Naval and Defense News

[Dysta]

When it keeps coming, they keep mavericking:

https://news.usni.org/2017/05/26/offici ... -china-sea

---------------

Non-military news. China has now banned the export of reclamation vessels unless with permissions, signaling the strategic value of artificial island constructions and their assets:

http://3g.china.com/act/military/111327 ... 88913.html (simplified Chinese)

[Hongjian]

ORIGINAL: Dysta

The state developers was nominated the top award by the government for the success of Chinese ABM program. The official article reported the variant of its missile is 'Air & Space Defense Missile' , or 'Hungtian' (空天) for the first two words in Chinese.

No foreign redirected news or analysis yet, but local medias and fans spectate it is the rumored HQ-19. It's yet to know the true name, as they believe it's still not yet to be serviceable.

Will bring more updates later on, I will temporary nickname it Hungtian:

http://3g.china.com/act/military/111327 ... 64541.html (Simplified Chinese)

Looks like the HQ-19 will soon be deployed. China-Daily reports in its typicalv unclear, poetic, non-military (and badly translated) fashion, as expected of official releases.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017 ... 520150.htm

Ultrafast missile interceptor developed

[Hongjian]

Some big news. I'm sure Dysta has also read about it.

A new "high speed semi-submersible combat platform" is in the works now. The PLAN high brass has authorized the construction of three of these still undesignated vessels that are known by their cryptic name "cqshygszzpt", which stands for 常潜式海洋高速作战平台 or "semi-submersible oceanic high speed battle platform". Major leakers in mainland chinese defense forums (like the user called "Pop3", who is proven to be an PLAN insider) have confirmed that this project is now being realized.

It is understood that this ship is basically a high-speed semi-submersible arsenal ship in the 20.000 ton class. Yes, you read that right. It sounds like something from a fanboy wet-dream and many PLA watchers, including me, have completely disregarded all the rumors that pointed to this project from years before.

hmmwv from China-Defense forum has more on this:

Did more digging, this thing has been in the works since 2010 or earlier. The head of the project Prof Dong Wencai passed away in Jan 2016 after battling cancer for over 2 years, at that time the pool test model has completed. Pop3 has also mentioned something like this before, but all pretty vague and sounded outlandish, and most people dismissed it (including me). But it looks like it'll be the real deal. The recent rumor that three very large combat vessels are under construction at JN (TL-Note; Jiangnan shipyard, Shanghai), DL (Dalian shipyard), and BH (Bohai nuclear submarine yard) may actually be correct, that'll be CV-18, CV-19, and this thing.

This Xinhua article described in detail how Prof. Dong's group advocated for this new type of platform and got approval for R&D.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2016-04/0 ... 873297.htm

Quote:
2010年，董文才带领团队向具有探索性的科研课题进军——提出了一种既可以在水面高速航行又可以在水下潜航，并能够在“水面-水下”间快速变换的新概念船型。

讨论会上，这种想法几乎遭到了所有与会专家的否定，“这是把水面高速艇和潜艇的优势集于一身了，但水面船和潜艇的设计差别简直是天壤之别，这怎么可能？”

董文才丝毫没有动摇坚持原创新船型的想法。他悉心听取并记录着每一条与会专家的疑问，逐条通过机理分析论证了新船型的可行性。

在项目申请终审评审会上，在场专家无不被董文才激情昂扬又非常缜密的汇报所折服，成功申报并最终圆满完成了探索一代“新型快速作战平台”的研究。

Prof. Dong Wen-Cai inspecting the floating model:


Leaks from his previously classified paper:




Some fan-made CGs depicting a more submarine-looking ship:

https://picload.org/image/riairria/arsenalship-1.jpg
https://picload.org/image/riairril/arsenalship-2.jpg

A fan-graphic based on the official model as depicted from the leaks:




Basically, the idea is simple: An arsenal ship is a fine and dandy thing, but it is vulnerable due to its size. So, the best way to solve that issue, is to reduce its radar and IR signature as well as possible - and nothing's better than just make it into a semi-submersible ship. In fact, some USNI thinkers have also thought about something like this:

Blitzo from Sinodefence:

This article (https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedi ... ccess-wall), I think gives a good rundown of the basic hallmarks of an arsenal ship.
Interestingly, the author says it would be of interest to reduce such a ship's RCS, and says "A long series of VLSs encased in a largely submerged hull would be optimal" as well as: "the ship’s freeboard should be as low as possible and not have a substantial superstructure—think of an iceberg with its top flattened. The most efficient method of doing this is by having the capability of ballasting down, similar to that of amphibious warships. With ballast tanks, voids, and fuel tanks along its underwater hull, and an internal double hull, a modicum of protection might be achieved against torpedoes and mines." The author envisions a mostly conventional hull surface ship with low freeboard that can be achieved by ballasts.... BUT, of course a natural but more extreme extension of this idea, is to have a semi submersible hull, which leaves only the conning towers exposed on the top, to further reduce RCS.

So, the semi-submersible idea offers two advantages: Signature reduction and being pretty much invulnerable to AShM itself, while the drawbacks of a submarine (like limited space as required of a tube-shaped hull-design that is built to withstand intense water-pressure) do not apply. I think this ship will pretty much look like those WWII "submarine battleships", as in the hull being optimized for surface cruise primarily, with its limited and temporal diving feature being merely a defensive technique.


A few more sources:
https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2388635-1-1.html
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2016-04/0 ... 873297.htm
http://www.whst.gov.cn/xwzx/show/31732.aspx
http://www.sohu.com/a/144000241_621017

Added a de-classified research paper talking about this concept:

http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTota ... 603007.htm

EDIT:
The Idea doesnt seem to be as outlandish as previously thought. Here, a 2002 Canadian Military Journal article:

http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo3/no2 ... 24-eng.pdf

Especially at this part on page 20:

CONCRETE STEPS

And yet, an examination in practical terms of the concrete steps the US military services are taking to transform their forces reveals a mixed picture. The US Navy has elements of a strategy in place — for example, its ‘network centric warfare’ concept and its shift in focus to the littoral battlefield — but these concepts have not yet been expanded into a complete roadmap for transformation. As a result, some of the Navy’s planned acquisitions may be inconsistent with the new security environment. It continues to centre its fleet on the aircraft carrier, even though these large platforms are likely to be increasingly at risk from landbased anti-ship missiles. It is also purchasing a significant number of new carrier-based fighters, such as the Joint Strike Fighter, which would be similarly at risk. In this context, it may make more sense for the Navy to focus on a force projection platform such as the Arsenal ship, a semi-submersible, stealthy barge armed with hundreds of missiles, few sailors and no (manned) tactical aircraft.

[Hongjian]

ORIGINAL: Dysta

When it keeps coming, they keep mavericking:

https://news.usni.org/2017/05/26/offici ... -china-sea

---------------

Non-military news. China has now banned the export of reclamation vessels unless with permissions, signaling the strategic value of artificial island constructions and their assets:

http://3g.china.com/act/military/111327 ... 88913.html (simplified Chinese)

For the intercept; it happened around the same place where China has recently found the underwater ice-methane concentration.

Not implying anything here...

[Dan109]

And then there were two....

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/s ... ssile-race

I'd think the navy would be crazy to go LRASM - like the article say, cost-per-kill would be very important, and JSM wins that no problem. Just put the LRASM on DDG/CGs. Boeing's reason for dropping out of the contest I think had more to do with their pricing. Right now they have a fairly good monopoly for the harpoon on aircraft, for their capabilities. They'd have to lower the cost to win the LCS bid, and then the Naval Air crowd would demand same low costs...my opinion.

[AlGrant]

U.S. to conduct ICBM intercept test on Tuesday

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-missiles-test-idUSKBN18M2C9
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-26/pentagon-will-try-shoot-down-test-icbm-next-tuesday
http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-plans-first-test-to-intercept-icbm-as-north-korea-threat-grows-20170527-gwekg6.html

[jtoatoktoe]

ORIGINAL: Dan109

And then there were two....

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/s ... ssile-race

I'd think the navy would be crazy to go LRASM - like the article say, cost-per-kill would be very important, and JSM wins that no problem. Just put the LRASM on DDG/CGs. Boeing's reason for dropping out of the contest I think had more to do with their pricing. Right now they have a fairly good monopoly for the harpoon on aircraft, for their capabilities. They'd have to lower the cost to win the LCS bid, and then the Naval Air crowd would demand same low costs...my opinion.

LRASM was dropped a few days ago (3rd post on this page). JSM will be a fine weapon for the LCS/Frigate.

[kevinkins]

the semi-submersible idea

From Wiki:
"In 2014, the United States Naval Special Warfare Command (NAVSPECWARCOM) unveiled its SEAL Insertion, Observation, and Neutralization (SEALION) craft, designed and built as a Combatant Craft Heavy (CCH). The craft is designed for low radar observability and can carry crew and payload internally. At that time there were two units operational, with a third one ordered for delivery in 2018. The SEALION is reportedly a semi-submersible with a planing hull for surface running and ballast tanks to run with a reduced profile. Its dimensions are 80 feet (24 m) long, 14.5 feet (4.4 m) abeam, and 9.5 feet (2.9 m) from keel to cabin roof. It displaces 80,000 pounds (36 t) and is powered by two ten-cylinder, 1,500-horsepower (1,100 kW) diesel engines. Its aft payload bay is configured to accommodate either two inflatable boats or one special forces modified jet ski or eight seats."

This seem to be a reasonable way to use the technology. I am not sure about an arsenal ship. Seems like you would be placing a lot of eggs in one basket. That said, I would like to wargame with them to see if I am right or wrong [&:]

[Hongjian]

Another leaked graphic.


As I understand, China has arrived at the conclusion quite early that there needs to be a large, survivable missile-delivery platform that can both survive getting into the firing range of a CSG and launch a volley size large enough to overwhelm the CSG's Aegis defenses. Distributed lethality concepts of building many small SSGs are not suitable because the sheer numbers required would cost more than a few large arsenal ships, and the coordination of so many small distributed assets under ECM conditions would also be prohibitive. Not to mention, China isnt the USN and doesnt have all of the Pacific as maneuvering and concealment space to hide their distributed assets - China only has three small puddles of water contained within the 1st Island Chain. So, the high-speed semi-submersible arsenal ship might be the only solution, even if it means to put all eggs in one basket. But at least this basket is more survivable and easier to coordinate and to pull saturational attacks with that many smaller platforms that require high degree of coordination and datalinking.

What is more important, in my opinion, is the political dimension of this project. It signals that China really intents to not only challenge but actually kill USN fleets with utmsot prejudice. A semi-submersible arsenal ship is pretty much a single-role platform: You cant do counter-piracy patrols with it, nor can you carry out humanitarian relief missions. It is even unsuitable for SLOC protection duties, as it needs a kill-chain to function well, as well as would be vulnerable on its own without ASW/AAW support - And you cant even sail it around the world to show flag, since it really isnt that sort of ship. This breed of ship would be made for the sole purpose of breaking USN carrier-fleet dominance and sinking their ships.
When this ship indeed appears in Bohai Shipyard the next few years, I would consider this an official declaration of war against the US.



Actually; this idea does remind me of a similiar (but smaller) French concept: SMX-25



Closest counterpart would be this concept; albeit not semi-submersible:

[kevinkins]

Another strike group head to the waters off Korea ...

https://www.voanews.com/a/third-naval-s ... 73637.html

[Hongjian]

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

That said, I would like to wargame with them to see if I am right or wrong [&:]

You can easily do that.

Add any SSBN in a scenario and change the SLBMs to 200 anti-ship missiles. Limit their diving depth via human control to periscope depth.

I can assure you (since I have already tried that) - this sort of thing means the death of any surface fleet, no matter how well protected.
Even when the missiles are launched at stand-off distance (where the sub needs off-board targeting), and the enemy CSG detects the vampires early and engage them at maximum range - the number of missiles will ensure that the CSG loses at least a few ships.

And at stand-off distance, the CSG's submarine escorts, even with their 35+ knots submerged, will never reach that simulated arsenal ship in time to destroy it before it launched all its missiles.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Another leaked graphic.


As I understand, China has arrived at the conclusion quite early that there needs to be a large, survivable missile-delivery platform that can both survive getting into the firing range of a CSG and launch a volley size large enough to overwhelm the CSG's Aegis defenses. Distributed lethality concepts of building many small SSGs are not suitable because the sheer numbers required would cost more than a few large arsenal ships, and the coordination of so many small distributed assets under ECM conditions would also be prohibitive. Not to mention, China isnt the USN and doesnt have all of the Pacific as maneuvering and concealment space to hide their distributed assets - China only has three small puddles of water contained within the 1st Island Chain. So, the high-speed semi-submersible arsenal ship might be the only solution, even if it means to put all eggs in one basket. But at least this basket is more survivable and easier to coordinate and to pull saturational attacks with that many smaller platforms that require high degree of coordination and datalinking.

What is more important, in my opinion, is the political dimension of this project. It signals that China really intents to not only challenge but actually kill USN fleets with utmsot prejudice. A semi-submersible arsenal ship is pretty much a single-role platform: You cant do counter-piracy patrols with it, nor can you carry out humanitarian relief missions. It is even unsuitable for SLOC protection duties, as it needs a kill-chain to function well, as well as would be vulnerable on its own without ASW/AAW support - And you cant even sail it around the world to show flag, since it really isnt that sort of ship. This breed of ship would be made for the sole purpose of breaking USN carrier-fleet dominance and sinking their ships.
When this ship indeed appears in Bohai Shipyard the next few years, I would consider this an official declaration of war against the US.



Actually; this idea does remind me of a similiar (but smaller) French concept: SMX-25



Closest counterpart would be this concept; albeit not semi-submersible:

I always liked the idea of Arsenal/VLS battery type ships. Digging deeper the criticisms have the common threads of cost to fill VLS, cost and complexity to maintain missiles in VLS and survivability. Be interesting to see China's approach to these challenges.

Mike

[Dysta]

I read those articles for a whole day, and I say it's something I don't understand: is semi-sub a marvel or fluke?

