Future PLAN Forecast Thread: Number, disposition, etc.

antiterror13

Brigadier
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

overall PLAN strength is already at least 15% of US Navy (have you read "How To Make War" by James F Dunnigan ?), but PLAN blue navy strength is perhaps only 1% of US Navy.

I agree to achieve what I said before is at least 20 years away
 

flyzies

Junior Member
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

Instead of only 2 fleets (North and South) as you mentioned, I would go for 4 fleets instead, North, East, South and West (Gwadar).

I agree with what you said...but i have serious doubt Pakistan will let the PLAN turn Gwadar into their naval base...that would be ideal for Chinese interests in the Indian ocean tho...
 

joshuatree

Captain
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

Perhaps with West Fleet, the budget will need a little bit bigger, $50B. I don't see any problem with $50 or $60B budget for PLAN as in 10 years time, PLA budget will be around $150B or about $300B PPP

West Fleet? Perhaps what PLAN needs is simply a fourth division called Expeditionary Fleet to encompass any PLAN deployments outside of the 1st island chain which the North, East, and South Fleets already have covered?

Another question I have is, when you have a naval fleet close to land based support, do you necessarily need frigates and destroyers as opposed to corvettes and patrol vessels to engage an invading naval force? Of course, I am assuming the corvettes would have comparable weapons system, maybe not in quantity but quality. If indeed a certain X number of corvettes can replace Y number of frigates and destroyers for the 1st island chain defence, would it make any financial sense for PLAN to develop corvettes for the North, East, and South fleets while frigates and destroyers are produced for the so called Expeditionary Fleet?
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

I agree with what you said...but i have serious doubt Pakistan will let the PLAN turn Gwadar into their naval base...that would be ideal for Chinese interests in the Indian ocean tho...

why not ? .. it will benefits both Pakistan and China :

China : West fleet, to contain India and to protect Chinese oil and merchant ships, and of course to protect Chinese investment in Africa, etc

Pakistan : As a deterrence force against India, MONEY $$$, get closer to China, more business from China, more technology transfer from China, etc, etc

it will happen within 10-15 years
 

szbd

Junior Member
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

A whole fleet based on Pakistan will have a very big political problem. First, it's against China's long term policy that she doesn't seek to permnantly deploy military force in other countries. Second, it brings distrust from many countries. Third, it affects the sovereignty of Pakistan unless the two countries form a serious military ally, which against another long term policy of China.

China should avoid to go on the USSR's failed path.
 

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

Let me revive this thread a little bit. :) Ideal Chinese navy? I propose (among other things) the following:

Scrap the destroyer/frigate blue water combo. Scrap any kind of hi/low mix for blue water operations. Instead, design a single class of ships, somewhat modular in nature, of decent dimensions, (150m length, 8000 tons) which would be built in vast numbers. For example, whereas usual destroyer/frigate mix might number 25 destroyers and 50 frigates, i propose 50-60 of such destroyer sized ships.

Key is to move away from individual units being built by shipyards but to try to approach the oldfashioned factory manufacturing line as much as possible. Use the recent british model of prefabricated sections as a starting point and go with it an extra mile or so. Cut the ship in even more sections and have 'shipyard' work on just that one section, for all 50-60 units. It would be important to have relatively small sections, so they could be handled inside a factory hall.

When done, all the prefab sections of one unit would be shipped to assembly plant, a true shipyard if you will, where they'd be assembled into one hull, before pushed into sea. I believe such a process would increase quality control, speed up production and, over such a large number of units, lower the unit price. Lets face it, if you want to build 50 or so new destroyers, one usually needs decades. The mentioned process could, though it would require large initial investment, cut that time in half, easely, while lowering the price. In such 'production line' approach, it would simply be inefficient not to keep line moving and producing at all time.

About the ship itself: (though that's less important, as this would obviously be after the 2015-2020 timeframe, so tech level used in PLAN ships would be impossibe to predict)

Minimize the amount of fixed superstructure. Yes, engine funnel is a must, and its position must be predetermined to make the design more efficient, but otherwise try to make the ship a collection of big building blocks, as much as possible. So, not only do we have prefab sections of the hull that would be joined and set in stone, but we'd have prefab sections of superstructures that could be mixed and matched for various needs, and modernized accordingly.

