It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China "Yuan"Class Submarine has been in service

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 02:51 AM
link   
There's a world of a difference between snorting and submerged(dived) ranges..
Please check your info..
Any diesel(conventional sub) with a range of 9000 miles W/O AIP surmerged(dived) is revolutionary if true..
The submerged ranges wouldn't be beyond 500 miles and that too at a 4-5 knots.Also I doubt the sea-endurance would exceed more than a couple of months.
Keeping this in mind I don't see any major differences between the Kilo Class subs in the PLAN and these Collins Class subs. The difference may be AIP and the fact that the Kilos are reportedly super quiet.
Now here comes the Yuan. Does it have AIP? Is it as quiet as the Kilo?
I don't know about the Yuan but the type 636 Kilos with the PLAN are sertainly no pushover for the Collins or any other sub for that matter, with or w/o AIP and esp in coastal defence ops(littoral)

Also I'm asking if there's any clarification of whether the Collins boats ARE indeed fitted with AIP. There are some reports of the Collins being 'AIP capable' but nothing beyond that as far as I've looked.
So I was asking..




posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 03:33 AM
link   
I'll check the figures.

Just checked dive....400miles at 4kts. I've heard the endurance is 90 days. They only mentioned the W/O AIP config'.

The Collins Class are somewhat larger than the Kilo/Yuan class subs, and heavier.

They're the largest conventional powered subs in the world. They've also been fitted to carry and fire but not armed with Tomahawks.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostITM
Their (the Yuan's) are more littoral because they're not designed to handle bluewater conditions


How so?. Thus far, design purpose is unknown, but its a good deal larger than the former Song class



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Tomahawks you say..
interesting..
yes there have been reports of the pros and cons of employing the TLAM on Collins Class subs but no confirmation of the same.
Presumably the TomaHawks will be horizontally launched if incorporated as I see no present vertical launch systems from photos of the Collins boats?
But arming these boats with a Land attack cruise missile would be a serious shift in the capabilities of the Australian Navy making its stance much more offensive rather than defensive.
I can see no other perceivable land targets other than China and maybe Indonesia.
What is the range(if air-refuelable then that) of the F-111 Aarrdvark?



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:42 AM
link   
THe TLAM modification is part of a Mk 48 upgrade. Somewhat built in the package. The Collins Class Boats have had the upgrade made to them.

Obviously the Tomahawk class for submarines is made for the 21 inch torpedo tube. It is now a question of accomodating the rack storage spaces/handling equipment and the tubes themselves to handle the data inputs.

Yes ..this does change the buisness somewhat.

With the US Navy playing a smaller role in Asia.and the loss of more and more bases..in the Phillipines and Japan....due to local politics...Australia has become more and more important. Many US operations have been shifted down under...along with the facilities and capabilities to carry them out.
Another place which will figure out of more and more importance in monitoring/managing what is going on in that sphere of the unfriendley world will be a place called Diego Garcia. I was shocked when I finally found it on a map. It really ...genuinely is ..out there ..in the middle of nowhere. And it is the only thing out there.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Tomahawks you say..
interesting..
yes there have been reports of the pros and cons of employing the TLAM on Collins Class subs but no confirmation of the same.
Presumably the TomaHawks will be horizontally launched if incorporated as I see no present vertical launch systems from photos of the Collins boats?
But arming these boats with a Land attack cruise missile would be a serious shift in the capabilities of the Australian Navy making its stance much more offensive rather than defensive.
I can see no other perceivable land targets other than China and maybe Indonesia.
What is the range(if air-refuelable then that) of the F-111 Aarrdvark?


Yep, it's a confirmation. I can't see why we don't get Tomahawks. As fars as most of the people here in Oz are concerned, we couldn't give a toss what Indonesia thought. They go buy Su27's without a "by your leave" to us, so why should we even bother with placating them. This "touchy feely" diplomacy is a waste of time. Anyway, we don't need any Tomahawks to hit anywhere in Indonesia, the F111's can hit any target in Indonesia. We've got plenty of JSLAM missiles with 500NM ranges and any numbers of other goodies the Indonesians and Chinese won't like or don't know about. They don't like the fact we have OTH radar and AEW planes.....all I can say is too bad.

Range of an F111 w/o air refuelling is around 6000kms.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Whoa, there is a lot of FUD in this thread.

The Collins do not have AIP, and their submerged range is not 9000nm. Collins is a diesel sub, largest conventional sub in the world, and oh btw, one of if not the best conventional sub in the world. The large size and powerful diesels give the Collins class bigtime advantages over AIP, and while the Collins was built to support AIP, AIP has never been deployed.

