What's new

China unveils a new concept of naval warships - semi-submersible arsenal-ship

Sorry it may sound good but having a large sail especially containing radar as powerful sensors for anti air or land attack will make the ship huge even if its hull is below water. You ever seen the sail of the Typhoon?
BMD-ship-003-130408-SeaAirSpace-HII-Lisa-Nova-Scotia-2012-64211.jpg

And don't doubt the anti ship missiles especially when they can be programmed to hit ships that have sails. And I haven't even mentioned subroc missiles anti submarine that can hit submarines that are partially submerged.



Submarines basic survival is stealth. Sorry but semi submerge ships are not that fast compare to submarines fully submerged. And it won't outrun something like P-8 or any other ASW aircraft. You talk about carriers obsolete but you are building more. Your Chinese military leaders disagree with that.

Carriers are obsolete if you're talking about an all out war between large nations. But thanks to nuclear, the all out war are things of the past. In the foreseeable future, proxy war will the most common. And that's where aircraft carriers come in to play.
 
.
Carriers are obsolete if you're talking about an all out war between large nations. But thanks to nuclear, the all out war are things of the past. In the foreseeable future, proxy war will the most common. And that's where aircraft carriers come in to play.

So you say.

With their anti-air asrenal, they dont need to run away from things like P-8, instead, they may run for them.

China build CVs for land-attack/invasion, basically its just floating airport, and they build things like this for future navy battles.

Have you forgotten that the P-8 can carry long range anti ship missiles and long range air dropped torpedoes? They will hunt for submarines or semi submersible platforms even from long distance.

635991932326837957-photo-2jpg

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-navy-on-track-for-high-altitude-p-8a-weapon-435653/

A new torpedo upgrade that will fundamentally change the way US Navy airmen hunt submarines is on track to seek approval to begin low-rate initial production later this year, Boeing and Navy officials say on 28 March.

The High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC) is in the midst of safe separation tests from the Boeing P-8A Poseidon. A guided flight test is planned in late Fiscal 2017, allowing the programme potentially to order 140 high-altitude torpedoes total over the first two lots.

Following operational testing scheduled for completion by FY 2020, HAAWC also will be available to the P-8 fleet’s foreign customers, which currently include Australia, India and the UK, says Capt Tony Rossi, programme manager for Maritime Patrol and Reconnsassance Aircraft.

The HAAWC integrates an air-launched accessory (ALA) kit with a GPS guidance system and folding wings onto a standard Mk54 torpedo. Boeing describes the HAAWC release ceiling as “up to 30,000ft”, but the precise maximum altitude is under discussion and could be higher.

The capability potentially transforms a typically low-altitude anti-submarine warfare (ASW) mission, as practiced for decades by Lockheed P-3C Orion crews, who are required to skim the wave tops at 100ft to release torpedoes.

In the Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) competition that led to the P-8A’s selection in 2004, Boeing officials were careful to emphasize that the 737-800ERX-derived aircraft could perform the same low-altitude ASW mission. The company even organised flights for sceptical P-3C crews and journalists, swooping down from 41,000ft on an ocean vessel, leveling off at 200ft and performing tight turns to make multiple surveillance passes of a simulated target.

Despite the company’s marketing, the navy’s ASW community were already eager to dispense with such laborious low-altitude operations, Rossi says. Indeed, the navy deleted the magnetic anomaly detector from the P-8A configuration, the only sensor that demands the aircraft fly at low altitudes.

“If it’s not something that drives you to low altitude, I’m not sure why you would go there,” Rossi says.

The P-8A has “no problem with low-altitude,” Rossi says. But the navy prefers to operate the aircraft at higher altitudes, where crews are less fatigues and can take full advantage of the Poseidon’s sensor suite, including a multi-mode radar, electro-optical/infrared camera and a multi-static active coherent acoustic system.

The HAAWC is expected to be fielded in 2020 with an initial capability that could be upgraded later. The initial configuration lacks a data link to allow the weapon to receive target updates from the P-8A launch platform en route to the moving target. Studies are underway to determine the requirements for the data link, Boeing says. But the HAAWC meets the navy’s standards for targeting accuracy without an in-flight navigation update.

Basically all ships sailing on or under the surface of sea could be hit by missile or torpedo; however this submersible will be tougher since its actually a destroyer/cruiser with very low radar signature and higher flexibility than conventional destroyer.

Dont forget: submarine could'not kill P-8 or any other flying objects which is the weakness of it, but submersible could, therefore P-8 etc may not be effective againts submersible.

