Weakness of the PLAN

MIGleader said:

wait, thew sa-n-12 is the grizzly and the sa-n-7 is gadfly right? the old sovs already have the grizzly like the 52b's.

Click to expand...

i don't know, but huitong's website and sinodefense still lists SA-N-7 as the SAM for 956 and I have yet to read an article contrary to that.

Gollevainen said:

I have seen pics 8same ones that you, propaply) from Sovs. building for china and all of them field those big quadruple cannisters for Moskit.
Now yakhont is much more smaller missile than moskit and it isent desingned directly from moskit...

This from bhramos which is practically an improved yakhont for India.
Those who have wider imagination, can compare the size of the possible yakhont launchers and moskit launchers to the old styx launchers seen also in the pic...

Now, those who claim that 956EMs should field yakhont, can you provide some source that claim so or is it just your own asumptions?

Click to expand...

New Purchases of Kilo Submarines and Sovremenny Destroyers From Russia

On Jan. 3, 2002, Rosoboronexport signed a contract with the Chinese for $1.4 billion for the construction of two Sovremenny-class destroyers for PLA needs. Let's look again at the Rosvoouruzheniye catalog (text is excerpted):

"Sovremenny Class is a Russian class of destroyers designed to engage hostile ships by means of missile attack, and to provide warships and transport ships with protection against ship and air attack. Intended primarily for anti-ship operations, it was designed to complement anti-submarine warfare (ASW) Udaloy destroyers (of a previous generation). The ships have anti-ship, anti-aircraft, anti-submarine and coastal bombardment capability. The ships, with a maximum displacement of 8,480 tons, are similar in size to the U.S. Navy's Aegis-equipped missile cruisers, and are armed with an anti-submarine helicopter, 48 air defense missiles, 8 anti-ship missile launchers, torpedoes, mines, long-range guns and a comprehensive electronic warfare system.

Unit Cost: $425 Million
Build Time: 15 Months" (end of description)

So, why is China paying Russia $700 million per destroyer?

According to the understanding of the authors, the major reasons are as follows:

1. China's People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) intends to obtain these two destroyers as early as possible – ideally by early 2006. PLA strategists know that the probability of a conflict around Taiwan and/or in the South China Sea – with U.S. forces as the major adversary – is growing, and there is no time to waste. That's why PLAN is ready to spend extra money.

2. These destroyers will be equipped with the very best weapon systems available in Russia.

3. Without doubt, in parallel with the two destroyers constructed in St. Petersburg, the shipyards in Dalian city would master the technology for constructing similar (or even better) vessels.

Let's look for the details of these items.

According to Russia's Interfax agency (June 28), the Severnaya Verf (Northern Wharf) shipyard in Petersburg began building the first of two Sovremenny 956EM Project destroyers for China in June 2002. E and M in the project designation stand for "export" and "modernized." Construction of the second destroyer should start at the end of July. The two destroyers are to be completed and delivered to the customer in early 2006.

The ships were developed by the St. Petersburg-based Severnoye (Northern) Design Bureau. Several Russian shipyards competed for the contract, Baltiysky Zavod (St. Petersburg-based Baltic Shipbuilding Plant) and Severnaya Verf shipyards being the principal competitors. Eventually, the order was placed with Severnaya Verf, which was engaged in building two 956E destroyers for PLAN from 1997 to 2000.

The project 956EM destroyers will boast cutting-edge armament assets. This vessel has been designed for countering hostile surface ships and landing craft (its major duty), countering anti-aircraft and anti-missile defenses of combat and transportation ships, providing fire support to landing units, and patrolling and carrying out various missions as part of a formation or separately.

The 956EM destroyer is fitted with advanced missile and artillery assets and torpedo, radar and anti-submarine systems, as well as the Moskit supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. Length of the destroyer is 150m, and beam is 17m; it is capable of traveling at a speed of 34 knots (60 km per hour). (end of brief description)

Severnaya Verf, indeed, constructed for China two Sovremenny 956E destroyers in 1997-2000. Both destroyers – by 1997 – were about 40 percent ready. The Russian navy – the initial customer – terminated the order due to lack of funds. Severnaya Verf got the new order for the additional two destroyers, to be constructed from scratch, in terribly heavy competition with Baltiysky Zavod (no room here to describe this New Russian-style thriller).

Remarkably, (a) this time, construction should take place much more rapidly (by early 2006 the two destroyers should start service in Qingdao or Zhanjiang naval seaports) and (b) the 956EM destroyers will be much more advanced than the 956E ones; the 'M' means a lot here. According to Western experts, these destroyers – according to their design, at least – are the naval vessels of the 21st century.

And they are incomparably more advanced than two Luhai-class destroyers, the best and largest Chinese-made naval vessels, whose construction was finished in Dalian in 1997 and 2000, respectively (there is some uncertainty regarding the second destroyer).

According to an article in Moscow-based Novyye Izvestiya newspaper (June 27), China is preparing for the American occupation of the naval base at Cam Ranh, Vietnam, recently abandoned by the Russian navy. That's why, according to the Chinese-Russian contract signed on Jan. 3, 2002, Severnaya Verf must produce two Project 956EM ships for PLAN as early as 2005.

The Chinese were primarily attracted by the Moskit anti-ship strike system with its supersonic missiles, which NATO calls the "aircraft-carrier destroyer." Two 956 E destroyers, received in 1999-2000, increased greatly PLAN's capability regarding conflict with U.S. Navy aircraft carrier groups. And there is information that the two new 956EM destroyers, which Severnaya Verf has begun to build, are to be equipped with more improved weapons, namely, Yakhont systems, whose effective range reaches 280 km (as opposed to 100 km for the Moskit missiles).

China's naval strategy is not limited to the struggle over Taiwan. Chinese interests are increasingly shifting south, and the PLAN has been given the mission of defending oil- and gas-rich islands in the South China Sea. (end of article briefs)

Important comment: The Yakhont missile launcher and its anti-ship missile are much more compact than the Moskit (Sunburn) launcher and its missile. That's why it is possible to deploy, on a 956EM destroyer, at least 16 Yakhont systems (up to 24, according to some sources). One 956EM could have the combat potential of two to three 956E destroyers!

As the authors mentioned in the recently published article "Chinese multi-level air-defense network," sometime in April 2002 Russia and China signed a contract to sell two S-300F (RIF) ship-borne anti-aircraft complexes to China for $200 million. Beijing plans to install the RIF complexes, with a 120-km range, on two new-generation missile destroyers to be built in China by 2005.

According to Hong Kong media reports in mid-June, these two destroyers aren't inferior to the Sovremenny 956EM; they will be constructed by "436th plant" (evidently, in Dalian) and use Chinese-made gas-turbine engines of 26,700 kW capacity. Earlier, China had to import these engines from Ukraine; now China is capable of producing them (based on technology from the Ukrainian Zarya Corp.).

There is some speculation (also in the Hong Kong media) that purchasing two 965EM destroyers for $1.4 billion means the delay of the Chinese-made destroyers project. In the authors' opinion, this is absurd. To the contrary, payment of such money to Russia means that China will get every bit of manufacturing technology and use it at its own shipyards.

So, by the beginning of 2006, PLAN could have up to eight comparatively modern missile destroyers: two Luhai, two Sovremenny 956E, two Sovremenny 956EM, and two Chinese-made Sovremenny replicas. This is a great challenge to U.S. aircraft carrier groups.

New-Generation Diesel Electric Submarines

The leading U.S. papers published, in May-June 2002, dozens of reports on a Chinese-Russian contract for PLAN to purchase eight Kilo 636 diesel-electric submarines for $1.6 billion. We'll describe the most remarkable features of this bargain.

1) These submarines are much more advanced than the four Kilo submarines received by PLAN in 1995-98. They are equipped with two new-generation weapon systems:

1. Klub anti-ship cruise missiles with a range up to 200 km; the Klub or 3M54E1 is developed by the Yekaterinburg OKB (Experimental Design Bureau) Novator; no counterpart has been invented in the world. They have three stages: The first two define movement at subsonic speeds, the third goes into operation 20 km from the target at supersonic speed, which guarantees invulnerability from enemy air-defense weapons and destroys the enemy's ship. The Kilo-636 submarine with the Klub system is capable of salvo firing of missiles simultaneously from six torpedo tubes – and not only at surface targets, but also at submarines.
2. The Shkval torpedo, whose speed reaches 100 meters per second. After launch under water, it flies through the air and descends by parachute into the region where the hostile ship was detected and then again travels under water. Under such conditions the commander of the targeted submarine simply cannot perform an anti-torpedo maneuver. Incidentally, the Russian navy has no ships yet with such a weapon. In 2001, China acquired at least 40 Shkval torpedoes from Russia and/or Kazakhstan. It is supposed to use them on "093 project" nuclear submarines also.

2) Just like the Sovremenny 956EM contract, the contract for Kilo submarines caused intense competition among Russian enterprises. This resulted, by early July 2002, in the following: Five submarines will be produced by the Komsomolsk-na-Amure shipbuilding plant (the Khabarovsk region of the Russian Far East), two by the St. Petersburg-based Admiralteisky Verf plant, and one by the Sormovo shipbuilding plant on the Volga river, in the Nizhny Novgorod region. The contract for constructing two submarines will be transferred from the Komsomolsk-na-Amure plant to Northern Machine Building Enterprise (NME) in Severodvinsk city, on the White Sea. That's despite NME having no experience in Kilo submarine construction (in contrast with the other three shipyards), and getting the Kilo submarines from Severodvinsk to China will be very difficult. 3) The authors conclude that, simultaneously with the eight submarines constructed in Russia, at least four submarines of the same kind will be built at China Shipbuilding Industry Group Corp.(SIGC) shipyards in Shanghai, Wuhan or Guangzhou cities. As early as 1997, the Chinese and Russians negotiated for China's purchase of about 10 Kilo submarines in exchange for their manufacturing technology.

In 1999, China finished the construction of a "super-Kilo submarine" – the improved version of China's Song diesel-electric submarine. China already has part of the Kilo construction technology; now SIGC will get the entire technology. 4) The order for eight submarines is distributed between three Russian enterprises, in order to accelerate the project's realization. The Chinese will spare no efforts to get all the submarines by 2006 (despite the contract prescribing project completion by 2007).

Finally, by 2006, PLAN could get an entire fleet of comparatively advanced diesel-electric submarines: three to four Song, four old-generation Kilos, eight new-generation Kilos, and at least four Chinese-made Kilos of the new version. Such a fleet, united with the aforementioned advanced destroyers, could greatly affect the naval balance not only around Taiwan, but in the South China Sea and East China Sea as well.

First Chinese Aircraft Carrier

No information about construction of a Chinese aircraft carrier from scratch is available; however, China now has the Varyag unfinished aircraft carrier.

The latest information about the fate of Varyag could be reduced to the following:

Varyag, after spending 110 days being towed by tugboats through the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea, Indian Ocean, South China Sea, East China Sea and Yellow Sea, arrived at Dalian seaport in late March 2002. In April-May, the vessel showed no outward signs of becoming "the world's largest floating casino and hotel" (Macao-based company Agencia Turistica bought Varyag from Ukraine under just this pretext, for $20 million, in 1998).

Heavy security measures bar any civilian access to Varyag at the Dalian shipbuilding plant (which of the two plants is unknown). This has fueled speculation, in the Hong Kong and Taiwan media, that Varyag is being used by PLA for the attempt to build its first operational aircraft carrier.

Varyag is stripped of its armaments, it no longer has the nuclear reactors installed earlier by the Ukrainian company Generating Systems of Crimea. Still, the Kuznetsov-class carrier Varyag is 70 percent complete and weighs 33,600 tons.