Remember what AIP is, it is a basically a hotel battery for endurance, but it is a low power system that pushes a submarine very slow over long distances. Example:


Conventional Sub Underwater World Record

Gluecksburg, Germany - One of Germany's crack new fuel-cell-powered submarines has set a world record with a two-week-long dive, the German Navy said Wednesday.

The trip by the U212A-class sub with a crew of 27 from Eckernfoerde in Germany to Rota in Spain involved the longest period that any non-nuclear vessel had ever spent under water.


15 days underwater, about 2500nm, and that is the world record.

BUT, the Collins large diesels can put out more power, and while they need to be recycled more frequently than AIP, it also allows them to support big power electronics that AIP submarines can't take advantage of without surfacing and using their own diesels.

That is the same reason why Japan has choose Diesels instead of AIP. Japan, while often overlooked, has the most modern submarine fleet in the world. They build 1 new sub every year and have been doing this for decades, and Japan operates 15 total subs in the fleet and 2 for training. This means the oldest Japanese submarine is always 17 years. Each class consists of 8 subs and goes through a mid-life upgrade after 8 years, and the reason they do a new class after 8 subs is to take advantage of new technology, meaning no submarine is ever behind the technology curve more than 8 years.

BTW, where is the source that the Yuan is AIP? The DOD speculates AIP in their latest Chinese military report, but all I have read on the Yuan is that it is the Chinese varient of the Russian Kilo.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   

The Collins do not have AIP, and their submerged range is not 9000nm. Collins is a diesel sub, largest conventional sub in the world, and oh btw, one of if not the best conventional sub in the world. The large size and powerful diesels give the Collins class bigtime advantages over AIP, and while the Collins was built to support AIP, AIP has never been deployed.


The submerged endurance of a Collins Class sub is 400Nm at 4/5kts. It's snort range is 9000Nm and surface range of 11500Nm. They are the best conventional subs in the world.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:28 PM
link   
The Yuan is a different design from the Kilo, although it looks like it was developed with a little influence from the russian submarine.


Apprantly started because the Song class was not going to meet future needs



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   


Apprantly started because the Song class was not going to meet future needs


Couldn't quite hit the right "notes", hey


Wonders if the Yuan Class will either.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Another place which will figure out of more and more importance in monitoring/managing what is going on in that sphere of the unfriendley world will be a place called Diego Garcia. I was shocked when I finally found it on a map. It really ...genuinely is ..out there ..in the middle of nowhere. And it is the only thing out there.

Thanks,
Orangetom


Diego Garcia is a MUCH more interesting place for me especially
. It is NOT a lonely place and the area's going to get much more interesting.

Besides the USN the only navy capable of projecting power in this area and entire Indian Ocean is the Indian Navy. As of today(and hopefully in the future) the USN and th Indian Navy do NOT have conflicting strategic goals in this region, and well the whole region is like a common playground so to speak. We have the usual 'ahoy there!' , what's up atmosphere
Of course both navies undertake serious joint missions for anti-piracy ops (esp in the Malacca region) and serious war games (most recently Malabar 06 which involved carriers from both navies).

Here are a couple of more interesting points:

1)
Gwadar is a port in Pakistan being constructed with total chinese (read PLAN) assistance. The implications are far reaching and the objective seems to be Diego Garcia and a permanent presence for the PLAN in the Indian Ocean. I wouldn't be too surprised if the same is being attempted along the African east coast.
Besides that there is a reported chinese 'listening post' on a bunch of islands called Cocos just of the Burmese coast. This is speculated to be purely for monitoring Indian missile/space launches which are conducted in a vicinity of a 1000km or so.

2)Here's the controversial part:
The Australians (purely according to my sources;please feel free to counter) are not too happy about the Indians sort of spreading their reach in the Indian Ocean.Again there is no conflict of strategic goals but India is for the better part non-aligned and so not a guaraanteed ally.

