Two More Chinese SSBNs Spotted

satcom

New Member
HI, I found this on Federation of American Scientists Strategic Security Blog


http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/10/two_more_chinese_ssbns_spotted.php



By Hans M. Kristensen

China appears to have launched two more ballistic missiles submarines from the Bohai shipyard at Huludao approximately 400 km east of Beijing. This could bring to three the number of Jin-class (Type 094) nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) launched by China in the past three four years.

The two submarines were discovered during analysis of newly published commercial satellite images on Google Earth. This is the second time in three months that FAS has discovered new Chinese ballistic missile submarines on commercial satellite images. The first time was in July 2007, when the first Jin-class was disclosed on the FAS Strategic Security Blog.

The submarines on the new image have the same dimensions as the previous submarine.

So How Many Do They Have?

Whether China has now launched two or three Jin-class SSBNs is still unclear. The image of the first SSBN discovered at Xiaopingdao in July 2007 was taken on October 17, 2006. The new image of the two SSBNs at Huludao was taken six and a half months later on May 3, 2007. One possibility is that the Xiaopingdao SSBN returned to Huludao for repair or further adjustment and was captured on the 2007 photo together with the second SSBN. Another possibility is that the two Huludao SSBNs are indeed the second and third boats of the new Jin-class SSBN.

The U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence estimated in December 2006 that "a fleet of probably five TYPE 094 SSBNs will be built in order to provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea SSBN presence." China has not stated how many SSBNs it plans to build and there is no authoritative information available in the public that confirms that China plans to build five SSBNs. It might, but it might also build less if it decides that three or four are sufficient.

Some Implications

The new Jin-class SSBNs add to the single and unsuccessful Xia-class (Type 092) that China launched in 1982. The Xia has never conducted a deterrent patrol and its operational status is in doubt. The rapid launch of two or three Jin-class SSBNs indicate that the Chinese navy feels confident it has overcome at least some of the technical problems that curtailed the Xia.

Each Jin-class appears to have 12 launch tubes for the new Julang-2 sea-launched ballistic missiles that are currently under development. If Julang-2 and three Jin-class SSBNs become fully operational, it would enable China to deploy up to 24 ballistic missiles at sea, assuming one boat would be in overhaul at any given time (and the Xia is still not operational). The range of the Julang-2 is estimated by the US intelligence community at more than 8,000 km (4,970+ miles), which brings Hawaii and Alaska (but not the continental United States) within reach from Chinese territorial waters.

Despite many rumors on the Internet about multiple warheads on Julang-2, the long-held assessment by the US intelligence community is that the Julang-2 will be a single-warhead missile.

Whether China plans to deploy a continuous sea-based deterrent is unknown. It appears doubtful because it would break with the Chinese practice of not deploying fully operational nuclear missiles. Nuclear warheads for China's land-based missiles are believed to be stored separate from the missiles, although this has never actually been verified for the entire force. If the submarines deployed into the Pacific (like U.S. and to a smaller extent Russian SSBNs) it would also break with Chinese policy of not deploying nuclear weapons outside Chinese territory. An alternative would be to operate the SSBNs as a surge capability, intended to deploy in a crisis.
 
Last edited:

Truculent

New Member
If you look at the picture carefully there seems to be differences between the submarines.Are they the same class?Are they both new?
 

crobato

New Member
Yes, they're both the same and new. They're sitting high above the water still being fitted out. They are also the same length as the sub statoined in Xiaopingdao, Dalian, which still appears in Google Earth. That sub has been fitted out in comparison and is sitting lower in the later. The length of the three subs is about 130m; the Xia class is about 120m. But the other sub appears to have a strange thing on its tail, of which there are various hypothesis what it may be, and the length of that sub plus that accessory makes it 133m.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
rubber look alike

Could it be that at least some of those are inflatable rubber decoys and/or training mockups? I remember a story about the Soviets pulling the same trick (unsuccessfully- the storm bent it in the middle) during the Cold War. The reason for showing them off? Desinformation, deception, and to judge Western intelligence analysis.
 

