PLAN breaking news, pics, & videos

A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Hendrik_2000 said:
Another article by GT expanding on unusual commissioning of 3 ships simultaneously. Dalian will go to South China theatre while Nanchang and Lhasa go to Beiyang fleet so 3 type 55 is in service now
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Unprecedented commissioning

Friday's commissioning of warships is unprecedented in many aspects, as it is the first time the PLA Navy has received three different types of large vessels on one day. This is also not seen in other countries, observers said.

This reflects the rapid development of the PLA Navy as well as the Chinese shipbuilding industry, as the two become world class, experts said, noting that China can develop, construct and harness these advanced vessels in a very short time, showing "Chinese speed."

It is also the first time the PLA South Sea Fleet has received three large surface and underwater main battle equipment on the same day, which highlights China's determination to manage the South China Sea, analysts said.

Under the current complex international situation, China attaches great importance to the construction of the South China Sea; the deployment of the new sea craft further strengthens the PLA's ability to safeguard national territory and territorial sea sovereignty, experts said.

Song said that China is facing grave military struggle pressure, and needs large warships to build a stronger navy.

These vessels will play important roles in solving questions in places like the island of Taiwan and the South China Sea, Song said.
Click to expand...

I believe this Type 094 actually Type 094A (improved) with hopefully carry JL-2A (improved version with longer ranged) SLBM
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
ougoah said:
So much surface warship development. What's PLAN doing about its relative weakness below the surface? Anti-sub may have improved a lot and caught up if not surpassed but can they ensure any decent safety against the hordes of USN subs? They must be feeling pretty damn confident with PLAN's current anti-sub warfare but maybe this area doesn't get any attention or leaks from the authorities for a reason. Once you can detect subs with certainty and effectiveness, they are basically sitting ducks. In this respect, it is only a question of technology. The rest of the problem is securing airspace for anti-sub aircraft to release their ordinance. Could that be why China seems to consider air domain to be more important?

China's own sub fleet is a threat to the USN surface vessels more than they are to USN subs. It may not need the same level and numbers of submarines (though that's certainly useful for A2AD) to be totally capable of removing the USN submarine threat. It just seems while plenty of things are leaked and even very publicly shown and talked about, anti-sub insight is limited to just a few special mission aircraft and whispers of revolutionary detection tech. Anyway it's certainly true that if PLAN possess one or some new and effective anti-sub capabilities, it's only a matter of contesting and fighting for airspace - which explain spamming Type 055s and weapons dedicated to taking carriers.
Click to expand...


voyager1 said:
I am also worried about their submarine construction rate and their capabilities. It seems to me that they have dropped the ball there relatively to the surface program.

The massive new sub construction base is a good step but its not enough. It has already be so many years and we have yet to see any dramatic increase in submarines being launched
Click to expand...


Think about procurement.

Money and time is always finite, so if you want to procure a new system in scale, you want it to be:
1. Technologically competitive/viable against the reference threat
2. Able to operate domains where you can achieve the prerequisite for their use

Let's take an example for the point 1.
Surface combatants. In the 1990s and 2000s we saw the PLAN iterate multiple small runs of destroyers before settling on a decent sized run of six 052Cs, and then a whopping twenty five 052Ds and eight 055s (and counting). That iteration wasn't done just for fun, it was done because they were waiting for all of the subsystems intrinsic to the overall capability of a modern destroyer to be sufficiently competitive in the first place.
Same goes for 054A and 056.
In terms of ASW relevant systems -- whether it's ASW helicopters, ASW MPAs, ASW capable surface combatants, SSKs, and SSNs, you are able to visually see which systems they've developed and are procuring in large numbers (or about to procure in large numbers), and which ones are still awaiting to reach competitive levels of capability.