The reasons (again as I see it):

a)The Indian Navy is quite a big navy with well-known blue water(surface) capability having operated 2 carriers(one at a time) in th last couple of decades.
b)As of today they have a sizeable surface fleet(blue water) which is quite modern with a good mix of large destoryers and few RCS reducing frigates.
c)Its AEW capabilities as of today are also not bad with a reach spanning the entire Indian Ocean (Tu-142B).
d)Decent sub capability with 10 kilos(Klub ASCM capable) and a 2 HDWs. I tend to look at them as mostly littoral though except for 200km+ ASCM range.
d)Fighter coverage is substantial with Harriers on the carrier(rhyme
) and about 50(Su-30MKI) fighters having a aerial refuel range of 8000km.
e) Fastest growing navy with serious blue water add ons:
One Kiev class carrier with MiG29Ks slated for 2008. One indigenous carrier with local naval LCAs or MiG29s or Su-33s slated for 2011-12.
6 Scorpene subs with Exocet ASCM capabilitypossibly reworked to carry indigenous ASCMS(BrahMos) and MESMA AIP. 3-4 new surface ship classes being built with more RCS reducing features.
AEW upgrades with the newest USN P-8A suite or the Nimrod suite.
And here's the creepy bit:
1-5 indigenous SSNs and/or 2-4 Akula II SSNs (not much info..very hush hush)
2-4 Tu22M supersonic bombers(though it looks like this has either gone on the backburner or completely fallen through).

There is enough documentation on the above right here in the weapons forum on ATS.

Now all this jazz cannot be for defensive naval postures
and it is probably safe to assume that it not meant for operations beyond the Indian Ocean (Pacific/Gulf)
The Indian Naval Doctrine is changing rapidly to expand deep into the Indian Ocean.
If the Aussies are content in dealing with their new roles(as metioned in above posts) in the Pacific and not too bothered about the seas off their west coast, then I see no friction. Otherwise I definitely believe that these two countries will have to get talking on a common minimum program for the Indian Ocean.

So you see Orangetom, Diego Garcia is not such a lonely place after all. We'll give you all the company you want!



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 12:06 AM
link   


Besides the USN the only navy capable of projecting power in this area and entire Indian Ocean is the Indian Navy.


Got news for you....... though not to the extent as India can now, Australia has been sending warships and planes throughout the Indian ocean for longer than India has been able to do so herself. Our subs shadow your surface ships all the time, although as a common courtesy we let you know where they are...... unlike our "relationship" with the Indonesians
Our warships regularly patrol the entire area, plus the Antarctic Ocean as well.


The Australians (purely according to my sources;please feel free to counter) are not too happy about the Indians sort of spreading their reach in the Indian Ocean.Again there is no conflict of strategic goals but India is for the better part non-aligned and so not a guaraanteed ally.


I don't think we're too worried about India that much, if at all. Considering we have an agreement with India to keep an eye out in the area, I can't see any conflicts as such with any of our mutual strategic goals. We do have common protagonists in the area.....namely Indonesia and now China. The Cocos Is you mentioned isn't the one which is a protectorate of Australia. If it was, the Chinese would get unceremoniously booted off quick time!!!.



[edit on 25-9-2006 by GhostITM]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   
In my discussions with Australian Navy folks, I have never sensed any of them seeing an emerging Indian Navy as a bad thing.

Australia has been working with India's Navy longer than virtually any other country, as I understand it Australia would be one of India's top partners, ahead of folks like the French and US who have put an emphisis lately on exercises with India involving Carriers.

Also, Diego Garcia is a bit overrated as a Naval base. While it is great as an air station, it really isn't designed with large warships in mind, and would require extensive work to be developed for that. There aren't many deep water points, in fact, if you have ever been there you would notice the MPF ships are stationed in the harbor, not in dock, as the dock facilities aren't really built for alot of large ships. If I remember correctly, I don't believe the island gets higher than 10m above sea level at any point.

One big point on the Indian Navy. While the Indian Navy is a powerful regional naval power, the Indian Navy still lacks a major air defense surface warship. The Indian Navy is designed for sea control, and has one of the most impressive ship-to-ship missile arsonals in the world at sea, and has proven in past engagements with Pakistan their capability in that regard.

While the Indian Navy is a regional challanger in the Indian Ocean where land based Indian Air Force assets can be utilized, the ability to project forces is still behind that of even smaller Navies like Australia. It might be why they are buying the USS Trenton, and are spending considerable resources developing an air defense warship for the future.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 12:44 AM
link   
If you would ..I need your opinion ..someone more local and with a opinion different from what seems to be stamped out official version..void of much real information.

What is the buisness with this piracy going on in places as you mention...Malacca and that area. I can only surmise by the news or lack of news that the local governments are not very adept at dealing with this issue. It seems to crop up from time to time. Most of the time it stays here on the back pages of the newspapers if it make the print at all. The recent buisness with the ocean liners ...and some storys of private ships being attacked have made the news.