Even with low radar signature it can be detected. Heck there are radars that can detect periscopes and those are smaller than sails especially when submarines are at periscope depth, still under water. And as I have said before radars for anti air or land attack is huge making sails huge.

I mean just looking at that Chinese concept pic its got 2 sails front and back, and the hull is not even fully submerged.
 
.
So you say.



Have you forgotten that the P-8 can carry long range anti ship missiles and long range air dropped torpedoes? They will hunt for submarines or semi submersible platforms even from long distance.

635991932326837957-photo-2jpg

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-navy-on-track-for-high-altitude-p-8a-weapon-435653/

A new torpedo upgrade that will fundamentally change the way US Navy airmen hunt submarines is on track to seek approval to begin low-rate initial production later this year, Boeing and Navy officials say on 28 March.

The High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC) is in the midst of safe separation tests from the Boeing P-8A Poseidon. A guided flight test is planned in late Fiscal 2017, allowing the programme potentially to order 140 high-altitude torpedoes total over the first two lots.

Following operational testing scheduled for completion by FY 2020, HAAWC also will be available to the P-8 fleet’s foreign customers, which currently include Australia, India and the UK, says Capt Tony Rossi, programme manager for Maritime Patrol and Reconnsassance Aircraft.

The HAAWC integrates an air-launched accessory (ALA) kit with a GPS guidance system and folding wings onto a standard Mk54 torpedo. Boeing describes the HAAWC release ceiling as “up to 30,000ft”, but the precise maximum altitude is under discussion and could be higher.

The capability potentially transforms a typically low-altitude anti-submarine warfare (ASW) mission, as practiced for decades by Lockheed P-3C Orion crews, who are required to skim the wave tops at 100ft to release torpedoes.

In the Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) competition that led to the P-8A’s selection in 2004, Boeing officials were careful to emphasize that the 737-800ERX-derived aircraft could perform the same low-altitude ASW mission. The company even organised flights for sceptical P-3C crews and journalists, swooping down from 41,000ft on an ocean vessel, leveling off at 200ft and performing tight turns to make multiple surveillance passes of a simulated target.

Despite the company’s marketing, the navy’s ASW community were already eager to dispense with such laborious low-altitude operations, Rossi says. Indeed, the navy deleted the magnetic anomaly detector from the P-8A configuration, the only sensor that demands the aircraft fly at low altitudes.

“If it’s not something that drives you to low altitude, I’m not sure why you would go there,” Rossi says.

The P-8A has “no problem with low-altitude,” Rossi says. But the navy prefers to operate the aircraft at higher altitudes, where crews are less fatigues and can take full advantage of the Poseidon’s sensor suite, including a multi-mode radar, electro-optical/infrared camera and a multi-static active coherent acoustic system.

The HAAWC is expected to be fielded in 2020 with an initial capability that could be upgraded later. The initial configuration lacks a data link to allow the weapon to receive target updates from the P-8A launch platform en route to the moving target. Studies are underway to determine the requirements for the data link, Boeing says. But the HAAWC meets the navy’s standards for targeting accuracy without an in-flight navigation update.



Even with low radar signature it can be detected. Heck there are radars that can detect periscopes and those are smaller than sails especially when submarines are at periscope depth, still under water. And as I have said before radars for anti air or land attack is huge making sails huge.

I mean just looking at that Chinese concept pic its got 2 sails front and back, and the hull is not even fully submerged.
Is the new torpeddo going to outrange 200km HQ-9 SAM?

Detecting small object in big ocean is not a problem but when comes to busy shipping strait. It is difficult to id between small fishing boat and a small floating object.
 
.
So you say.



Have you forgotten that the P-8 can carry long range anti ship missiles and long range air dropped torpedoes? They will hunt for submarines or semi submersible platforms even from long distance.

635991932326837957-photo-2jpg

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-navy-on-track-for-high-altitude-p-8a-weapon-435653/

A new torpedo upgrade that will fundamentally change the way US Navy airmen hunt submarines is on track to seek approval to begin low-rate initial production later this year, Boeing and Navy officials say on 28 March.

The High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability (HAAWC) is in the midst of safe separation tests from the Boeing P-8A Poseidon. A guided flight test is planned in late Fiscal 2017, allowing the programme potentially to order 140 high-altitude torpedoes total over the first two lots.

Following operational testing scheduled for completion by FY 2020, HAAWC also will be available to the P-8 fleet’s foreign customers, which currently include Australia, India and the UK, says Capt Tony Rossi, programme manager for Maritime Patrol and Reconnsassance Aircraft.

The HAAWC integrates an air-launched accessory (ALA) kit with a GPS guidance system and folding wings onto a standard Mk54 torpedo. Boeing describes the HAAWC release ceiling as “up to 30,000ft”, but the precise maximum altitude is under discussion and could be higher.

The capability potentially transforms a typically low-altitude anti-submarine warfare (ASW) mission, as practiced for decades by Lockheed P-3C Orion crews, who are required to skim the wave tops at 100ft to release torpedoes.

In the Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) competition that led to the P-8A’s selection in 2004, Boeing officials were careful to emphasize that the 737-800ERX-derived aircraft could perform the same low-altitude ASW mission. The company even organised flights for sceptical P-3C crews and journalists, swooping down from 41,000ft on an ocean vessel, leveling off at 200ft and performing tight turns to make multiple surveillance passes of a simulated target.

Despite the company’s marketing, the navy’s ASW community were already eager to dispense with such laborious low-altitude operations, Rossi says. Indeed, the navy deleted the magnetic anomaly detector from the P-8A configuration, the only sensor that demands the aircraft fly at low altitudes.

“If it’s not something that drives you to low altitude, I’m not sure why you would go there,” Rossi says.

The P-8A has “no problem with low-altitude,” Rossi says. But the navy prefers to operate the aircraft at higher altitudes, where crews are less fatigues and can take full advantage of the Poseidon’s sensor suite, including a multi-mode radar, electro-optical/infrared camera and a multi-static active coherent acoustic system.

The HAAWC is expected to be fielded in 2020 with an initial capability that could be upgraded later. The initial configuration lacks a data link to allow the weapon to receive target updates from the P-8A launch platform en route to the moving target. Studies are underway to determine the requirements for the data link, Boeing says. But the HAAWC meets the navy’s standards for targeting accuracy without an in-flight navigation update.


Yes, but the first question is: how far is the max range of HAAWC in order to shoot effectively a submarine or submersible? Can P8 launch HWAAC to a submersible beyond the range of S-300 or HQ-9? Otherwise the P-8 will be an easy target first before it could launch that HAAWC.

And the second question - which the most important one - is: "how P-8 will be able to detect and tract the submersible with very low radar signature?" before it could launch that torpedo? The torpedo HAAWC will render useless if the supporting radar could not detect the position of submersible within the range of HWAAC.

Even with low radar signature it can be detected. Heck there are radars that can detect periscopes and those are smaller than sails especially when submarines are at periscope depth, still under water. And as I have said before radars for anti air or land attack is huge making sails huge.

I mean just looking at that Chinese concept pic its got 2 sails front and back, and the hull is not even fully submerged.


Yes, but that must be either a "very big radar" or operated within "very short distance" in order to detect a periscope, which means that radar wont be an effective way against a submarine/submersible.

Otherwise that radar will certainly make zumwalt render useless and a total failure, as zumwalt's radar signature is much bigger than a "periscope".

I doubt AWACS could detect a periscope beyond 250km range, which is approximately the range or HQ-9. :)
 
Last edited:
.
Is the new torpeddo going to outrange 200km HQ-9 SAM?

Detecting small object in big ocean is not a problem but when comes to busy shipping strait. It is difficult to id between small fishing boat and a small floating object.

Totally agree.

Even in the open sea, its still difficult to identify whether the small object is enemy's warship or small fishing boat or otherkind small floating object.
 
.
Hmm, it seems that oldman brought some good conversations here. Very well.

Pls ignore those malnutritious arguments, guys.
 
.
It looks like a good ship.

I wonder if Pakistan can get something like this.
 
.
Yes, but the first question is: how far is the max range of HAAWC in order to shoot effectively a submarine or submersible? Can P8 launch HWAAC to a submersible beyond the range of S-300 or HQ-9? Otherwise the P-8 will be an easy target first before it could launch that HAAWC.

And the second question - which the most important one - is: "how P-8 will be able to detect and tract the submersible with very low radar signature?" before it could launch that torpedo? The torpedo HAAWC will render useless if the supporting radar could not detect the position of submersible within the range of HWAAC.

Like I've said before, radars can detect the periscope easily, even from the air. Thats why they don't keep periscope up for a long time. Only a few seconds. But in this case your concept ship are two large sails, so its like a submarine on the surface, making it easier to detect.

