can't begin to express how disturbing this report is

When "Hunt for Red October" came out, it was quite a disappointment that someone talked so much to Tom Clancy

https://www.breitbart.com/asia...ubmarine-technology/

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on Monday published a gloomy report warning that the U.S. Navy is losing its competitive edge in submarine warfare to China, which went from creaky, noisy, slow-moving subs to ultra-quiet nuclear-powered attack vehicles in less than 20 years.

The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has greatly narrowed the submarine warfare gap, which could spell big trouble for U.S. plans to defend Taiwan with submarines.

Two particularly troubling events took place in 2023. First, satellite photos showed China putting together the hull for a new sub that would be dramatically larger than any previous PLAN undersea vessel, and then China field-tested a nuclear sub using the same quiet hydrojet propulsion system American subs employ.

Hydrojet or “pump-jet” technology is the next step beyond noisy propellers, which tend to be the greatest source of noise from underwater vehicles. Propeller technology has evolved tremendously over the last few generations of subs, but hydrojets are even more silent, efficient, durable, more functional in shallow water, and best of all, less prone to cavitation.

Cavitation, whereby water boils into bubbles under high pressure at low temperatures, is among the greatest threats facing stealthy submariners. It is the undersea equivalent of stepping on a sheet of bubble wrap while attempting to sneak past guards.

If China can produce big submarines with pump-jet propulsion, it will have entered the same era of undersea warfare as the U.S. Navy. The Chinese are also reportedly beefing up their anti-sub defenses, including a vast network of sensors deployed in the South China Sea that has inevitably become known as the “Underwater Great Wall,” plus more sophisticated tactics for using aircraft in anti-submarine warfare (ASW).

China’s string of fortified islands in the South China Sea would make excellent platforms for ASW planes and helicopters — and unlike ships that carry such aircraft, islands cannot be sunk with torpedoes by hard-pressed sub commanders. China’s rapidly expanding surface fleet is well-provisioned with submarine detection systems, as well.

China demonstrated its enhanced ASW capabilities in an August naval exercise, right after conducting joint ASW drills with the experienced Russian navy. Those demonstrations were evidently very convincing to worried American and European defense analysts, whose Taiwan defense scenarios usually envision American subs picking off enough Chinese ships to slow or thwart an invasion. Some analysts told the WSJ that China may now be capable of hunting and destroying foreign subs before they could enter the Taiwanese battlespace.

China is also getting closer to the missile and submarine technology it needs to pose a severe threat of striking American ground targets with sub-launched weapons. Former U.S. Navy officer Christopher Carlson told the WSJ that China’s sub fleet is now roughly on par with the Russian fleet of the 1990s, and that fleet was plenty dangerous. If Moscow decides to share more top-shelf sub technology with its good friends in Beijing, the Chinese threat could grow even worse.

The good news is that American subs are still at least a full generation ahead of China’s. The bad news is that China does not need to achieve technological parity to become a major threat, especially when it has the “home court advantage” of operating subs in nearby theaters like the South China Sea.

The Chinese could also build enough last-generation subs to overwhelm American ASW resources, which are stretched thin over vast oceans. Carlson noted the U.S. Navy currently operates far more top-of-the-line nuclear subs, but it is not inconceivable that China could triple the U.S. submarine production rate within a decade.

Defense News in August suggested the U.S. Navy might need to rethink submarine warfare to retain its edge, perhaps by doing the last thing old-school submariners ever wanted to do: going loud.

In other words, instead of fighting a losing battle to maintain a full-generation edge in stealth, the U.S. should develop undersea drones, decoys, and other active countermeasures to “suppress or confuse the sensors China or Russia will depend on for undersea detection and targeting.” Such a strategy could be enhanced by collecting extensive intelligence on adversary sensor networks in advance, and by developing better systems to intercept torpedoes and mines, allowing American sub commanders to stand and fight when they cannot evade.

quote:

The good news is that American subs are still at least a full generation ahead of China’s.

