PLAN ASW Capability

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
China claim to have developed the world most advanced MAD. If this is true then the day that US submarine can freely roam western pacific will soon come to and end

Has China developed the world’s most powerful submarine detector?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Major breakthrough in magnetic detection technology brings unprecedented accuracy in finding metallic objects hidden deep underground and in the water, Shanghai scientists say

PUBLISHED : Saturday, 24 June, 2017, 8:31am
UPDATED : Saturday, 24 June, 2017, 9:28pm


9f632ea8-5740-11e7-839c-33f85c43b72e_1280x720_233114.jpg



Chinese scientists claim to have made a major breakthrough in magnetic detection technology that could bring unprecedented accuracy to the process of finding hidden metallic objects – from minerals to submarines.

The Chinese Academy of Sciences, the country’s largest research institute, said in an article on its website on Wednesday that a “superconductive magnetic anomaly detection array” has been developed in Shanghai and passed inspection by an expert panel.
The experts were quoted as saying that the device, which works from the air, could be used to pinpoint the location of minerals buried deep beneath the earth in Inner Mongolia, for example, with a level of precision as high as anything currently available around the world.


The device could also be used on civilian and military aircraft as a “high performance equipment and technical solution to resources mapping, civil engineering, archaeology and national defence”, the article said.

a565306c-5740-11e7-839c-33f85c43b72e_1320x770_233114.jpg



China’s military may soon adopt the technology, if it hasn’t already, said Professor Zhang Zhi, an expert in remote sensing with the Institute of Geophysics and Geomatics, China University of Geosciences in Wuhan, Hubei.

“The technology could be used to detect minerals on land, and in the ocean to nail down submarines,” said Zhang, who was not involved in the project.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Anti-submarine aircraft have been equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors, or MAD, since World War II. The devices monitor the small disturbances metallic objects cause to the Earth’s magnetic field, analyse the data and use complex algorithms to calculate the object’s position.

Precise locations are often difficult to obtain, however, because the strength of a magnetic signal drops rapidly as the distance from the source increases.

Aircraft have to fly low, and the submarine has to be operating sufficiently close to surface for the device to register it. The power of the signal can be reduced by other factors, too, such as if the submarine is made from less ferromagnetic materials.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Dr Lei Chong, an assistant researcher studying MAD technology at the Department of Micro/Nano Electronics, Shanghai Jiaotong University, said the Chinese device was different from conventional designs in at least two ways.

The first is the large number of probes the device uses. With this “array”, it can collect much more data than traditional detectors, which tend to use just one antenna, said Lei, who was not involved in the project.

The new MAD also uses a superconductive computer chip cooled by liquid nitrogen. This super-cool environment significantly increases the device’s sensitivity to signals that would be too faint for traditional devices to spot.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


“I am surprised they made such an announcement,” Lei said. “Usually this kind of information is not revealed to the public because of its military value.”

The superconductive MAD array was developed over four years by a research team led by Professor Xie Xiaoming from the Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, according to the CAS article.

Xie could not immediately be reached for comment.

Chinese research teams have also recently completed the development of eight other types of magnetic detectors, some of which are small and sensitive enough to be used on satellites, the article said.

The academy said that due to the difficulties involved in developing such equipment, most countries, including the United States, don’t yet have it. Germany is the rare exception, it said.

Despite the article’s claims, Lei said it was too early to say whether China was leading the world in MAD technology.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


“The US military might have developed similar equipment but kept their lips sealed about it,” he said.

“It’s impossible, therefore, to compare one country to another on this kind of sensitive technology based only on openly available information.

“Converting a mineral detector to a MAD for submarines requires a lot of extra work. Military users have very different requirements to those in the civilian sector,” he said.
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Don't exaggerate. US has never been consistent. But I'm sure China has diplomats working on it.
Who said US has ever been consistent? The question is: who is going to listen to bitching when you commit the very act that you bitch about? The answer is: no one.
 

PikeCowboy

Junior Member
People listen to whatever it is convenient to listen to, hypocrisy or whatever you want to call it never even plays into it.

I think that if the relevant countries permit, China should set up its underwater listening network as much as possible.
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
People listen to whatever it is convenient to listen to, hypocrisy or whatever you want to call it never even plays into it.