Of course, that'd require a very complex system of ballasts in the hull itself to provide compensation for probable future changes of superstructure and equipment, but it's perfectly doable. What sort of mix and matching am i talking about? Well, make the helipad one building block. Offer options for a smaller single helohangar or a bigger, double one. Offer single or double sensor masts, in various sizes. Offer various sizes of command bridge sections, etc. Naturally, weapons fit would be VERY customizable. Two 155mm guns on deck? No problem. No big guns at all but bunch of VLS cells? No problem. Do you want one ciws or eight with that?

Of course, one should have some smaller combat ships, too. Instead of some tiny frigates or large FACs, i propose a regular sized corvette, optimized for high seas (trimaran design maybe?) but not meant to actually spend a lot of time at sea. It would not be equipped for carrying lots of fuel nor lots of supplies. Instead, it mission profile would include quick dashes into open seas, even hundreds of km from coast, striking, then returning home for replenishment. Now, that does sound like just a large FAC, but why not make it just one of possibilities?

Make them with same prefab building block process as larger ships, make them customizable. Whereas those larger ships might need months to be refitted for a different role, these smaller ones could probably be reconfigured within weeks, even days if one just wants to change weaponry/sensors. Naturally, every combination should be tested and certified beforehand. In the end, one very well could have some of the smaller vessels fit a traditional coast (or even ocean) patrol boat roles.

Yeah, yeah, i'm not proposing anything new here, but i am calling for going several steps further and approach shipbuilding from a different perspective, turning it into a manufacture of various interchangable components, all done on a scale as large as possible, to speed up production and lower the costs.
 

kunmingren

Junior Member
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

Let me revive this thread a little bit. :) Ideal Chinese navy? I propose (among other things) the following:

Scrap the destroyer/frigate blue water combo. Scrap any kind of hi/low mix for blue water operations. Instead, design a single class of ships, somewhat modular in nature, of decent dimensions, (150m length, 8000 tons) which would be built in vast numbers. For example, whereas usual destroyer/frigate mix might number 25 destroyers and 50 frigates, i propose 50-60 of such destroyer sized ships.

Key is to move away from individual units being built by shipyards but to try to approach the oldfashioned factory manufacturing line as much as possible. Use the recent british model of prefabricated sections as a starting point and go with it an extra mile or so. Cut the ship in even more sections and have 'shipyard' work on just that one section, for all 50-60 units. It would be important to have relatively small sections, so they could be handled inside a factory hall.

When done, all the prefab sections of one unit would be shipped to assembly plant, a true shipyard if you will, where they'd be assembled into one hull, before pushed into sea. I believe such a process would increase quality control, speed up production and, over such a large number of units, lower the unit price. Lets face it, if you want to build 50 or so new destroyers, one usually needs decades. The mentioned process could, though it would require large initial investment, cut that time in half, easely, while lowering the price. In such 'production line' approach, it would simply be inefficient not to keep line moving and producing at all time.

Think this is a very good idea, i just don't believe its technological feasible. manufacture different parts at different location and then bring them together is a very challenging engineering process even in industrialized nation such as US, especially with something as big and sophisticated as a warship. dividing the ship into smaller part seems to me like just asking for more trouble, its like instead of 50 things that can go wrong, now there are 100 things that can go wrong. Plus it seems to me that if pieces are built in the same place, mistakes can be more easily corrected than to have to wait for the piece to to shiped back and forth between different parts of the production chain.
 

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

Like i said, it's something to be done not now but in 15 or more years time. Brits are doing it now, albeit on a much smaller scale. Lego building block approach was also done by Danes on ther Flex series of ships, years ago. I do believe technologically it would be perfectly doable, it would be a question of money and political willpower.

As for asking for more trouble - that's why one'd have small series built first, with the just hull, then inspected, before ramp up. Boeing 787 is a pretty complex piece of machinery yet it's built the same way. Besides, building each ship at its own shipyard does lead to standardization issues and makes quality control more expensive, as there have to be multiple teams checking out the quality.

In the end, one of main reasons is time. Just how does one build a 50 or more unit fleet in a small time period? I fear that without an approach similar to one proposed here, PLAN will not be fielding an all-modern, 50-60 unit bluewater fleet before 2050. (all modern for 2050) With the proposed approach, which would allow for much easier modernization and keeping up with technology, same level tech for all the 50-60 unit size fleet could be attained decades earlier.
 

AmiGanguli

Junior Member
Re: Ideal Chinese Navy

It's definitely doable -
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

But unlike Airbus, you wouldn't need to have manufacturing plants scattered in distant places. You could easily have them within a couple of km of the assembly plant, connected by a specially constructed rail line.

I'm not convinced that this makes sense, though, unless you can get some other business to fill the pipeline.
 
Last edited:
Top