Your second question, you have to remember the the P-8 can launch long range missiles and torpedoes from far distance even future JASSM missile with 1000km range. So your question goes back to how can it counter that?



Yes, but that must be either a "very big radar" or operated within "very short distance" in order to detect a periscope, which means that radar wont be an effective way against a submarine/submersible.

Otherwise that radar will certainly make zumwalt render useless and a total failure, as zumwalt's radar signature is much bigger than a "periscope".

I doubt AWACS could detect a periscope beyond 250km range, which is approximately the range or HQ-9. :)

Planes do have big radars. Its well known fact.

o04hgxhpn2u5f823tnme.jpg


The Zumwalt has been known to have the signature of a small boat. But its not invisible to the radar. So your concept ship wouldn't be invisible either if you point that out. Not to mention not completely submerged hull and large sails to carry large radars.
 
.
Like I've said before, radars can detect the periscope easily, even from the air. Thats why they don't keep periscope up for a long time. Only a few seconds. But in this case your concept ship are two large sails, so its like a submarine on the surface, making it easier to detect.

Your second question, you have to remember the the P-8 can launch long range missiles and torpedoes from far distance even future JASSM missile with 1000km range. So your question goes back to how can it counter that?





Planes do have big radars. Its well known fact.

o04hgxhpn2u5f823tnme.jpg


The Zumwalt has been known to have the signature of a small boat. But its not invisible to the radar. So your concept ship wouldn't be invisible either if you point that out. Not to mention not completely submerged hull and large sails to carry large radars.

Try to use the like of P-8 to counter this thing is a sucicidal mission:

(1) First of all, sure plane can carry big radar, but ship can carry bigger radar, and you have to consider the earth's sphere surface such that not matter how powerful your radar is, you can merely detect such sumerible ships beyond 300 km range (OTH radar cannot be used to detect submerised targets, not to mention airborne OTH radar is a impossiblity for such mission).

(2) The ship, with data-link, can attack CVs 1000-2000 km away from them, thats a huge area, roughly equal to the size of USA, need to be covered for things like P-8, and because of the range problem, P-8 has to enter highly contested airspace deeply without proper back up, and should be easy targets for not just SAMs but your enemy's air-superiority fighters.

(3) Because of the range problem even if you tried, you have to field lots P-8s and air-refueling supporting planes to give a creditable detection network against such ships, we are talking about hundreds of them, which means your strength will be thinned and enemy can break into it at anywhere.

The ship is not a death-star, so yes it is counter-able theortically, but at what cost?
 
.
Try to use the like of P-8 to counter this thing is a sucicidal mission:

(1) First of all, sure plane can carry big radar, but ship can carry bigger radar, and you have to consider the earth's sphere surface such that not matter how powerful your radar is, you can merely detect such sumerible ships beyond 300 km range (OTH radar cannot be used to detect submerised targets, not to mention airborne OTH radar is a impossiblity for such mission).

(2) The ship, with data-link, can attack CVs 1000-2000 km away from them, thats a huge area, roughly equal to the size of USA, need to be covered for things like P-8, and because of the range problem, P-8 has to enter highly contested airspace deeply without proper back up, and should be easy targets for not just SAMs but your enemy's air-superiority fighters.

(3) Because of the range problem even if you tried, you have to field lots P-8s and air-refueling supporting planes to give a creditable detection network against such ships, we are talking about hundreds of them, which means your strength will be thinned and enemy can break into it at anywhere.

The ship is not a death-star, so yes it is counter-able theortically, but at what cost?

First of all, the plane has the advantage because its flying higher so it can actually see its target, heck with the enemy radar it makes it easier.

2nd the P-8 has long range and can be protected with fuel tankers and aircraft flying nearby, and if you go after the tankers, you are going to meet opposition. Considering aircraft and long range cruise missiles and ships, they can easily hit the concept shi.

Funny you talk like its hard to find the carrier group since Chinese posters always claimed it can find them easily. Now you telling the U.S. military is not capable of doing so?
 
.
First of all, the plane has the advantage because its flying higher so it can actually see its target, heck with the enemy radar it makes it easier.

2nd the P-8 has long range and can be protected with fuel tankers and aircraft flying nearby, and if you go after the tankers, you are going to meet opposition. Considering aircraft and long range cruise missiles and ships, they can easily hit the concept shi.

Funny you talk like its hard to find the carrier group since Chinese posters always claimed it can find them easily. Now you telling the U.S. military is not capable of doing so?

Since when I think its hard to find CVs? with China's Jianbing series SAR and other remote sensor satellite networks its pretty easy to locate CVs.

What I am saying is it is hard to locate submerised targets.

And no matter how high P-8 can fly, once they can see the ship, at that angel, so can the ship locate them, and with bigger radar and larger arsenal, I bet the ship can take down the aircrafts like P-8s first.
 
.
Since when I think its hard to find CVs? with China's Jianbing series SAR and other remote sensor satellite networks its pretty easy to locate CVs.

What I am saying is it is hard to locate submerised targets.

And no matter how high P-8 can fly, once they can see the ship, at that angel, so can the ship locate them, and with bigger radar and larger arsenal, I bet the ship can take down the aircrafts like P-8s first.

Your so called submerged ship is not a submerged ship. I mean the title says semi submersible. Not completely submersible. And didn't you Chinese posters mentioned it would be near a carrier group not be by itself?

No, the aircraft can see first. You know the carrier group sends E-2D to detect over the horizon as early warning? They won't see enemy aircraft with long range missiles without it.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/E2DAdvancedHawkeye/slideshow/E-2D_slideshow_7.jpg
E-2D_slideshow_7.jpg
 
.
Your so called submerged ship is not a submerged ship. I mean the title says semi submersible. Not completely submersible. And didn't you Chinese posters mentioned it would be near a carrier group not be by itself?

No, the aircraft can see first. You know the carrier group sends E-2D to detect over the horizon as early warning? They won't see enemy aircraft with long range missiles without it.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/E2DAdvancedHawkeye/slideshow/E-2D_slideshow_7.jpg
E-2D_slideshow_7.jpg

Yes, it is, this is from the inventor of this ship's own PPT, you can just ignore the fan arts:

waveskimmer.jpg
 
.
Since when I think its hard to find CVs? with China's Jianbing series SAR and other remote sensor satellite networks its pretty easy to locate CVs.

What I am saying is it is hard to locate submerised targets.

And no matter how high P-8 can fly, once they can see the ship, at that angel, so can the ship locate them, and with bigger radar and larger arsenal, I bet the ship can take down the aircrafts like P-8s first.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/sinking-enemy-warships-the-us-navys-fiery-new-weapon-15132

Dave Majumdar

February 5, 2016

TweetShareShare

The United States Navy’s fleet of Aegis cruisers and destroyers are getting a massive boost in lethality. For years, many believed that America’s mighty surface combatants were on track to be outgunned by their Russian and Chinese counterparts—however, a newly unveiled modification to the Raytheon Standard SM-6 changes of all of that.

“I'm announcing today new capability for the SM-6. We're modifying the SM-6, so that in addition to missile defense, it can also target enemy ships at sea at very long ranges,” U.S. defense secretary Ashton Carter said at Naval Base San Diego in California on February 3.

“This is a new anti-ship mode. It makes the SM-6 basically a twofer. Can shoot down airborne threats,” Carter said. “And now you can attack and destroy a ship at long range with the very same missile.”

While the long-range SM-6 was known to have an extremely potent air and missile defense capability, this is the first time the Pentagon has acknowledged that the weapon has an anti-surface mode as well. The older, shorter-range version of the Standard—the SM-2—also had an anti-surface mode, though it is not exactly far reaching.

The SM-6—which incorporates an active radar seeker and networking—was designed to engage targets beyond a ship’s radar horizon. Using the Naval Integrated Fire Control battle network, an Aegis warship could engage over-the-horizon targets—including aircraft and missiles—by using targeting data from a Northrop Grumman E-2D Advanced Hawkeye.

The physical radar horizon for a S-band radar like that of the Aegis is about 250 nautical miles for a target flying at about 30,000 feet. For target flying at lower altitudes, the radar detection range would be shorter—which is where the E-2D comes in. While the range for the SM-6 is classified, the weapons range could potentially be greater than 250 nautical miles.

Because the E-2D has the capability to track air and surface targets, the SM-6 would effectively allow U.S. warships to engage enemy surface combatants over-the-horizon with a Mach 3.5+ missile. While the SM-6’s warhead was designed to kill aircraft—and as such is relatively tiny—the fact that it also has ballistic missile defense capability suggests it has a hit-to-kill capability.
 
.
As for the title, the mod modified my tittle, so just stick to the facts which directly come out of the inventor's own PPT and papers.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom