China Advances Missile Program

The Washington Times ^ | 6/22/2005 | Bill Gertz

[Paul Ross]

my point was that China doesn't have the numbers of advance submarines as well enough large platform submarines.

This point may not be valid much longer. I would recommend reading up on the impending naval threat by reviewing Richard Fisher's articles.

Keep in mind under GWB/Rumsfeld's current production downscaling plans...the USN likely will collapse to only 28 SSNs by 2015. Likely even lower if they implement the "Blue-Gold" crew rotational plan to try and sustain at-sea deployments...which "use up" the subs five years faster than planned operational life expectancy. You may want to take a gander at this, this SinoDefense site .

Here is the latest revised text from "Sino-Defense" the China Defense site regarding their submarine plans:

25 June 2005

Navy Development Projects
Type 094 SSBN
Type 093 SSN
Yuan class SSK

Nuclear Submarines
Type 092 (Xia) SSBN
Type 091 (Han) SSN

Diesel-Electric Submarines
Type 877/636 (Kilo)
Type 039 (Song)
Type 035 (Ming)
Tpe 033 (Romeo)

Yuan class is the new-generation indigenous diesel-electric submarine for the PLA Navy

China’s maritime strategy relies heavily on submarines to patrol the coastal waters, blockade the Taiwan Strait, and deter foreign interventions. The submarine force has always been one of the priorities in the PLA’s military modernisation programme. Although the PLA Navy (PLAN)’s current submarine force is widely regarded as obsolete by Western standards, it is acquiring new submarines with upgraded systems and more sophisticated weaponry in the next few years. In together with the existing submarine, these new equipment will help make the PLAN’s submarine fleet a formidable prospective undersea opponent in the East Asia Littoral.

In addition to about 40 Type 035 Ming class and older Type 033 Romeo class diesel submarines, the PLAN currently also operates 4 Russian-made Kilo class and 5 indigenous Type 039 Song class diesel submarines. These are fairly modernised designs which could pose serious threats to surface and underwater targets. The nuclear submarine fleet is composed of 5 Type 091 Han class nuclear attack submarine (SSN) and a Type 092 Xia class nuclear missile submarine (SSBN), which can carry 12 JL-1A submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM).

While one may think the PLAN’s current underwater power as modest at best, a number of shipbuilding programmes are taking place both domestically and abroad, which will completely change the shape of the PLAN submarine force in the coming years. Russian shipyards in St. Petersburg are currently building eight Kilo class Project 636 diesel-electric submarines, one of the quietest and advanced conventional submarines in the world, for the PLAN. These submarines were ordered in a US$1.6 billion deal in 2003 and will be delivered by 2007. At least another 5 indigenously developed Type 039 Song class are under construction at Wuhan and Jiangnan Shipyard. At the same time, the latest Yuan class was just revealed at Wuhan Shipyard in 2004.

On the nuclear submarine front, the first successor to its noisy and unreliable first-generation Type 091 Han class SSN, known as the Type 093, is reported to have been undergoing sea trials since late 2002. The design of the submarine was assisted by Russia.

Artist impression of the Type 093 SSN

Artist impression of the Type 093 SSN

The first new generation SSBN Type 094 was reportedly launched in August 2004. The submarine will carry as many as sixteen newly developed JL-2 SLBM each with 3~6 multiple re-entry vehicle (MRV) warheads. The missile has an extended range of 8,000km, which will enable the submarine to attack the west coast of the United States from west Pacific near Chinese coast.

Artist impression of the Type 094 SSBN

China’s submarine acquisitions are accompanied by a number of breakthrough in advanced submarine technology. China successfully equipped its Song class with the submarine-launched version of the YJ-8 (C-801) series anti-ship sea-skimming missile in the 1990s. The eight Kilo class submarines, which China expect to receive in the near future, will incorporates upgraded weapon systems including the versatile and potent Klub missile system. China has also made significant progress in developing air independent propulsion (AIP) system, which would allow its conventional submarines remain submerged for weeks at a time without snorkelling.

By 2010 the PLAN will be deploying 12 Kilo class, 10~15 Song class, and 2~5 Yuan class diesel-electric submarines, as well as 2~4 Type 093 SSN and 1~2 Type 094 SSBN. This will augment the existing conventional and nuclear submarine fleets to form a considerable undersea power which could make a serious challenge to any naval force in the region.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for post. Just a note regarding a statement made in this lastest thread:

"The first new generation SSBN Type 094 was reportedly launched in August 2004. The submarine will carry as many as sixteen newly developed JL-2 SLBM each with 3~6 multiple re-entry vehicle (MRV) warheads. The missile has an extended range of 8,000km, which will enable the submarine to attack the west coast of the United States from west Pacific near Chinese coast."

