China is developing a submersible ship

Submersible ships are a relatively old development, but taking into account modern technologies, it can get a “new life”. The Chinese corporation Bohai Shipbuilding Heavy Industrial is developing a new combat unit for the Chinese Navy, which will combine the speed of the ship and the subtlety of the submarine, reports "Warspot" with reference to the magazine Popular Science

Chinese research institutes have been working on building a submersible ship since 2011. Today, the Chinese Navy is considering two options: a project that looks more like a submarine, but without the possibility of complete immersion; a ship that can almost completely go under water, leaving only the upper part of the superstructure on the surface.

Half-submarine ship

According to unofficial information, the Chinese corporation Bohai Shipbuilding Heavy Industrial is already assembling the first prototype of a large warship that can be used effectively above and below water. It is not yet known which option — ship or semi-submarines — was chosen to create the prototype, but it is indicated that it can be created by the 2020 year.

Submersible ship being developed for the Chinese Navy

According to the Chinese hydrodynamic expert Professor Dong Wen Cai, who is involved in the development of the submersible, for the Chinese Navy, it is planned to create a large half submarine or submersible ship (the planned displacement of each of the options is 20 000) armed with hundreds of guided missiles. The new ship will combine fleet and stealth. According to the developers, movement in the underwater mode will allow the ship to remain unnoticed by the enemy’s radar and to protect itself against the attacks of anti-ship missiles, and in the surface position it can reach maximum speed.

Tests of the scale model of the submersible ship. Shot from CCTV 7 storyline

Comments

[Blackmokona]

What's the point? The upper part is visible, and the water resistance is much greater.

[DEPARTMENT]

Well, if you cut down the satellites and navigation from the USA with electronic warfare .. It will be completely invisible visually! Especially if this landing ship will be ..
The United States owes China a trillion dollars, so the gold and foreign exchange reserves of cunning mattresses will go to capture ... (the Russians will help them in this ..)

[Blackmokona]

Yes, yes in WWII aircraft using radars, found German submarines, on the periscope that dried up. But according to the protruded superstructure, 20 thousand tons of the ship, their radars will not work?
And the option with a submarine, in which the maximum speed at the exit to the surface, is generally a return to the PMV submarines.

[Thrall]

It remains for the Chinese to construct a “falling plane”

[Setrac]

Quote: Thrall

It remains for the Chinese to construct a “falling plane”

Every joke has a fraction ... jokes, and everything else is true. the falling planes were dive bombers.

[Vladimir16]

A little later, wings will be attached to this ichthyander and there will be a semi-submersible flying submarine.
And no doubt HUNDREDS of guided missiles
The cartoon remembered: “Man, do you sew seven hats?” - and seven soshu!

[uporov65]

No, it's not that, you need to put wheels on the ship for this miracle, and let it go to the bottom. In this position, the radar will definitely not detect it.

[voyaka uh]

"WWII aircraft using radars, found German submarines,
on the dried up periscope. "///

Right. But now there are two important differences.
1) Such a submarine is now a missile carrier. She has containers with missiles.
The plane will be shot down.
2) Detected by radars at close range. And now you need to find with
tens of kilometers. Semi-submerged radar from afar is much more difficult.

AND...
You probably saw the tall towers-radars of the latest English destroyers? The high logging pyramid of the Zumvolt?
It comes to the point of absurdity. Isn’t it more logical to hide the ship itself under water, and the radar, on the contrary,
raise to air. Which is what the Chinese did.

[Vz.58]

The wake trail is clearly visible on certain sonars for less than 30 minutes and in stormy weather

[voyaka uh]

We are comparing Chinese development with a surface-launched missile carrier ship
class destroyer, not a submarine.
The surface ship has: 1) EPR 2) optical visibility. 3) wake trace
4) acoustic visibility.
In the first two, the Chinese have a big advantage.

[Blackmokona]

So radars have radically improved.

[Maz]

Only this advantage, Vojaka, is completely destroyed by one torpedo from any submarine, or from an underwater minefield of bottom torpedoes in the coastal zone. The detection range underwater of this monster will be very, and very long, because 20000 tons will need to be shoved forward with good engines. And he will make noise on the floor of the Pacific Ocean, plus a satellite is just a miracle, not a target. If you want, you won’t miss. But long-range torpedoes hit 50 miles, and missile torpedoes even further - hundreds of kilometers. So, what did the Chinese invent, that’s what, but to us by a light bulb, no matter what the child was amusing, if only the Americans would troll. Judging by your reaction from the Chinese, Be Ezrat Ashem (בעזרת השם), it worked out perfectly.

