Acoustic Signature of Arihant-class SSBN

[AUSTERLITZ]

Against the USN, China will use the asymmetric warfare just as the saturation attack from the DF-21D/DF-26/WU-14, and no need to worry for China.

Worry about the fact that the US vs China will be disaster for the humanity, so you better to pray that this won't happen in our lifetime.

I'm not keen on any war.In any case DF-21 at this stage is a largely hypothetical threat.When china actually decides to test it against a moving target at sea with electronic defenses we can take it seriously.Hitting a defenseless static target in gobi desert on land proves nothing but propaganda value.

The CJ-10 has already been navalized, and it can easily fit into the universal VLS of the Type 052D.

And you need to keep up your info up to date.

I don't even understand where cj-10 came from or what it has to do with this conversation.Are you intelligent enough to understand what we are even talking about?
CJ-10 is land attack cruise missile...IT IS NOT A ACTIVE SEEKER NAVAL SAM.
Can you even comprehend what i said?If not the whole exercise is pointless.

 

[Penguin]

The design for the Type 052C was approved in September 2001 building starting in 2002, and entering service by 2005. The construction of the Luzhou class destroyer at of the China’s northern Dalian Shipyard was revealed in 2004 with the help of Internet photographs and they entered service in 2006.

052B and 051C can be considered a fall-back option in case 052C failed.


The 5V55U missile was acquired by the CHinese in 1993. The 48N6 missile used in 051Cs S-300FM systems first came into Chinese possession in 2002
HHQ-9A — Ship-borne naval version of HQ-9A (Upgraded version, first tested in 1999 and service entry in 2001)

Accoring to SIPRI Russia delivered 150 5V55U/SA-10C SAM ordered in 1992 in the period 1993-1997 (for S-300PMU) .
It delivered 150 of the 48N6/SA-10D Grumble SAM ordered in 2001 in 2002 (again for S-300PMU).
It deliverd 150 48N6/SA-10D Grumble SAM ordered in 2002 in 2006-2007 for Type-051C (Luzhou or Shenyang) destroyers, equipped with S-300FM
And 297 of the 48N6E2/SA-10E SAM ordered in 2004 in 2007-2008 (S-300PMU2)
And finally 750 48N6E2/SA-10E SAM ordered in 2006 in 2008-2009 for S-300PMU-2

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I'm not keen on any war.In any case DF-21 at this stage is a largely hypothetical threat.When china actually decides to test it against a moving target at sea with electronic defenses we can take it seriously.Hitting a defenseless static target in gobi desert on land proves nothing but propaganda value.



I don't even understand where cj-10 came from or what it has to do with this conversation.Are you intelligent enough to understand what we are even talking about?
CJ-10 is land attack cruise missile...IT IS NOT A ACTIVE SEEKER NAVAL SAM.
Can you even comprehend what i said?If not the whole exercise is pointless.

The LACM genius, I am talking about the CJ-10 being a LACM launched from a ship platform.

And the HQ-9 is actually an active seeker naval SAM, unlike the semi-active S-300.

Plenty of Chinese official sources have already acknowledged this fact, and those western tabloid sources are indeed feeding your trolling ammunition against China.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

The LACM genius, I am talking about the CJ-10 being a LACM launched from a ship platform.

And the HQ-9 is actually an active seeker naval SAM, unlike the semi-active S-300.

Plenty of Chinese official sources have already acknowledged this fact, and those western tabloid sources are indeed feeding your trolling ammunition against China.

And what does an LACM have to do in a topic with SAMs?Genius,
Oh i'm sure plenty of chinese sources.

 

[Azeri440]

Our sub is only "noisy" on the western press, but in the reality they just don't have any clue on its whereabouts.

yes because a country that has been chasing Soviet subs for decades and gained unmatched level of experience

will suddenly have problems determining the location of nosier Chinese subs with more advanced technology

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

yes because a country that has been chasing Soviet subs for decades and gained unmatched level of experience

will suddenly have problems determining the location of nosier Chinese subs with more advanced technology

The Cold War Soviet subs was in fact noisier than the modern Chinese subs.

China's Type 093 SSN has acoustic signature of 110 decibels

 

[Nilgiri]

The Cold War Soviet subs was in fact noisier than the modern Chinese subs.

And US detection capability has stayed stagnant at cold war level too?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

And US detection capability has stayed stagnant at cold war level too?

Indeed, the US anti-sub warfare capability has improved tremendously after the Cold War.

So this will only push us to develop the deadlier and quieter subs.

With three Type 093G SSNs being finished at the same time, it does demonstrate China's strong determination to build up a powerful sub fleet.

 

[Nilgiri]

Indeed, the US anti-sub warfare has improved tremendously after the Cold War.

So this will only push us to develop the deadlier and quieter subs.

With the three Type 093G SSNs finished at the same time, it does demonstrate China's strong determination to build up a powerful sub fleet.

I agree, let us watch and see how the arms race goes in the coming decades.

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

All subs have a unique acoustic signature based on their class, size, propulsion type. Boomers are noisier than the DE's as they generate more noise, but this noise is countered by using masking techniques.

The quietest subs are said to be Russian, but this claim cannot be authentic as this tech is the most guarded secret all over the sub community.

That is why boomers were made with SLBMs, so they wouldn't have to come close to hunt & kill. They can sit anywhere around the globe and launch nukes...So being quieter doesn't matter much, unless it's a DE.

Searching for a submarine is the most difficult of tasks at sea....I have had hundreds of hours of ASW exercises with live subs ( and not only PN), and it's pretty damn tough to classify a sub.

 

[nForce]

All subs have a unique acoustic signature based on their class, size, propulsion type. Boomers are noisier than the DE's as they generate more noise, but this noise is countered by using masking techniques.

The quietest subs are said to be Russian, but this claim cannot be authentic as this tech is the most guarded secret all over the sub community.

That is why boomers were made with SLBMs, so they wouldn't have to come close to hunt & kill. They can sit anywhere around the globe and launch nukes...So being quieter doesn't matter much, unless it's a DE.

Searching for a submarine is the most difficult of tasks at sea....I have had hundreds of hours of ASW exercises with live subs ( and not only PN), and it's pretty damn tough to classify a sub.

Why ballistic missile submarines are noisier ?

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

Why ballistic missile submarines are noisier ?

Size and propulsion.
The main reason is that the reactor is always running, creating steam noise, which can be heard on SONAR, and the reactor pump (used to circulate reactor coolant), also creates noise, as opposed to a conventional submarine, which can move about on incredibly silent electric motors.

 

[Azeri440]

The Cold War Soviet subs was in fact noisier than the modern Chinese subs.

China's Type 093 SSN has acoustic signature of 110 decibels

that's not a fact , that's a speculation , even the estimate puts it at the level of Akula sub

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

that's not a fact , that's a speculation , even the estimate puts it at the level of Akula sub

The modern Chinese subs use the technology that didn't exist in the Cold War, so it is not the speculation.

 

[Azeri440]

The modern Chinese subs use the technology that didn't exist in the Cold War, so it is not the speculation.

and what technology would that be ?

Like I said , even if that number is in fact true , it's still on the same level as Akula sub