Chinese Submarines - are they noisy?

[Manticore]

It's propaganda.

The US military also claims Chinese thermonuclear warhead numbers have remained unchanged for 30 years. Total crap. We know China deployed the DF-5A, DF-5B, DF-31, DF-31A, and JL-2 ICBM/SLBM in the last 30 years. Also, China may have already started deploying DF-41 ICBMs.
.

While replying to a member, particularly a lady do show her proper respect. You can get your point of view across without being so rash

 

[SipahSalar]

Pakistan has built up significant military capabilities on a very limited budget; they certainly would not go all in and spend billions of dollars on 8 submarines if they are noisier than 30 year old Russian tech, agreed?

Pakistan Navy has been the most incompetent of the all three branches. Corruption going right up to the naval chief. So you can never know :-D

 

[Manticore]

Ive put forward a valid question of a member by quoting his question from the other thread. I've raised a question means that I am open to debate and I want to know chinese perspective in this case. Who says that I have taken the link as fact?
What does '' Please update us on this issue if possible '' mean to you? Does it look like I am purposely bashing china?
I am seriously disgusted by the tone in which certain members have started to respond to me rather that replying to the content of my post

Take a look at the source.

T

It is right for us to stay humble, but taking something that is completely untrue as fact would be very foolish.

 

[Jguo]

Ive put forward a valid question of a member by quoting his question from the other thread. I've raised a question means that I am open to debate and I want to know chinese perspective in this case. Who says that I have taken the link as fact?
What does '' Please update us on this issue if possible '' mean to you? Does it look like I am purposely bashing china?
I am seriously disgusted by the tone in which certain members have started to respond to me rather that replying to the content of my post

If my tone offended then I apologies, it was not my intention. I was addressing the general viewpoint of the idea, perhaps I should have phrased it better: 'to take it as fact would be unwise'

 

[Penguin]

During the Cold War, the U.S. Navy would arrange its own submarines in lines where each boat was 25 miles from the next, forming a sort of net to catch Soviet subs. With the introduction of the latest generation of quiet Russian diesel subs in the 1990s, the Americans thought that convergence-zone detection was no longer possible. But the Navy’s just discovered that China’s homemade subs are even louder than 20-year-old Russian boats. “Apparently they [U.S. subs] are making first convergence zone detections and holding them,” the analyst reports.

China's Noisy Subs Get Busier -- And Easier to Track | WIRED

Acoustic Quietness of Chinese Submarines

Please update us on this issue if possible

Considering the east coast of Amarica (Canada + US) is about 3,000-mile (4,800 km), this would require 192 submarines......

I would have expected something on SOSUS here

Autonomous Hydrophone Array (AHA) : Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

 

[Víðarr]

Considering the east coast of Amarica (Canada + US) is about 3,000-mile (4,800 km), this would require 192 submarines......

But even before SOSUS was developed the submarine force had begun looking explicitly at the utility of ASW submarines, or SSKs, using passive, low frequency acoustic arrays. This effort began soon after World War II as part of a general search by the submarine force for new missions, and was formalized under Project Kayo in 1949. Kayo included the establishment of Submarine Development Group 2 (SubDevGru 2) which was tasked with "solving the problem of using submarines to detect and destroy enemy submarines." In 1952, the first submarines explicitly designed for that mission - SSKs 1-3 - became available. Their key attribute was a big, low frequency bow array, the BQR-4. The first use of the BQR-4 in exercises produced stunning results. In the words of K-1's first skipper:

"USS K-1, off Bermuda in 1952, picked up a snorkeling (sic) exercise submarine at 30 miles, a range previously unknown to me, its CO, and my fire control party. The K-1 stayed at battle stations for five hours expecting every minute, after the first 15 minutes of tracking, for the bearing-rate to break and the target to go by. Can you imagine it? JT ranges from 4000 to 10,000 yards until 1952: and then in one Fleet exercise period, BQR-4 ranges out to 30 miles."

