Jump to content


Photo

Water Dragons Of The Middle Kingdom


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#21 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 26 December 2017 - 0012 AM

Almost exactly one year ago (timing unintended coincidence - December 26th 2016) more or less 14 Type 52Ds were accounted for.

type52Doo1.jpg

http://www.tank-net....83#entry1284929

 

As of now, currently 17 are accounted for. Not only the wiki but other places on the web seem to think more or less 17 as of now as well, such as here.

type52Dnumbers.jpg

https://zh.wikipedia...导弹驱逐舰


  • 0

#22 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 26 December 2017 - 0314 AM

Two Type 055 destroyers are being built at the shipyard in Dalian, Liaoning.

type055x1.jpg

 

type055x2.jpg

 

Can also be seen with just google map directly, although a bit of a time lag.

https://www.google.c...4!4d121.6335463

 

 

Two more Type 055s are being built in the Jiangnan Shipyard in Shanghai, one with its hull formed and the other with hull parts being laid out.

type055x3.jpg

Chinese article about this image in the spoiler

Spoiler

http://mil.news.sina...pp3758706.shtml

A bigger image of it. Five LCACs also, article says they are Type 726As.

type055x4.jpg

 

This shipyard can be viewed directly with google as well.

https://www.google.c...m/data=!3m1!1e3

 

So those four plus the 1 already launched this year in late June makes five Type 055 Destroyers so far.


Edited by JasonJ, 26 December 2017 - 0347 AM.

  • 0

#23 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 12 January 2018 - 2332 PM

Construction of the third carrier has started last year. As of now, the word is about 80,000 tons, "new launch system", 4 "CBGs" by 2030.

Spoiler

http://www.scmp.com/...ircraft-carrier


  • 0

#24 Adam_S

Adam_S

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 966 posts

Posted 12 January 2018 - 2347 PM

What's the word on the PLAN's antisubmarine warfare capability? I don't see an awful lot there that could deal with a top of the line Western SSN at the moment and without that, all this flashy stuff is just so many targets.


  • 0

#25 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 13 January 2018 - 0352 AM

That is the area they seem to be lagging, but they need to worry less about US SSNs (I doubt they will ever meet a French SSN :) ) than about the local SSKs as the Japanese are top of the line and the fleets of South Korea and Vietnam are also quite modern.


  • 0

#26 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 13 January 2018 - 0609 AM

One factor to their ASW could be Chinese SOSUS that is probably being built, primarily between the various Chinese held features in the South China Sea. Probably harder for them to make SOSUS around Taiwan and towards Okinawa, which does highlight a strategic importance of keeping the Senkaku Islands out of their hands.
Some more here: http://gentleseas.bl...sea-on.html?m=1
  • 0

#27 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 13 January 2018 - 0708 AM

SOSUS is only as effective as noisy are the opponent subs, so Vietnamese Kilos and Taiwanese subs can be detected but the new AIP Japanese subs are a completely different proposition, and US SSNs are going to be difficult to make out. Back in the 80s, the Victor III and the Akula nearly put SOSUS out of business and the PRC lacks the intelligence to identify the discrete frequencies that need to be monitored agains silent subs, so it's not going to be a ton of help.


  • 0

#28 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,713 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 13 January 2018 - 1259 PM

Well, has the SOSUS network(s) had any sort of upgrade to the arrays in 40 years?

 

Signal processing, I'm sure, but the physical arrays?


  • 0

#29 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 13 January 2018 - 1350 PM

I don't think so, but note the US was moving to Low Frequency Active by the end of the Cold War

 

Edited: but it's updating them now: https://thediplomat....sensor-network/


Edited by RETAC21, 13 January 2018 - 1351 PM.

  • 0

#30 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,713 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 13 January 2018 - 1734 PM

Ooh, well found :D

 

I keep hearing stuff from ex-RAF people about the "scare" when Victor 3 appeared, and subsequent types.

 

They were fairly dismissive.


  • 0

#31 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 17 January 2018 - 1359 PM

Hear the same in Jive Turkey's youtube streams, guy was a sonar man so he knows his stuff. Soviet/Russian boats of the latest generation started out pretty quiet but as time wore on, lack of maintenance made them more noisy so they weren't much of a challenge.


  • 0

#32 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted 18 January 2018 - 1153 AM


The Chinese are starting to field VDS, MPAs, and their own seabed hydrophone system. This is a great leap forward for them ASW wise (hah!), but they are still working against the fact that while it is their own back yard, it's been the 7th Fleet's home field for a half century before that. Can you imagine how the USN would feel if every time it did a shake down cruise it was effectively in foreign navy's primary AO? Nothing they do can happen without the fear of being monitored. Where as USN ships can safely operate on sonar ranges off FLA and CA and know that no one is listening to their exercises or sound measurements. So the PLAN has a number of difficulties:

They have no experience operating these new systems. They are pretty much making up the doctrine and training from scratch, or from Russian material.

They have no previous data tracking US or other opponent boats, since as recently as 10 years ago they were effectively ASW blind. They probably literally don't even know what a USN boat sounds like, as compared to the likelihood that the USN has individually tracked and made a library recording of most of their boats.

The US likely has a much superior understanding of the hydrodynamics of the area, having operated there for many decades before the PLAN came out to play. USN SURTASS vessels for instance have patrolled that area for a couple decades now; those are the vessels the Chinese pick a fight with every once and a while and try to steal the towed arrays from.

It's extremely likely that the US operates its own post-SOSUS detection system around, if not inside, the first island chain. This likely includes nonacoustic as well as acoustic sensors, along with acoustic modems that also allow the system to directly talk to submerged SSNs.


All in all, I'd hate to be a high priority PLAN surface target in a Sino-American war. If D/Es are a threat to US CVs, for Lioaning USN nuke boats are practically a death sentence.
  • 0

#33 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 18 January 2018 - 1545 PM

All true, but maybe the PRC is not looking to pick up a fight with the US.


  • 0

#34 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted 18 January 2018 - 1623 PM

Ooh, well found :D
 
I keep hearing stuff from ex-RAF people about the "scare" when Victor 3 appeared, and subsequent types.
 
They were fairly dismissive.


What wouldthe RAF know about a Victor III? I assume that was a typo for RN?
  • 0

#35 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted Yesterday, 12:48 PM

The RAF was the owner of the Nimrod maritime patrol planes, they better knew about the Victor III


  • 0

#36 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,840 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted Yesterday, 01:01 PM

Ah, didn't realize that they were organized that way. In the US MPAs come under the Navy not the airforce, but I totally forgot RAF generally controlled everything going back to coastal command.
  • 0

#37 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,713 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted Today, 06:12 PM

there was a fight again most recently, with the RN making a play for the P-8. And failing.


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users