Along with being several generations ahead in institutional knowledge.

Just having modern tech is only one hurdle. It also takes knowing how to use and support it effectively.

quote:

The bad news is that China does not need to achieve technological parity to become a major threat, especially when it has the “home court advantage” of operating subs in nearby theaters like the South China Sea.

There are almost unique issues about defending Taiwan.

That is not open ocean warfare. It is one of the areas with the highest density of fishing vessels w diesel engines.

Much of the area is shallow water filled w noise.

A large force with inferior technology can defeat a smaller force w superior technology. It is all about attrition ratios.

I will post the full Wall Street Journal article later.

We should always be concerned about the Chinese. I take the OP article with a grain of salt. I remember a couple of years ago everyone got their knickers in a bunch over one of their aircraft carriers. Another article posted a picture of the damn thing. It had a swooped-up bow. Something aircraft carriers stopped using after the catapult had been invented. They have an aircraft carrier, but it remains to be seen what kind of aircraft can operate off of it.

They may indeed have the "caterpillar" propulsion design. But, the Chinese don't lead the world in innovation or new technology, and it remains to be seen if they can make it work. What they don't steal they are 30 years behind everyone. Something tells me the people at NAVSEA are way ahead of them.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: goose5,

One of my first thoughts after reading this is how incredibly slow we are now at building ships...even old technology ships. The article talks about how China can overwhelm us with old tech subs. We should at least be able to pump out equal numbers, but our shipyards aren't nearly as productive as they need to be, with the possible exception of Bath Iron Works (GD). I'm afraid unions contributed to this.

The Chinese have a different philosophy when it comes to shipbuilding. Most of their surface fleet can't sail more than 500 miles off their coast. Our philosophy is to build a ship as big as possible. With as many capabilities as possible. Build it so it can get anywhere in the world ready to fight. In any situation. And, have that ship serve for 30 years. That takes time.

What worries me is everything we seem to build is to support a carrier. What if with missile technology and unmanned vehicles improving we are close to the time of the carrier becoming obsolete? It has happened before. The center piece of the Navy used to be the battleship.

There is one thing I'm certain of. The US Navy hasn't been completely unleashed since World War Two. I don't think anyone has any idea of what they are capable of today.

I'm aware of that, but also keep in mind...speaking of WW2, how many ships were pumped out then compared to now. I know it's apples and oranges, but our shipbuilding industry has suffered greatly over the years.

They didn’t catch up to shit

They STEAL and reverse-engineer EVERYTHING

There’s no innovation with Chicoms

6guns I hear you. Just like everything else here, it's shackled with regulations and rules. The system is maintained to line people's pockets. And, it's a creature of politics. One side wants to kick up the spending, and the other wants to cut it.

The military would do much better with an annual fixed amount under a peacetime setting. They could plan much better under those circumstances.

Goose, I agree w most of what you said.

Many of their older subs are also very limited in how far they can travel. Especially traveling quietly.

Taiwan is only 200 miles from China.

Most of the Chinese fleet is effective in a coastal war.

"I don't think anyone has any idea of what they are capable of today." That one I respectfully disagree with

6guns - agree w you too. A significant factor in WWII was the U.S. ability to rapidly develop the ability to crank out large quantities of ships, planes, tanks

I don't think the U.S. has nearly that ability today. Short sighted politicians have let our in-country manufacturing and building capabilities decrease to dangerous levels

It's a very difficult and frustrating situation and can't be solved in a day...week...years??? We've been mostly aware of this situation for a long time with no real change. Kinda like social security and every other damn problem we have. No one has the balls or vision to take the bull by the horns.

https://archive.is/20231121010...shift-china-8db10a0d

For decades, the U.S. hasn’t had to worry much about China’s submarines. They were noisy and easy to track. The Chinese military, meanwhile, struggled to detect America’s ultraquiet submarines.

Now, China is narrowing one of the biggest gaps separating the U.S. and Chinese militaries as it makes advances in its submarine technology and undersea detection capabilities, with major implications for American military planning for a potential conflict over Taiwan.

Early this year, China put to sea a nuclear-powered attack submarine with a pump-jet propulsion system instead of a propeller, satellite imagery showed. It was the first time noise-reducing technology used on the latest American submarines had been seen on a Chinese submarine.

A few months earlier, satellite images of China’s manufacturing base for nuclear-powered submarines in the northeastern city of Huludao showed hull sections laid out in the complex that were larger than the hull of any existing Chinese submarine. A second modern construction hall at the plant was finished in 2021, indicating plans to boost output.

At the same time, the western Pacific is becoming more treacherous for U.S. submarines. Beijing has built or nearly finished several underwater sensor networks, known as the “Underwater Great Wall,” in the South China Sea and other regions around the Chinese coast. The networks give it a much better ability to detect enemy submarines, according to Chinese military and academic texts.

The People’s Liberation Army, as China’s military is known, is getting better at finding enemy submarines by adding patrol aircraft and helicopters that pick up sonar information from buoys in the sea. Most of China’s navy now has the ability to deploy underwater listening devices called hydrophones on cables trailing ships or submarines.

In August, China conducted a submarine-hunting exercise lasting more than 40 hours in the South China Sea, involving dozens of Y-8 anti-submarine patrol aircraft. A few weeks earlier, the Chinese and Russian navies conducted a joint anti-submarine warfare exercise in the Bering Sea, off the coast of Alaska.

In recent years, China has also rapidly expanded its surface fleet. It now exceeds the U.S. fleet by number of ships, although China’s ships are generally smaller and less sophisticated. In response, a larger percentage of the U.S. Navy has been deployed to the Pacific, including some of America’s most advanced ships and aircraft. The U.S. has also increased the tempo of naval operations in the region and deepened coordination and training with allied fleets, such as Japan.

The U.S. also needs new strategies below the waves to face a more potent adversary, said Christopher Carlson, a former U.S. Navy officer. The U.S. needs far more resources, such as patrol aircraft and attack submarines, to locate, track and potentially target a new generation of quieter Chinese submarines, he said.
“The implications for the U.S. and our Pacific allies will be profound,” he said.

Simulations of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan conducted by American military analysts often assume U.S. submarines would try to sink ships in the attacking Chinese fleet. The destruction of Chinese ships could help blunt the invasion and enable Taiwan to better defend itself, some of the simulations show, but a greater threat to U.S. submarines would complicate that task.

Even getting close to the Taiwan Strait might become more precarious. China’s nuclear-powered attack submarines could be assigned to a hunter-killer role seeking U.S. and allied submarines to the east of Taiwan, said Brent Sadler, a former U.S. submarine officer who is now senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a think tank based in Washington, D.C.

One book published by a former PLA officer in 2020 suggests new Chinese attack submarines will have their engines mounted on shock-absorbing rafts to better damp vibrations. China is working on other quieting technology for submarines, such as new hull materials and more-efficient nuclear reactors for propulsion, academic research papers show.

Based on the available information, Carlson, the former U.S. Navy officer, anticipates the new Chinese submarines will be as quiet as Russian Akula I-class attack submarines commissioned from the 1990s—a series still in service today that marked a leap forward in stealth and speed from previous Russian submarines.

To be sure, a new generation of Chinese nuclear-powered submarines is years away from active duty, and significant progress in the program isn’t guaranteed. Submarines often go through several prototype stages over a period of years before final designs are reached.

The new attack submarine launched by China this year could be a test model that isn’t intended for deployment. Entire projects can be scrapped for technical, economic or political reasons. The U.S. Seawolf-class submarine program was dropped in 1995 because of high costs.

There is also little chance that China will catch up with the U.S. in submarine technology soon. The latest U.S. Virginia-class attack submarines and the planned Columbia-class ballistic-missile submarines are a generation ahead of China’s capabilities in terms of noise-reduction technology, propulsion, weapons systems and other areas, military analysts say.

