Two More Chinese SSBNs Spotted

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
Given that JL-2 missiles are MIRV'd, this will give China some real second strike capability. Previous 092 were noisy, unreliable and rendered almost a non-factor by its downfalls. Eventhough the new SSBN may still be obsolete by modern standards, it's a huge improvement for China.


Allow me to post a bigger pic.......
 

Truculent

New Member
It may be a huge improvement but I have seen elsewhere that a few retired submariners thought it probably handles like a pig!
 

crobato

New Member
With a hump like that, you are going to have a high center of gravity. That's not going to be nice when you turn the sub around. Plus the hump is not going to do good with the hydrodynamics. And they better make sure those holes around the hump are going to be covered underwater, or they're going to make drag or noise.

What's impressive that China now appears to have settled their nuclear reactor technologies into safe and stable designs, and can now apparently pump out nuclear subs like burgers off a fast food outlet. It seems likely that there are three of these subs, and the corresponding SSN ratio is not going to be negative to the SSBNs. That means at least 3 to 6 093s would have to be on the water or launched as well. There is a huge immense building on the back that from GE images, looks like it can hold a fleet of these subs, obviously a new huge manufacturing facility. That's probably more profound in the long run, it means they're going to crank out subs en masse.

The design of the sub as it looks now however, is less than impressive. Its fairly small for an SSBN at a measured 130m in length, when most appear to be from 150m and above. Its obviously converted from an 093 design, and quite conservative. They don't have exactly ambitious requirements for it, and appear to be satisfied they can for now, put these things in the water, safely and reliably. All this indicates a transition phase. Their next step is going to be more ambitious, and most probably an SSBN that will be designed from scratch to be one.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
layout

Crobato,
Why do you think the Soviet Typhoon, the largest boomer, has its missile compartment in front of the sail?

http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/bcmt/slbm_2.htm

Only the first of these submarines to be constructed, the Dmitry Donskoi, is still in service with the Russian Navy, serving as a test platform for the Bulava (SS-NX-30) missile currently under development. All the R-39 missiles have been retired. The Typhoons are slated to be replaced with the Borei class starting in 2007.
http://www.answers.com/topic/typhoon-class-submarine
Will we ever see this layout again in smaller subs? Also, since the PLAN now has Xia follow on, in your opinion, what are they likely to do with the old Xia?
 

crobato

New Member
I'm not really sure what is the logic in the design of the Typhoon. If I learned something new I would let you know.

The Typhoon design wasn't carried into the next generation of Russian SSBNs like the Borei. I had the impression that the Typhoon wasn't meant just to be an SSBN, but a family of subs of sorts that may include special cargo transport.

As for the old Xia, the difference of missile diameters and sizes between the JL-1 and the much larger JL-2 renders a refit to make the Xia JL-2 compatible impossible. (It was easier to modify a Golf class for JL-2 test firing since that sub only has one single tube running up the sail). The current "wisdom" on the Xia---which as of the 2005 GE image is undergoing an extensive refit---is that the sub will be converted to an SSGN.
 

crobato

New Member
Oh and I should add there are actually three subs in that GE image. If you are keen you would spot the third sub, which by the way, isn't really on the water. The third sub has its rear end sticking out of the assembly hall, apparently about to be rolled into the dry dock.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
I'm not really sure what is the logic in the design of the Typhoon. .. I had the impression that the Typhoon wasn't meant just to be an SSBN, but a family of subs of sorts that may include special cargo transport. .. The current "wisdom" on the Xia---which as of the 2005 GE image is undergoing an extensive refit---is that the sub will be converted to an SSGN.
In case you didn't know, Typhoon was designed as an "unsinkable" boomer capable of firing SLBMs from under the Arctic ice, by some accounts. The advantage of placing the missile compatment forward of the sail is to have reactor, living/intertainment quarters and command/control all closely grouped together. I guess the size determined the layout.
I would also expet the Xia to be an SSGN and/or training & trials platform.
 

crobato

New Member
Is there any Microsoft images? I would be happy if someone can point out if Microsoft has any equivalent to Google Earth.

As of GE images in 2005, the Xia is in the drydock for a major refit. The front upper bow is exposed, indicating changes in the sensor; the missile compartments are exposed indicating work being done there; the compartment behind the missile compartment is also open indicating work on the power section (new reactor?). The propeller is also shrouded, which may indicate a new prop. A model of the Xia has surfaced that showed the sub having a seven bladed variable pitch prop. It would be nice to see an update on the area.

