Posted on 03/07/2005 9:49:24 AM PST by Jeff Head
You may wish to check out Patrick Robinson's series of books. I would recommend two: Kilo Class and Nimitz class.
I've heard rumours that the phased array radar(PAR) used on China's 052C is actually a more advanced version of PAR than the ones on Burkes, though nobody can confirm this.
I know how fast our subs go and I know of their capabilites. They are dominant in blue water without equal. Litoral waters are a different matter, particularly when there is signifant land based air cover. Not that we would lose at all...just that the threat and danger go way up.
So, please don't get me wrong, I have a son in law in the submarine sevices and believe we will persevere in any case...I just cannot and will not too cavalierly underestimate and write off dedicated enemies.
Let's put it this way-a N-sub will slaughter any number of D/Es in deep ocean by virtue of it's ability to stay submerged for great periods,at great depts & much greater speed & with increased efficiency of it's sonars.Nearer to the shore(in littorals),the situation becomes a lot more hazy,with speed & dept not as useful.
Tom_Paine,the Kilos that China are acquiring from Russia carry a new cruise missile system(in anti-ship & land attack variants) with ranges from 220kms to 300kms.So It doesn't even need to go out of port to hit Taiwanese vessels.
From what I have read, submerged endurance of a normal D/E doesn't go much beyond 24-30 hours due to the need to recharge it's batteries.The current D/Es that China is acquiring from Russia reportedly feature an air-independent propulsion module which can theoritically allow the sub to stay submerged for upto 8-10 days(which is a huge advantage for a D/E).If & when the Germans start selling to China,the PLAN would have it's eyes on Germany's Fuel cell based AIP,which according to reports can sustain a sub underwater for as long as 15 to 20 days & is more efficient than competing Russian & French systems.
But the Chinese are using our own dollars to rapidly close the gap, and any new, capable system must be judged as an increased threat and cannot be discounted or underestimated, particularly in the China Sea/South China Sea region where they have significant land based air support and very short logistic lines.
Thanks for the update. Our current technology for making screws still makes our boats pretty damn quiet. I was on a fast attack sub during Viet Nam and the screw noise from Russian nucs was unbelievable.
Bear in mind that the Europeans-Germany,France,Italy & Britain are only inducting or going to induct ships with advanced radars-some of which are rated as better than the Aegis/Spy-1 combo.Don't rule out the PLAN getting those.You don't necessarily need to sell missiles with such systems.
I agree. A shame that the CIA stopped them in the 1980s. Taiwan needs the ability to turn China into a gigantic sheet of glass.
I did some more research on the web and found this site that had some good info on Chinese ships and planes:
http://www.sinodefence.com/
Hmmm. Hey jeff, you didn't rip all your photos from this web site did you?
Having said that, it is very advanced and would only increase the risk and danger in the hands of an overt belligerent. I pray the Chinese don't get it, but know they are proceeding with their own development and whatever aqvenues they can acquire in the mean time. There is but one end and reason for it...us.
Not all of them...there are several places on the web where great photos of the growing Chinese threat are located...but that site has some great pics for sure.
The Virginia-class is also built with littoral combat in mind while still retaining deep-water capabilility.
"the US Navy in the forefront -- find themselves ill-equipped to counter the explosive growth in the Third World fleet of stealthy, fourth generation diesel-electric subs like the U-212/214-class (Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH of Kiel and Thyssen Nordseewerke GmbH of Endenand, Germany) and the Scorpene-class (DCN of France and Izar (formerly Bazan) of Spain). Such current technology subs can stay submerged for days without need for snorkeling. Equipped with closed-oxygen diesel drives such as the French "MESMA" (Module d'Energie Sous-Marine Autonome) AIP steam-turbine system that burns ethanol and liquid oxygen to make steam to drive a turbo-electric generator, the design permits retrofitting into existing submarines by adding an extra hull section. Typical cost for a new submarine powered by MESMA is $250 million. These warships are openly for sale to almost anyone with a big enough checking account (except Taiwan, but that’s another story). For the budget-conscious – or someone simply in a hurry to raise hell with an allied navy -- a Russian P-130 or Piranha-T Small-class submarine may be purchased for a fraction of the cost of a Scorpene. While limited in crew size and range, a Piranha-T’s torpedoes and mines are quite suitable for denying coastal waters to most navies ill prepared for ASW."
"Today’s conventional subs – SSKs -- with their “airless” diesel technology, super-quiet electric motors, greatly improved noise reduction, and great submerged dash speed in shallow water, make active ranging in most cases almost useless. The halving since 1991 of the US Navy’s submarine fleet -- a primary ASW asset itself – further aggravates the situation. The US and allied navies have become keenly aware of this danger. ASW, like anti-mine warfare, has traditionally been unglamorous, complicated, and absolutely essential to the Navy. There was no movie “Top Bunk” starring Tom Cruise as P-3 pilot Hank “Sleepy” Levey on a typical 12-hour flight looking for submarines in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the dramatic highlight of which was two off-duty crewmen flipping a coin over one bunk."
There is no Ukrain connection here.
The aerial defence systems on 051C and 052B are either imported directly from Russia, or manufactured under license from Russia.
The PAR on 052C is developed indigenously by China's Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology.
Understood...but its size and the reactor itself (no matter how you cut it, a reactor is still inherantently louder than batteries) will restrict its overall effectiveness in the littoral regions IMHO. Too expensive, too big, and too capable to risk sending in there IMHO, we need our own diesel electrics in my view.
No sh!t. Too many people have a warped veiw of China or think we should appease the dragon instead of slay it.
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/052c.asp
Kindly tell these folks to correct their data,then.
Jeff, while I believe this falls under acceptable "fair use", shouldn't we at least try to credit the source?
Sicne the EU refused to build D/Es for Taiwan as part of Bush's 2001 arms deal, the D/Es were and still might be (pending Taiwan's own politics) built here. There is a chance that we might adopt that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.