The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia (PLAN) - 2008 Update

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia ^ | January 2, 2008 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN ASIA - 2008 UPDATE By Jeff Head - Last Update: January 2, 2008 Throughout 2007 the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has concentrated on integrating its newest surface combatants into its various fleets, while introducing new combatants simultaneously. In particularly, the newer nuclear attack and ballistic missile submarines have been officially seen and photographed, punctuating the PLAN's continued advance and improvement of its nuclear submarine capability, while continuing to build and add new diesel electric submarines. It's new Landing Ship Dock and now new, associated LCAC craft are being integrated into the fleet. The PLAN thus continues its unprecedented modernization and buildup integrating its new guided missile destroyers, guided missile frigates, fast attack craft, very modern and quiet diesel/electric attack submarines, nuclear attack submarines, nuclear ballistic missile The new Type 051C, guided missiles destroyers have undergone sea trials and their pennant numbers have been added, 115 and 116 as they have joined the North Sea Fleet. The new Type 071 LPD has been conducting sea trials. This is a significant addition to the PLAN, representing the largest amphibious vessel in their inventory and a very modern and capable design of which more are sure to be built. The vessle displaces 20-25,000 tons and is capable of both air assault and amphibious assault as the new LCAC craft which have now started appearing, and which are shown in the following photographs attest. The PLAN has introduced a new LCAC design, clearly intended for their new Lanning Platform Dock. These are very similar in size and function to the US Navy's LCAC and appear capable of carrying at least one main battle tank or and assortment of other vehicles and troops. The LPD appears to be able to hold at least two, and perhaps three of these craft. The new Type 054A guided missiles frigates have been undergoing sea trials. With their vertical launch missiles and heavier displacement and other improvements, they represent extremely modern and capable frigates. The east and south sea fleets will probably both benefit from these vessels, particularly as more are added. The PLAN has offically recognized the existance of the new Type 093 nuclear attack submarine (SSN) and the Type 094 ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). The SSN appears to be roughly equivalent to a US Navy Los Angeles attack submarine in design and capability, and perhaps close to the advanced Los Angeles class. The SSBN carries 12 SLBMs, each with a range of several thousand kilometers. It cannot be over emphasized how critical these developments are in the relative sea power in the western Pacific, particularly as the PLAN builds more of these vessels. It is thought that at least two, and perhaps up to four new SSNs are already launched and through trials, while at least one, and perhaps two of the new SSBNs have been launched to date. In the mean time, steady work continues on the Varyag, the full-deck aircraft carrier undergoing refit at the Dalian naval shipyards. Outside of finish work on the island, the deck and hull seem to be complete with unknown progress on the interior spaces, particularly the propulsion. Significant anticipation as to the launch date of this vessel is building, with some conjecture that it may be launched just before or during the Olympics shecdeuled in Beijing. The PLAN, during this period, has shown a willingness and the capability to spend significant time and monies on training and integration exercises for its newly acquired vessels...all extremely critical in developing the expertise, policies, procedures, and doctrine for their growing modern navy.

Once again, by way of reference, it should be noted that in general numbers, over the last several years, the PLAN has built and launched over 80 new major surface combatants for its fleet. In that same time period, they have not decommissioned any major surface combatants, meaning they have added over 80 major surface combatant vessels to their inventory. In that same period, the US Navy has built 46 new major surface combatants. At the same time, the US Navy has decommissioned 49 major surface combatants, many of them with 10-15 years of service life remaining, meaning a net loss of three major surface combatants in this period.

Clearly the trend shows that the PLAN is rapidly closing the gap between itself and the US Navy, and particualrly when focusing on the Western Pacific, which is where the PLAN is concentrated, this is a trend worthy of watching and considering in future US Navy and other western nation's planning and acquisition schedules.

LINKS OF INTEREST

Jeff Head is an engineering consultant with many years experience in the power, defense, and computer industries. He currently works for the federal government helping maintain and protect regional infrastructure. He is a member of the U.S. Naval Institute, and is also the author of a self-published and best-selling series of military techno-thrillers called the Dragon's Fury that projects a fictional third world war arising out of current events. You can learn more about that series by clicking on the pictures of the novel covers below:

THE DRAGON'S FURY SERIES

Copyright © 2008 by Jeff Head

[RikaStrom]

Lovely. /unhappy voice

SD - heh

[AuntB]

Only one candidate cares about this issue.

Duncan Hunter.

http://www.issues2000.org/2008/Duncan_Hunter_Free_Trade.htm

China is cheating on trade; junk our bad China trade deals
China is cheating on trade. Let me tell you how they’re cheating. If this podium was made in China, and cost $100, and it’s exported from China to the US, when it goes to the water’s edge to be exported, the government gives a check to that company, for all their taxes. They give their taxes back, at about 17%. So if this podium was $100, they give them back $17 in cash. When an American podium arrives to be sold in China, they give our exporters a bill for $17.

So before the international competition in trade even begins, before the opening kickoff of the football game, they’ve got 34 points on the scoreboard.

Just to make sure the American manufacturer never wins, they devalue their currency by 40%. [That 40% discount causes] the world to buy their products, and it’s pushing American products off the shelf. When I’m president, I’m gonna junk the bad trade deal we have with China. I’m gonna force them to the table and we’re gonna make a good deal.
Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC Mar 14, 2007

[darth]

We can make one trillion dollars in greenback securities go up in smoke with a single executive order. We should also be running a few Green Beret teams through Monterey to learn Tibetan. Not to mention the effect of a total trade embargo. Not to mention our capability to stop oil and other imports. The Chinese oligarchs need to understand how much the conquest of the Taiwanese will cost them.

