Chinese Navy (PLAN) News & Discussions

[Figaro]

You're basing these dates off of what?

Numerous PLA watchers have spoke of a commission in the early 2020's (which is in parallel with the 095). 2023 is just a tentative date; it may be commissioned even earlier. My point is that it would be strange for the 096 to enter service before the completion of the JL-3 ... especially given Chinese experience in SLBMs, most notably the JL-2 and JL-2A

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

It looks though the PLAN is developing a new class of heavy surface combatant.

20000-ton plus cruiser? 40000-ton plus battleship?

With all sorts of missiles and guns and directed-energy weapons...

I have long thought about such a destroyer.

On the lines of the Russian Battlecruisers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirov-class_battlecruiser

These give China quite a huge advantage, because with a nuclear reactor they have endless endurance and range, only limited by crew supplies and crew endurance. They don't need extensive support facilities and distant bases. While Russia fields only one such cruiser, China can perhaps field a dozen or more, given its shipbuilding capability and financial might.

 

[Figaro]

I have long thought about such a destroyer.

On the lines of the Russian Battlecruisers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirov-class_battlecruiser

These give China quite a huge advantage, because with a nuclear reactor they have endless endurance and range, only limited by crew supplies and crew endurance. They don't need extensive support facilities and distant bases. While Russia fields only one such cruiser, China can perhaps field a dozen or more, given its shipbuilding capability and financial might.

I don't think China will ever put nuclear reactors into their surface combatants ... as evidenced by the inefficiencies and huge upkeep of those Kirovs. Nuclear powered warships are a thing of the past ... China won't resurrect them from the Cold War.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

I don't think China will ever put nuclear reactors into their surface combatants ... as evidenced by the inefficiencies and huge upkeep of those Kirovs. Nuclear powered warships are a thing of the past ... China won't resurrect them from the Cold War.

Russians have had difficulties with pretty much all of their Naval vessels, so the Russian experience to keep these destroyers going, which are more than 2 decade old, is no sign of anything.

Nuclear Power provides pretty much endless supply of power, and is the only one that can do so. This is the reason why all american submarines are nuclear. US doesn't need nuclear surface combatants because it has an American base, allies, and support facilities in nearly every corner of the world.

In this region, they have, Okinawa, Japanese mainland ports, Korea, Guam, Phillipines, Singapore, Australia, Deigo Garcia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait.

 

[Dante80]

Russians have had difficulties with pretty much all of their Naval vessels, so the Russian experience to keep these destroyers going, which are more than 2 decade old, is no sign of anything.

Nuclear Power provides pretty much endless supply of power, and is the only one that can do so. This is the reason why all american submarines are nuclear. US doesn't need nuclear surface combatants because it has an American base, allies, and support facilities in nearly every corner of the world.

In this region, they have, Okinawa, Japanese mainland ports, Korea, Guam, Phillipines, Singapore, Australia, Deigo Garcia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait.

Nuclear marine propulsion is not a new thing. Both the Soviet Union and the US dabbled with it in the past, and the idea of a nuclear range Navy is pretty old in itself. See operation Sea Orbit for reference.

There is a reason though for the whole thing not catching on. While Nuclear Propulsion makes sense for power hungry (catapults) Aircraft Carriers and speed/range dependent SSNs/SSBNs (patrol endurance), it was found pretty fast that the solution was not truly fitting for a whole surface battle group. The cost/effect ratio was unbalanced, and in the end fuel was really only one of the things that a patrolling group needed in Replenishment at sea (RAS) operations. The low fuel cost is offset by the high operating costs and investment in infrastructure, as well as a significant decommission cost.

I can see PLAN moving to Nuclear propelled CVs in the future (it makes sense), but for destroyers or cruisers? No.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Nuclear marine propulsion is not a new thing. Both the Soviet Union and the US dabbled with it in the past, and the idea of a nuclear range Navy is pretty old in itself. See operation Sea Orbit for reference.

There is a reason though for the whole thing not catching on. While Nuclear Propulsion makes sense for power hungry (catapults) Aircraft Carriers and speed/range dependent SSNs/SSBNs (patrol endurance), it was found pretty fast that the solution was not truly fitting for a whole surface battle group. The cost/effect ratio was unbalanced, and in the end fuel was really only one of the things that a patrolling group needed in Replenishment at sea (RAS) operations. The low fuel cost is offset by the high operating costs and investment in infrastructure, as well as a significant decommission cost.

I can see PLAN moving to Nuclear propelled CVs in the future (it makes sense), but for destroyers or cruisers? No.

But PLAN doesn't have what USN possesses, which is a huge array of bases worldwide, ready to equip and supply.

Along with that, if lasers and Railguns do indeed become mature, they could only reliably be powered by nuclear power.

 

[Dante80]

But PLAN doesn't have what USN possesses, which is a huge array of bases worldwide, ready to equip and supply.

Along with that, if lasers and Railguns do indeed become mature, they could only reliably be powered by nuclear power.

PLAN also does not have the mission requirements and political mandate that the USN has. Its most demanding mission (protection of sea routes on the far seas - China<->Africa) is a lot less taxing (considering), and is also a reason for China moving to establish a presence in Djibouti, Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

With regards to Lasers and/or Electromagnetic weapons, it seems that both the USN and PLAN are planning to fulfill that capability via a competent IEPS.

 

[LKJ86]

https://m.weibo.cn/1663285094/4232024283407176

---
2018.4.17-20

http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/view/2018-04/23/content_8012474.htm

 

[lcloo]

I have seen many posts here and in some other forums doubting there is sufficient trained sailors to man the new ships entering PLAN service. Here is Dalian Naval Academy, training Chinese and foreign naval personals. China has the foresight to train sailors before finished building their ships. Lets discard the doubts.

Photo celebrating 69 anniversary of founding of PLAN by Dalian Naval Academy.

 

[LKJ86]

 

[LKJ86]

052B 169

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/WfKgb3SrZ9jzJ2WLKfcu_Q

 

[LKJ86]

In Indian Ocean
2018.4.24

 

[lcloo]

Indeed you are right. So what is that? 055#4 for JNCX? or a 052D?


Thank you that is real pleasent surprise. 055#3 has progress very fast. the one I noted as #3 could be #4?

Now I guessed I know what this ship is, It is the new 052D variant with extended length on landing deck.

 

[Figaro]

I have seen many posts here and in some other forums doubting there is sufficient trained sailors to man the new ships entering PLAN service. Here is Dalian Naval Academy, training Chinese and foreign naval personals. China has the foresight to train sailors before finished building their ships. Lets discard the doubts.

Photo celebrating 69 anniversary of founding of PLAN by Dalian Naval Academy.

View attachment 468914 View attachment 468915 View attachment 468916 View attachment 468917 View attachment 468918

Agreed. Just because we don’t have a public ceremony over commissioning does not mean the new 052Ds have not been commissioned ... and definitely does not a mean a lack of trained personnel.

 

[samsara]

Agreed. Just because we don’t have a public ceremony over commissioning does not mean the new 052Ds have not been commissioned ... and definitely does not a mean a lack of trained personnel.

Some forumers, here and there, are indeed INTENTIONALLY saying like that, after all the clues, as a way to solicit the said pictures from the other members, that they perceive as possibly having the coveted access to such info. Remember this famous line: "Show the picture or it does not exist!" IMO, in some circumstances it's just a cheap trick. Simply ignore them!
Or, purely a kind of disparaging remark in covert form... indirectly hinting the state of lacking brain for not being able to plan on the needed human resources [though have the capability to build the hardware] LOL
And depending on the quality of the said forumers, some could be merely lacking of the common sense.
All in all, just ignore those kinds of personalities!! They have their own skins at play.