As for the Typhoon, it may be meant for being more than just an SSBN, since a cargo or transport version was also proposed. By concentrating everything to the back of the sub, you are in fact duplicating the layout of a container ship, underwater style. It maybe that the Typhoon was originally intended to spawn an entire family of submarines on its own.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
pictures, quote

A model of the Xia has surfaced that showed the sub having a seven bladed variable pitch prop. ..As for the Typhoon, it may be meant for being more than just an SSBN, since a cargo or transport version was also proposed. By concentrating everything to the back of the sub, you are in fact duplicating the layout of a container ship, underwater style. It maybe that the Typhoon was originally intended to spawn an entire family of submarines on its own.
Could you post a picture of that model? I was unable to find it.
But I had found these:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/new_chinese_ballistic_missile.php

http://www.denizaltici.com/images/DH-2.NUC.CIN.SSBN Type 092 Xia cl..jpg

http://www.denizaltici.com/images/DH-2.NUC.CIN.SSBN Xia cl.foto.jpg


Could China Conduct Deterrent Patrols?

The limited range of the JL-2 is a second major constraint. Various official US sources place the range as 4500 miles, 4000 nautical miles or 8000 kilometers.

NASIC is fond of saying the JL-2 will “for the first time, allow Chinese SSBNs to target portions of the United States from operating areas located near the Chinese coast.”

The operative word here is portions … as in Alaska. I may not be willing to trade Los Angeles for Taipei, as Xiong Guangkai (or whoever) suggested, but Anchorage is another story. Or, at least, the Chinese have to worry about that.
To target cities in CONUS – say our latte sipping friends in Seattle, for instance—Chinese boomers would have to patrol the deep waters of the North Pacific – a very long round-trip. Indeed, ONI’s suggestion that five submarines would be necessary to keep only a “near continuous” deterrent at sea suggests ONI’s analysts have reached similar conclusions about the distance of patrolling areas from China’s submarine bases.
Another operational concern that points to North Pacific patrols is the need to hold at risk both Moscow and populations centers in the Continental United States. The actual operating area might be slightly larger if China’s leaders were willing to have submarines patrol out of range of some targets until receiving the order to fire.
To reach the North Pacific, a Chinese boomer would have to transit the narrow gaps between South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan – a kind of Asian equivalent of the GIUK gap—to reach areas in the North Pacific from which the JL-2 could target significant portions of the United States.
This island chain offers a number of opportunities for fixed sensor emplacements, similar to the SOSUS system, that should provide ample opportunity for US attack submarines and other US and Japanese ASW platforms to pick up and trail the boomer on patrol. Although I wasn’t cleared the see the good stuff during my stint on the Japan desk at OSD, a review of press reporting suggests a high level of knowledge about Chinese submarine operations in and around Japanese waters.
Once out in the deep water, Chinese SSNs and SSBNs would be extremely vulnerable because deep water propagates sound very effectively. Stefanick estimates the Los Angeles-class submarine has a 25-100 nm detection advantage over the Victor III, which is probably quieter than the 093 and 094 class submarines. That reminds of a line in that silly e-mail about Chuck Norris: If you can see Chuck Norris, Chuck Norris can see you. If you can’t see Chuck Norris, you may be only seconds away from death. Replace “see” and “Chuck Norris” with “hear” and “Los Angeles-class” and now “Virginia-class” submarines.
Range is just one of the operational concerns, of course. China would also have to think about secure, survivable communications systems for patrolling boomers. This is long topic, however, and brings up much larger discussion about command and control issues.

Hainan Island?

Although the Boomer was spotted up North, near Dalian, some folks think China will eventually base the SSBN at or near the Yulin Naval Base on Hainan Island. I was skeptical that China would base the SSBN so far south. Indeed, I would have thought that basing the submarine so far from a patrolling area against North American targets would suggest a Russia-oriented role for the 094.
But ONI and others, however, seem to believe that the 094 will make the 9,000 km round-trip between Hainan Island and the patrolling area that I outlined. Assuming that the submarine travels about 10 knots (18-19 km/hour) to avoid cavitation that would compromise the location of the submarine, the round trip from Hainan to the patrolling area takes about 10 days each way (the trip is about 4300 km). Assuming the 094 has an 80 day endurance, that leaves a 60 day patrol.
All of a sudden, that ONI estimate of 5 submarines to maintain a “near continuous” presence makes sense. 5 submarines for a sixty day patrol works out to about 300 days a year. Possibly ONI estimates that the SSBN’s have a little more endurance or that the Skippers are willing to run a few more risks to get on station. But the numbers work out about right.
Someone told Demetri Sevastopulo that basing the 094 on Hainan Island “would give its submarines easier passage and make them harder to track and target.”
Easier isn’t the same thing as easy. The submarine still has to pass through the Luzon Strait which is relatively narrow (360 kilometers, broken into smaller passages by several islands).
Admittedly, the Luzon Strait is a complex littoral environment with lots of shipping noise in which Chinese boomers could hide and get out to sea. But the Navy can still study, model and line with the Strait with sensors. This fact is not lost on the Office of Naval Research, which seems to be very interested in the “unique oceanography observed in the South China Sea” and seems to have funded a fair amount of research including the Asian Seas International Acoustics Experiment (ASIAEX), Windy Islands Soliton Experiment (WISE) and god knows what else.
And, of course, once through the Luzon Strait, a skipper still has the problem that deep water propagates sound. ..
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/category/china/
 

crobato

New Member
Why don't you just go ahead and download Google Earth, which is free, and check it out for yourself. You can bookmark the locations and check it time to time for updates. You don't need to look to FAS or anything like that when you can easily do it yourself for free.

The new Xia 406 model pic can be found in the CDF or Chinese Defense Forum in the Navy then Under Sea then 091/092 thread department. I also have a copy here but I don't know how to post images on this forum which I think requires a special authority. I can however, post the image to DT's affiliated SDF or Sinodefenceforum.

The range of the JL-2 mentioned in the above article is based on its land based equivalent, the DF-31. Mind you, that is a dangerous estimate because the 11,000km DF-31A is said to be entering service circa 2007, and likewise, this may assume that this missile may have its SLBM equivalent (perhaps designated JL-2A.)

The article makes a lot of speculation about basing in Hainan. Hainan has sprawling sub facilities that includes underground tunnels and submarine caves, and quite a number of subs are spotted there, including the 093 and the improved 091 (091G). Kilos, Songs and Yuans are also spotted there. The island is now the focus of new space launch facility that will be built there.

But basing the nuclear SSBNs? Despite the reasonable speculation, there is no evidence that this has occurred. All the 094 sightings via satellite and photograph had remained in the North China Sea and the Bohai sea.

I'm still not clear why China wants an SSBN, considering that land based mobile ICBMs can be stationed at more northern latittudes in Heliojang province within China than the Bohai sea region. In order to reach the same latitude, a PLAN boomer has to slip through the disputed Tsushima-Dokdo islands, then go up the Sea of Japan, then go through a narrow straight via Hokkaido, then to the Kuril Islands and the seas near Siberia.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
I'm still not clear why China wants an SSBN, considering that land based mobile ICBMs can be stationed at more northern latittudes in Heliojang province within China than the Bohai sea region. In order to reach the same latitude, a PLAN boomer has to slip through the disputed Tsushima-Dokdo islands, then go up the Sea of Japan, then go through a narrow straight via Hokkaido, then to the Kuril Islands and the seas near Siberia.
I agree, and it's been noted by some on sinodef. forum that SSBN fleet isn't going to be that survivable/credible in the case of China. My guess is that they may opted to have a hybrid SSBN/GN class that will carry a mix of SLBMs & SLCMs, or that they just decided to get experience building & operating them as extra option to fall back on. BTW, it's not necessary to go across the Sea of Japan, just by sailing around Japan from E.China Sea will bring an SSBN to the East of the Kuril Islands chain. IMO Hainan may serve as training and/or temporary base for SSBNs to familiarize their crews with operating in the S.China Sea.
And to avoid the chokepoints, theoretically it's possible to slowly sail South across Indonesian straits & around Australia and NZ into the S. Pacific. Once between Hawaii and Galapagos islands or Baja California, and NE of Tahiti, a boomer can target all continental US. Or it can sail across the Indian Ocean, around Africa and into the Atlantic to an area just NE of S. America to cover US Eastern seaboard & the rest of CONUS. On the other hand, the same boomer can target Alaska & parts of US W.Coast (if not all of it) from the W. Pacific, as the above quote suggests. After all, the US West coast is part of US mainland, with California being the most populous state. For deterrance purposes, it may be more than enough, IMHO.
 