[Jeff Head]

Duncan Hunter is the man I support. I also believe Thomspon can be brought around to understanding and responding to this.

[Jeff Head]

IMHO, in the interim, we should pursue something like this for our major escorts, while continuing to build the carriers:

Ticonderoga CG Interim Replacement Proposal

[meadsjn]

Thanks for the reassuring update. Is there any bad news?

[ryan71]

That’s a nice ship. I read your ideas from that thread and I think you’re right on. I like RAM and it’s vital we get the AGS to sea.

We (or the Koreans) could build 12 of these before we figure out what to do with DD21/CG21.

[Calpernia]

..

[DakotaGator]

We can make one trillion dollars in greenback securities go up in smoke with a single executive order. We should also be running a few Green Beret teams through Monterey to learn Tibetan. Not to mention the effect of a total trade embargo. Not to mention our capability to stop oil and other imports. The Chinese oligarchs need to understand how much the conquest of the Taiwanese will cost them.

Concur!

[steveegg]

Duncan Hunter is the man I support. I also believe Thomspon can be brought around to understanding and responding to this.

Thompson does understand the Red Chinese threat at least somewhat. He's a bit more focused in dealing with what is in front of us now (the Islamokazis).

The rest of the field may as well have Ron Paul-Nut blinders on with regards to Red China. 'Tis a damnable shame that between Thompson and Hunter (the two candidates I've given money to this cycle), they can't even crack 20% in many polls.

[SierraWasp]

Din’t yer mom tell ya? That self-pingin can make ya go blind! No, you can’t keep doin it till ya need thick glasses!!! (smirk)(Happy New Year!!!)

[griffin]

amphibian development is troubling.

Battleships use to be the big thing prior to WWII. The carrier took the battleship’s preeminence after Pearl. Carrier battle groups are pretty significant budget and logistic hogs. In light of UAV and missile development I as somewhat interested in the Chinese amphib development.

With today’s precision guided munitions, long range missile systems and smaller UAV’s.....all that is required would be to secure a landing point with amphib, PGMs and missiles....then offload UAVs to operate from land.....and who needs carriers for major operations. Could carrier groups be a thing of the past in the not too distant future?

[steveegg]

Damn; you’re just full of interesting news. You pass this stuff along to CDR Salamander yet?

[griffin]

Also, with todays computers, kinetic energy reactive armor systems that are being put in use today would be great fleet defense for the longer distances associated with naval combatants. Again, perhaps making the carrier air patrols less needed?

[AppyPappy]

The Chinese are going to figure out what the Russians figured out. A navy force is VERY expensive. If you don’t use it for anything, it becomes a big albatross around your neck. Not only that, naval success comes from experience and the Chinese have little experience in naval operations.

Granted, they could invade Taiwan but it would cost them a bundle.

[steveegg]

Could carrier groups be a thing of the past in the not too distant future?

For operations close to one's own (or a friendly's) coast, almost certainly. However, once one extends out beyond roughly 250 miles from the nearest air base, the long-range missiles/long-range land-based aircraft combination becomes essentially a single-shot deal. Yes, it can be very devastating, but the attacker had best hope that it is at least 95% devastating because the follow-on strikes are going to be a long time coming.

What the carrier group offers that the long-range land-based options don't is worldwide rapid repeatability against targets near the coast without anybody else's assistance, at least as long as the airplanes aren't shot down and the carriers aren't sunk.

[griffin]

Experience is huge.

I was watching CSPAN over the holidays and took in a committee hearing in which I listened to Adm Roughead. One question asked of Roughead was what he found most interesting/threatening in the PLAN modernization/expansion. He essentially said, from my interpretation, the increased professionalism of their officer and NCO corp.

[AppyPappy]

It doesn’t replace actual combat. The Russians major strategy was Shoot-Saturate-and-Scoot. Their ships were built for that. The problem was that no one had really used it in combat in the missile age. The Indian Navy knocked out a Pakistani ship in port but they only fired a couple of missiles. This ideas of launching 80 missiles to knock out a group is pretty sketchy.

And an aircraft carrier is worth more than a whole lot of frigates when it comes to fighting.

[griffin]

didn’t quite follow your reply....

I see the largest benefit of manned aircraft operating around a carrier as the ability of loiter and autonomous re-targeting. Seems to me the two main purposes of carrier based airwings are to defend the fleet and provide offensive land and surface attach operations.

Both manned aircraft and weapons systems like rocket precision guided munitions/cruise missiles have limited range and ordnance carrying capabilities. As communications and re-targeting guidance capabilities increase, re-targeting becomes possible. Can manned attack aircraft compete? How many precision guided cruise missiles equal the capability of a strike aircraft? In the space required to house that aircraft on a carrier with it’s support staff and equipment, how many precision munitions could be housed?

For defensive needs, guided reactive projectiles are rapidly advancing. They are small and hypersonic.

IF one could use these systems to outperform and/or saturate coastal defenses until airstrips and aircraft can be build and offloaded, respectively....would one need a carrier?

I’m probably missing something....but I wonder how many guided cruise missile destroyers equal the offensive capability of an aircraft carriers airwings PROVIDED they have very effective reactive armor systems and can have reasonable confidence in being stationed close (~10 nm -determined by the time response of their defense systems) to shore.

[griffin]

K. Thanks. Agree about the experience.

I would think that the number of frigates to equal one carrier is substantial, but would point out that that ratio is heavily influenced by the cycle rate of the frigate’s launchers, the number of missiles in the ships magazines, the capabilities of it’s targeting systems, and the performance specifications of its missiles to name a few. The latter two are increasing at a rate that is amazing. I wonder if that is a factor in Chinese PLAN development strategy.