided by the manufacturers than the state.
    Also, another example for highly expensive sub being Seawolf class.
    The fact is, a specialized attack submarine designed to primarily hunt for other quiet subs will always cost more than a general purpose sub like the Virginia. The Virginia was designed with cost of production in mind and it was deemed sufficient because there wasn't any other nation that could assume aggressive SSN posture against the US at that moment.
    In the future however, US,China and Russia will need to one up each other in the race to dominate the SSN class hunting tech, so it'll be more expensive than just settling for a set of general requirements.
     
  5. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    2,705
    The cost of the 093B will likely never be made public, hence we have to estimate the cost.

    The subs don't have to be exactly the same as you're just nitpicking.
    Broadly speaking, they all have the same mission, which is to be as quiet as possible, whilst sensing the opposition first, then launch missiles or torpedoes.

    So rough cost estimates should be valid, irrespective of the exact details.

    Remember that you're trying to argue that a Chinese SSN somehow cost more than a British SSN, which just sounds wrong.
    Look at the huge difference in costs for equivalent surface warships between the UK and China for example.
     
  6. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    241
    This estimate is not valid, check the cost difference between the Virginia and the Seawolf.
     
  7. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    241
    Thinking a bit, the cost of submarine exponentially increase with the next parameters :
    - diameter
    -diving deep
    -speed

    The standard pressure vessel equitation gives good starting point .
     
  8. Anlsvrthng
    Offline

    Anlsvrthng Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    241
    Quick submarine calculation :
    600 M/mm^2 steel, 10 /11 meter diameter, 300/600 meter diving deep:
    600 meter diving deep, 12 metric ton for each meter of submarine
    300 meter diving deep , 6 metric ton for each meter of submarine

    Diameter increase proportionally increase the mass ( 11 meter --13.2 ton/m)

    Means a 100 meter, 600 meter diving deep submarine hull on its own has a 1200 tons (0 safety margin : ) ) , and without any internal support structure and so on.

    With 50% safety it become 2400 tons .
    The same for 300 meter is 1200 tons.

    For 600 meter the leftover non pressure vessel mass is 50 tons / meter.

    The leftover mass can be used for machines, weapons, propulsion, sound damping and so on.
     
  9. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    3,386
    The cost of an SSN is a function of capabilities and capabilities frequently involve trade offs. If you want to determine the cost of a type 93 you first need to establish what capabilities China has built into its design. If you don't know you don't have a reasonable basis to project cost.

    Yasen is expensive because it can dive deep, is fast, has the biggest weapon load and good sensors. As such it is reflected in its cost and displacement. They are all related. There is no free lunch. You get what you pay for. Seawolf can basically match those capabilities and why it is also very expensive. When the US moved onto the Virginia program it was a conscious decision to down grade some of those capabilities and consequently is cheaper to build. The Astute is cheaper because it is slower and cannot dive as deep as the Virginia. However the Astute has very good sensors and is very silent and why some have argued is better than the Virginia. After all, pump jets were invented by the British - the US just adopted it from the British.

    The ability to go deep is a function of material yield strength and is a significant cost factor. Russian subs can go deep because it uses Titanium but it is incredibly difficult to weld plus the Russians compromise on safety (which is another story). The Seawolf use HS-100 steel and the LA class uses HS-80 steel AFAIK.
     
    #489 Brumby, Jun 24, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
    ougoah likes this.
  10. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    3,386
    edit
    HS-100 and HS-80 should read HY-100 and HY-80.
     
Loading...

Share This Page