This is somewhat misleading in the sense that this particular missile's maximum range would force the sub to be far into the central Pacific, not anywhere close to any Chineese coastal area. A quick look at any map of the Pacific will bear this out. With advertised maximum range being 8000KM, what they could reach is Hawaii. Of course how good will their guidance systems prove to be?
But thanks for the otherwise informative post(s).

[Kuehn12]

I agree that they are making progress in the sphere of submarines, but this is far cry from a monolithic threat which would crash over the shores like a great red tide.

Will the Navy decommission existing subs or will they upgrade these submarines with increasingly sophisticated sensor suites, fire control systems, submarine launched land attach cruise missiles and long range ballistic missiles. Submarine warfare isn't limited to attack subs; surface ships designed for Anti-Sub warfare, torpedos launched from carriers. We might even have huge sonar systems displaced through out the Pacific Ocean in a sensor network which would give telemetry to torpedos with increasing ranges.

[president2016]

I doubt that Iran has been exported nuclear know how by Saddaam - I believe that Iraq fought a prolonged war against Iran. They did not like each other. Most likely Iran's nuclear program is by their own engineering, or perhaps with the help of Pakistan. Please do research before spreading innuendo.

[Kuehn12]

Chinese SSBN launched ... or not.
Bill Gertz reports that China has launched its new Type 094 SSBN. The story, however, doesn’t make much sense. Gertz claims that the “new Type 094 was spotted by U.S. intelligence agencies at the Huludao shipyard [...], is in the early stages of being outfitted and is not yet equipped with new JL-2 submarine-launched nuclear missiles.”

If the SSBN remains in the shipyard awaiting oufitting, has it been launched? Maybe he was in a rush, because he also mischaracterizes a public DIA report:

A Pentagon report on Chinese military power made public in May stated that the new Chinese missile submarine would not be deployed until around 2010.

That isn’t what the report, Chinese Military Power says. Here is the relevant passage:

China also is developing two follow-on extended-range versions of the DF-31: a solid-propellant, mobile ICBM and a solid-propellant submarine- launched ballistic missile, the JL-2, which will be deployed on a new ballistic missile submarine by decade’s end.[Emphasis mine]

The missile (not the submarine) will be be deployed by (as in “not after”) 2010. Chinese Military Power doesn’t have an estimate about the submarine. In 2002 Congressional testimony, DIA Director Thomas Wilson said the SSBN and JL-2 would “likely will be developed and tested later this decade.” That statement is consistent with the submarine being under some stage of construction now.

The story, ostensibly about the SSBN, devotes roughly one-third of the words to the JL-2 missile:

Gertz reports “U.S. intelligence officials said the Chinese suffered a setback in their JL-2 missile program when a test flight of the JL-2 missile failed over the summer.” Chinese sources of uncertain repute tell ArmsControlWonk that the JL-2 program is under-funded.
Gertz cites purloined intelligence documents about the DF-31/JL-2 program—except on the question of how many warheads the DF-31 can carry. On that question, he cites super-hack Rick Fisher (who says multiple) instead of the CIA (which says one). That’s called cherry picking.
Gertz claims China’s “current ballistic missile submarine known as the Xia, which is equipped with medium-range missiles.” At least two intelligence estimtes DIA’s Chinese Military Power and the National Air Intelligence Center’s Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat claim the missiles are not deployed aboard the submarine.
Late, Late Update: A colleague helpfully points out:

... the use of the term “launch,” in naval contexts, doesn’t imply anything like what we would call operational capability. At launch, most ships are just shells waiting for their full load of electronics, weapons and (not infrequently) propulsion systems. There’s a bit of an element of scaremongering in Gertz’s statement: “launch” is essentially a meaningless term, if we don’t know how long it takes to fit out a ship. It’s just a phase of construction.


· Posted by Jeffrey Lewis · 3 December 04

This was an article I saw which cast some doubt as to when the Type 94 submarine will be operational. The underlying thesis I have is; one it isn't easy to develop a state of the art navy, secondly we won't allow the Chinese to eclipse us. Naval procurements can change and naval vessels have a much longer shelf life.
Do you really think defense planners will be like the tortoise and the hare, with the defense planners being the hare sleeping away as tortoise, the Chinese, catches up.

[newgeezer]

I, for one, would rather China was dependent on LOTS of other nations for its needs.

Meanwhile, let's us work on OUR energy independence.

[Paul Ross]

I agree that they are making progress in the sphere of submarines, but this is far cry from a monolithic threat which would crash over the shores like a great red tide.

Unfortunately, they are not alone. Not in foreign terms, with many allied dictatorships which give them common cause...but actual marxist-affiliates, such as Venezuela's Chavez, and Brazil's President, and so on. And domestically we have many of their agents, not just espionage and trade, but of influence. Do a spot check of the politics extant on any major U.S. university. What do you think are the real politics of Peter Jennings, Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and Tom Brokaw...and their owners? I remember watching Brian Lamb's interview Mike Wallace on C-SPAN, and he was challenged by a caller about China's intentions to invade and subjugate Taiwan...and he was okay with that.

