China’s Submarine Fleet, Evolution & news

[jkroo]

It is not about mass production. And it is not about the overhead. Once a specific demanding technology comes into play, the production and the utilization of that technology becomes expensive. As long as simple educated low ranked personell is able to handle the ship and and the production, China can outmass the high tech navies. But when sophisticated technology comes into play, China applies the same rules. One more problem, China is doing it in a way to fast time.

For example. Simple diesel engines late 80ies style needed some hands to put on and some good old technicans that are used to mechanical tools. Thats the average cost job. The new engines, are connected to computers, stuffed with sensors and all that high tech stuff. What do they need to get maintained? not that simpe mechanics, you need mechatronic experts. Maintenance has become an expensive part.

Sophisticated technology is well known, and the price to pay, western navies are aware of. The big question is, will china go that way? Can China go the technological step, and keep the costs low? I have my doubts.

Your 'doubts' is also my doubts on you. lol

 

[terranMarine]

Your 'doubts' is also my doubts on you. lol

That i do not doubt because we share your doubt as well

 

[GS Zhou]

Sophisticated technology is well known, and the price to pay, western navies are aware of. The big question is, will china go that way? Can China go the technological step, and keep the costs low? I have my doubts.

Let me show you the cost comparison between China's Type 052D destroyer vs. US Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis destroyers.

• China Type 052D destroyer

The PLAN Genral Yin Zhuo once mentioned in a press conference that, the per tonnage cost of 052D is RMB 500,000.

We know that 052D is about 7,500ton, so cost per unit will be 7,500 * 0.5 million = 3,750 million RMB, or $ 535 million;

link and screenshot to Yin's comments
http://news.ifeng.com/a/20140423/40006172_0.shtml

• US AB-class destroyer

The US Navy 2011 budget report states that, one AB-class destroyer (Flight IIA design) would cost $2,028.7 million

Link and screenshot to the US Navy budget report
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98051/m1/1/high_res_d/RL32109_2011Apr19.pdf

So $535 million of 052D vs. $2 billion of AB-class. The superb cost advantage of China even in high-tech stuff be proved!!

 

[Han Patriot]

It is not about mass production. And it is not about the overhead. Once a specific demanding technology comes into play, the production and the utilization of that technology becomes expensive. As long as simple educated low ranked personell is able to handle the ship and and the production, China can outmass the high tech navies. But when sophisticated technology comes into play, China applies the same rules. One more problem, China is doing it in a way to fast time.

For example. Simple diesel engines late 80ies style needed some hands to put on and some good old technicans that are used to mechanical tools. Thats the average cost job. The new engines, are connected to computers, stuffed with sensors and all that high tech stuff. What do they need to get maintained? not that simpe mechanics, you need mechatronic experts. Maintenance has become an expensive part.

Sophisticated technology is well known, and the price to pay, western navies are aware of. The big question is, will china go that way? Can China go the technological step, and keep the costs low? I have my doubts.

I have a feeling you are not from the engineering industry.

 

[Salty_Waters]

Your 'doubts' is also my doubts on you. lol

well, as long as this is your only problem . But maybe you find some time to think about my argument. And if you have a serious idea why I might be wrong, be my guest. If not, I take you as the first one not to take serious in that forum.

I have a feeling you are not from the engineering industry.

feelings... that strange things that outweight ideas and arguments.

Let me show you the cost comparison between China's Type 052D destroyer vs. US Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis destroyers.

• China Type 052D destroyer

The PLAN Genral Yin Zhuo once mentioned in a press conference that, the per tonnage cost of 052D is RMB 500,000.

We know that 052D is about 7,500ton, so cost per unit will be 7,500 * 0.5 million = 3,750 million RMB, or $ 535 million;

link and screenshot to Yin's comments
http://news.ifeng.com/a/20140423/40006172_0.shtml

View attachment 368720

• US AB-class destroyer

The US Navy 2011 budget report states that, one AB-class destroyer (Flight IIA design) would cost $2,028.7 million

Link and screenshot to the US Navy budget report
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98051/m1/1/high_res_d/RL32109_2011Apr19.pdf

View attachment 368723
So $535 million of 052D vs. $2 billion of AB-class. The superb cost advantage of China even in high-tech stuff be proved!!

Well, not to get me wrong. 1st of all, I was not only talking about aquisition costs. I was talking about the total cost of ownership, meaning all expenses through lifespan of a system. For navy vessels, more of 2/3 of costs occure in lifespan. I have not said, that china can build cheaper ships. I said, that china has to pay much higher costs once they use sophisticated (automation) technology (f.e.).Comparing a 052D with Arleigh Burke IIA is likecomparing apples and pears. At least when it comes to the costs.

But well, discussing free market rules with comunist is a little bit of wasting time.

 

[jkroo]

well, as long as this is your only problem . But maybe you find some time to think about my argument. And if you have a serious idea why I might be wrong, be my guest. If not, I take you as the first one not to take serious in that forum.

LOL. So you just can't comprehend my post. It's OK.

But seriously, No one will take it serious that a post without photos, data, figures, tables or charts. It will even be treated as seriously bullsh!t in China and no serious arguments will come. lol.

So take it easy and idea expressing in an online forum is nothing. Just fact rules.

BTW, Feel free to talk and act as a smart a** if you will. lol.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Let me show you the cost comparison between China's Type 052D destroyer vs. US Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis destroyers.

• China Type 052D destroyer

The PLAN Genral Yin Zhuo once mentioned in a press conference that, the per tonnage cost of 052D is RMB 500,000.

We know that 052D is about 7,500ton, so cost per unit will be 7,500 * 0.5 million = 3,750 million RMB, or $ 535 million;

link and screenshot to Yin's comments
http://news.ifeng.com/a/20140423/40006172_0.shtml

View attachment 368720

• US AB-class destroyer

The US Navy 2011 budget report states that, one AB-class destroyer (Flight IIA design) would cost $2,028.7 million

Link and screenshot to the US Navy budget report
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98051/m1/1/high_res_d/RL32109_2011Apr19.pdf

View attachment 368723
So $535 million of 052D vs. $2 billion of AB-class. The superb cost advantage of China even in high-tech stuff be proved!!

And are AB class and type 052D at a similar level?

I am asking seriously. I am new to this stuff. Please cite some reliable sources.

 

[nang2]

well, as long as this is your only problem . But maybe you find some time to think about my argument. And if you have a serious idea why I might be wrong, be my guest. If not, I take you as the first one not to take serious in that forum.


feelings... that strange things that outweight ideas and arguments.


Well, not to get me wrong. 1st of all, I was not only talking about aquisition costs. I was talking about the total cost of ownership, meaning all expenses through lifespan of a system. For navy vessels, more of 2/3 of costs occure in lifespan. I have not said, that china can build cheaper ships. I said, that china has to pay much higher costs once they use sophisticated (automation) technology (f.e.).Comparing a 052D with Arleigh Burke IIA is likecomparing apples and pears. At least when it comes to the costs.

But well, discussing free market rules with comunist is a little bit of wasting time.

be careful. not every Chinese is a communist. just like not every American or German is a fan for free market.

 

[帅的一匹]

you are absolutely right. My apologies to all open minded and well educated chinese that felt offended by calling them communists.

And those three jokers, posting high level replies, I am stiil waiting for an argument. your feelings are clear now.

Your Scorpene doesn't even have a torpedo to fire. Don't trolling here and ruin this thread.

It's a thread about Chinese submarine, not Chinese communist.

And are AB class and type 052D at a similar level?

I am asking seriously. I am new to this stuff. Please cite some reliable sources.

As a grown up, you can check it yourself in Google.

 

[Salty_Waters]

And are AB class and type 052D at a similar level?

I am asking seriously. I am new to this stuff. Please cite some reliable sources.

To be fair, this is leading off topic... so just that reply on that, after it I wont go on on DD's here.

To compare an AB with a Type 052D, is like comparing apples with pears.

main gun, allomost the same
VLS: 1/3 more capacity at AB, MK41 is hot launched v 52D VLS is cold launched (need for cold launch booster)
Main reason, why an AB and a 052D can't be compared, is the Aegis-System. AB is able to handle automaticly +100's of surface, subsurface and areal targets and designate threats with a special counter measure by directing connected units on that targets. That's something called integrated automated warfare. Something, China is still lacking for some years ahead. Something you can't apply to your ship by making an update with an USB stick.

AB's are, to say it simple: swimming computers, with all sensors and weapons integrated into the ships architecture. 052D's have computers, that assist naval officers in doing the job, that an arleigh burke can do autonomusly. AB's are doing their job by integration into the network of a fleet, where computers can decide what is the most effective answere to the thread. That's why Aegis is the first system that allows an effective ballistic missile defence.
Maybe 055 will have some features, that allow to say, that they are Aegis-Type DDG/CG, but the 052D are not.

So thank you for your question, that gets me back to my argument before. If fanboys like it or not, there the higher acquisition costs and the operational cost come from. The systems are expensive to build, whatsoever low your wages are. The maintenance needs high educated personell (electic engineers, informatic engineers), sophisticated tools, and expensive spare parts. So no product for mass production, and no product that can easily be outnumbered. But let me get back to your question.

At least one minor difference, but one that pays when things get hot: more than 70 years of naval operation experience (expensive and tragic lessons learned) are incorporated into ships design and surviveability, leading to massive differences in damage control and fire fighting systems of both classes. I had the chance to get aboard of an 054A (quite nice design, a good ship). But looking at the damage control /fire fighting system gives me a clear idea of where PLAN is rite now and what they still have to learn with next generation of navel vessels. 052D was constructed in the same time like 054A, so same operational standards are the baseline for design requirements.

To be fair, PLAN has an incredible speed by developing it's actual fleet (i really like it). And for sure it will have a fleet, that is head to head with the USN within the 21st century. But be aware, there is a price to pay for a fast development, there is a price to pay for having the most advanced technology.

But finaly, let'z get back to the topic.

Your Scorpene doesn't even have a torpedo to fire. Don't trolling here and ruin this thread.

It's a thread about Chinese submarine, not Chinese communist.


As a grown up, you can check it yourself in Google.

Yeah, guy it is about chinese submarine, that's the point you forgot by posting your provocative first answere to my costs argument (you forgot the toppic)... and now, again you demonstrate the absence of knowledge: Scorpene is not our submarine. If you try that as "a grown up" google it for yourself honey, you can easily figure out, that Germany has Type 212A submarine. One with a torpedo. But thank you for showing me your knowledge, now I know that: I needn't to take your posts serious.

 

[帅的一匹]

Whatever it is, your home built France subs don't have torpedo to use.

 

[j20blackdragon]

That's something called integrated automated warfare. Something, China is still lacking for some years ahead.

How do you prove this statement? I don't necessarily agree or disagree with you. I'm just wondering how you would prove your claim.

AB's are, to say it simple: swimming computers

I hope you realize a good number of Arleigh Burkes are still using the 1980s era AN/UYK-43 32-bit MILSPEC computer.

Only the ships with the full Baseline 9 upgrade will shed their 1980s AN/UYK-43 32-bit MILSPEC computers, completely strip out the ship’s combat information center and install a new series of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) servers to process the targeting information from the ship’s SPY-1 air defense radar.

Moreover, I'm willing to guarantee the computers on an Aegis ship pale in comparison to the computers on this list.

https://www.top500.org/lists/2016/11/

China is also producing some of the best programmers.

https://www.cnet.com/news/which-country-has-the-best-programmers-hint-its-not-the-us/

052D's have computers, that assist naval officers in doing the job

Ok...

that an arleigh burke can do autonomusly.

AI is the ultimate form of automation. China is leading here too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...0/13/china-has-now-eclipsed-us-in-ai-research

AB's are doing their job by integration into the network of a fleet, where computers can decide what is the most effective answere to the thread.

Computers again?

https://www.top500.org/lists/2016/11/

That's why Aegis is the first system that allows an effective ballistic missile defence.

Happened 7 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_anti-ballistic_missile_test

 

[j20blackdragon]

Don't believe that US Navy Aegis ships use standard off-the-shelf servers? I post additional evidence. But I encourage everyone to google and verify what I'm saying.

Engineers at [Lockheed Martin’s] Moorestown [facility in New Jersey] have been ripping out Aegis’ traditional military-grade computers and replacing them with cheaper, faster commercial computers such as IBM’s Blade server. Going to so-called “commercial off-the-shelf” computers means Aegis can be upgraded every time IBM comes out with a faster computer — say, every two or three years. This helps the Navy keep up with the ever-increasing pace of technological development. “We have not reached the limit of Aegis,” [Aegis engineer Alan] Ostrow says.

http://defensetech.org/2006/11/22/aegis-turns-20/

The design of the Zumwalt solves that problem by using off-the-shelf hardware—mostly IBM blade servers running Red Hat Linux—and putting it in a ruggedized server room. Those ruggedized server rooms are called Electronic Modular Enclosures (EMEs), sixteen self-contained, mini data centers built by Raytheon.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/10/the-navys-newest-warship-is-powered-by-linux/

Navy Needs New Servers for Aegis Cruisers and Destroyers After Chinese Purchase of IBM Line

https://news.usni.org/2015/05/05/na...destroyers-after-chinese-purchase-of-ibm-line

U.S. Navy Looks to Replace IBM Servers for Security After Lenovo Purchase

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-nav...for-security-after-lenovo-purchase-1432047582

 

[samsara]

中國解決水下通信世界性難題, 或用於核潛艇提高二次核打擊能力
China solves underwater communication issues worldwide, may use nuclear submarines to increase the second nuclear strike capability

Published on Jan 23, 2017

This year China will improve the real time monitoring of the West Pacific Ocean conditions of the deep observation, will technically solve the "worldwide problem" of the inaccessible depths of the sea waves transmitting data, so as to improve the marine environment and weather forecast accuracy, and the communication technology will also be used for nuclear-powered submarines carrying nuclear missiles. According to an article published by Japan's Sankei 6 titled "China will employ the deep sea data (transmission) for military matters" reports that ..., so the technique will be used to communicate with submarines, which is used in the military. New system is known as "the first kind of two-way communication with regard to the underwater submarine approach", in calm, the deep layer, can be in more than 10,000-meter distance between acoustic wireless communication, can meet the global communication needs of Chinese nuclear submarines. In addition, this technique can be used to record and monitor other submarine route, its collection of marine data will be used for anti-submarine warfare.

中國今年將完善能夠實時監測西太平洋海洋狀況的深海觀測網，將在技術上解決從電波難以到達的深海傳送數據的“世界性難題”，從而改善海洋環境和氣象預報準確度，且這項通信技術也將被用於搭載核導彈的核動力潛艇。據日本《產經新聞》6日發表的題為《中國要將深海數據用於軍事》的報導指出，中國這次潛標的布放深度與潛艇航行深度幾乎一致，因此這項技術會被用來與潛艇進行通信，即用於軍事。新系統被稱為“針對潛入水下的潛艇的首種雙向通訊方式”，在平靜的深水層，能在超過1萬米的距離間進行聲波無線通訊，可滿足中國核潛艇的全球通訊之用。此外，這項技術可被用來記錄和監視別國潛艇航線，其收集的海洋數據也會被用於反潛作戰。

　　巡邏在遠洋大海之中的潛艇與基地之間的通訊，尤其是執行全程遠程水下巡邏任務的核潛艇，是一大難題。在以前，這往往有兩大途徑，一是通過長波電台，二是通過興起時間並不長的藍綠激光，才能實現。但是在傳輸速度、接收深度、接收時間等方面均有特殊要求，而且在安全性上也較低，因此局限性也不小。比如使用最早最多的長波通訊吧，需要建造長度甚至可達數十或者數百公里的天線陣，才能滿足更遠距離的通訊要求。而同時，長時間潛航在300米以下的接收信息的潛艇也必須在收到約定簡短信號提醒後，在一定時間內浮起到特定的深度（30米）才能接收信號，而此時並不能發送信號，如需要向基地發送信號必須浮出水面或者使用浮標才能實現，且必須使用數十或者數百分鐘才能才能發送很簡單的信息數據，而此時潛艇的被發現概率大幅上升而安全性大大下降。

藍綠激光通訊雖然大幅改善了長波通訊的一些痼疾，比如在傳輸速率和穿透海水的深度上提升很多，相對來說也使潛艇更安全，保密性能也可滿足要求，但也存在受天氣的影響和依賴特種飛機與衛星的缺點，因此只有少數國家在使用。隨著更多國家擁有航程更遠的潛艇艦隊，比如巴西、日本、韓國、澳大利亞、以色列、巴基斯坦、印度等都在建立AIP或者核潛艇艦隊，它們對於潛艇遠程通訊的需求也集中體現出來，很多國家都在積極尋找更快傳輸速度和可隨時通訊的新技術。如今通過國內外的報導來看，中國已經走在了世界的前頭，成為世界上第一個成功解決潛艇巡航深度通訊技術的國家。

現在還不知道這項“針對潛入水下的潛艇的首種雙向通訊方式”是使用的傳統通訊方式還是不久前宣傳的量子通訊技術，但毫無疑問，該技術達到了可與潛深達500米，遠離基地10000千米以外水下平台實時通訊的問題。這項技術是在2016年實現的，相信軍用的類似技術應該更早應用於中國海軍的潛艇。這項技術的工作細節是這樣描述的：在水面上放置了一個數據實時傳輸的浮體，它與潛標通過無線和有線兩種方式連接。潛標將數據傳輸給浮體，浮體發射到衛星上，衛星就可以再反饋回陸地實驗室。而更先進的軍用版本的存在應該是毫無置疑的。在實際應用上，如今中國正在大力擴充核潛艇艦隊，093A/B、094B、095和096型核潛艇的巡邏距離正在逐步擴大，而新一代的AIP潛艇如039A、041和041A正在批量服役，上述這些潛艇均將遠赴東太平洋和印度洋甚至是大西洋執行遠程巡邏任務，而如果裝備了中國最新的潛艇通訊技術，那麼其意義無論怎麼描述都不為過。

　　最重要的是，此前有美國洛克希德·馬丁公司的工程師說，正在為美國潛艇研發類似技術。這家美國公司提出的解決辦法——當時尚在研發中——也是通過浮標讓潛艇與衛星間建立聯繫。這也就是說，目前美國還沒有這樣的技術，中國的技術實際上已走在美國之前，居於世界領先的位置。可以相信，這項尖端技術的應用，可以使得中國的二次核反擊能力獲得極大提升，更有利於中國遠洋海軍的真正成型。

 

[grey boy 2]