wp2000

Member
Could it be that at least some of those are inflatable rubber decoys and/or training mockups? I remember a story about the Soviets pulling the same trick (unsuccessfully- the storm bent it in the middle) during the Cold War. The reason for showing them off? Desinformation, deception, and to judge Western intelligence analysis.
No need to deploy decoys now (If they wanted to, they shouldv'e done that 10 years ago before the new gen nuke boats were launched). The second 094 is doing sea trial now. If western intels are half as good as we are told, it shouldn't be a secret to them.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
decoy utility

Still, I think in some scenarios they may want to appear stronger than they actually are, as Sun Tzu taught. Anyway, it amazes me that they didn't try to camouflage/conseal those subs- either they don't care if they are detected or the resulting alarm & speculations in the absence of transperancy will do the desinformation on their own!
 

wp2000

Member
Still, I think in some scenarios they may want to appear stronger than they actually are, as Sun Tzu taught. Anyway, it amazes me that they didn't try to camouflage/conseal those subs- either they don't care if they are detected or the resulting alarm & speculations in the absence of transperancy will do the desinformation on their own!
Last time I checked, Sun Tzu taught "to appear WEAKER to your enemy, stronger to your friend":)
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
quotes

Thanks for the correction, you are right. I found this one:
Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
But he also said:
So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak. ..
The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.
China has been weak for about 200 years up till now, so to avoid being bullied and be taken seriously she must, at the very least, appear capable of striking back. And in today's world, SSBN/GN fleet is one of the tools for the 2nd strike capability/safeguarding sea lines and territorial claims in China seas.
 
Last edited:

tphuang

Super Moderator
Could it be that at least some of those are inflatable rubber decoys and/or training mockups? I remember a story about the Soviets pulling the same trick (unsuccessfully- the storm bent it in the middle) during the Cold War. The reason for showing them off? Desinformation, deception, and to judge Western intelligence analysis.
why? Do you think Western intelligence rely on GE to do their analysis? A western satellite should be able to determine whether a sub is a inflatable rubber decoy or a real one.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
I got new pictures of 093 and 094 here. Looks different from the boomer that we saw last year that is different from the first 092. That shows there was definitely other boomers between the original 092 and this 094. Either that was a modification of 092 or an earlier 094.
For some reason, I can't get it attached, so I will just leave the link here.

 

crobato

New Member
Does anybody have a photograph of the submarine with the appendage?
Check with Tphuang's new 094 pic as he linked from the bottom. You can also check the sinodefenceforum. Note the appendage on the tail, so I think this is the same sub with the appendage on GE.
 

crobato

New Member
I have no idea. Best to check every three months or so. I got various placemarks on PLAAF and PLAN bases so I can quickly check if there are any changes or not.
 

Truculent

New Member
The FAS website has a file to download with google earth that has lots of Chinese sites on it.Does a Russian one exist?
 

perestroika_07

New Member
A threat?

Admin: Text deleted. Please refer to the forum rules about posting behaviour and etiquette.

1st Warning issued.



I wonder why the spoting of these subs should make any held line at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Firehorse

Banned Member
A western satellite should be able to determine whether a sub is a inflatable rubber decoy or a real one.
How? If a decoy or mockup is well done, there may be no way, IMO.
Could it also be that they took 1-2 of the older SSNs and converted them to SSGN by inserting a plug for missile tubes?
 

XaNDeR

New Member
Copycat tehnology from old soviet SSBN designs, its still dangerous since its a SSBN , they are planning to build 6 total subs which would mean quite a powerfull strategic power capable of deploying it over the whole world , If China is building its military to protect China why the need for such a powerfull strategic asset ?
 

crobato

New Member
I don't see how it resembles any Soviet design. We have photos of the subs at the pier shot directly at the surface and not from a satellite point of view. The 093 -> Victor III series references were completely shot down the moment the actual photos of the 093 surfaced.
 

Schumacher

New Member
U have to understand that it causes considerable pain to many out there to see the SSBNs were not based on old Soviet design.
It takes a lot more than presenting facts to change their mind. :)
 
Top