Chinese submarines thread


Status
Not open for further replies.

PrOeLiTeZ

Junior Member
Registered Member
AIP system weren't designed neccesarly for increase in speed, it was to extend its underwater durations longer, needing less surface recharge then non AIP system subs. Diesel subs would be useful in the shallow waters of Hong Kong stationed as defensive subs.

In PLAN case moving from defensive nations for centuries their are no protecting their interest and manuevering to a more offensive combined defensive role.

Having Yuan/Song stationed as coastal defensive subs to protect crucial harbours and ports will further in if Subs get through you got you 022 as the backup. While the 093 acts as the foward defensive stations to protect China interest or act as spearheads for naval assaults or escorts.

How I relate this like NHL you got you blockers, quarterbacks and runner
 

flyzies

Junior Member
Who are you defending from? Submarines or ships? If you are defending against ships, the PLAN seems to building a horde of 022s (some in the CDF is estimating more than 80+ have been built). It is against subs, a small surface vessel like a corvette with ASW capability can do it faster and at much less the cost. Remember the advantage of any surface vessel is their speed and ability to surge and concentrate in numbers at a given area.

And remember, if you are able to project power in the first place, you don't need much of a coastal defense at all. Power projection takes care of coastal defense itself. Note the United States Navy.
The 022s will definitely be effective against ships yes. But ASW tech in PLAN could do with alot more improvement right now...esp on surface vessels anyways. So in the current situation the best way of defending against a sub is to use another sub...which is exactly why PLAN will keep SSKs running IMO. At least until its ASW tech matures and they build the corvettes you described...

Power projection eventually takes care of coastal defence, and that is PLAN's ultimate goal I believe...to use power projection force to handle the bulk of navys work. Unfortunately it is going to be quite some time before they achieve it.
Moreover, I think the geographical nature of seas surrounding China demands PLAN to be very capable in littoral water warfare.

You really hit the nail in this one of your later posts...
The PLAN will definitely need SSKs for littoral operations, not just in its homeland but also that at potential threats, since it is literally surrounded by countries in the seas. I wonder if they will include special forces or spy insertions. China's very geographic nature means it cannot go into the blue seas without taking care of brown water control first. In fact, the huge chain of these countries from Indonesia to Japan represents the world's largest and most diverse littoral environment, then add China's immensely rugged coastline at that. It is very interesting to note that the three ESF sub bases are located in littoral waters if you check them in GE. The depth of the waters may make it inaccessible or risky for large nuclear subs.
 

Raptoreyes

New Member
Re: Chinese sub thread

Darth Sidious baby..got an answer for you..my son , a sonar tech in the USN, once told me this...I will para-phrase..."the best(safest)place for a Chinese sub is in it's homeport"

I keep reading these threads about the 092 & 093. Does anyone have any real, not "P S", pictures of either boat? If so please post.
I have heard that most Chinese conventional battery and fuel cell boats make more noise then then US Nuclear boats of the LA and SeaWolf class. Its my understanding that most Chinese conventional boats have a noise level relative to current US/British passive sonar detection similar to early model Sturgeon SSN's retired from the US inventory against sonar of the period it was considered contemporary However the source is one I can only rate as moderately reliable.

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats. While soviet subtech sometimes surpassed American subs in dive depth, and top speed the soviet never really made a boat that came very close in quieting and number of weapons reloads/weapons range. The Akula SSB Oscar SSGN and Sierra SSN boats are said to have closed the gap somewhat.

Given all that how much better do the Chinese expect to do then the Russians did? Have the Chinese borrowed enough technology from America to avoid having their boats taken out at an embarrassing kill ratio vs US Subs should a subtitle naval war erupt. Due to the nature of submarine warfare attrition is not a bennift to the Chinese as it just means the undersea portion of the USN has more to shoot at with the same risk factor per engagement.
 