Last edited:

crobato

New Member
The problem with deep sea water is that it is also the most conducive to sound and long range detection. Hence the sub trying to creep around the Korean peninsula might actually have a better chance of being undetected than to head into the open Pacific Ocean. Around the East China sea, the area between Taiwan and Japan are frequently patrolled by the navies and MPAs of both. So you're trying to get through a picket fence there. There is not to mention there are major US naval and air force base in Okinawa. Or you may try to get the boomers to sneak through the Philippine islands but what do you do next after wards? The Philippine Sea is deep ocean, and at the other end of it, you already have Guam, which has a US naval and air force base, with at least three LA class submarines stationed there.

The most likely scenario is that the 094s are waiting for the DF-31A equivalents of the JL-2s. That will give them around 11,000km range, which allows them to target anywhere right off the Bohai sea. Given the alleged debut of the DF-31A, its only a matter of time, certainly imminent, that this missile will get an SLBM version.

There is also a theoritical possibility that the subs can be used for ASAT. The last ASAT launch was launched with the KT-1 booster. That's basically the civilian version of the DF-21 IRBM, whose SLBM version is the JL-1A used for the Xia. The KT-2 booster, with much greater altitude and range, corresponds to the DF-31/31A, and which in turn, corresponds to the JL-2. There is a possibility of this idea given a most recent event.

This event has something to do with patrols and with the recent moon probe launching of Chang'e. In addition to two Yuanwang space event ships, one stationed in the South Pacific, one in the South Atlantic, one nuclear sub also went into the deep ocean on patrol, and according to a Kyodo news blurb, the sub sent signals to the launched probe in order to effect a course correction. This was an exercise meant to see if subs can be used to send signals to satellites for course corrections, and this has potential ASAT use.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
another alternative

Good points! SSBNs/GNs can also be used against aircraft carriers & their escorts, and they won't need long range SLBMs for that, IMO.
But if we are talking about 11K mi range missiles, I bet that boomers to carry them will have to be larger than current Xia follow-ons.
I did try to find a pic of Xia model again, without success. Please post a link to image, if possible. Here is what I did find:
Sea-Launched Missile Facilities
2 possible SSBNs pics- see attachment. They are to fussy to tell, and may not be very recent. You can post images by going to "advanced" editing and then attach files from your computer (first save them there) just like with your email.
As for mobile ICBMs in NE China, their trajectory will cross the Russian Far East making their use politicaly (if not militarily) risky, not to mention BMD interceptors in Alaska & California, and TBMD in Japan. This is probably another possible reason why the PRC leadership decided to proceed with SSBN option.
 
Last edited:

crobato

New Member
You are already in the correct region already. The subs on the pier are the Hans. The Xia is in fact further to the north, just a little bit more but in dry land, inside a drydock, having a major refit.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
Thanks!
I don't see the propeller clearly here, where/when did you see it?

Each Type 094 SSBN carries twelve JL-2 (NATO codename: CSS-NX-4) submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM), each with 1~3 nuclear warheads. With its maximum range of 8,000km, the missile will allow Chinese SSBNs to target portions of the United States for the first time from operating areas located near the Chinese coast. Equipped with the JL-2 missiles, the Type 094 SSBN would only have to patrol just to the northeast of the Kuril Islands to hold about three-fourths of the United States within its missile's range. Other armaments of the submarine may include six 533mm torpedo tubes. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/type094jin.asp
Are those 533mm torpedo tubes capable of spitting out ASh/CMs? If so, then, if Type 094 have them, they are de-facto SSGNs as well and could be used to augment PLAN's attack submarines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-16
 
Last edited:

crobato

New Member
The propeller is under a white shroud. It seems likely it is being changed. Next time I will post the pic of the Xia model with skewed prop at the SDF for your benefit.

All the Chinese subs (except the Mings) with 533mm tubes are capable for firing the underwater variants of the Ying Jing series, mainly the YJ-82, also known as C-802. The latest C-802A variant is a virtual copy of the YJ-83, except it does not have the YJ-83's datalink, since the sub has no datalink to guide such a missile in its midphase, a task that would require the sub to be in the surface and therefore vulnerable.

The later modified Hans, all the Songs, the Yuans, the Shangs, are all capable of firing YJ-82s underwater. We can assume that the 094 should be capable of it as well, and the Xia after it comes out of its refit. Still China needs to develop some true SSGN. In theory, six YJ-82s can be made to fit into the hole where your JL-1 missile compartment in the Xia. However, unless its rocket powered, AshMs particularly jet powered ones, cannot be assumed to be vertical launched, since standing on its tail in storage can lead to fuel distribution problems. The missile has to be designed to compensate for the "standing" issue. US SSGNs can fire Tomahawks vertically, and Tomahwaks can be fired from the VLS of Aegis ships. The Tomahawks are already predesigned with that in mind. However, Harpoons cannot, which is why they cannot be VLSed. The Russian SSGNs like the Oscar that use Granits for example have the missile tubes set in an angle and in an incline, not vertically launched. Like the Harpoon, the Granit is another jet fueled missile.

