doggychow14
New Member
wats the deal with the new Yuan-Class sub. i would like to know more about it and if its true that is it is "better" than the Russian Kilo's.
new Yuan-Class Sub
- Thread starter doggychow14
- Start date
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese produce new type of sub
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published July 16, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China's naval buildup has produced a new type of attack submarine that U.S. intelligence did not know was under construction, according to U.S. defense and intelligence officials.
The submarine was spotted several weeks ago for the first time and has been designated by the Pentagon as the first Yuan-class of submarine.
A photograph of the completed submarine in the water at China's Wuhan shipyard was posted on a Chinese Internet site this week and confirmed by a defense official as the new submarine. Wuhan is located inland, some 420 miles west of Shanghai.
One official said the new submarine was a "technical surprise" to U.S. intelligence, which was unaware that Beijing was building a new non-nuclear powered attack submarine. U.S. intelligence agencies have few details about the new submarine but believe it is diesel-powered rather than nuclear-powered, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The new boat, which appears to be a combination of indigenous Chinese hardware and Russian weapons, suggests that China is building up its submarine forces in preparation for a conflict over Taiwan, defense analysts say.
"China has decided submarines are its first-line warships now, their best shot at beating carriers," said Sid Trevethan, an Alaska-based specialist on the Chinese military. "And China is right."
"One has to marvel at the enormity of the investment by the People's Liberation Army in submarines," said Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military.
China also is building two nuclear-powered submarines -- one Type 093, believed to be based on the Russian Victor-III class and armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles, and a Type 094 attack submarine, which the Pentagon believes has a finished hull and will be ready for deployment next year.
According to Mr. Trevethan, China currently has a force of 57 deployed submarines, including one Xia-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine, five Han submarines, four Kilos, seven Songs, 18 Mings and 22 Soviet-designed Romeos. Beijing also has eight more Kilos on order with Russia.
Disclosure of the new submarine comes as the United States is trying to sell eight diesel submarines to Taiwan, which Beijing views as a breakaway province. Taiwan currently has just two World War II-era Guppy-class submarines and two 1980s Dutch submarines.
Mr. Fisher, an analyst with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said that despite the imbalance of power on the Taiwan Strait in favor of Beijing, the Bush administration has been slow to sell the submarines it offered Taiwan in April 2001.
"It is simply appalling that the United States cannot get its act together to organize the production of eight new submarines for Taiwan," Mr. Fisher said.
U.S. defense officials have said delays with the Taiwan submarine deal are the result of the Taipei government's budget problems.
Chinese leaders told National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice last week that China would "not sit idly by" as Taiwan moved toward formal independence, and President Hu Jintao denounced U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan.
But Miss Rice said the United States will go ahead with its Taiwan arms sales plan because of China's missile buildup opposite the island.
A Pentagon report made public in May stated that China is changing its warship forces from a coastal defense force to one employing "active offshore defense."
"This change in operations requires newer, more modern warships and submarines capable of operating at greater distances from China's coast for longer periods," the report said, noting that submarine construction is a top priority.
Mr. Fisher said the Chinese submarine buildup should prompt the Pentagon to step up U.S. anti-submarine warfare capabilities, which he said are "at an historic low" because of cutbacks in specialized ships and aircraft.
The Navy should consider building its own diesel attack submarine to be able to "effectively duke it out with the new tidal wave of Chinese subs, that if left unchecked, may soon dominate the Asian littoral regions," Mr. Fisher said.
The Pentagon is also building up U.S. naval forces in the Pacific, with the addition of up to six attack submarines in Guam and the possible deployment of an aircraft carrier battle group to Hawaii in the coming months.
www.washingtontimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese produce new type of sub
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published July 16, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China's naval buildup has produced a new type of attack submarine that U.S. intelligence did not know was under construction, according to U.S. defense and intelligence officials.
The submarine was spotted several weeks ago for the first time and has been designated by the Pentagon as the first Yuan-class of submarine.
A photograph of the completed submarine in the water at China's Wuhan shipyard was posted on a Chinese Internet site this week and confirmed by a defense official as the new submarine. Wuhan is located inland, some 420 miles west of Shanghai.
One official said the new submarine was a "technical surprise" to U.S. intelligence, which was unaware that Beijing was building a new non-nuclear powered attack submarine. U.S. intelligence agencies have few details about the new submarine but believe it is diesel-powered rather than nuclear-powered, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The new boat, which appears to be a combination of indigenous Chinese hardware and Russian weapons, suggests that China is building up its submarine forces in preparation for a conflict over Taiwan, defense analysts say.
"China has decided submarines are its first-line warships now, their best shot at beating carriers," said Sid Trevethan, an Alaska-based specialist on the Chinese military. "And China is right."
"One has to marvel at the enormity of the investment by the People's Liberation Army in submarines," said Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military.
China also is building two nuclear-powered submarines -- one Type 093, believed to be based on the Russian Victor-III class and armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles, and a Type 094 attack submarine, which the Pentagon believes has a finished hull and will be ready for deployment next year.
According to Mr. Trevethan, China currently has a force of 57 deployed submarines, including one Xia-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine, five Han submarines, four Kilos, seven Songs, 18 Mings and 22 Soviet-designed Romeos. Beijing also has eight more Kilos on order with Russia.
Disclosure of the new submarine comes as the United States is trying to sell eight diesel submarines to Taiwan, which Beijing views as a breakaway province. Taiwan currently has just two World War II-era Guppy-class submarines and two 1980s Dutch submarines.
Mr. Fisher, an analyst with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said that despite the imbalance of power on the Taiwan Strait in favor of Beijing, the Bush administration has been slow to sell the submarines it offered Taiwan in April 2001.
"It is simply appalling that the United States cannot get its act together to organize the production of eight new submarines for Taiwan," Mr. Fisher said.
U.S. defense officials have said delays with the Taiwan submarine deal are the result of the Taipei government's budget problems.
Chinese leaders told National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice last week that China would "not sit idly by" as Taiwan moved toward formal independence, and President Hu Jintao denounced U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan.
But Miss Rice said the United States will go ahead with its Taiwan arms sales plan because of China's missile buildup opposite the island.
A Pentagon report made public in May stated that China is changing its warship forces from a coastal defense force to one employing "active offshore defense."
"This change in operations requires newer, more modern warships and submarines capable of operating at greater distances from China's coast for longer periods," the report said, noting that submarine construction is a top priority.
Mr. Fisher said the Chinese submarine buildup should prompt the Pentagon to step up U.S. anti-submarine warfare capabilities, which he said are "at an historic low" because of cutbacks in specialized ships and aircraft.
The Navy should consider building its own diesel attack submarine to be able to "effectively duke it out with the new tidal wave of Chinese subs, that if left unchecked, may soon dominate the Asian littoral regions," Mr. Fisher said.
The Pentagon is also building up U.S. naval forces in the Pacific, with the addition of up to six attack submarines in Guam and the possible deployment of an aircraft carrier battle group to Hawaii in the coming months.
I'll try to go dig some pictures up for you guys. At this point nobody knows the specs on this new class of sub. But it is believed that China incorporated technologies they learned from Kilos and the existing Song class. Also Russian assistance is believed to be involved.
doggychow14
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #6
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/articles/military_photos_200471823.
there's a pic of it at the site. aren't diesel subs quieter than nuclear? http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/posts/3671266.shtml
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/
there's a pic of it at the site. aren't diesel subs quieter than nuclear? http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/posts/3671266.shtml
http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/
Normally it is. But SSK's do not have the speed of nuclear powered subs.
I got the pics uploaded into the gallery, enjoy.
I got the pics uploaded into the gallery, enjoy.
I've posted this already on another forum, this is a compilation of my answers to various questions, so hopefully it makes sense in "absentia" of the original questions, but I'll paraphrase them here:
I also believe that it's a modified Kilo (look at the torp layout and sonar intrusion). It's lack of a frontal dome tends to indicate a dependance on other means for it's task. It lacks the ability to go out and do SSK in an absolutely lethal sense, and that implies fighting in controlled areas or an assumption that it's enemy will be in a notionally controlled environment. (ie in waters of chinas choosing where other support assets can provide intel down the line)
My third opinion is that China is toying with ice pack penetration. High sails fitted with planes have generally been used by nukes to punch through the icepack prior to simulating a launch. If you're under the ice it's harder to be seen at a MAD level (not impossible - just harder). The fact that the top half of the bow is less populated by launchers also provides an opportunity to "snuffle through" thin ice as part of that process. Sonar does appear to have been sacrificed in an absolutly autonomous sense. That also seems to indicate a pairing opportunity with another sub or approp skimmer when its in an SSK role.
In short, I think this small run of vessels are mules testing the hull concept for small SSK nukes, and SSN's/SSGN's (cruise launchers, not VLS launchers). They are functional mules though, so have a dual purpose
I agree with you on the Amur relationship. In fact on other boards I have mentioned the Amur links, it's just poor craftwork on my part (and being lazy) that I only referenced the Kilo link.
Also the sail dimensions makes me wonder whether it has ADS VLS built in.
I suspect that the Chinese were building this concurrently on their own initiative (read into that what you wish). Russia is not in a position to build it's own demands, Indias and Chinas concurrently - its economy and current industrial base wouldn't support it. I suspect that the Chinese have been parallel building.
More to the point, their build quality has lifted in a dramatically short time frame - the days of mocking their absolute build quality are receding. I still think they have problems, as from my own experience in discussions with them at air shows has shown that they are not that focussed on the issues of milspec rated equipement. The build philosophy appears to be COTS dual use and to get volume going. The west tends to focus on Milspec for robustness and redundancy issues and work on the premise that these are tactical and operational advantages. That premise was based on the problems that we knew the Russians had with their gear on sustained tempo.
The Chinese OTOH have been able to see dramatically what effect technology has had on reduced theatre war, and have also been exposed to their own quality control probs from Russia - hence one of the reasons why they start to modify things as soon as they "look at them". Su27's being a case in point.
They've also seen what problems India, Malaysia and the old Warpac countries have had with some Russian kit. In that sense, they are incredibly fast learners and are willing to change processes immediately to resolve it. For me that shows that there is some commercial "haka" mentality - warfighting is a business - and they are treating it as such.
I also believe that it's a modified Kilo (look at the torp layout and sonar intrusion). It's lack of a frontal dome tends to indicate a dependance on other means for it's task. It lacks the ability to go out and do SSK in an absolutely lethal sense, and that implies fighting in controlled areas or an assumption that it's enemy will be in a notionally controlled environment. (ie in waters of chinas choosing where other support assets can provide intel down the line)
My third opinion is that China is toying with ice pack penetration. High sails fitted with planes have generally been used by nukes to punch through the icepack prior to simulating a launch. If you're under the ice it's harder to be seen at a MAD level (not impossible - just harder). The fact that the top half of the bow is less populated by launchers also provides an opportunity to "snuffle through" thin ice as part of that process. Sonar does appear to have been sacrificed in an absolutly autonomous sense. That also seems to indicate a pairing opportunity with another sub or approp skimmer when its in an SSK role.
In short, I think this small run of vessels are mules testing the hull concept for small SSK nukes, and SSN's/SSGN's (cruise launchers, not VLS launchers). They are functional mules though, so have a dual purpose
I agree with you on the Amur relationship. In fact on other boards I have mentioned the Amur links, it's just poor craftwork on my part (and being lazy) that I only referenced the Kilo link.
Also the sail dimensions makes me wonder whether it has ADS VLS built in.
I suspect that the Chinese were building this concurrently on their own initiative (read into that what you wish). Russia is not in a position to build it's own demands, Indias and Chinas concurrently - its economy and current industrial base wouldn't support it. I suspect that the Chinese have been parallel building.
More to the point, their build quality has lifted in a dramatically short time frame - the days of mocking their absolute build quality are receding. I still think they have problems, as from my own experience in discussions with them at air shows has shown that they are not that focussed on the issues of milspec rated equipement. The build philosophy appears to be COTS dual use and to get volume going. The west tends to focus on Milspec for robustness and redundancy issues and work on the premise that these are tactical and operational advantages. That premise was based on the problems that we knew the Russians had with their gear on sustained tempo.
The Chinese OTOH have been able to see dramatically what effect technology has had on reduced theatre war, and have also been exposed to their own quality control probs from Russia - hence one of the reasons why they start to modify things as soon as they "look at them". Su27's being a case in point.
They've also seen what problems India, Malaysia and the old Warpac countries have had with some Russian kit. In that sense, they are incredibly fast learners and are willing to change processes immediately to resolve it. For me that shows that there is some commercial "haka" mentality - warfighting is a business - and they are treating it as such.
doggychow14
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #9
Does the sub have an AIP. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/yuan.asp says some sources say it does.
Nothing in place to give absolute confirmation, but again, I would suspect that it's highly likely.doggychow14 said:
The sub is large enough to be a fleet unit, that means that it's tasking appears to be long range and running loose.
If thats the case, then it needs stamina - and an AIP will be critical.