Raptoreyes

New Member
Re: Chinese sub thread

Hey bd popeye, just pretend that u r a desiel sub captain and u get close enough to ur enemy undetected... u let lose ur weapons etc... how do u think a desiel sub get escape or survive afterwards. What do u think would be a tactic for survival in such a situation?
If your captain of a conventional sub your only possible means of survival AFTER launch would be to fire just above a strong thermal layer launch a noise maker and then duck under the layer within seconds of firing your ordinance. If your a Chinese boat trying to use your Vertical launch Tubes, then this option does not work most of the time but for torpedo's I would give this sort of attack run a 5-10% chance at the most for the firing conventional sub to escape. (assuming they the sub fires at an American surface group but better odds if they fire at commerse and avoid military vessels)

Unfortunately any conventional sub I know of is quite range limited without making HUGE amounts of noise and snorkeling is at best an imperfect solution in high seas. If water covers the snork even for a moment you will just about feel your eyes coming out of your sockets at the sudden drop in pressure as the noisy battery charging engines suck up air.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Re: Chinese sub thread

I have heard that most Chinese conventional battery and fuel cell boats make more noise then then US Nuclear boats of the LA and SeaWolf class. Its my understanding that most Chinese conventional boats have a noise level relative to current US/British passive sonar detection similar to early model Sturgeon SSN's retired from the US inventory against sonar of the period it was considered contemporary However the source is one I can only rate as moderately reliable.

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats. While soviet subtech sometimes surpassed American subs in dive depth, and top speed the soviet never really made a boat that came very close in quieting and number of weapons reloads/weapons range. The Akula SSB Oscar SSGN and Sierra SSN boats are said to have closed the gap somewhat.

Given all that how much better do the Chinese expect to do then the Russians did? Have the Chinese borrowed enough technology from America to avoid having their boats taken out at an embarrassing kill ratio vs US Subs should a subtitle naval war erupt. Due to the nature of submarine warfare attrition is not a bennift to the Chinese as it just means the undersea portion of the USN has more to shoot at with the same risk factor per engagement.

I am going to ask you are you asking questions to provoke people here or not? If any of your sources is from Strategypage, consider it unreliable.

Now for the serious questions we don't know what the real noise levels of the subs are. In peacetime, you like to keep that from potential gatherers, so you will need to obscure your real signature, even if it has to use noise generators. Personally I don't think they are as quiet as the latest Western sub designs, but nonetheless they are featuring some modern quieting features such as closed limber holes, anecholic tiles and skewed propellers, so their technology level is right up to the LA-Akula class of boats. Personally I must also add that Chinese subs appeared to have improved rather late---2004 is the crucial year. That is why they are all of sudden in a major build surge starting only from that year. Previous to that year, their designs have been hit and miss, testbeds with issues that need working out. The discovery of the Yuan was a major surprise for everyone in that year, since it has become questionable that the production and movement of the subs can be tracked.

Soviet subs have some noise issues that come from design decisions the Chinese are not sharing. For example, many Soviet subs have twin reactors, while US and everyone else submarines, including the Chinese, only have one. (There is only US SSN ever to have two reactors). Many Soviet subs also have two propellers and still kept that arrangement when US subs have shifted from two propellers to a single one (despite Rickover's objection).

So when you have two reactors, two reduction gears, two driving shafts and two props, you will make at least double the noise compared to a set up where you only have one of each. The Chinese nuclear subs don't have these issues; they all use single reactors, single prop arrangements, even with the Han and Xia class. If it is true that the 093 and 094 class have turbine electric drive (an idea the French used with their nuclear subs), by all means expect to be a bit more quiet since they removed one noise making factor and that is the gearbox. Do note the considerable French flavor in the PLAN development in other fields.

Lets compare the Songs and the Yuans against the Kilos, for example. The Kilos, like many earlier and small conventional submarines, don't even passive low frequency flank sonars that are used for long range detection. But the Chinese had the foresight to add them to the Song and the Yuans. The Russians never had passive flank sonars on a conventional until the first Lada class came out, so the Chinese actually beat them to it. The latest Google Earth measurements put the Songs and Yuans right to the size levels of the Collins and Oyashio class, among the largest diesel boats built and size helps in making a sub quieter. Frankly there is not a lot of diesel boats with passive flank sonars, because of space issues, and usually it is the few bigger diesel boats in the world that do. You also need to put your diving planes in the sail so the planes won't interfere with the flank sonars, which is one reason the Kilo is a bad design to put a set of flank sonars.

In addition to that, by having more space in the Song and Yuans, there is more room for batteries, which means more electrical power for sensors and command centers, and more room for reloads.

There is also the fact that these subs are capable of firing AshMs underwater and now feature their own wire guided heavyweight torpedo, the YU-6.

To be honest, I am not perfectly satisfied with the current state of Chinese sub designs, but I am not a professional, only an amateur's opinion. In my opinion as it goes, PLAN crews need to train more in farther waters, and the Chinese sub designs still have room for improvement, compared to the latest sub designs were are seeing, but it does not make the current subs are something you can expect to walkover. The experience with the Song with the Kitty Hawk which has deeply surprised many and shook a deep fundamental nerve shows they cannot be underestimated.
 