This was the convergence zone phenomenon, another characteristic of low frequency sound propagation which led to concentric rings of increased sound pressure levels at 25-30 mile intervals around a sound source. With the ability to detect snorkelers at one or even two convergence zones, SSKs could be used to form barriers off enemy ports and across geographic chokepoints such as the Bear Island-Norway gap or the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap. Still, even with such long detection ranges, a barrier strategy would demand large numbers of submarines, and the K-1 and its two sisters were designed as mobilization ships to be produced in operationally significant numbers only in war. Meanwhile, existing fleet boats were given SSK conversions using the somewhat less effective BQR-2.

The Third Battle: Innovation in the U.S. Navy's Silent Cold War Struggle with Soviet Submarines

It doesn't reference the US East Coast though, apart from submarine tactics development exercises in the Gulf of Mexico, just choke points like the GI-UK gap. Points where Soviet, and NATO ships (the Soviets set up their own convergence points on the other side of key choke points) would have to pass through. Kind of like the straights separating the SCS and Indian Ocean.

The ocean topography and distance of the US East Coast would not offer favorable conditions for the convergence zone tactic. Hence why this tactic wasn't done there. Plus, if Soviet subs are near the US East Coast, our defenses have failed. We tried to keep the Soviets back beyond their missile ranges and out forces as close to them as we could.

it's a limited analysis, but we didn't see convergence zones on the US East Coast, with the exception of tactics development exercises.

 

[Armstrong]

This was the convergence zone phenomenon, another characteristic of low frequency sound propagation which led to concentric rings of increased sound pressure levels at 25-30 mile intervals around a sound source. With the ability to detect snorkelers at one or even two convergence zones, SSKs could be used to form barriers off enemy ports and across geographic chokepoints such as the Bear Island-Norway gap or the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap. Still, even with such long detection ranges, a barrier strategy would demand large numbers of submarines, and the K-1 and its two sisters were designed as mobilization ships to be produced in operationally significant numbers only in war. Meanwhile, existing fleet boats were given SSK conversions using the somewhat less effective BQR-2.

The Third Battle: Innovation in the U.S. Navy's Silent Cold War Struggle with Soviet Submarines

It doesn't reference the US East Coast though, just choke points like the GI-UK gap. Point's where Soviet, and NATO ships (the Soviets set up their own convergance points on the other side) would have to pass through. Kind of like the straights separating the SCS and Indian Ocean.

Can't simply buoys with sonars attached to them that directly intimate a nearby submarine/base about an encroaching enemy submarine also form a detection zone ?

I am, of course, saying this off the top of my head 'cause I haven't the faintest clue about submarines and what I've just written maybe absolute nonsense !

 

[Víðarr]

Can't simply buoys with sonars attached to them that directly intimate a nearby submarine/base about an encroaching enemy submarine also form a detection zone ?

I am, of course, saying this off the top of my head 'cause I haven't the faintest clue about submarines and what I've just written maybe absolute nonsense !

I was just updating my post with information on that exact concept. SOSUS was the US military's main detection method on the East Coast, it has a long-range, though other SOSUS systems existed around the world to provide more accurate tracking.

The first prototype of a full-size SOSUS installation – a 1,000-foot-long line array of 40 hydrophone elements in 240 fathoms of water – was deployed on the bottom off Eleuthera by a British cable layer in January 1952. After a series of successful detection trials with a U.S. submarine, the Navy decided by mid-year to install similar arrays along the entire U.S. East Coast – and then opted two years later to extend the system to the West Coast and Hawaii as well. These early SOSUS line arrays were positioned on the sea floor at locations that accessed the deep sound channel and oriented at right angles to the expected threat axis. Their individual hydrophone outputs were transmitted to shore processing stations called “Naval Facilities” – or NAVFACs – on multi-conductor armored cables.

