Chinese conventional submarines has been equip with new generation
“双速制反舰导弹” [dual speed control ASCM] with a range of at 290 nautical miles – more than double that of its likely progenitor, the Russian SS-N-27
Klub ASCM (export version) 4 years ago
中国海军常规潜艇4年前已开始换装鹰击18导弹
http://weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404105951107007167
It is projected that YJ-18 would have an initial subsonic phase estimated at .8 Mach similar to the Klub of about 180km, but 20km from the target would unleash the supersonic sprint vehicle at speed of Mach 2.5 to 3. The “dual speed” function allows the system to realize certain advantages of subsonic cruise missiles, such as their “relatively long range, light weight and universality …” but also takes the chief advantage of supersonic ASCMs as well, namely the ability to “大幅压缩敌方的反应时间” [radically compress the enemy’s reaction time].
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/chinas-yj-18-supersonic-anti-ship-cruise-missile-americas-13010
http://nationalinterest.org/feature...-ship-cruise-missile-americas-13010?page=show
. . .
The article interestingly discusses recent Russian placement of additional
Kilo-class submarines equipped with the
Klub-missile systems into the Black Sea. These new submarines “based on the Crimean Peninsula, operating in harmony with air and land-based missile forces [can] … limit the deployment of NATO fleets into the Black Sea …” I have noted before in this column
the seductive possibilities of the “Russian model” for Chinese strategists. This Chinese author concludes the piece, explaining that, “
The YJ-18 will gradually replace the YJ-82 across the PLA Navy submarine fleet. That development combined with surface ship and air-launched missiles will create a comprehensive attack system of even greater combat power.” The implication seems to be that for China, in its various maritime disputes, the YJ-18 can play a role similar to the one that nearly identical Russian weapons have played in creating decisive local military superiority in the Black Sea area.
On the other hand, Beijing has been making noteworthy strides in military transparency of late, for example with the
most recent white paper or
the somewhat unusual discussion of the new Type 093G nuclear attack submarine in China Daily. Nevertheless, the gap in transparency continues to be quite wide when it comes to
some of the most lethal weapons in China’s arsenal,
such as the new YJ-18. Allowing the rumor mill to churn, spreading anxieties regarding Chinese capabilities hither and thither is really not in China’s interest and greater transparency, of course, is necessary.
[Should ask the the author what he wanna know indeed? Doesn't he know the secrecy nature of any military import???]
For Washington, some additional attention seems warranted in future intelligence community studies with respect to Chinese ASCM (anti-ship cruise missile) development. The 2015 ONI study gave some attention to YJ-18, but omitted discussion of the supersonic YJ-12,
the long-range subsonic YJ-100 or
the CX-1 supersonic ASCM that are apparently now in development, according to Chinese sources. Renewed attention will help muster the necessary focus for the U.S. going forward to prepare its forces adequately. For all the ink spilled and Washington seminars convened to discuss China’s expanding coast guard fleet,
it is obviously the ever-growing sophistication of the Chinese ASCM arsenal that poses the “clear and present danger” to American sailors.
Lyle J. Goldstein is Associate Professor in the China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, RI.
--------------------
“clear and present danger” ==> ONLY for interventionist, trouble seeker!! 