But China doesn’t necessarily need to match U.S. capabilities. By making submarines that are much harder to detect and producing them at scale, it can stretch the resources used by the U.S. military to keep track of them. And any war would likely be fought in China’s backyard, the area it knows best.

To patrol the region, the U.S. rotates squadrons of P-8 aircraft through a base in Okinawa, Japan. One recently retired U.S. anti-submarine warfare officer said that a lack of American anti-submarine patrol aircraft based permanently in the Asia-Pacific region would be a handicap.

“We know where their subs are now,” he said. “But continuing to do so depends on having the assets to keep track of them.”

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
They didn’t catch up to shit

They STEAL and reverse-engineer EVERYTHING

There’s no innovation with Chicoms

Well, to state the obvious: That's a way to catch up. Militaries have been doing that for millennia, hell the USSR did it over and over again with us. Just because they didn't invent it doesn't mean they can't put it to some kind of effective use. They can spend the next twenty years learning how to use them, figuring out how we use ours, meanwhile an economic next gen war rages that we are poised to lose.

We'd be best off deporting every last Chinese immigrant en masse, and I mean right now. I know it's never going to happen, but it would be best for our country. We're walking right into this.

As a former nuclear engineer at one of DoD’s Naval shipyards I’m not too worried. We were soooooo far ahead back in 2002, that even if China has closed the gap tremendously in the interim, we are still well ahead. Having said that, I don’t believe we should rest on our
laurels and we should make sure we maintain the advantage, and a significant one at that. However, I’m quite confident that there’s no need to panic quite yet. The other thing to remember is that China’s propaganda machine is well oiled and generally speaking, their published capabilities generally exceed their actual capabilities by at least 50%.

For China to be willing to take a risk of being embargoed by the free world, things would have to get way out of hand first.
Stories like this were common during the Cold War. The news media uses stories like this to get clicks and military contractors to sell more hardware.

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
For China to be willing to take a risk of being embargoed by the free world, things would have to get way out of hand first.
Stories like this were common during the Cold War. The news media uses stories like this to get clicks and military contractors to sell more hardware.

This is true across ALL of China's sectors, including the military. If they were even halfway capable of doing things with military technology, they would have working drains in their cities, probably.

China is full of shit. See their BS carrier as an example:

I wouldn't look too deeply into this article. Propulsor technology for naval submarines was developed over 20+ yrs ago; the UK and US subs already use this, along with vastly improved silencing and build methodologies that China is just starting to understand. While China no doubt is ahead of the US in overall build volume and general maritime, the advanced realm of submarines is still in its infancy for them. While the article points out the advances the USSR's Akula subs made and the technology the PLAN learned, what the article doesn't point out is, after those boat's first deployment, the noise level of those subs progressively got worse on each cruise indicating the attention to maintenance never kept up once it left the shipbuilder.

The greater threat for the US undersea warfare is the relative shallowness of the South and East China East, and how ringed is it with sensors. US subs are much larger than other nations, principally because the US Navy is a blue water navy, our ships have to cross entire oceans on a regular basis, other nations can do similar but it takes a much greater level of planning and maintenance attention to get their ships ready. The other issue is our shipyards, there's only two yards that build nuclear-powered subs, those yards have been behind for a better part of a decade and not showing any ability to increase its output.

As for the PLAN aircraft carrier, I'm not worried. Not only is the embarked air wing tiny, but their capabilities are unrealized. We certainly shouldn't ignore their developments but, let's not get carried away thinking they now have a blue water fleet capability; there's A LOT for them to learn and I'm not just talking about getting hulls in the water and launching aircraft. Keep in mind, their carriers are there to intimidate everyone else NOT named the US Navy.

Their new stealth fighter is just as shitty.

China will simply flood both the Taiwan strait and advance through the South China Sea at the onset of hostilities with active sonar. No sub or UUV will be able to evade detection at that point so..

Maybe this country should do something about the tremendous trade disparity that enables the PRC to spend so much on their military.