What is your take on this and its causes?? I am surmising that these people are getting greedy or despirate for new conquests in this buisness.

Anything you can shed light upon from your part of the Globe would be appreciated.
A bit off topic...but something of which I am instrested.

As to the PLAN ..I have been waiting for stories or evidence they are looking outside of China for growth..their navy is soon to follow.

One more thing. Long before I got my amateur radio license I listened to shortwave radio from a cheap set I purchased at a yard sale and listened off an olde wire antenna. I would often tune into the ham bands to listen to traffic from around the world. I recall listening to some olde timers speaking with some guys in the Navy back then. One of them had gotten orders to someplace called the Rock.
IT turned out to be Diego Garcia. Now mind you ..back then it was in the early days of the US Navy using this base. ..though as I understand it ..other nations Navys had been using it for years and years before. It was some time before I actually looked it up on a map...and to my surprise ...learned how far out there it really is.
I really enjoyed that olde yard sale short wave set ..it took me around the world so to speak.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostITM


Got news for you....... though not to the extent as India can now, Australia has been sending warships and planes throughout the Indian ocean for longer than India has been able to do so herself.


true..true..



Our subs shadow your surface ships all the time, although as a common courtesy we let you know where they are......


really? haven't much on that here, but will confirm.
Though I would love to hear some accounts to back that up.
Esp since a snorting sub isn't too hard to detect for ANY maritime vessel let alone AEW a/c and ships.
Also considering the dived ranges of the Collins class, it would have to mean that the IN surface vessels would have to come very very close to Australia for them to be able to sneak up to these ships undetected. Could you maybe specify which ships were shadowed, so we could look at sonar capabilities?
Again this is all very new and interesting and I will definitely find out more here.




I don't think we're too worried about India that much, if at all. Considering we have an agreement with India to keep an eye out in the area, I can't see any conflicts as such with any of our mutual strategic goals. We do have common protagonists in the area.....namely Indonesia and now China.



Good to hear that..


[edit on 25-9-2006 by GhostITM]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by darksided

One big point on the Indian Navy. While the Indian Navy is a powerful regional naval power, the Indian Navy still lacks a major air defense surface warship. The Indian Navy is designed for sea control, and has one of the most impressive ship-to-ship missile arsonals in the world at sea, and has proven in past engagements with Pakistan their capability in that regard.


I didn't quite get your point.. a dedicated air-defense vessel other than a carrier?
Because all the blue water ships are armed with the BARAK I (and soon the jointly developed BARAKII) systems which provide suitable air defence. Maybe the navy wouldn't have a credible defense in terms of the Harrier strike force against the likes of better equipped naval fighters like the F/A-18 hornet, Tomcat, Mig29Ks, Su-33 but other than that fleet air defense with harriers is not so bad.



While the Indian Navy is a regional challanger in the Indian Ocean where land based Indian Air Force assets can be utilized, the ability to project forces is still behind that of even smaller Navies like Australia. It might be why they are buying the USS Trenton, and are spending considerable resources developing an air defense warship for the future.

Could you elaborate?
With the induction of the Kiev Class MiG 29K carrier in 08 the air defense shortfalls can be addressed.

Orangetom, I'll get back to you on the piracy bit..

[edit on 25-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Could you elaborate?
With the induction of the Kiev Class MiG 29K carrier in 08 the air defense shortfalls can be addressed.


Even a carrier with good aircraft are still vulnerable to attack, plus your carriers aren't going to be ready all the time for deployment. India lacks large mobile air warfare destroyers or cruisers. Even your frigates aren't setup primarily for that role whereas Australian ships have not only antiship and antisub capabilities, most of our capital ships are also designed for air warfare....especially our larger frigates and new destroyers. Any of our larger assets could take out planes launched off Indian carriers before they got within range for weapons release. Even the Anzac class frigates have good anti air capabilities.

I'll clue you in tomorrow...time for bed here



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   


Even a carrier with good aircraft are still vulnerable to attack, plus your carriers aren't going to be ready all the time for deployment. India lacks large mobile air warfare destroyers or cruisers.


I see.. I'm totally waiting for you to clue me in on that. Esp on the air attack vulnerabilities of a carrier..



Even your frigates aren't setup primarily for that role whereas Australian ships have not only antiship and antisub capabilities, most of our capital ships are also designed for air warfare....especially our larger frigates and new destroyers.


Could you specify these anti-air fittings please?
Missiles, and FCR?
and how they are lackoing on IN frigates?




Any of our larger assets could take out planes launched off Indian carriers before they got within range for weapons release. Even the Anzac class frigates have good anti air capabilities.

With what? At what ranges?
I think there's a major misconception of the BARAK (esp due to the apparent failure/inactivity of the same with recent Israeli incident) system on IN ships.
Also the ASCM capabilities of IAF (AF/navy) a/c are again not very well understood here(Esp the Brahmos).
Planeman, a point of view if you please?



I'll clue you in tomorrow...time for bed here



Waiting for your specs tomorrow.


Orangetom hows about we do the piracy thing after we investigate this a bit more?




[edit on 25-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
I didn't quite get your point.. a dedicated air-defense vessel other than a carrier?


Yes.

There is a trend that has been in motion since the end of the cold war, it is the air defense Naval warship, and it is expected to become more and more important to Naval warfare as cruise missiles and ballistic missiles continue to improve.

Examples would be the Spanish Alvaro de Bazan class, the French and Italian Horizon Destroyers, the British Type 45 Destroyers, the Netherlands De Zeven Provinciën class, South Korea's KDX-III, the Chinese Luzhou class, and the German Sachsen class.

(Although the Russian Kirov and Slava classes, US Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke classes, and Japanese Atago and Kongo classes also can serve in this role, they are very large ships with size that give them more flexibility to other roles.)

These ships have the capability to detect and engage planes and missiles at greater than 100km, and up to 390km in some cases, which is a capability that is noticably not in the Indian Navy yet. The Barak system you discuss has a top range of 10-12km, which is anywhere from 10 to 30 times less range of the Standard, Aster, and S-300FMs deployed in other Navy fleets. The max range of the Indian Navies best surface SAM missile is 50km, but the system most likely wouldn't be effective at that range against anything other than large aircraft. The problem iwth that is, even old Harpoon, Exocet, and C-802 missiles have ranges well beyond 50km, meaning the Indian surface fleet couldn't shoot down the attacking aircraft before they launched their anti-ship missiles.

While aircraft carriers can bring aircraft to bear for fleet defense, it is still very much questionable how effective aircraft will be against saturation missile strikes that include supersonic sea skimming anti-ship missiles. Whether it is detection issues or speed issues, even the most advanced concepts in the world like the CEC/AEGIS/AESA/E-2D/AIM-120 combinations may or may not be able to provide the coverage and engagement capability required to stop saturation strikes.

So while aircraft are nice, in the end, it will be up to air defense ships to be the last line of defense for task forces, shooting down aircraft before they can get close enough to launch their missiles, leaving shorter range point defense systems like the Barak system as a failsafe against missiles that get through the air defense umbrella, not as the primary air defense system.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by darksided
The Barak system you discuss has a top range of 10-12km, which is anywhere from 10 to 30 times less range of the Standard, Aster, and S-300FMs deployed in other Navy fleets. The max range of the Indian Navies best surface SAM missile is 50km, but the system most likely wouldn't be effective at that range against anything other than large aircraft. The problem iwth that is, even old Harpoon, Exocet, and C-802 missiles have ranges well beyond 50km, meaning the Indian surface fleet couldn't shoot down the attacking aircraft before they launched their anti-ship missiles.


True.. the envelop offered by the long range SAMs mostly controlled by Shtil aren't much more than 50km.



While aircraft carriers can bring aircraft to bear for fleet defense, it is still very much questionable how effective aircraft will be against saturation missile strikes that include supersonic sea skimming anti-ship missiles. Whether it is detection issues or speed issues, even the most advanced concepts in the world like the CEC/AEGIS/AESA/E-2D/AIM-120 combinations may or may not be able to provide the coverage and engagement capability required to stop saturation strikes.


Again true, but here I was inclining more towards interception(BVR engagement) before the a/c are within range to launch ASCMs.
Most ASCMs of the C-80X series would have a max usable envelop of around 100~120km which could be handled by air interception...still optimistic though..
However Any Harpoon blk II AGM 84D(and beyond) would put any current IN ship totally at the mercy of th BARAK and other point defense systems.
Still, its not an utter gaping hole so to speak, but a weakspot for sure.

Keeping this in mind the naval doctrine advises that all future ships and perhaps current ones too, be fitted with long range Air defense systems.
Since local projects have been somewhat unsuccesful in the short range air defense sphere, it seems that long range air defense will mostly be a purchase or a joint program for now.

And indeed, progression seems to be in that direction:
Long Range Barak in the works :Feb 06



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join