Thus this makes me wonder if there will be a VLS version of the YJ-62 missile, but so far there is nothing to indicate it, not even an illustration of such from Chinese magazines or brochures in defense shows.

This makes me think that for now, after the refit, the Xia will act like any other SSN, though it can launch YJ-82s in its torpedo tubes.

From your other post, yes you may have a point that Russia may not like having Chinese ICBMs crossing over their "space" which creates the impetus for the Chinese SSBN program. I only wonder how the PLAN can work this out with the 2nd Artillery (China's strategic rocket forces, a self autonomous organization actually independent of the PLA).
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
Well, few years ago the Russians put their SSBNs under new unified strategic command, so their navy won't act independently in a nuclear crisis. I suppose it is still stands. The Chinese may do the same with their boomers in not too distant future.
IMO even if they get very long range SLBMs capable of reaching CONUS from the Yellow & E.China Seas, their trajectories will also go over Korean peninsula & Japan; for that reason the ideal SSBN basing & patrol locations are on the S.China Sea coast, including Hainan, and S.China Sea/ W. & S. Pacific, respectively. While in the S.China Sea, they would also be handy if armed with Ash/CMs. But then I would expect the US to install NMD system in Guam & Hawaii, in addition to putting more interceptors in California, as SLBM trajectories will also move South, if launched from those locations.
I saw your post on sinodef. but can´t access the picture as I´m not a member, and unfortunately I don´t have the time for other forums. I could only find this picture, but not sure if it shows the Xia.
 
Last edited:

crobato

New Member
I don't know where you get this analysis of trying to fire SLBMs from the South China seas to the continental US, but you are looking at it from a flat map. Using a globe, the true closest trajectory from China to the US actually arcs to the north through Alaska, and vice versa. Thus, stationing SSBNs in the South China seas is inconceivable as a trajectory that arcs across Guam will arc much of the south Pacific then up into the southern US. This distance is much greater the northern route. Even with improvements in range of the missiles, that is going to be a much greater range barrier to overcome. Try taking transpacific flights direct from Beijing to a destination in the US like Seattle or San Francisco. These flight routes take you over Siberian Russia then Alaska then down Canada before.

Will the Russians be alarmed if the missiles fly over their area? Certainly but they could see from the trajectories they are not the targets. This is not to mention this can also be cleared or declared to the Russians before hand. Trajectories reaching over Japan or Korea isn't an issue to base boomers in the south China seas because ABM systems generally intercept in the terminal or reentry phase, not in the initial rising phase.

So you are now faced with a much greater range problem to overcome. In other words, the SSBN basing in the South China seas is not going to happen unless either you are targeting a different country or your missile ranges have to improve even much further.

Basing of boomers in Hainan simply isn't happening right now as a matter of fact. There is no Chinese BBS report to collaborate that, there is no photo to collaborate that despite that we have photos to prove that 091G Improved Han, 093 Shang, Kilos and Yuans are definitely stationed in Hainan. No image from GE.

Because of the greater range needed to overcome, boomers stationed in Hainan would have to slip through Philippine littoral waters but once in the Pacific they would have to go north to close the range gap before they can fire their missiles in range. That would make them vulnerable to US hunter killers in the event of war, and its much harder to hide your sound in deep water, where sound propagates the farthest. On top of that, its going to be a much longer journey.

In peacetime, no one is going to stop from making long range patrols, but you can expect to be tracked and tailed by another sub which is going to happen no matter what. Thus, there is really no advantage in basing in Hainan because the Japanese nor the US can physically stop from you doing a patrol in peacetime if your subs leave off the northern ports. All they can do is track and trail you. Thus you can use peacetime to station your subs in a deterrent patrol in the north like in the Kuril islands, where trajectories are shortest, with subs doing round robin rotations on deterrent patrols.

When you sign up with DT forums, you are also automatically signed in with any other forum affliated with DT, and that includes the SDF. So I don't know what is the problem not being able to access the SDF.

The picture posted is the screw of a Song class submarine.
 
Top