PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

Skywatcher

Captain
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Well, not to show any disrespect to the Admiral, but the main accuracy a SLBM needs when it comes to attacking major cities is its range. If it's range it adequate, it's CEP can be huge (relatively speaking), be off by 2-3 miles, and still be effective when it comes to attacking a large metropolitan area.

As to the quietness, I agree with his statement. Right now, the US would find these vessels if they are some place the US Navy can get at them. But if they have the range for their missiles, they can sit safely, deep in the China Sea, even just off shore, and launch and the US could not stop that launch. If they had to be out to sea, beyond the 1st island chain, that would be different. In fact, in the deeper waters of the China Sea I imagine there are US attack boats tailing them. But not close in to shore.

If the JL-2 does have warheads in the 100-200 kiloton range, then you need it to be very accurate to go after the intended target (enemy strategic installations, as opposed to city busters).
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

If the JL-2 does have warheads in the 100-200 kiloton range, then you need it to be very accurate to go after the intended target (enemy strategic installations, as opposed to city busters).

Yes, but China's nuclear doctrine is minimal deterrence, not to conduct a decapitating strike.

I'd argue the PLA shouldn't allocate even one of its nuclear tipped missiles for attacking military targets, only civilian populaces, so as to maintain its doctrine of only being capable of a retaliation.

Of course, the PLA's current nuclear capability is very limited.
There are 4 094s that sound good on paper but only 1 is "operational" at this stage, and we don't know consistently if JL-2 can reach continental US from home waters, nor just how many MiRV warheads it has, or how powerful each is.

And the DF-31As are estimated to only exist in small quantities, only 15 launchers exist or something ridiculous like that.


I'd like to see a total of 8 SSBNs in service as a good number (4 094s and 4 096s circa 2020+), preferably armed with MiRVed JL-2s with range that can cover all the relevant targets (i.e.: continental US) while being safe within China's territorial waters, whether it's the bohai bastion or sanya.

It's usually said that you need 3 or 2 SSBNs to conduct a real deterrence patrol, because you need one that is on station and another which is transiting to the location (and another one that is at home, being maintained).
But if PLAN SSBNs are armed with missiles that can reach far enough without venturing from home waters, then they'd possibly only need 2 or even just 1 SSBN for each deterrence "patrol," meaning there will be more subs in the water capable of hitting targets at any one time.

A far larger land based ICBM force needs to be maintained as well -- at least 50 DF-31A/DF-41 launchers, with more missiles in readiness storage.

I think even foreign adversaries of the PLA can agree that China's nuclear deterrence capability is ridiculously feeble at this stage, namely in its capability to deter the US. DF-31 and various nuclear tipped IRBMs can deter russia, india, etc, quite handily, but the disparity between warheads the US have to strike at China and the few warheads China has to strike at the US is laughable.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

If the JL-2 does have warheads in the 100-200 kiloton range, then you need it to be very accurate to go after the intended target (enemy strategic installations, as opposed to city busters).
Yes, but I was speaking directly to the US Admiral's specific response to talk about the PRC's SSBNs attacking US cities, not about attacking specific US strategic installations like ICBM launch silos.

So, my point was simply that while a smaller CEP is absolutely critical for attacking such a strategic installation, a small CEP is not critical when attacking a metropolitan area.
 

chuck731

Banned Idiot
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Well, not to show any disrespect to the Admiral, but the main accuracy a SLBM needs when it comes to attacking major cities is its range. If it's range it adequate, it's CEP can be huge (relatively speaking), be off by 2-3 miles, and still be effective when it comes to attacking a large metropolitan area.

As to the quietness, I agree with his statement. Right now, the US would find these vessels if they are some place the US Navy can get at them. But if they have the range for their missiles, they can sit safely, deep in the China Sea, even just off shore, and launch and the US could not stop that launch. If they had to be out to sea, beyond the 1st island chain, that would be different. In fact, in the deeper waters of the China Sea I imagine there are US attack boats tailing them. But not close in to shore.



I wonder if a noisy SSBN close to shore could still be triangulated accoustically from a few hundred miles offshore and taken out preemptively with a nuclear tipped cruise missile.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

I wonder if a noisy SSBN close to shore could still be triangulated accoustically from a few hundred miles offshore and taken out preemptively with a nuclear tipped cruise missile.
Depends on the conditions in that shallower water, and the "listening" assets that are used.

But seriously, if one side starts throwing nuclear missiles around in an effort to prempt or respond to SLBM or ICBM attacks, then we all are going to have a lot more to worry about then whether or not we got one or two subs before they could launch.

