Posted on 10/08/2015 10:48:08 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Over the past two decades, the People’s Republic of China has made great advances in its military capabilities. However, it still lags woefully behind in developing nuclear-powered submarines. The problem for the Chinese is that they lack the necessary quieting and propulsion technologies to build anything remotely comparable to an American or Russian nuclear submarine.
Even the newest Chinese Jin-class ballistic nuclear missile submarines and improved Shang-class nuclear attack submarines are louder than 1970s-era Soviet-built Victor III-class attack submarine or the Delta III-class boomer, according to the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Intelligence.
In fact, even China’s forthcoming Type 95 will be louder than the Soviet Union’s Project 971 Shchuka-B-class submarines — better know by its NATO reporting name Akula I. Nor is it likely that the Type 96 nuclear-power ballistic missile submarine will be any better. Chinese diesel submarines are, of course, another matter entirely.
But why are the Chinese lagging behind in nuclear submarines when they seem to be advancing in leaps and bounds in almost every other field? I asked several of the best U.S. naval experts why that’s the case.
Jerry Hendrix, a former Navy captain, director of the Defense Strategies and Assessments Program at the Center for a New American Security had this to say:
It’s a two-part answer. One, noise-quieting technologies is one area where we have been particularly careful not to let out. Still, the Russians have not made any prohibitions against sharing some particular technologies and their export Kilos are pretty quiet so that leads you to the second answer: The Chinese maritime manufacturing techniques are not yet adapted to submarines. Their stuff is still pretty noisy. That’s all I can really go into. Bryan McGrath is the deputy director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for American Seapower and the managing director of the The FerryBridge Group naval consultancy. He’s also a retired Navy commander. He had this to say:
China’s nuclear submarine program lags other areas of its naval prowess for two primary reasons. The first is that until twenty years ago, designing and building nuclear submarines simply was not a priority. The second reason is related to the first, and that is the fact that designing and building nuclear submarines is an extremely difficult technical undertaking. That they decided to feature nuclear submarines twenty years ago did not instantly result in the requisite skills to effectively and efficiently build them. These will take time, focus and very likely, a stepped-up industrial espionage program to attain. Bryan Clark is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. He was a special assistant to the chief of naval operations and was a Navy submarine officer. He offered his take:
Nuclear submarines have not been a priority for China, since the advantages they offer over diesel or air-independent propulsion (AIP) submarines (greater endurance, speed, and capacity) are not as significant for the missions they have used their submarines to do, such as coastal defense against enemy surface ships and surveillance.
Current Chinese diesel submarines like the Song are not as advanced as their European counterparts, but they are effective in this role and appear to be reliable enough for those missions; China’s Kilo-class submarines are able to carry the very lethal SS-N-27 anti-ship cruise missile. China’s newest AIP submarine, the Yuan, is reported to have modern combat systems and be able to deploy missiles, torpedoes, and mines as well. The recent increase in emphasis on nuclear submarines is coming as China attempts to increase its reach and role in geopolitical affairs.
Today, they are developing an SSBN and a new class of nuclear attack submarine in line with their effort to deploy a “blue-water” navy and desire to have a second strike nuclear capability on par with other great powers. Andrew Erickson, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College and frequent TNI contributor, summed it up succinctly: “One word: propulsion!”
“Submarines suitable for comprehensive blue water operations must be nuclear-powered, energy-dense and quiet,” Erickson wrote recently for TNI. “China has struggled in these and related areas. And it can’t simply draw on its burgeoning civilian nuclear industry because the technologies and skill sets are so different.”
China can’t use the lessons learnt on its civilian land-based high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs) because those systems lack the energy density for naval applications.
How much does that quieter technology cost? And what’s the address of the Clinton foundation?
Fortunately for them, word is the US Navy’s new P-8 can’t do ASW.
“why are the Chinese lagging behind in nuclear submarines when they seem to be advancing in leaps and bounds in almost every other field?”
Trick question, because Clinton could only serve two terms as president.
Shouldn’t someone tell the Navy that?
P-8 Poseidon
http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.display&key=CFD01141-CD4E-4DB8-A6B2-7E8FBFB31B86
Mission
The P-8A Poseidon is being designed to replace the P-3C Orion as a long-range anti-submarine warfare (ASW)...
Primary Function: Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) and...
Well,
Bill did give the chi coms the info on how to make nukes real small.
It doesn’t matter how noisy they are if they strike first.
You can have the plans to a state of the art piece of US tech, but that doesn’t mean you can reliably reverse engineer and duplicate it on a large scale. Ship yards, contractors, manufacturers all need to be brought up to the technology.
I hope the U.S.Navy is Not underestimating the capabilities of the Chinese Navy.With all of the Intelligence agents they have running around in this country who knows what information they have gleaned from the navy and all of its numerous contractors.
Submarine warfare is an area we can’t afford to be on the losing side.
quick, send chelsea to westinghouse, and keep this off of email and crackberry
:-( :-( :-(
What if the noise is a head-fake by the inscrutable Chinese?
What Clinton could not finish, Obama will
What Clinton could not finish, Obama will
They don’t need to be that quiet. They can overwhelm their adversaries with volume.
If that is true, the military should have corrected that. Did they not swear to protect the country against foreign and domestic enemies?
After the present clown leaves the WH, the floodgates of information on him will open up and Congress critters will beat their breasts, loudly protesting: “I didn’t know”
I should hope the US Navy is not complaining?
I doubt the cost is the issue.
The key is a manufacturing technology, and it's simply a matter of finding a vendor willing to sell it to them.
The Soviet Union was able to find a vendor back in the 80's, and it made it more difficult for the US to track their subs. When it became public, I was so pissed I refuse to buy anything from that company, to this day.
Beat me to it! The other part is China doesn’t care if you know they are there and they actually seem to want to be “loud and proud”. I drive a midsize stodgy sedan yet I continuously pass and out drive high end sports cars all the time. It’s how willing you are to use and maximize your equipment that counts. If I use all of my POS car and you are able or are only willing to use 30% of your Maserati, I win. Also I don’t care if my POS is damaged but you worry about your Maserati all the time. I win again.
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.