PrOeLiTeZ

Junior Member
Registered Member
Re: Chinese sub thread

I have heard that most Chinese conventional battery and fuel cell boats make more noise then then US Nuclear boats of the LA and SeaWolf class. Its my understanding that most Chinese conventional boats have a noise level relative to current US/British passive sonar detection similar to early model Sturgeon SSN's retired from the US inventory against sonar of the period it was considered contemporary However the source is one I can only rate as moderately reliable.

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats. While soviet subtech sometimes surpassed American subs in dive depth, and top speed the soviet never really made a boat that came very close in quieting and number of weapons reloads/weapons range. The Akula SSB Oscar SSGN and Sierra SSN boats are said to have closed the gap somewhat.

Given all that how much better do the Chinese expect to do then the Russians did? Have the Chinese borrowed enough technology from America to avoid having their boats taken out at an embarrassing kill ratio vs US Subs should a subtitle naval war erupt. Due to the nature of submarine warfare attrition is not a bennift to the Chinese as it just means the undersea portion of the USN has more to shoot at with the same risk factor per engagement.
Seems to me that this post that you sent, is indicating that China submarine fleet is a push over in battle. What is impressive is how the the PLAN is jumping technology so quick, being equipped with single SSBN and couple SSN that are refurbished old era nuclear first generation subs. To second generation much much improved nuclear subs with minimal estimates at moment of 2 SSBN and 2 SSN.

As to diesel subs from being equipped to old era Soviet subs Ming, Romeo to larger more capable domestic Yuan, Song subs. As to crobato post #976 with more room it gives room for more batteries, equipment, operating area and also which I think is important for the crew is less strain mentally if it was more confined with smaller subs. Early generation Soviet subs mentally strained some of the Soviet operators, due to their confined operating space.
 

Roger604

Senior Member
Re: Chinese sub thread

We could have it as a rule of thumb that Chinese boats will be much much nosier then their western counterparts. During the Cold War Russian SSBN's were kept in bastions surrounded by neting and heavily mines fields with multiple SSN protectors, because the soviet government was not confident they could avoid detection of the American LA class boats.
In the past few months or so, enough information has appeared about the current generation of Chinese nuke subs -- Type 093 and Type 094 -- that earlier estimates had to be completely revised.

Before the semi-official unveiling of Type 093, estimates of Type 093 quieting dated back to the late 90's, early 2000's level, which was something like Victor III. Even estimates of the quieting level in 2003/2004 were around early LA class levels.

But given the serial production of this model, and the confidence the navy has shown, the current best estimates are that it's a match for late model LA class or Akula class. Anything worse than that, the PLAN would not consider adequate to fully commit too.

The same applies to Type 094. It's probably around the same technology level as the early Ohios, but a bit noisier since it's not as big.

If your captain of a conventional sub your only possible means of survival AFTER launch would be to fire just above a strong thermal layer launch a noise maker and then duck under the layer within seconds of firing your ordinance. If your a Chinese boat trying to use your Vertical launch Tubes, then this option does not work most of the time but for torpedo's I would give this sort of attack run a 5-10% chance at the most for the firing conventional sub to escape. (assuming they the sub fires at an American surface group but better odds if they fire at commerse and avoid military vessels)
Chinese subs can fire anti-ship missiles with ranges around 300 km. As long as it knows the approximate location of its target, it's in no danger at all from this far away.


The Chinese have successfully led on the US about its sub capabilities for a while. Like crobato said, the Yuan, Shang and Jin were developed, put into service and serial produced all without other countries knowing about them.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
Re: Chinese sub thread

Chinese subs can fire anti-ship missiles with ranges around 300 km. As long as it knows the approximate location of its target, it's in no danger at all from this far away.
But the hit probability is decreased immensely. The farther you fire out, the less the probability you will hit your target. Especially when your missile does not have mid course correction capability.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Re: Chinese sub thread

But the hit probability is decreased immensely. The farther you fire out, the less the probability you will hit your target. Especially when your missile does not have mid course correction capability.
Figure out why there are Y-8s (High New) are carrying the H-6H's surface search radars with a Light Bulb datalink on the back on the tail. The PLAN had long figured out they needed such a datalink infrastructure in the first place, to support the YJ-83s launched from 022s to upgraded old ships that don't have OTH targeting radars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top