According to Hong Kong media, it is extremely doubtful that Agencia Turistica will ever turn Varyag into a floating casino. Moreover, this company's owners are closely connected with PLAN. (end of Varyag-related information briefs)

It looks like the probability of Varyag becoming PLAN's first aircraft carrier should be estimated as at least 70 percent. And this also could be accomplished by 2006.

Conclusions

1) The PLA intends to accomplish a major PLAN overhaul by 2006.

2) At that time China will have complete technology for manufacturing advanced submarines and destroyers.

3) The balance of power in East Asia (let alone around Taiwan) would be tilted in favor of China.

well then again its not parel whit the pics we all can view. The article itself is speculating about it, not giving it as a fact. Also, why on earth china has to aquire three modern SSMs from aviable four marketed by Russia ALONG when they are making two to three models by themselves? Whats the point of fielding two ship classes, all whit different SSM fit? Sure there is more easyer ways to achieve support and maintanance catasthropes?

Couple of things. All the articles mentioning yakhonts are older than ones citing improved moskits. That newsmax article is from 2002. (newsmax site is a bit unreliable anyway, in my opinion) Kanwa stuff mentioning moskits is from 2003 and 2004.

Google for pics of 956em (make sure its new ones, not articles bout old ones) there's visibile differences between new and old but the containers for missiles ARE the ones for moskits.

Yakhont is not evolved moskit. It's not just size, it's different layout too, different engine, etc. I'm sure yakhont used technology from moskit and improved on it, and i wouldn't be surprised if improved moskit borrows some stuff (like the engine, makign it more efficient thus providing longer range) from the yakhont but those two are different missiles.

All that being said, moskit is by no means a bad missile. It's 30% heavier and slightly faster than yakhont, providing more kinetic energy upon impact, in addition to over 50% bigger warhead. I don't know how much those stats have been changed in improved moskit but weight / speed is probably the same, with perhaps only warhead being smaller but also likely no smaller than yakhont's. (note that i'm only guessing here.) Also, guidance system should benefit most from the refit and modified design, especially since the head of the missile is bigger than yakhonts (which also has to provide for the frontal air intake, unlike moskits side air intakes). I'm again guessing here but i wouldn't be surprised if the improved moskit has better guidance than the yakhont.

Gollevainen said:

well then again its not parel whit the pics we all can view. The article itself is speculating about it, not giving it as a fact. Also, why on earth china has to aquire three modern SSMs from aviable four marketed by Russia ALONG when they are making two to three models by themselves? Whats the point of fielding two ship classes, all whit different SSM fit? Sure there is more easyer ways to achieve support and maintanance catasthropes?

Click to expand...

Excellent statement Gollevainen. Why have two classes of ships with different SSM? that does not make any sense. In actual operations it makes things difficult,but not impossible, for a navy to work in unison. Conmmonality is a key to sucessful operations.

Well pic speaks (or lies) better than thousand words....



this was posted by swimmerXC and is supposedly the new sovremennyy for chinese navy. Now is anyone seriosly stating that Yakhonts will be fitted anymore? Also the supposed Kashtan fitting is just rumours as you can see the AK-630s. I have wondered that also, why would china go for Kashtan if it already have two CIWS in production?

never quote a newsmax article, it's full of blatant bias and false information.

for example, Sov clones? Who's ever heard of Chinese sovs? And they clearly discounted the 4 052 class destroyers.

No way is the Yakhont and the Moskit alike. The sunburn has 4 side engines, while the Yakhont is more of a wingless Fishbed/Shipwreck minimized with a nose intake.

China produces 2 kinds of CIWS already? I know China has the type 730 and the AK-630 in service, but which other kind of CIWS does China produce? The LW-2000 isn't for the navy.

PS- You don't have to mention newsmax's faults everytime, do you?

kashtan is going on them. the missles may not be yahkont, but a 200 km moskit. this is according to stratege center.

it would be difficult to remodel a sov for the type 730, so why try?

china payed an extra 400 mil for those sovs, and they dont pay that for nothing.