For point 2.
In certain domains of warfare, there are explicit prerequisites that should be achieved before a certain system/mission can operate.
For example, if you want to conduct a drop of paratroopers against an enemy you generally want air superiority and a minimum level of SEAD.
If you want to conduct an amphibious assault, you generally want air superiority and sea control and fires superiority.
For ASW, there are surface, subsurface and aerial ASW -- and in aerial ASW in particular you need the ability to at minimum contest the air in the area of operations where your ASW MPAs (but also ASW helicopters to an extent) will operate. If you have no ability to contest the air, or ideally to achieve air superiority -- then investing in ASW MPA procurement makes no sense because your aircraft will be vulnerable, and shot down. Even during peacetime, having a fleet of ASW MPAs without requisite air power and counter air power, it means your ASW MPAs are vulnerable to more bullying/harassment from the fighters of unfriendly nations.
Now let's look at PLAN ASW MPAs in the form of KQ-200s. They started entering service in numbers in 2015/2016. In relation to regional air powers in east asia/western pacific, that is about when the balance of net air power started to become more even, with the PLA achieving air power that could operate over water, with comprehensive BVR, AEW&C, EW support in relevant numbers. Not a coincidence.
And since then, we've seen KQ-200s being produced in large numbers. I'd say from 2015/16, KQ-200s might be the most highly produced special mission variant of the current in production Y-9 variants. For good reason -- because now, procuring KQ-200s fulfills both points 1 and 2.


So to answer both your questions -- no, I do not think the PLAN are dropping the ball at all when it comes to ASW or submarines, and I think viewing surface warship development as if it is being overemphasized (or ASW under-emphasized) is incorrect. With regards to the latter, the procurement of advanced surface warships in numbers doesn't mean they are foregoing ASW, it just means that surface combatants currently fulfil points 1 and 2 and that a robust surface combatant capability is going to have to be procured anyway, and there's no compromised opportunity cost in procuring surface combatants now rather than later.

In fact their procurement of the relevant ASW systems and ASW relevant capabilities -- and the lack of large scale procurement of certain other ASW systems -- makes complete sense in context of recent changes in certain domains of air-naval power in the region as well as in context of the technological/industrial capability of their own suppliers.


Finally, with regards to nuclear submarines -- we can all see the massive expansion at Bohai. The only reason they would expand their production capacity like that in such a greenfield manner is if the PLAN knew they would order a large number of nuclear subs into the near future.
And as previously established, they would only order a large number of any given system, if it was able to satisfy points 1 and 2 above. You can make your own conclusions from there.
 
Last edited:
S

steve_rolfe

Junior Member
Lethe said:
The British side is missing HMS Albion and Bulwark and the three Bay-class LSDs operated by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. Also the RN operates 13 Type 23 frigates, not 14.
Click to expand...
Sadly the RN is to lose 2 Type 23's under the latest interim review. The type 26's and type 31's are badly needed a.s.a.p.
 
Lethe

Lethe

Captain
steve_rolfe said:
Sadly the RN is to lose 2 Type 23's under the latest interim review. The type 26's and type 31's are badly needed a.s.a.p.
Click to expand...

As I understand it the idea is to end up with more combatants in future by redirecting funds from operations, maintenance and personnel to acquisition. There's some logic to that, but at a political level it contains more than a whiff of bullshit. I mean, when was the last time a nation "drew down" in order to "build up"? At best it seems like a government scraping to find savings now whilst keeping their fingers crossed for the future. It will be interesting to watch it all unfold, that's for sure.
 
D

ddd...

New Member
Registered Member
ougoah said:
So much surface warship development. What's PLAN doing about its relative weakness below the surface? Anti-sub may have improved a lot and caught up if not surpassed but can they ensure any decent safety against the hordes of USN subs? They must be feeling pretty damn confident with PLAN's current anti-sub warfare but maybe this area doesn't get any attention or leaks from the authorities for a reason. Once you can detect subs with certainty and effectiveness, they are basically sitting ducks. In this respect, it is only a question of technology. The rest of the problem is securing airspace for anti-sub aircraft to release their ordinance. Could that be why China seems to consider air domain to be more important?

China's own sub fleet is a threat to the USN surface vessels more than they are to USN subs. It may not need the same level and numbers of submarines (though that's certainly useful for A2AD) to be totally capable of removing the USN submarine threat. It just seems while plenty of things are leaked and even very publicly shown and talked about, anti-sub insight is limited to just a few special mission aircraft and whispers of revolutionary detection tech. Anyway it's certainly true that if PLAN possess one or some new and effective anti-sub capabilities, it's only a matter of contesting and fighting for airspace - which explain spamming Type 055s and weapons dedicated to taking carriers.
Click to expand...
This is an indication that the PLAN is transforming from a deterance force to presence force. As stated in its latest defence white paper, the main tasks of PLAN is "near seas defense and far seas protection". My understanding on the breakdown is:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top