Will the Navy decommission existing subs or will they upgrade these submarines with increasingly sophisticated sensor suites, fire control systems, submarine launched land attach cruise missiles and long range ballistic missiles.

According to the available evidence we will collapse to only 28 SSN's because GWB and Rumsfeld refuse to budget sufficiently to maintain the force...let alone improve it and keep it fielded as you suggest.

Submarine warfare isn't limited to attack subs; surface ships designed for Anti-Sub warfare, torpedos launched from carriers.

The next carrier, the CVN-21, is on the super-slow track, and won't be finished until 2018!? Our F-14's need to be retired. They are really old. There is no carrier replacement for it. The "Super" F-18 doesn't cut it. The Naval version of the F-22 was cut out by Xlinton in 1993. The entire F-22 program, the nation's key to maintaining air superiority, indeed the linchpin, is basically being shut down in 2007 by GWB/Rumsfeld order. The DDX, the premier new ASW surface warship is at risk of being cut by GWB/Rumsfeld. Never getting off the ways. Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Vern Clark has been campaigning to keep this critical new technology demonstrator from the axe...but it looks like the national security case...which is solid...is falling on deaf ears. He spoke elogquently this past week in front of the American Enterprise Institute. Those who heard him saw the degree of patriotic concern...

It is almost as if, in secret, a "business decision" "at the top" has been made that U.S. superiority will be completely abdicated by the year 2020...or before, so no point in spending any money to maintain that which we aren't committed to keeping. We might even have huge sonar systems displaced through out the Pacific Ocean in a sensor network which would give telemetry to torpedos with increasing ranges.

Uh, we already have such a sonar network for our ships. But it is a deteriorating Cold War legacy item. I don't believe we have any such replacements budgetted. And it is getting old. And also R&D in the military has been taking real and huge hits under the stress of the Iraq operations. The only exception has been UAVs...which could be hacked and turned against us... But UAV's are the preferred budget item because of lesser superficial costs of acquisition...these decisions are being made apparently without enough serious questions at the top of this risk assessment. So no budget for any serious quantitative deployments of manned systems, either aerial or naval (surface or subsurface) appears in store.

No bucks, no Buck Rogers.

[Paul Ross]

Chinese sources of uncertain repute tell ArmsControlWonk that the JL-2 program is under-funded.

ArmsControlWonk is an left wing left-over from the old nuclear freeze movement. He opposed Reagan's build-up. And GWB's termination of the ABM treaty. Nothing said by them should be treated with anything but the gravest of suspicions. They have been targetting Gertz with their venom for some time now. And ineffectually. Because he got it right. The sub was launched. The missile tubes "outfitting" likely are being added secondarily, after checking out the rest of the systems...which probably are a major "prerequisite" step. Whereas ArmsControlWonk is getting "Chinese sources" to set the record straight? I don't think so. A lefty State Dept. type will be told exactly what they want to hear.... remember Grima Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings? Our Fifth Column is just like that. Only they wear suits and ties.

And don't think the U.S. DOD is immune. Xlinton's stooges are still in there. Meanwhile GWB's appointments...even to the DOD... languish as the RATs filibuster. One of Xlinton's agents in place, Thomas Barnett, at the USN War College, only just got fired this December. He preached that as a matter of economics China would NEVER interfere with the U.S., and that our Navy was invincible against there's. He had no naval technical knowledge whatsoever, yet he pompously boasted along those line. Now the Deputy Sec. of Defense is saying what Rumsfeld is reluctant to admit: Our Navy is threatened by Chinese developments. How many more of Xlinton's agents are fighting that conclusion with foot-dragging and revisionism, and are still perpetuating ideologically-blindered error and apologias for China?

[Paul Ross]

I doubt that Iran has been exported nuclear know how by Saddaam - I believe that Iraq fought a prolonged war against Iran. They did not like each other. Most likely Iran's nuclear program is by their own engineering, or perhaps with the help of Pakistan. Please do research before spreading innuendo.

Apparently you attack first and don't do any research yourself. You ignore the fact that Saddam sent his AirForce to Iran, his mortal enemy, during the first Gulf War. You also appear to be ignorant of the U.S. Congressional Hearings where Iraqi sources were cited as having transferred 5-6 six months before we invaded, "hundreds" of "washing-machine-sized" centrifuges from Iraq's nuclear program to China...loaded with the uranium they were enriching.

If given credence, one has to surmise that Saddam evidently felt it was better to give them to the Mullah's than to have done the nuclear effort all for nothing. They also manifestly had "a deal" before he would dare do such a thing.

[Pesmerga]

You disgust me with your ignorance!! Your pacifist mentality is dangerous to this country! CHICOM SYMPATHIZER!!!