I would imagine at that point both sides would be unloading everything they have at the other side...and then other players may get inolved too...either trying to make sure one side or the other is complete toast, or in the fear that missiles will be coming their way to try and level the playing field.

Hope it never comes anywhere near that.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Look at what it says in bold.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Chinese cyber spying may justify sanctions: US panel

AFP
By Shaun TANDON


Washington (AFP) - A US panel raised the specter of sanctions against China, warning Congress that Beijing has not curbed its rampant spying on American interests, a major national security concern.

The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission in its annual report also flagged China's massive increase in military spending as a worry, citing its naval expansion as a threat to America's role in Asia.

The report accused China of "directing and executing a large-scale cyber espionage campaign," penetrating the US government and private industry.

"There is an urgent need for Washington to take action to prompt Beijing to change its approach to cyberspace and deter future Chinese cyber theft," said the commission, set up by Congress to make policy recommendations.

The report listed proposals aimed at "changing the cost-benefit calculus" for China including banning the import of the manufacturing giant's goods that are determined to include technologies stolen from the United States.

Other possibilities include restricting access to American banks for companies deemed to have used stolen technologies or banning travel to the United States for people involved in hacking.

The commission called for a combination of steps, saying China would likely "make only temporary or minor changes" in response to solo measures.

The report comes after months of disclosures from former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden that America engaged in sweeping espionage worldwide, including the monitoring of online correspondence and tapping the communications of leaders of both friendly and rival countries.

China has used Snowden's revelations to accuse US President Barack Obama of double standards, saying Beijing is also a victim of cyber espionage.

The commission's report said the United States and China have maintained dialogue on cybersecurity but quoted observers as estimating that Snowden's disclosures have set back US efforts "by at least six months."

"Frankly, yes, it has hurt the US ability to express concern. There's no question of that," Dennis Shea, the vice chairman of the commission, told reporters.

"I personally believe there is a distinction between what the United States does for security purposes and the whole scale economic espionage that's going on directed against the United States," he said.

In a report released in February, the security firm Mandiant said China was devoting thousands of people to, and has made a major investment in, a military-linked unit that has pilfered intellectual property and government secrets.

The commission said the Chinese unit decreased activity for about one month after the Mandiant report, but the reduction may have been because the US government shared information with Internet service providers.

US National Security Adviser Susan Rice, in a speech Wednesday at Georgetown University, said cyber espionage also hurt China "because American businesses are increasingly concerned about the costs of doing business" there.

"If meaningful action is not taken now, this behavior will undermine the economic relationship that benefits both our nations," she said.

The wide-ranging report warned that China, which has steadily ramped up its military budget as its economy soared to the world's second largest, may soon challenge US forces' dominant role in Asia.

People's Liberation Army "modernization is altering the security balance in the Asia-Pacific, challenging decades of US military preeminence in the region," it said.

China is "rapidly expanding and diversifying its ability to strike US bases, ships and aircraft" throughout the region, including areas it could not previously reach, such as the US Pacific territory of Guam, it said.

Quoting the Office of Naval Intelligence, the report said that China by 2020 will likely have 313-342 submarines -- including around 60 that can fire intercontinental ballistic missiles or cruise missiles against ships.

Obama has pledged to "pivot" US foreign policy to pay greater attention to Asia in light of the rise of China, which has increasingly tense relations with US allies Japan and the Philippines over territorial disputes.

The commission called on Congress to fund shipbuilding to meet Obama's goal of stationing 60 percent of US warships in the Asia-Pacific by 2020, up from 50 percent.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

LOL what???


Also, sanctions would definitely be interesting to see. Mostly just to see all the parties who would be opposed to it and watch them struggle to come to a decision.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Look at what it says in bold.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Quoting the Office of Naval Intelligence, the report said that China by 2020 will likely have 313-342 submarines -- including around 60 that can fire intercontinental ballistic missiles or cruise missiles against ships.
Here's how I responded on Yahoo.

Jeff Head said:
Please. This article says the PLAN will have what? 313-342 submarines by 2020? Seriously? What idiot writer came up with that? The ONI never has said anything remotely similar to that. What editor let that pass? They have maybe 50 diesel electric subs right now, and another 10 nuclear subs of all varieties...so 60 subs total. And they have like 5 that can fire Sub Launched Ballistic missiles. So, we are supposed to believe they are going to build between 260 and 280 new subs in the next 6 years? What absolute Bravo Sierra. And 55 Ballistic Missile subs. This article has ZERO credibility.

What a rediculous statement. ONI has never forecast anything like that. Someone is grandstanding...or just utterly incompetent.
 
Last edited:

In4ser

Junior Member
Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

I love yahoo news...I always go there when I want a good laugh, especially when there is a flame wars in the comments section.
 
Top