[Setrac]

Quote: voyaka uh

Isn’t it more logical to hide the ship itself under water, and the radar, on the contrary,
raise to air.

The combat stability of modern warships is ensured by a large stock of buoyancy - a multiple relative to displacement. Such a ship has a buoyancy reserve close to zero.

[Genry]

What is the submarine's buoyancy margin? In your opinion, they can not be used? The thing is the design of the ship, not the soap bubble (the best margin of buoyancy).

[Setrac]

Quote: Genry

What is the submarine's buoyancy margin? In your opinion, they can not be used?

So this is not a submarine, it cannot dive deep into the adversary.

[kashtak]

Quote: Setrac

Such a ship has a buoyancy reserve close to zero.

but the side height is close to zero. minimum RCC flight altitude from two to five meters above the wave crests. Are you sure what will fall?

[Setrac]

Quote: kashtak

but the side height is close to zero. minimum RCC flight altitude from two to five meters above the wave crests. Are you sure what will fall?

It mattered a hundred years ago, when squadrons fired at each other with conventional cannons, the rocket would hit.

[kashtak]

Quote: Setrac

It mattered a hundred years ago, when squadrons fired at each other with conventional cannons, the rocket would hit.

any homing system has a chance of hitting. and therefore miss. this probability can be great but never one hundred percent. a target with such a low silhouette is a difficult target.

[Setrac]

Quote: kashtak

any homing system has a chance of hitting. and therefore miss. this probability can be great but never one hundred percent. a target with such a low silhouette is a difficult target.

I repeat, this is your goal is difficult for a conventional gun, the missile will hit with a high degree of probability. Moreover, such a vessel having received a hole at the slightest inclination or having taken a little outboard water will immediately begin to sink briskly.

[Genry]

Quote: Setrac

such a vessel having received a hole at the slightest inclination or having taken a little outboard water will immediately begin to sink briskly.

You have antediluvian ideas about drowning. Bulkheads, compartments, fillers made of foam, .... And this ship always has a good balance of buoyancy. Immersion occurs on the go, due to the wings and contours of the hull, pulling the hull to a shallow depth (diving).

[Setrac]

Quote: Genry

You have antediluvian ideas about drowning. Bulkheads, compartments, foam aggregates, ....

All this works with large buoyancy reserves.

Quote: Genry

Immersion occurs on the go, due to the wings and contours of the hull, pulling the hull to a shallow depth (diving).

What nonsense are you talking about here? Everything you listed is not for this ship.

[Genry]

Quote: Setrac

Sonar too?

You are very far from the topic ...

Quote: Setrac

Do you realize how easy it will be for aviation and submarines?

For aviation, it is hardly noticeable (a meter-long protrusion sticks out of the water from radio-transparent material), and has advantages over surface ships, with large silhouettes and a large area of ​​reflection of radio waves.
With submarines, the risks are neither more nor less than that of a classic ship.

Quote: Setrac

Without airborne lighting

Yes? Yes? Do we have a stone age?
He should not have them. It should only have means of communication with reconnaissance vehicles, which can be both space and air and ...

Quote: Setrac

as slow as a submarine

Who told you submarines are slow?
This ship has no restrictions on air intake and engine power is not limited.

Quote: Setrac

he will drown in the first storm.

Why should drown during a storm? Specifically!
Such a ship has less interaction with the waves, it just passes under them. He doesn’t need to climb the ridge and dangerously cross it and accelerate in decline, fuck in the next wave (fraught with breaking the ship).

[kashtak]

Quote: Setrac

I repeat, this is your goal is difficult for a conventional gun, the missile will hit with a high degree of probability.

to the submarine? you are an optimist, respect. surface homing systems are difficult. one thing is a normal board at least a couple of meters high, and if lower? keep in mind that you have to beat after a few meters of water, just that.

[Setrac]

Quote: kashtak

to the submarine? you are an optimist, respect.

Why on board? To the deck? And immediately overboard water will begin to pour.

Quote: kashtak

keep in mind that you have to beat after a few meters of water, just that.

But he will have parts protruding from the water, important parts.

[Genry]

Quote: Setrac

What nonsense are you talking about here? Everything you listed is not for this ship.

Well, you didn’t get it at all.
Or do you want ballast tanks, an electric motor, batteries, stocks of compressed air ... There is enough diesel and snorkel here - it will go at 10 meters depth and no locator will see.

[Setrac]

Quote: Genry

There is enough diesel and snorkel - it will go at 10 meters depth and no locator will see.

Sonar too?
Do you realize how easy it will be for aviation and submarines? Without airborne lighting, slow as a submarine, but it will sink in the very first storm.

[Maxom75]

And further. Superstructures are made high to achieve the highest possible point for the placement of radars, and if it plunges, the detection range will decrease. And at the expense of visibility. The launch of rockets will immediately give out its location and it is unlikely that they will have time to shoot, they will drown him earlier.

[the most important]

Quote: voyaka uh

Isn’t it more logical to hide the ship itself under water, and the radar, on the contrary,
raise to air. Which is what the Chinese did.

The assumption that in the future the fleet will go under water as much as possible I have already expressed many times on this site. And now, it happened !!! A submarine with different missiles from the Bulava and Caliber to the S-500 and Zircon. Modern "Shark". Can't she replace the frigate cruiser? And the radar can be made retractable, like an arrow of a crane 100 m up. But what a stealth! And target designation from space should be duplicated. For the fight against AUG the most suitable weapon. A salvo of 50 anti-ship missiles and under water ...

[voyaka uh]

In general, I agree with you
But:
In a full-fledged submarine, it is necessary to make an expensive durable hull (pressure at a depth), and preferably a nuclear one, if it is large. And acoustic
stealth, and much more ... It turns out - a lot of money.
And the Chinese have proposed a compromise. Like a destroyer, but
flooded, inconspicuous. The case is ordinary. The engine is normal.
Such a ship can not be put into battle alone. But the squadron of such ships
and in a mix with real submarines, it can arrange surprises for the enemy.
Especially in coastal waters.

[Setrac]

Quote: voyaka uh

In a full-fledged submarine, it is necessary to make an expensive durable hull (pressure at a depth), and preferably a nuclear one, if it is large. And acoustic
stealth, and much more ... It turns out - a lot of money.

A modern surface combat missile ship is the most expensive type of ship per unit mass.

[Maz]

They will be drowned like kittens in a bucket of Warsaw at least. cheap, anaerobic and vicious.

[Setrac]

Quote: the most important

A submarine with different missiles from the Bulava and Caliber to the S-500 and Zircon. Modern "Shark".

"Severodvinsk" - this is the submarine cruiser with cruise missiles, in addition there is the "Antei", this Chinese semi-submersible ship - just a laugh.

[arnar114]

You think in simplified terms .... Familiarize yourself with the AUG shipboard and air group, by quantity and specialization, their performance characteristics. The boat is limited in communication and search systems. Without external target designation and guidance, it is practically safe and useless. A semi-submersible vessel, with a depth of 10-15m, will not have wind resistance, and wave resistance will decrease. It is very promising for use in the Arctic regions, for ice-free wiring. The construction of such a vessel is much more expensive than displacement.

[Maxom75]

it’s easier to shoot a drone or to hang an airship with a radar over the water area, the detection range will be enormous.

[34 region]

13.49. Black! I do not know about the return, but they will implement the idea of ​​the Colombian drug cortex. After all, drug dealers, too, were not fools when they built themselves semi-submersible (ships or boats). And I think there will be no problems with streamlining. Under 80 kilometers will go under water. Zamvolta's nose is not in vain made in the shape of an iron. So the water resistance is less than on an inverted iron. There was a broadcast on TV where models with different bow were driven in the pool. It is interesting how they will move in the storm? Under water or above?

[Blackmokona]

So drug courts built ships purely for stealth while not having the ability to build normal sudbmarins, and made it very small. This is not to hide 20 thousand tons of colossus.

[34 region]

14.42. Black! So here is the main reason, stealth. And for such a colossus, they will certainly carry out all the calculations.

[kashtak]

Quote: Region 34

It is interesting how they will move in the storm? Under water or above?

the designer knows him. but logically it’s more reasonable to let waves pass over you.

[Maxom75]

crawling along the bottom))

[Vz.58]

And also to cut down anti-submarine aircraft and to cut down the eyes of observers and to cut down the systems of acoustic observation. And another condition, the United States will sit and watch as they cut everything down, then yes, of course, it will be possible to do something. For example, go to Las Vegas, relax

[Setrac]

Quote: DEPARTMENT

. It will be completely invisible visually!

Any drone will see him.

[kashtak]

Quote: Setrac

Quote: DEPARTMENT

. It will be completely invisible visually!

Any drone will see him.

Of course, it’s not invisible to see it like any other surface ship.

[Julio Jurenito]

Well, and why the heck goat button accordion ?! The idea of ​​a “water-borne destroyer” was put forward even by Dzhevetsky in the second half of the 19th century, even full-scale tests were carried out at the Baltic Fleet, and even then it was rejected as dead-born: the compartment better resisted artillery fire, but was easily vulnerable to whitehead mines (torpedoes) that had already appeared. A small reflective surface for radars should not deceive anyone: no one has yet canceled passive and active echolocation and magnetolocation. Conventional submarines would be better built.

I recommend: http://www.gorod.gatchina.biz/dll_9105102
http://class-fizika.ru/yt25.html

[voyaka uh]

Visible only optically, at close range and in fine weather.
But the radar is not visible at all.
Another thing is that such a ship itself does not see anything.
Therefore, it will have to be equipped with a flying radar, raised when
necessary, on a balloon. And deflating and retracting into the body,
when it is not needed.
In general, technology is disruptive. The Chinese are starting to be "ahead of the rest."

[Blackmokona]

So here the add-in will look out, how can you not see it with the radar?

[NIKNN]

Quote: BlackMokona

So here the add-in will look out, how can you not see it with the radar?

Well, I think the add-on will have stealth technology and with it to the maximum, and materials and other technologies, it’s all easier to make the entire ship invisible ...

[Blackmokona]

And the price in the end will be like a dozen ships.

[34 region]

14.43. Black! Or there will be the price of a diesel submarine of a similar displacement. No need to dive, so the body will be softer and cheaper.

[abrakadabre]

Well, I think the add-on will have stealth technology and with it to the maximum, and materials and other technologies, it’s all easier to make the entire ship invisible ...

And I don’t need my own radars for this. And for acoustic stealth there will be pull-out oars.

[kashtak]

Quote: BlackMokona

So here the add-in will look out, how can you not see it with the radar?

the dimensions of the protruding superstructure do not exceed the dimensions of the boat. there are still chances to not see or confuse behind wave crests and interference.

[avt]

Quote: voyaka uh

In general, technology is a breakthrough.

For pants? Or a budget?

Quote: voyaka uh

The Chinese are starting to be "ahead of the rest."

Yeah. Especially when you consider the fact that to this day they can’t make a normally functioning SSBN, so as others can use ICBMs from a submerged position. Well, this option is quite suitable for them - there’s no need to dive. True positional area for such "breakthrough"

Quote: voyaka uh

general technology

must be defended by large forces. But this is another story, and they build ships quickly.

[kashtak]

Quote: avt

normally functioning SSBN

call SSBN armed with air defense systems and artillery?

[megajob]

But what do you all think of such stupidity as “one in the field warrior”? It is clearly said - "carry hundreds of shock missiles," which means the task is to quickly go out into the area and dump hundreds of conventional "tamogavks" onto the enemy’s Boschs !! Such radar ships didn’t give in. Own radar, it will be enough for him that encrypted information from the "General Staff" will come.
Such a breakthrough technology will make it possible to carry out sudden blitzkig, or to deliver crushing blows to an unsuspecting enemy. And this is not necessarily the United States. I would even compare this with the Soviet ekranoplanes - the same global concept.
And on the account "the planes will see him" - so radar is not a telescope for you !! If an unknown crap the size of a small yacht "shines" on it, you don’t send each such flare to be checked visually, so I can smell it (not military) with your gut that only targets with sufficient "flare" are checked.

[avt]

Quote: megajob

And on the account "the planes will see him" - so radar is not a telescope for you !! If an unknown crap the size of a small yacht "shines" on it, you don’t send each such flare to be checked visually, so I can smell it (not military) with your gut that only targets with sufficient "flare" can be checked.

So in the middle of the last century in the same Baltic, our Be-6s detected a 206 project of the Germans only in the surface position, or at the periscope depth and with the periscope raised. So what ? Since then, the type of stupefied?

[Glory1974]

In general, technology is disruptive. The Chinese are starting to be "ahead of the rest."

Everything new is well forgotten old. At the end of the 19 century in Russia was tested "destroyer". The destroyer before the attack plunged, leaving the cabin, pipes and torpedo tubes in the water. When tested, they could not hit him with artillery guns. a small target and shells ricocheted off the water.

[siberalt]

Eh, this ship would still have wheels, but a propeller!

[Basarev]

The project is very similar to the whim of Khrushchev - a diving frigate.

[kashtak]

Quote: Basarev

The project is very similar to the whim of Khrushchev - a diving frigate.

not closely related.

[yehat]

the meaning is very simple - the security of such a ship is much higher - water and armor, and disguise,
In addition, displacement can be used more efficiently (although the latter does not outweigh the inconvenience), pitching and weather are less important.

[kashtak]

What's the point? The upper part is visible, and the water resistance is much greater.

maybe it’s not a matter of visibility, but in the area where RCC can get for example. plus a wider choice of weapons than the submarines.

[edge]

Quote: kashtak

maybe it’s not a matter of visibility, but in the area where RCC can get for example. plus a wider choice of weapons than the submarines.

there is such a thing as hydroacoustics, anti-submarine torpedoes, mines ...... what a charm it will be when a rocket (air-surface) or lionfish is planted in the cabin, one hit and to the bottom of all

[kashtak]

Quote: hert

there is such a thing as hydroacoustics, anti-submarine torpedoes, mines ...... what a charm it will be when a rocket (air-surface) or lionfish is planted in the cabin, one hit and to the bottom of all

I am a teapot, therefore, I write perhaps. Compare the area of ​​the side and superstructures of the surface ship and the same at its superstructure which is not visible to all. the probability of hitting is likely to fall similarly. that’s the reason. RCC accuracy is not at all absolute. if it does get it, then how do you yourself evaluate that it’s more dangerous to get to the top of the superstructure or to the side. as for anti-submarine and universal weapons, the range of torpedoes is several (up to 10 times) lower than that of anti-ship missiles. this is the second reason. if the RCC gets on board, then the chances of any are few. battle is not a drill where inert warhead simulators are used.

[abrakadabre]

there is such a thing as hydroacoustics, anti-submarine torpedoes, mines ...... what a charm it will be when a rocket (air-surface) or lionfish is planted in the cabin, one hit and to the bottom of all

And there is such a charm as a water hammer. For example, a torpedo or a mine does not have to bump into the side. Sometimes it is much more profitable to dive under the bottom and flop. So it is here. RCC does not necessarily hit the side that is sunk to too shallow depth. It’s enough to jerk in a certain close neighborhood.

[edge]

Quote: BlackMokona

What's the point?

money the sea, and you can throw, especially since no one has such a topic ....

[Tolstoevsky]

poacher's dream

[MPK105]

Wow ... What technology has come to ...

[bouncyhunter]

Hi, hello! What do the Chinese have nowhere to put money?

[MPK105]

Great, Brother Dashing ... God save you for your birthday greetings ...
Danke shon, Partai Genossa !!!

[bouncyhunter]

Foolish! Happy Birthday to you, my friend! All that you wish for yourself, but more !!!

[MPK105]

Something like this ... DO NOT DISCUSS ...

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: MPK105

Something like this ... DO NOT DISCUSSION ..

Leh, and you weren’t put into the bathhouse because of me? If so, then do not be offended ... [media = http: //www.youtube.com/watch? V =
TE9qI-ExuIw

[Okolotochny]

Hi Kazachura !!! Well, with you! And what for you so many candles? Who is going to spy on? "Big Brother" is not asleep?

[yuriy55]

Quote: bouncyhunter

What do the Chinese have nowhere to put money?

This is more real ... It can be seen after the yuan was added to the list of reserve currencies - nowhere ...

[bouncyhunter]

Quote: yuriy55

It can be seen after the yuan was added to the list of reserve currencies - nowhere ...

There was this thought, but he doubted it. Since I do not think so alone, doubts have disappeared.

[Mountain shooter]

They already had a supersonic submarine. And an almost submersible ship - is it to sink quickly? Like, without a buoyancy margin? Bad concept.

[Logall]

It is unclear how they are going to use it.? Not up to the boat — not up to the ship! It will not succeed not over not a supply! Everyone should have their own purpose, and this is just a useless hybrid.

[avg-mgn]

As far as you can understand, the main goal of this concept is to provide max. secrecy on the march, no one talks about invisibility. The thought itself is old, if technologically embodied, perhaps there will be a thing (or will not) ...

[megajob]

Remember the Soviet ekranoplans !! The same is under-plane and under-ship, but the idea is gorgeous !!

[edge]

Quote: Logall

It will not succeed not over not a supply! Everyone should have their own purpose, and this is just a useless hybrid.

if only as a transport .... throw technology and people somewhere far

[Engineer]

Khrushchev would have shed a tear ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Engineer

Khrushchev would have shed a tear ...

And Dzhevetsky with Bubnov, too.
"Water-borne destroyer" and a turbine submarine with pilothouse-shaft-pipes.

[alstr]

This is actually a well-forgotten old decision. She even fought in Russian-Japanese 1905.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B5%D1%82%
D0%B0_(%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD
%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B0)

[mlad]

shortage, underfregate

[HEATHER]

Well, where are they soaping up?water resistance is much greater.Yes, it’s all the same. There’s a small crowd of one and a half million. What are we going to do? A. I know. And we will go to the North.

[edge]

either in sha or in australia ......

[Wedmak]

How will this submarine behave in a storm? And it’s not going to plunge properly and you won’t walk very much along the waves.

[roskot]

Something to me, "English scientists" say that there is nothing good in this idea.
Neither the submarine nor the ship.

[Dym71]

According to a Chinese expert on hydrodynamics

Apparently some kind of breakthrough among the Chinese was outlined in hydrodynamics, as he likes to write “Department” - “I smell it with genes”!
- Vital, no offense.
It’s a pity not to see “gridasov” for a long time - a specialist in fluid dynamics! For a couple of years I would explain the development prospects.
- "The nut of knowledge is hard, but still we are not used to retreat! It will help us to split it ..."
Gridasov, strike a couple of lines, for awareness, so to speak, and enlightenment ....

[atesterev]

Maybe what am I going to do? Then get ready ...
The fluid resistance to body movement consists of two main components:
1. Friction resistance.
2. Resistance to form.
When the body moves at the boundary of the media (water-air), one more component arises:
3. The wave resistance.
The higher the speed of the body, the greater the proportion of the last component in the total resistance, and the further the body from the interface, the smaller the fraction. For example, in submarines in the submerged position, this component is practically zero.
That's something like ...

[voyaka uh]

And what is the minimum depth so that the "wave impedance" is zero?
For example, the ship goes at a depth of 5 m (upper deck) and only a small cabin outside.
The “wave resistance” of the cutting can then be neglected.

[atesterev]

Although I am a shipbuilder, I don’t remember the specifics now. The only thing I can say is a relative characteristic, that is, the ratio of the depth of immersion to the linear size of the body.

[atesterev]

Most likely, if the width (diameter) of the body can be taken as a characteristic parameter, then at the immersion depth comparable with the width, the wave resistance should decrease by an order of magnitude. In other matters, this must be studied from the relevant literature.

[Maz]

Israelis, Sailors from you are like a ballerina to me.

[Dead duck]

Quote: BlackMokona

But on the pop-up add-on

they will make a superstructure in the form of a fishing schooner, let them "radar" as much as they want

[common man]

Quote: Deadush

they’ll make a superstructure in the form of a fishing schooner,

Then it’s better in the form of “Abramovich’s yacht”. or just yachts, sailing
.

[Romanenko]

This type of vessel, proposed by the states during the war for the delivery of goods under Lend-Lease, even wanted to make the hulls of reinforced concrete, but it didn’t seem to get to the point, and later, in the 80s, small-sized semi-submersible vessels used drug lords for a long time to deliver poison in the USA, the advantages, even when using the radar in the 80s, were very relevant for drug dealers, there were simply problems with the equipment, but I think the Chinese can transform and re-direct it in a new way

[san4es]

French concept DMX-25 (submarine frigate)

[Mentat]

Quote: voyaka uh

In general, technology is disruptive. The Chinese are starting to be "ahead of the rest."

Sorry, of course, but you wandered. These breakthrough technologies have struck two centuries ago.

[Vadim237]

Where is their super-fast submarine, with a double cavitator and a speed of 5000 km per hour.

[spravochnik]

And why the hell do you need such ... crap. Neither this, it will turn out a bad ship and a bad submarine. I don’t god a candle, I don’t damn the poker.

[Kerensky]

Quote: hert

Quote: Logall
It will not succeed not over not a supply! Everyone should have their own purpose, and this is just a useless hybrid.
if only as a transport .... throw technology and people somewhere far

As a tanker it will be good.

[Alexey Schetinin]

I don’t understand why the Chinese spend extra money. They can buy at least one submersible ship from Ukraine. They very well advertised it on the day of the Ukrainian Navy, when their lead ship began to sink under the eyes of all spectators. these are modern technologies. Not like ours.

[Anchonsha]

Well, we need to follow the latest in weapons and evaluate its quality in the confrontation with the enemy. And in the future, such a ship will not really help China. Only if you use it off the coast of your country

[Nukesmoke]

Wow, apparently not the “Ships and Shipping" of the future somehow got to China!