SOSUS The "Secret Weapon" of Undersea Surveillance

SOSUS would detect Soviet subs before they could get near the US East Coast, thus a convergence zone was impractical (for other reasons too).

*I don't want to go too deep into this here. This isn't the right thread, and I'm not the most well versed on submarine doctrine. @SvenSvensonov would be a better choice to talk to.

 

[Armstrong]

I was just updating my post with information on that exact concept. SOSUS was the US military's main detection method on the East Coast, it has a long-range, though other SOSUS systems existed around the world to provide more accurate tracking.

The first prototype of a full-size SOSUS installation – a 1,000-foot-long line array of 40 hydrophone elements in 240 fathoms of water – was deployed on the bottom off Eleuthera by a British cable layer in January 1952. After a series of successful detection trials with a U.S. submarine, the Navy decided by mid-year to install similar arrays along the entire U.S. East Coast – and then opted two years later to extend the system to the West Coast and Hawaii as well. These early SOSUS line arrays were positioned on the sea floor at locations that accessed the deep sound channel and oriented at right angles to the expected threat axis. Their individual hydrophone outputs were transmitted to shore processing stations called “Naval Facilities” – or NAVFACs – on multi-conductor armored cables.

SOSUS The "Secret Weapon" of Undersea Surveillance

SOSUS would detect Soviet subs before they could get near the US East Coast, thus a convergence zone was impractical.

So Admiral Armstrong is a natural at anti-sub warfare !

I wish we had the resources to replicate something like that across Pakistan's coast !

But I suppose the Indian Navy neither presents as huge a threat to us as the Soviets did to the American Navy nor could we possibly muster up the resources to do something like that. So far, as I've understood, Pakistan Navy's saving grace has been our superior submarine fleet but because of our nose-diving economy and India's economic resurgence we'd soon loose that advantage too if we haven't already.

I hope we study what the Scandinavian's did against the Soviets to address the conventional disparity; what methods did they employ to ensure that they maintained a minimum credible deterrence against a conventionally superior adversary and what were those unique things that gave their deterrence a multiplier effect.

This is such fascinating stuff.....I should've joined the military...!

 

[Penguin]

Still, even with such long detection ranges, a barrier strategy would demand large numbers of submarines, and the K-1 and its two sisters were designed as mobilization ships to be produced in operationally significant numbers only in war. .

See my previous point.

 

[rcrmj]

it is very very noisy````as noisy as Virginia, Ohio and Seawolf lol

 

[Beast]

Ive put forward a valid question of a member by quoting his question from the other thread. I've raised a question means that I am open to debate and I want to know chinese perspective in this case. Who says that I have taken the link as fact?
What does '' Please update us on this issue if possible '' mean to you? Does it look like I am purposely bashing china?
I am seriously disgusted by the tone in which certain members have started to respond to me rather that replying to the content of my post

Becos you quote a very dubious and questionable report. From the read of it, it is very low class non constructive report. As members has valid called of how do they know type095 quietness when it has not even launch yet?


We have many cases of troll purposely pick controversial article like bashing of China as paper tiger which can't even defeat Somalia insurgent and claim China tank as old as WWII relic. Do you think such article would not cause resentment?

 

[longlong]

Chinese submarine noise the water by playing MP3 through the waterproof loudspeaker.

You have to be smart enough to enjoy the hide-and-seek with your lovely friend.

 

[DoTell]

I'm not a submarine expert. But, is the following story fabricated? If not, how "noisy" could it have been?


The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced | Daily Mail Online

American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.
By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.

According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy. The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat. One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.

The incident, which took place in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan, is a major embarrassment for the Pentagon.

 

[terranMarine]

I'm not a submarine expert. But, is the following story fabricated? If not, how "noisy" could it have been?


The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced | Daily Mail Online

Ahum according to Gambit the US Navy knew the presence of our sub
Whether the news is true or fabricated, who knows.