I think that if the relevant countries permit, China should set up its underwater listening network as much as possible.
Well if the relevant countries permit the building of the sensor network inside their EEZs then there is obviously no inconsistency in the Chinese position. Yes, it is true that countries listen to whatever is convenient for them to listen to (this is how it has always been), but this is not the feeling of people on military forums. They justify feelings and demand actions based on such things as 'righteous indignation' and 'right vs wrong' and 'violation of sovereignty'. If you admit that the strong will do whatever the strong want, CHINA INCLUDED, then you need not burden yourself with such morality-laden concerns. The USN will spy in China's EEZ as long as the USN has the strength to do so and China does not have the strength to push the USN back, and no one should complain that it is 'wrong' for the USN to do so. China will also do whatever it wants in someone else's EEZ and will do so until and unless that someone has the strength to push China back. As long as we are all clear on this point, then it's all good. But as soon as you bring any moralistic or legal concerns back into the discussion, then all's not good, and you become a hypocrite. That's all I'm saying.
 

sanblvd

Junior Member
Registered Member
I feel like there has been a huge increase in ASW assets produced recently. Its almost as if PLAN first worked on anti ship capabilities in the late 90s to early 2000s, then start to work with anti air capability with 052C and 052D in mid 2000s to now, and finally they are starting to work on ASW capabilities.

This is a very dangerous plan, they were lucky that no one attacked them during this phased development.

Once ASW is done, I wonder what they will move on next? I'm thinking perfecting carrier operations.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
I feel like there has been a huge increase in ASW assets produced recently. Its almost as if PLAN first worked on anti ship capabilities in the late 90s to early 2000s, then start to work with anti air capability with 052C and 052D in mid 2000s to now, and finally they are starting to work on ASW capabilities.

This is a very dangerous plan, they were lucky that no one attacked them during this phased development.

Once ASW is done, I wonder what they will move on next? I'm thinking perfecting carrier operations.

Catching up is hard to do . PLA was starved of defense funding in 80's and early 90's while all those time the Japanese keep funding their naval development in 80's,90's ending up with roughly 40 DDG and 100 PC3 It is the bread and butter of the navy.

Only in last 21/2 decades China start to increase defense spending. But technological constraint due to embargo and the need to reinvent every wheel,slow down the naval build up.

I supposed surface to surface missile is the easiest since China has developed missile technology since the 50's and 60's . The surface to air missile defense follow after the breakthrough in radar technology and improving electronic industry

No that the navy has increase wordlwide exposure due to economic expansion and change of "far sea" naval doctrine , ASW get their due attention.

But PLAN is still in catching up mode vis a vis Japan and US. Only now they closed the gap in surface ships and submarine but still behind in ASW
Therefore it make sense to allocate larger share of the defense budget toward the Navy and Air force
 

sanblvd

Junior Member
Registered Member
20 years ago Chinese navy in all aspects when compare to Japanese navy was lacking, but now their Anti ship, anti air capability and amphibious capability has far surpass Japan.

If they use the same amount of dedication in build up their ASW assets it won't take that long.
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
A new class of ship measuring military acoustic takes shape at the Huangpu Shipyard, Guangzhou. Displacement ~ 5,000 tons.

DDKAXtIUMAEOgli.jpg


DDKAXtGUwAEvVqs.jpg

DDKAXtkVwAAVH4R.jpg


DDKAXtjVYAAV55l.jpg
Is there any official acknowledgement that this ship is a SURTASS-type vessel? The big cranes on the weather deck suggests to me that this ship could be something like a sub tender or other logistics-type ship rather than a surveillance ship, unless of course they are temporarily there for the purpose of construction. TBH it would be helpful to get shots of the stern to see what kinds of things are hanging off the rear end.
 

Yvrch

Junior Member
Registered Member
Well if the relevant countries permit the building of the sensor network inside their EEZs then there is obviously no inconsistency in the Chinese position. Yes, it is true that countries listen to whatever is convenient for them to listen to (this is how it has always been), but this is not the feeling of people on military forums. They justify feelings and demand actions based on such things as 'righteous indignation' and 'right vs wrong' and 'violation of sovereignty'. If you admit that the strong will do whatever the strong want, CHINA INCLUDED, then you need not burden yourself with such morality-laden concerns. The USN will spy in China's EEZ as long as the USN has the strength to do so and China does not have the strength to push the USN back, and no one should complain that it is 'wrong' for the USN to do so. China will also do whatever it wants in someone else's EEZ and will do so until and unless that someone has the strength to push China back. As long as we are all clear on this point, then it's all good. But as soon as you bring any moralistic or legal concerns back into the discussion, then all's not good, and you become a hypocrite. That's all I'm saying.

They justify feelings and demand actions based on such things as 'righteous indignation' and 'right vs wrong' and 'violation of sovereignty'

Actually, even the sole superpower have justified its feelings and demands actions on such things.
You know, the Russians?
I'm not calling anyone anything, but it's quite hilarious to see it when the ruse went sideways and got paid back in exact same coin, given the long running overwhelming narrative of shining city on the hill, universal values, freedom, democracy and such.


2016_12_29-USinterferenceForeignElections.r21401176743.png



Rule-based world order and customary international law, much ballyhooed by no other than US and Japan?

Let's throw in Okinotorishima here while we're at it.

China has been consistent in demanding US to stop survalillence in her EEZ. She didn't say she will not do so unilaterally. Quite consistent I'd say.
 
Top