I mean, when Ohio-class sub installed with adaptive units for tomahawks, the land attack capability will be septupled from the original amount of VLS, with deeper diving depth and substantial speed as long as it's not operate in shallow sea. If these adaptive canisters can be improved to install SAM, ABM or even ARM, it may do as much as a Burke can with much deadlier hull profile.

But a semi-sub, I understand it is able to install surface ship's sensors, guns and even a hangar if the area is big enough, but the hull profile isn't submarine based and still need ballast that cost quite amount of space, which is both pricey and not as stealthy as a proper sub. It might dodge ASM when diving, but not the torpedoes when opponent has RUM.

If I am allowed to design an arsenal ship, I'd prefer the self-serving container ship (with build in cranes to move/dump containers) as a platform, with cruising speed of 25 knots, and extra cabins for a hundred of crews. Then put hundreds of containers loaded with missiles, guns, radars, drones and even the amphibious units for the initial strike. Maybe escorted with one or two subs too. When not at war, it can be rapidly disarmed for commercial use, so the cost can be recovered.

Like this one minus the sails or eco stuffs: https://youtu.be/f7lpb-lvBE0

If arsenal ship works out as intended, it's better be an expenditure rather than a core asset.

[Dysta]

Russian MC-21 conducted a successful maiden flight yesterday:

https://youtu.be/b7txungWU4o

Also a list of next-gen and new company-built airlines:

http://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-b ... t-mc-21-12

[Hongjian]

https://www.eastpendulum.com/la-chine-f ... ubmersible

Henri.K with more information on the semi-submerged arsenal ship. And lots of great pictures of the floating models grabbed from state TV.


And nice that he mentions the Type 022 FAC missile catamaran. I was about to mention them in regards to the argument of why the hell China would build 'blind' missile launch platforms. China built 80 of them, after all. The semi-submerged arsenal ship is basically the same, only much larger, stealthier and with more weapons.

[jmax]

China plans undersea observation system ‘for science and national security’

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... m=referral

[Dysta]

ORIGINAL: jmax

China plans undersea observation system ‘for science and national security’

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... m=referral

They needs both methane hydrate, and SOSUS very badly. The ASEAN just gone wimpy, but the US doesn't go any less bolder than last year.

[kevinkins]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... d-use.html

The interesting quote for me:

"Use of such weapons on enemy troops is a gray area that, for now, the U.S. military is steering clear of since international agreements ban the use of weapons intended to blind, Afazal said."

And Thule in the news:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-thul ... se-arctic/

[Dysta]

Non-military news. USACPD announced 107-page long of report, about the most recent battle of journalism, propaganda and information warfare:

https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/271028.pdf

[Hongjian]

[X(] Really... What's with this wave of chinese military transparency lately?

Basically, what they are talking about is a Shaftless Pumpjet for China's next gen SSN and SSBN. And it is already in use right now, according to Rear Admiral and Prof. Ma Weiming, perhaps China's most important naval engineer of this age.
This is basically the propulsion technology as used by the 09V (095) Tang-class SSN and the 09VI (096) next gen SSBN.

It is a similiar concept like the electric shaftless drive planned for the next gen Columbia class SSBN.

Icloo from Defence.pk:

Quote:

Admiral /Professor Ma Wei Ming disclosed on a TV interview a new propulsion system (bearingless pump drive) for next generation submarine has been developed. He said this new techomology is now being applied (on certain ship), and China is leading US on this perspect.

近日，央视采访中国工程院院士、海军工程大学电力电子研究所所长马伟明院士时，首次曝光了我国下一代潜艇使用的无轴泵推技术。这些技术比美国相关技术还要先进，并且已经在实际应用中。此外，马伟明院士在电力推进方面也有很大的成果。

Subtitle: "This is what I'm talking about"


Subtitle: "We are more advanced than the US in this regard"


Subtitle: "This is our next generation submarine"


Subtitle: "We are already using it right now"


Han Patriot from Defence.pk:

Quote:

Link to the interview. It's actually a program telling the achievement of the various award winners for Chinese Key Innovators Award. It details military to civillian technology including Chinese research on 4G technology. That's the reason Huawei and ZTE sprinted ahead, we had 4G technology.

I think this propulsion is electric propulsion, they are leading the world by at least 10 years, as claimed by this award winner. I don't think he is bragging. It's saying its an integrated electric propulsion system which supplies power to high energy weapons, I guess it's lasers?

He also said the propulsion system already used for next generation nuclear submarine. Damn, this means the next gen submarine is already completed. This guy shouldn't reveal so much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeTNUWVbpZ0

Guys this Ma WeiMing is also responsible for EMALS. His expertise is integrated electric propulsion systems for navy. There is a picture of Navy Admiral holding an umbrella for him while he was testing something through the walkie talkie. This guy says he dare claim Chinese electric propulsion and EMALS is more advanced than US.

Again; leaked research paper excerps. As always: