09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

That picture from the chinese study with the seven shot tube seems to simply be a copy of this picture of the MAC:

I suspect the drawings were part of a study looking at existing concepts and solutions for an SLBM tube launching LACMs and they simply used an existing drawing as an example.

That is to say, the seven shot tube might not reflect what the eventual real sino-MAC may look like. However there are enough rumours over the years to suggest the PLAN are seriously looking at such a capability.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Russian offering to share nuclear sub technology with China would be a huge deal, as I think that is an area where China currently desperately needs to reform as there is a lot of entrenched interests using the necessary secrecy and high security of such strategic assets to effectively monopolize the market and protect ineffective individuals and organisations from any sort of real competition. Thus this removes almost all pressure for them to get their act right, which is why China's nuclear subs are still such a weakness.

I know for a fact that China has world class engineers and designers who proposed cutting edge nuclear sub designs and concepts way back in the late 90s and early 2000s which are only just coming online in the latest US and European classes. Had their proposals been given serious consideration, Chinese SSNs and SSBNs are almost certain to be far better than what they are now, and may well have closed the gap with the most advanced American and European classes to a generation or less.

The current Chinese nuclear sub maker is very similar to SAC back in the 90s and shares most if not more ills. But unlike the aviation industry, China's nuclear sub section only has one player , so there was never any real way the anyone could force it to shape up or have a realistic alternative the PLAN could turn to.

hmm. I cannot claim to more than you know. You certainly know more than i do. But i think, based on what we have already seen, that if the chinese government really wanted a new SSN, they would just given the task to another shipyard. There are many shipyards in china and there is more than a single large state-owned shipyard.

I think that the main reasons for the weak state of chinese nuclear submarines today:
- low level of chinese tech in past years (unlike other military fields, they couldnt import nuclear submarines and so had/have a lot of catch-up to do);
- cost (they are very expensive to build and maintain. They cant afford to build a lot of outdated nuclear vessels);
- low priority in past years (nuclear submarines are mainly ocean-going vessels. The chinese navy was, and still is to a certain extent, a defensive force)

 

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

China has many shipyards, but only one can make nuclear subs.

These are very specialist vessels that require unique skills and equipment to build. If China wants any other shipyard to build nuclear subs, it needs to make substantial monetary investments, but more importantly, it needs to get the existing shipyard to share its skills and knowledge, and that is when the vested interest use national security as an excuse to strangle all serious competition.

It's basically a catch-22 situation. You need to demonstrate you have a viable design to get the PLAN to give your proposal serious consideration, but you can't have a viable design if the existing nuclear sub player won't cooperate with you to allow you to fill in the blanks since they control all shipborne reactor knowledge and skills.

Maybe once China starts building nuclear carriers things might start to improve as the current stranglehold on key technologies are broken. But tbh, for that to happen China really needs a shipyard other than Dalian to be able to build nuclear carriers as I have serious reservations about the management at Dalian.

 

[Skywatcher]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Okay now Then to your SSN/SSBN
First a correction reading your Idea, it would not be a SSN it would in the USN system be a SSGN. This is because via replacing the SLBM's with multi shot SLCM the end product would have a huge cruise missile load. I mean if you figure a load of six missiles per tube, with the PLA boomers 16 missile tubes then you have 96 Cruise missiles compare that to there 52D with 64 VLS tubes capible of Such but mix loaded with other missile types reducing the Cruise missile strike load.
So then why build separate SSN and SSBN? the Money.
SSBN's are more expensive as they need those large missile tubes, this makes them rarer, They are build in significantly smaller numbers because they can run double or better the price of a SSN because of those missile launch systems. SSN's Are needed in numbers to counter those SSBN's as they have to move in and shadow them keep track of them and hunt down enemy SSN's who are hunting Allied SSBN's as well as escort fleet formations and sneek around enemy ports. You need At least double the Number of SSN's to do all of this so building a fleet of one class of very very expansive subs and then retro fitting them to pull triple duty means a very pricey fleet.

Also, if the 094 SSGN conversion carries 96 LACMs, then the 052Ds in the taskforce could focus on AA and ASW (possibly antiship too).

 

[asif iqbal]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Type 094 SSBN

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

A new image shows the 5th 094 SSBN under construction. This is believed to be a new variant like the 4th boat with a modified hull and also a casing shielding the propellers

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

A new image shows the 5th 094 SSBN under construction. This is believed to be a new variant like the 4th boat with a modified hull and also a casing shielding the propellers

Nice pic.

It was believed that a total of six Type 094s would be built before they moved on to the next version.

I guess we will see if that holds.

Six good SSBNs, which can take up regular deterence patrols is a very credible force.

Five vessels (which this one will represent) eclipses the four Vanguards the UK has, and the four Triomphant class SSBNs the Ferench have. So, now, behind the US and Russia, China now will have ther 3rd largest SSBN force in the world..

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

A few things:

Can you post the coordinates of this image?

Also, the shadow of the sub doesn't make it look like 094.

Finally, the "ducted propeller" could very well just be a fabric protective covering for the propeller as the sub is on land.

 

[kroko]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

A few things:

Can you post the coordinates of this image?

Also, the shadow of the sub doesn't make it look like 094.

Finally, the "ducted propeller" could very well just be a fabric protective covering for the propeller as the sub is on land.

Its in huludao. Check GE. However you will only see a photo dated 26-02-2013. You have to check the historical images of that place and choose the latest photo (date:11-10-2013).

 

[Blitzo]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Thanks for the info.

Well I think this particular submarine doesn't look like an 094 or 093. The shadow of its sail seems very long.

If anything, it sub might be the 032 test sub, however its length is far too long for it.


But I can kind of make out a hump on the submarine itself, and where it ends seems to be approximate to where we know 094 ends. The length of the sub is also similar to 094's dimensions. And near the middle appears to be two adjacent open missile tubes either under construction or maintenance or what not, so most likely this is an 094, and the shadows are simply caused by some temporary structure on the hull.


The question is whether this is a new sub or an old sub coming in for maintenance. Or it might just be 094 #4 before it supposedly entered service last year. Edit: although #4 was meant to have been launched in december 2011... And of course nuclear subs don't go from launch to commissioning so quickly.

Hmm.