Military Review

China is once again trying to bring its Boomer submarines into the sea

120
China is once again trying to bring its Boomer submarines into the sea



Once again, China seems to have eliminated most of the flaws (if not all) on its latest SSBN (a nuclear submarine with ballistic missiles, also called the “Boomer”). A submarine of the 94 Type class has recently been spotted in something similar to sea trials.

China has long been seeking to send one of its SSBNs to combat patrols. The reason for this is that, to date, China has not been able to withdraw a single SSBN to combat patrols. America, Russia, Great Britain and France do it all the time. American SSBNs go on combat patrols with nuclear weapons on board and for half a century now they are ready to use it at any moment. What is happening with China? There, apparently, there was a combination of technical and political problems.

China has already created two generations of SSBNs. At the beginning of the 1980-s of the SSBN, the Type 92 was launched, but due to numerous technical problems, it never went into combat duty. She went out only on study trips in Chinese coastal waters. Only one such boat was built. In the last decade, the NPS Type 94 has appeared. In the West, it was believed that now Chinese SSBNs would be on alert, but this did not happen. It turned out that the SSBN Type 94 also had a lot of technical problems.

This sad saga began with the submarine Type 93, which looks like a thirty-year Soviet submarine of the class Victor III (project 671 "Pike"). The first submarine Type 93 was commissioned in the 2006 year. The submarine Type 93 became the basis when creating a SSBN Type 94, which looks the same as the Submarine Pike, only with a missile compartment. The idea of ​​restructuring a nuclear submarine by adding additional compartments to deploy ballistic missiles is an old trick first used in the US in the 1950-ies in the production of the first stories SSBN The Chinese seem to have done the same with their new shock submarines Type 93, creating a large SSBN Type 94 with a displacement of 9000 tons. The priority seems to be given to the construction of SSBNs Type 94 as having nuclear missiles capable of reaching the territory of the United States. This will give China more influence than some of the new shock submarines. The first submarine Type 94 was commissioned three years ago. But so far it has not gone into the sea, equipped with nuclear warheads.

Having sent the first two new 7.000 ton submarines to the sea, Type 93, China, apparently, was not happy with their work. Submarines Type 94 does not expect better results. The 93 Type submarine turned out to be too noisy, and the list of smaller defects was too long. It is not entirely clear how many submarines the Type 93 will be built, probably no more than three or six. Additional resources appear to be directed to the creation of the next class of submarine submarines, Type 95 and the next class of SSBNs Type 96.

Nuclear submarines Type 93 and Type 94 have been in development and construction for more than ten years. Work on the 94 Type began in the 1990's. For years, all that was known was that the Chinese had technical problems on their boats. Type 94 is a modern nuclear submarine created using technologies acquired in Russia, plus what was independently achieved by the Chinese in their previous efforts in the field of nuclear submarine shipbuilding. Despite the fact that the Chinese are experiencing difficult times when trying to create reliable and low-noise nuclear submarines, they are determined to acquire the necessary skills. And they do it by trial and error. American intelligence believes that China is now focused on the development of new submarines Type 96. Thus, the detection of submarines Type 94 on the sea trials, most likely, indicates the development of new technologies designed for the Type 96.

There are other problems. It seems difficult for the Chinese government to send SSBNs armed with twelve or more SLBMs (submarine ballistic missiles), each of which carries one or more nuclear warheads. Western countries carefully select officers and crews of their SSBNs and use a variety of codes and procedures (PAL, "Permissive Action Links" or a safety device of a nuclear weapon to prevent unauthorized use of nuclear weapons) in order to ensure that no madman could use any of these SLBMs. Russia also carefully selects crew members and uses PAL codes, and a special services representative is present on its SSBNs, whose main task is to ensure that the SLBMs are used strictly by the command of the government from Moscow. China has always much less trusted its armed forces when it came to nuclear weapons. China also lacks advanced PAL technologies like Western ones. All this is rarely even mentioned in the West, but it is very relevant for China. Therefore, when the SSBN Type 96 appears at the end of this decade, they will show whether the Chinese government was able to overcome the distrust of its crews of submarines carrying nuclear weapons.
Originator:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/articles/20130329.aspx
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. PISTOL
    PISTOL April 8 2013 08: 37 New
    +5
    Without Russia, they will not succeed; we are the best in the construction of nuclear submarines!
    1. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution April 8 2013 08: 58 New
      +5
      Not really, we also have flaws, like everyone else.
      1. Beck
        Beck April 8 2013 10: 28 New
        22
        I will repeat it. The future geopolitical rival of the Eurasian Economic Community, 10-15 years later, is China. And there is nothing to arm him.

        The West long ago imposed an embargo on the supply of modern types of weapons and military technology to China. The Kremlin did not block the sale of the Varyag to Kmtay, now China, having studied it, has planted 7 aircraft carriers at its shipyards. The Kremlin sold T-72 tanks to China, now the Chinese have their own more or less modern tank building. The Kremlin sold the Mig-29, Su-27 to China and created modern combat aircraft manufacturing in China. The Kremlin also promised to sell the Su-35. The beauty. This is so that later on the Chinese clones of the Su-35 to divert air defense forces and means from counteracting the old enemies of the United States and Japan. We don’t want to see further the hill.

        For the full kollekor and for the benefit of officials, the Kremlin only needs to not dispose of retreating submarines of the Typhoon type, and, by "friendship", sell one to China. The beauty will be indescribable when in five years 10 pieces of Chinese typhoons will be added to American submarines in the Pacific Ocean.
        1. djon3volta
          djon3volta April 8 2013 11: 23 New
          -6
          Quote: Beck
          The beauty will be indescribable when in five years 10 pieces of Chinese typhoons will be added to American submarines in the Pacific Ocean.

          with such problems that are described in the article, given that their politicians trust the military less than the Russians, this will happen no earlier than 2030-35.
          in general, the Kremlin’s foresight for China must be taken from far, Stalin began to supply them with weapons, and I think you can trust Stalin’s foresight.
          1. Beck
            Beck April 8 2013 11: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: djon3volta
            with such problems that are described in the article, given that their politicians trust the military less than the Russians, this will happen no earlier than 2030-35.


            Well, of course, for 5 years I blurted out in the heat of heat. So this is for clarity. But in 15 years, no one in the Pacific will need Chinese nuclear submarines.
          2. nnz226
            nnz226 April 8 2013 12: 47 New
            +5
            To the Typhoons (nuclear submarine ave. 941 Shark) to China, as from Beijing to Moscow in a plastusky way!
            1. Beck
              Beck April 8 2013 13: 05 New
              +4
              Quote: nnz226
              To the Typhoons (nuclear submarine ave. 941 Shark) to China, as from Beijing to Moscow in a plastusky way!


              But who says right now. The Kremlin wouldn’t sell their merchandise to China, even if only one, this would be enough for the Chinese.
        2. Tektor
          Tektor April 8 2013 12: 23 New
          -1
          "Eurasian geopolitical rival, in 10-15 years, this is China"- it seems to me that after 100 years, at least.
          "China, having studied it, planted 7 aircraft carriers at its shipyards."- an aircraft carrier without airplanes is a big bucket, a good target. And no one in the world has good aircraft for aircraft carriers yet ... The usual Fu15 is superior in its capabilities to an order of magnitude super-duper hornets. The aircraft carrier is good against the Papuan. Its importance is now striving for zero due to advances in rocket science and underwater hunters ...
          Su-35 is all the same good old Su27. Commercial, marketing move of the dry - changed the location of the blocks and get a new model ... Mikoyanovtsy are indignant: they are not so much overgrown as to assign a new index to each upgrade.
          1. Beck
            Beck April 8 2013 12: 56 New
            +4
            Quote: Tektor
            "the geopolitical rival of the Eurasian Economic Community, 10-15 years later, is China" - it seems to me that in 100 years, a minimum.


            You somehow do not follow the events and the development of technology.

            So that in a hundred years, China would become a leader in the economy, everyone would like that. But these are pink dreams. China is now the second economy in the world and not far from the USA.

            Quote: Tektor
            "China, having studied it, planted 7 aircraft carriers at its shipyards." - an aircraft carrier without airplanes - a big bucket, a good target


            More recently, there was an article on the site that the Chinese have created, on the basis of Su, their clone of a carrier-based fighter and are now planting it on their aircraft carrier (Varyag). When 7 aircraft carriers of China come off the slipways. China drove through Varyag (essentially a training ship) a lot of pilots and will be already prepared crews.

            Quote: Tektor
            And no one in the world has good aircraft for aircraft carriers yet


            Sorry, but what kind of crap did you drive away. You want to immediately put a plane from the fiction onto the deck. What kind of planes there are. Some more meet the requirements, others less.
        3. StolzSS
          StolzSS April 8 2013 15: 37 New
          0
          China horseradish will pull the construction of 10 typhoon boats. It's not just expensive, it's fantastically expensive; they are titanium and hefty in China, just titanium is not enough for this ...
          1. politruk419
            politruk419 April 9 2013 07: 38 New
            +2
            Typhoon titanium? My friend, urgently in Google.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr April 10 2013 21: 24 New
              +1
              Quote: politruk419
              Typhoon titanium? My friend, urgently in Google.

              "....... Durable hulls are made of titanium alloys, lightweight - steel, covered with non-resonant anti-radar and soundproof rubber coating with a total weight of 800 tons [24]. According to American experts, durable boat hulls are also equipped with soundproof coatings .... . "
              Information from Wiki http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9FD0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%
              B5_%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B0_941
              _%C2%AB%D0%90%D0%BA%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B0%C2%BB

              (at the end of the article links where everything came from)
        4. neri73-r
          neri73-r April 8 2013 21: 26 New
          0
          The West long ago imposed an embargo on the supply of modern types of weapons and military technology to China.


          The West does not allow to develop a single country in the world, fearing competition !!!!! Hence this cartoon about global warming (to block development under a convenient pretext - the lack of environmentally friendly production), hence the ban on peaceful atom (energy security), since this is all the independence of the nation from Anglo-Saxons and others like them !!!
          1. Beck
            Beck April 9 2013 18: 53 New
            -1
            Quote: neri73-r
            The West does not allow to develop a single country in the world, fearing competition !!!!!


            So what? Reptiles amers do not allow anyone to develop. And now let China arm it. They will be sold to them by aircraft carriers, F-35s, Abrams, the latest developments in military technology. So who will it come out first sideways? It will come to us. Amer in the second turn will come sideways, but they don’t want the second stage either, therefore they don’t sell anything. And the Kremlin chased for money, although it knows that sideways, first of all, we will get it.
        5. Nitup
          Nitup April 8 2013 21: 59 New
          0
          Listen, dear geopolitics, our geopolitical rivals are well known to us. These are, first of all, the USA and Great Britain. And as long as these states exist, they will be our number one geopolitical rivals. Enmity with Russia is not beneficial for China. The fact that China is trying to copy weapons and is actively arming itself does not mean that it is going to fight with Russia. This suggests that the Chinese want to remain a sovereign state-in the future. All this hysteria about a possible war between Russia and China was raised by the Anglo-Saxons, so that people would perceive China as an aggressor. And the blue dream of the Anglo-Saxons is to quarrel Russia with China in order to weaken the two countries as a result of the war and, like in the Second World War, begin to support one side against the other, and then attack the second country and become the winner. This is your old tactics: to fight with the wrong hands. And I am not surprised that you, a comrade from the USA, write about supposedly hostile China.
        6. Nitup
          Nitup April 8 2013 22: 02 New
          0
          Listen, dear geopolitics, our geopolitical rivals are well known to us. These are, first of all, the USA and Great Britain. And as long as these states exist, they will be our number one geopolitical rivals. Enmity with Russia is not beneficial for China. The fact that China is trying to copy weapons and is actively arming itself does not mean that it is going to fight with Russia. This suggests that the Chinese want to remain a sovereign state-in the future. All this hysteria about a possible war between Russia and China was raised by the Anglo-Saxons, so that people would perceive China as an aggressor. And the blue dream of the Anglo-Saxons is to quarrel Russia with China in order to weaken the two countries as a result of the war and, like in the Second World War, begin to support one side against the other, and then attack the second country and become the winner. This is your old tactics: to fight with the wrong hands. And I am not surprised that you, a comrade from the USA, write about supposedly hostile China.
      2. Sirocco
        Sirocco April 8 2013 13: 26 New
        +6
        By the way, these problems are not from a joke. When the question of why the boat cannot give 30 knots in the underwater position was answered, the sailors have flippers flying laughing Perhaps China has encountered a similar problem)))
      3. rolik
        rolik April 8 2013 15: 44 New
        +6
        Quote: Phantom Revolution
        we also have flaws, like everyone else.

        We have disadvantages an order of magnitude smaller than others, now it has become. On Shumkov pulled themselves up on the acoustics too. The latest products are much better than mattresses and British. Well, the Chinese good luck in copying our boats. Of course, they copied it clumsily, more like an option for walking by land (everything is rectangular and square. Or maybe they stepped on the technology of Stealth, this is now fashionable. But Stealth in underwater mode requires a little different than chopped contours. But I think it will go. Although a roar across the ocean will stand.
    2. vadimus
      vadimus April 8 2013 11: 28 New
      +1
      A remake of the song "Black Boomer" in the Chinese manner ...
    3. Krilion
      Krilion April 8 2013 16: 45 New
      +4
      Quote: GUN
      Without Russia, they will not succeed; we are the best in the construction of nuclear submarines!


      it’s not enough to build a boat ... the immeasurable part of the work also relates to the creation of appropriate weapons .. and I can only imagine what happens when the whalers start trying to fire a rocket from this SSBN ... the boat will surely fall apart to the horseradish and the rocket will not explode leaving the aquatic environment ...
    4. stjrm
      stjrm April 10 2013 17: 51 New
      0
      The Americans are not very bad, even very good submarines.
  2. Romn
    Romn April 8 2013 08: 47 New
    16
    China is certainly an ally, but it would be necessary to help him so that his nuclear submarines would NOT go on combat duty for longer! smile
    1. INTER
      INTER April 8 2013 09: 07 New
      +2
      I agree, do not teach and instruct yourself will cost more!
      1. Gari
        Gari April 8 2013 10: 43 New
        +1
        Black "Boomer" on combat patrol.
    2. I think so
      I think so April 9 2013 00: 42 New
      0
      Nonsense You say-Chinese submarines are in no way dangerous to Russia. They are dangerous ONLY for the USA. China has a border with Russia and in order to threaten it with SUFFICIENT overland capabilities, China does not need nuclear submarines against Russia. And your concern about China is the echoes of a long-established US company to COLLECT Russia and China. Almost all the “Russian” media are doing this now and you are an involuntary victim of this company ...
  3. Andrey57
    Andrey57 April 8 2013 08: 59 New
    +3
    In the construction of the nuclear submarine, let China do everything itself, we are so calmer hi
  4. amp
    amp April 8 2013 09: 09 New
    -10
    So the Chinese army is a paper tiger. The best airplanes are the analogues of our instant 21, instant 23, tanks are also old .... and now the submarines have not yet learned how to do it. The only thing that inspires respect is the potential size of their infantry. But this is precisely the infantry in the literal sense of the word, since China does not have armored personnel carriers or even just trucks for this infantry.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 09: 13 New
      11
      Quote: amp
      So the Chinese army is a paper tiger. The best airplanes are analogues of our instant 21, instant 23,

      Dear, you are very far behind reality. In China, there are enough new aircraft, including the Su-27 and Su-30, now they are developing their own 5 generations.
      Quote: amp
      tanks are also old

      The situation with tanks is the same; how many China has put into service in recent years is not known, but many!
      Quote: amp
      But this is precisely the infantry in the literal sense of the word, since China does not have armored personnel carriers or even just trucks for this infantry.

      it's just funny, I don’t even see the point of answering. Wake up and look in the yard 2013 hi
      1. amp
        amp April 8 2013 09: 35 New
        -1
        Well, of course, they did, do not tell tales. Even in moment 23 they don’t have much, the main fleet of aircraft they have analogues in moment 21 and even moment 18. Their tanks have junk and junk. Fully Soviet T 56.
        As for motorized infantry, armored vehicles even for the peacetime army are not enough, not to mention the fact that all mobilized millions are put on armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. The motor transport is so small that a significant part of their divisions are actually stationary.
        The only thing that inspires respect is a large number of air defense systems, among which there are a lot of C 300 analogues.
        1. Professor
          April 8 2013 09: 39 New
          +5
          Well, of course, they did, do not tell tales.

          You would give us figures on the composition of the PLA then and the dispute would be a pre-issue.
          1. amp
            amp April 8 2013 09: 53 New
            0
            Well, according to the BCC of China.
            http://www.modernarmy.ru/article/118
            Su 27 and Su 30 are imports from Russia, and not the products of the Chinese defense industry at all.
            1. Bronis
              Bronis April 8 2013 10: 21 New
              +3
              Well, the Chinese military-industrial complex produces quite a few fighters of its own design. J-10 - about 200 pcs. Joint FC-1 also started. In the BTA and helicopter industry - there are also shifts. They also try to produce "drying" in series, ignoring the rights of the Russian Federation. Not everything is smooth, but they work in this direction ...
              In the Air Force, their main problem is engines (more precisely, the accompanying production of alloys and some component base). But they only produce quite a lot of equipment, maybe not the best, but in series. And this is a plus to them. It is better to have 200 TTX-medium fighters than the best 20 and nothing more. And better in both proportions. This is what they are trying to achieve. They have every chance. The question is the timing of the implementation of plans ...
              1. Gari
                Gari April 8 2013 10: 51 New
                +2
                And someone noticed at the end:
                China has always had far less confidence in its armed forces when it comes to nuclear weapons. China also lacks advanced PAL technologies like Western ones. All this is even rarely mentioned in the West, but it is very important for China. Therefore, when the Type 96 SSBNs appear at the end of this decade, they will show whether the Chinese government was able to overcome the distrust of its crews of nuclear submarines.
                If they themselves do not trust their armed forces with nuclear weapons, what about us?
                1. Bronis
                  Bronis April 8 2013 11: 25 New
                  +2
                  This distrust has its historical background from the time of the Civil War. They have a peculiar system of submission to the PLA - and state. council and party advice. In recent years, 20 the composition of both tips is identical. But before this was not always the case, and the leadership often competed for power (although not openly). And who the army would go for - the question ... “Legs” - is from here, but this distrust should not be exaggerated. Most likely, this is an attentive attitude to the potential opportunity. The same questions were posed when creating strategic nuclear forces in the USSR and the USA. It's just that our methods have long been developed. They probably don’t have to the end (but who knows).
                2. Ascetic
                  Ascetic April 8 2013 11: 34 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Gari
                  Therefore, when the Type 96 SSBNs appear at the end of this decade, they will show whether the Chinese government was able to overcome the distrust of its crews of nuclear submarines.
                  If they themselves do not trust their armed forces with nuclear weapons, what about us?


                  About distrust of military personnel is just speculation. In fact, if we talk about strategic SSBNs, then the main problem for the Chinese with the Juilan-2 missile, which has still not been brought to mind. It successfully passed only throw tests. Further, the Chinese faced technical difficulties in adapting this missile to the Qin carrier type 94. They also have problems with multipurpose submarines, there are a whole range of problems (limited capabilities of communication systems, control efficiency, etc.). e.) not giving them the opportunity to carry out the tasks of ocean patrolling and deterring the enemy’s ASG and nuclear submarines, for which these boats are intended. Well and of course the performance characteristics of the boats, speed. maneuverability. noise and stuff remain a mystery because no one saw them in " Abot "In general, the potential of strategic nuclear forces in China is negligible in fact a technological gap reaches approximately 20 years if not bolee.Estestvenno compared with the US and Russia.
                  1. Ascetic
                    Ascetic April 8 2013 11: 35 New
                    +7
                    Given the relatively small size of China’s nuclear potential and the low accuracy of Chinese missiles, the Chinese strategic nuclear forces are incapable of delivering a preemptive strike against countries with comparable nuclear capabilities, and even more so, to countries that exceed them.
                    Finally, it must be said that now in the conditions of a virtually unspoken strategic alliance between Russia and China, China is no longer a danger to Russia, but on the contrary, its strategic nuclear forces are complemented by the Russian strategic nuclear forces in the Far East, actually providing our rear. For the United States and the West as a whole, this is extremely bad news: the strategic alliance of the two giant countries that managed to pit each other for almost the entire XNUMXth century has now become a reality and their nuclear weapons complement and strengthen each other.
                    Of course, Russia needs to take into account that any alliances can be broken and in certain circumstances, China can again become an enemy of Russia, especially in the case of its radical weakening, as it was during the time of Yeltsin. But in the foreseeable future this most likely will not happen and we can rely on the combat power of the Chinese strategic nuclear forces.
                    By the way, in April 2012, India successfully tested its first Agni-5 long-range missile (Agni translated from Hindi for Fire) with a launch range of 5000 km and capable of carrying a warhead weighing 1,5 tons. This missile in range covers the entire territory of China. Thus, India becomes an additional factor balancing the ambitions and opportunities of China. Now, undoubtedly, part of its medium-range missiles, China will be forced to reorient to the south-west - to India. For Russia, India is a longtime ally and does not have a single interstate contradiction with us.

                    link
                    And therefore, the main task of Western ideologists and their apologists for Internet fighters in every possible way to inflate in Russia the image of China as the main enemy.

                    On the real state of China's strategic nuclear forces and the prospects for their development, it is very intelligible and see the video in detail
                    Military expert Konstantin Makienko and senior researcher at the Institute of the Far East of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vasily Kashin about the Chinese army and the Chinese Strategic Missile Forces.

                  2. Gari
                    Gari April 8 2013 12: 37 New
                    0
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    About distrust of l / s is just speculation


                    The armed forces of China should be in full combat readiness to ensure victory in any war, said Secretary General of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the country Xi Jinping.
                    Xi Jinping noted that the soldiers must show "absolute loyalty to the party" and maintain their "impeccability and reliability"

                    11.03.2013
                  3. rolik
                    rolik April 8 2013 16: 07 New
                    0
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    technological lag reaches about 20 years if not more

                    I can’t say for aviation exactly how many years they are behind. But the boats are 30-40 years behind, and this is provided that we will stand still. But that certainly, in any case now, will not wait.
                3. Gemar
                  Gemar April 8 2013 12: 46 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Gari
                  China has always had far less confidence in its armed forces when it comes to nuclear weapons.

                  They have too many fanatics! Many of the Chinese people think that their country is the largest in territory, and people with higher education think it! Many believe that football and an electric guitar were also invented in China. At first, when I first arrived in China, I tried to prove that they were wrong, however, it turned out to be a dead number!
                  Do you think they only copy the Su-27 \ 30 and T-72 \ 90 ??? NO! They even copy foreign songs in their own way! Try to prove to them later that 99% is borrowed from the underdeveloped barbarians with whom they consider us.
                  In addition, they are conducting very serious propaganda of the superiority of the Han Chinese to other nations. I lived in a hotel in Yiwu, so there were weekly lessons for businessmen "deception of foreigners." I DO NOT EXPLOIT! The Chinese paid money to be taught meannesses!
                  Magazines and television are constantly brainwashing the Chinese on the subject of "how cursed foreigners will soon be defeated by our UNBEATABLE Amria, who are MILLIAR Plusminus."
                  And, when the next piece of news comes up, you don’t want anyone to shy away from the United States (and now across the Russian Federation, given the propaganda about “temporarily lost territories, right up to the Urals) ???” the idea constantly pops up on the forums if we are such strong Han Chinese, why not deliver a preemptive strike on Western provocateurs?
                  Therefore, it turns out that
                  China has always had far less confidence in its armed forces when it comes to nuclear weapons.
                  1. Bronis
                    Bronis April 8 2013 13: 41 New
                    +8
                    Had to communicate with Han. And not the most stupid and uneducated. You are right, unfortunately. In the best case, they call us "younger brothers" (when we communicate, but the chill feels) - they are very ancient with a distinctive culture. Why then "And the dawns here are quiet" to shoot in the form of a series on the 30 series.
                    Of course, not all Chinese think so, but the fact that all this has been elevated to the rank of state policy is true. But we do not need to be indignant at this, and draw conclusions and take measures - to cover emigration, first of all. We may well coexist peacefully and even be allies. You just need to think more about yourself and remind you where the resources come from. If it is possible to somehow stabilize demography, strengthen the economy and the armed forces, the Far East and Siberia will not shine on them. And given that India will breathe him in the back of the head (in the literal sense - geography) - we can be intermediaries. While Indy-Rus Bhai-Bhai ... I repeat, will the Far East and Siberia be Chinese - depends mainly on us, not China ...
                    1. Gemar
                      Gemar April 8 2013 13: 50 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Bronis
                      I repeat, whether the Far East and Siberia will be Chinese - depends mainly on us, not China ...

                      good + + +
                    2. Uncle
                      Uncle April 8 2013 20: 23 New
                      0
                      Quote: Bronis
                      I repeat, whether the Far East and Siberia will be Chinese - depends mainly on us, not China ...

                      In ultra-Orthodox circles, they are primarily afraid of the invasion of China, no one takes America seriously ....
                      1. Bronis
                        Bronis April 8 2013 21: 56 New
                        +3
                        In ultra-Orthodox circles, they are primarily afraid of the invasion of China, no one takes America seriously

                        Yes, and Christ with them ...
                        I'm generally ultra-Orthodox (and generally ultra-irreconcilably anyone) more than the Chinese are afraid smile . Everything should be moderate. Well guys, well, don’t have to beat any "non-traditional" comrades in the name of the Lord. That is what they need. And many are also pleased ... but this is a lyrical digression from the topic.
              2. Denis
                Denis April 9 2013 01: 46 New
                +1
                Quote: Bronis
                In the air force, their main problem is engines

                According to reports, at least five prototypes of the J-10 flew with WS-10 engines, and as a minimum, the AL-10FN was already installed on the J-31 as a minimum. All mass-produced vehicles are equipped with Salyut engines, and they claim that China has already purchased more than 200 engines AL-31FN-World Aviation
                So take big steps towards, copy!
            2. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 10: 22 New
              0
              Quote: amp
              Su 27 and Su 30 are imports from Russia, and not the products of the Chinese defense industry at all.

              What we supplied, we delivered! The site already had a sufficient number of articles on the Chinese Air Force, with all possible details. And about the infantry too
              1. amp
                amp April 8 2013 11: 22 New
                -4
                Nevertheless, the Russian Air Force is stronger, not to mention the US Air Force.
                they intend to buy thousands of copies of our twigs and dryers in thousands, but we also seem to intend to buy su 35 for example. As for the T 50, mass production is scheduled for 2015, and according to some reports, small-scale production is already in 2013. According to Apple, I think everything is clear to everyone.
                So my opinion is still the same - their army is strong mainly in large reserve and that’s all. In the event of a clash of peacetime armies, the history of Damascus would be repeated.
                1. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 11: 33 New
                  +2
                  Quote: amp
                  they intend to buy thousands of copies of our twigs and dryers

                  They already produce them in full and put into service!
                  Quote: amp
                  but we kind of also intend to buy su 35 for example

                  48 aircraft wink
                  Quote: amp
                  As for the T 50, mass production is scheduled for 2015, and according to some reports, small-scale production is already in 2013.

                  postponed to 2016 and there is no small-scale production.
                  Quote: amp
                  In the event of a clash of peacetime armies, the history of Damascus would be repeated.

                  in the event of a collision, what forces stand in the way of the Chinese army? The road is open, the sign remained the story Great.
                  1. leon-iv
                    leon-iv April 8 2013 11: 55 New
                    -1
                    They already produce them in full and put into service!
                    Do not indulge in cypheries
                    48 aircraft
                    The KO is hinting that this is the first contract that with a 147% probability will be repeated with an increase in purchases.
                    postponed to 2016 and there is no small-scale production.
                    EMNIP recently refuted it.
                    in the event of a collision, what forces stand in the way of the Chinese army? The road is open, the sign remained the story Great.
                    And in an hour they receive it in the camp of the strategic nuclear forces?
                    1. Alexander Romanov
                      Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 12: 46 New
                      +1
                      Quote: leon-iv
                      Do not indulge in cypheries

                      Yes, here's the hell to whom the Chinese will tell. How much and what they have adopted, but not enough. When it comes to the VAF, it has infa.
                      Quote: leon-iv
                      KO is hinting this is the first contract which with a probability of 147% will be repeated with an increase in purchases

                      Here's how to put it and talk. It's about the present! What will happen there later and what will be signed - let's see.
                      Quote: leon-iv
                      And in an hour they receive it in the camp of the strategic nuclear forces?

                      not necessary, but the subscriber gives the figures of our power with the repetition of Damansky.
                      1. leon-iv
                        leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 54 New
                        +1
                        VAF will come, he has infa.

                        Well then I’ll throw a bit the best Air Force pilots Fly on our cars that deign))
                        . It's about the present! What will happen there later and what will be signed - let's see.

                        Well, the Chinese have 100500 projections there too
                        but the subscriber gives the figures of our power with the repetition of Damansky.

                        What power is there ??? IMHO the fierce file of our command and the heroism of the border guards.
                    2. Uncle
                      Uncle April 8 2013 20: 27 New
                      0
                      Quote: leon-iv
                      The road is open, the sign remained the story Great.
                      And in an hour they receive it in the camp of the strategic nuclear forces?

                      So many of them will leak through the border that YU will be on Russian territory.
                  2. antiaircrafter
                    antiaircrafter April 8 2013 18: 01 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    What forces stand in the way of the Chinese army?

                    Frost, impassability, hype and space.
            3. Professor
              April 8 2013 10: 41 New
              +2
              Well, according to the BCC of China

              Okay. The ground units of the PLA have over 10 thousand light tanks,
              7000 MBT in 11 teams, I won’t even write about BMPs and armored personnel carriers.

              Absolutely all the Air Force have the ability to underground ...
              1. leon-iv
                leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 01 New
                0
                Land units of the PLA have more than 10 thousand light tanks
                Most of which Type62 - Junk
                7000 MBT
                why cheat norot so
                ok 2700 type 95 and ok 800 type 99
                Absolutely all the Air Force have the ability to underground ...
                a reference you will not pamper for more like a horror story. Or is it just to the border districts.
                1. Professor
                  April 8 2013 12: 16 New
                  +4
                  Most of which Type62 - Junk

                  Part was modernized, and the remaining trash is still tanks, and not as some here claim that the Chinese are walking on foot.

                  a reference you will not pamper for more like a horror story. Or is it just to the border districts.

                  Do you know me the first day? wink
                  link: Assessment of the underground bases of the Chinese Air Force (Part 1)



                  http://topwar.ru/11683-ocenka-vozmozhnostey-podzemnogo-bazirovaniya-vvs-kitaya-c
                  hast-4.html
                  1. leon-iv
                    leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 22 New
                    +2
                    but not as some here claim that the Chinese are walking on foot.
                    gyhy well then you can safely consider all our T-55/62
                    Do you know me the first day?
                    Aah, I see. A relative for a very long time, he engineered in the north in the USSR. They also dabbled in shelters (caponiers) but refused. The problem was that it was impossible to shelter different types of aircraft. Stupidly did not fit (when there was a transition from 3-4 generation).
                    1. Professor
                      April 8 2013 12: 34 New
                      0
                      So there everything is much more serious, they dug in the mountains a bunch of tons ...
                      1. leon-iv
                        leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 44 New
                        0
                        So there everything is much more serious, they rummaged in the mountains heaps of tonelli ...

                        It is not so simple. Any infrastructure is prepared for a specific type of aircraft. And now I’m not ready to say about whether all these shelters can be used now. For new aircraft.
                      2. Professor
                        April 8 2013 12: 58 New
                        0
                        For new aircraft.

                        I understand that the article is long, consists of 5 parts, but it is worth it to read it. There is also about new aircraft. In Russia they can be smoked out of holes only by nuclear weapons, and even after the destruction of not weak Chinese air defense.
                      3. leon-iv
                        leon-iv April 8 2013 13: 04 New
                        0
                        In Russia they can be smoked out of holes only by nuclear weapons, and even after the destruction of not weak Chinese air defense.

                        Yes, I read it. It turns out that they have infrastructure only in places of basing.
                      4. Professor
                        April 8 2013 13: 15 New
                        0
                        It turns out that they have infrastructure only in places of basing.

                        At least in places of basing.
                        The real combat readiness of the PLA remains the greatest mystery.
                      5. leon-iv
                        leon-iv April 8 2013 13: 27 New
                        +1
                        The real combat readiness of the PLA remains the greatest mystery.

                        Well, as Taiwan will try to squeeze there and see.
                  2. leon-iv
                    leon-iv April 8 2013 13: 16 New
                    +1
                    Thanks prof sa ssyklu. Sent to a friend from the engineering troops. Let him read.
                  3. antiaircrafter
                    antiaircrafter April 8 2013 18: 06 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Professor
                    they can be smoked out of holes only by nuclear weapons

                    Well, why? You can bury it there.
                  4. Professor
                    April 8 2013 20: 34 New
                    +1
                    The use of nuclear weapons is not seriously considered, then kirdyk everything.
          2. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 12: 49 New
            +2
            Quote: leon-iv
            Aah, I see. A relative for a very long time, he engineered in the north in the USSR. They also dabbled in shelters (caponiers) but refused. The problem was that it was impossible to shelter different types of aircraft. Stupidly did not fit (when there was a transition from 3-4 generation)

            In vain you are so, the professor is right. The size of the Chinese tunnels is terrifying, even to the Pentagon. They dug so much that they put their whole billion and the place remains
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 55 New
              -1
              they will put their whole billion and the place will remain

              Here is what is interesting dumps do not meet the declared. It was about super-underground rocket factories.
  • Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt April 8 2013 09: 43 New
    +3
    and even an instant 18. Their tanks have junk and junk. Fully Soviet T 56


    I only know m 54 \ 55 and instant 17 and instant 19.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 10: 25 New
      +1
      Quote: Grishka100watt
      I only know m 54 \ 55 and instant 17 and instant 19.

      By air hi
      China has launched mass production of the J-10, J-11 and FC-1 fighters, which are copies of the Russian Su-27/30 and MiG-29, and intends to build and sell at least 1200 combat vehicles in the near future, at prices lower than the “originals” ". This was not news for the Russian defense industry: back in 2003, China refused to renew its Su-27SK production license and set about creating its own copy machine.
      1. fzr1000
        fzr1000 April 8 2013 13: 35 New
        0
        But they’re buying motors for “dryers”. And after all, the Chinese appeared on Saturn in 1992. And what about the engine since? But nothing.
        In general, China has always had problems with metals and metalworking. Including because the raw materials themselves are worse from the beginning, so they have to "save".
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus April 8 2013 17: 10 New
          0
          Quote: fzr1000
          But they’re buying motors for “dryers”

          Buying a replacement for the old Su-27. Chinese engines are on the J-11B. The situation with the J-10B is not clear
          Quote: fzr1000
          And what about the engine since? But nothing.

          2 years ago, the resource was 300 hours.
          1. fzr1000
            fzr1000 April 8 2013 19: 21 New
            0
            500 hours now, nothing more.
          2. fzr1000
            fzr1000 April 8 2013 19: 21 New
            0
            500 hours now, nothing more.
          3. fzr1000
            fzr1000 April 8 2013 19: 23 New
            0
            500 hours now, nothing more.
          4. fzr1000
            fzr1000 April 8 2013 19: 23 New
            0
            500 hours now, nothing more.
        2. gispanec
          gispanec April 8 2013 19: 23 New
          0
          Quote: fzr1000
          Including because the raw materials themselves are worse from the beginning, so they have to "save".

          strange .... we’ve been selling them our scrap metal for 10 years ...... I know and they’re supplying ore to them ...... so they have our RAW MATERIAL !!!
          1. fzr1000
            fzr1000 April 9 2013 07: 42 New
            0
            And for some reason, I took manganese and magnesium and something else (zinc in my opinion) from China in the 90s, because they turned out to be cheaper. There still then, I don’t know how it is now, and with metallurgical technology, not everything was in order either. Maybe what has changed?
  • Canep
    Canep April 8 2013 12: 12 New
    0
    Quote: amp
    Well, of course, they did, do not tell tales. Even in moment 23 they don’t have much, the main fleet of aircraft they have analogues in moment 21 and even moment 18. Their tanks have junk and junk. Fully Soviet T 56.

    Mig-18 and T-56 - this is complete nonsense, well, there are no such. Now imagine - you're in the trenches and you’re junk rushing at type 59. I think you’ll no matter what’s going to be junk rushing at you or the T-90. And by the way, in Xinjiang Uygur IN the PLA T-80 were new. I in 1996 served in the 68th MSD.
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus April 8 2013 16: 43 New
    0
    Quote: amp
    Well, of course, they did, do not tell tales. Even in moment 23 they don’t have much, the main fleet of aircraft they have analogues in moment 21 and even moment 18. Their tanks have junk and junk. Fully Soviet T 56.

    Sorry dear, but before talking about the PLA, you would at least recognize the name of military equipment.
    What is the Mig-18 and T-56?
  • djon3volta
    djon3volta April 8 2013 11: 26 New
    +1
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Now they are developing their own 5 generations.

    and when will they create their own strategic bomber? without the help of Russia, and their own in the design bureau from scratch.? wassat
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov April 8 2013 11: 35 New
      -1
      Quote: djon3volta
      and when will they create a strategic bomber of their own?

      China is preparing an analogue of the Su-34
      2
      vpk-news.ru - China is developing a tactical bomber J-17 ("Jian-17"), close in configuration to the Russian attack aircraft Su-34.

      China will not rust, given how quickly they create everything. You can continue to soar in the clouds.
      1. djon3volta
        djon3volta April 8 2013 13: 13 New
        0
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        China will not rust, given how quickly they all create

        I don’t argue, they can organize an external case in a month. One will look one from a distance .. and what about the stuffing? they have a lot of things, but there isn’t the main thing - technologies and outstanding designers and engineers. The Russian school of our engineers and designers is recognized It is considered the best all over the world! because it was created before the 1917 revolution. Here, the practice is 100 years old. And what school does China have? How much practice?
  • fzr1000
    fzr1000 April 8 2013 12: 42 New
    0
    So far, China does not have an aircraft engine similar to 117 C, and it will not be 5 years old. Until ... until they find the formula of a heat-resistant alloy from which turbine blades are made.
  • Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk April 8 2013 09: 18 New
    -1
    An armed conflict with the PRC is more real than with the United States, and these submarines are detrimental to our country's defense capabilities.
    1. Grishka100watt
      Grishka100watt April 8 2013 09: 27 New
      +7
      Armed conflict with China is less real than from the United States. China does not need war, it has something to lose. And the United States, if it goes on like this, there is nothing to lose except the fleet, which will already rot.

      I will say it differently: if it is calm, then Russia and China will develop, and the United States will bend.
      1. Romn
        Romn April 8 2013 10: 00 New
        +5
        I’m afraid after a couple of decades of quiet development between Russia and China, they will aggressively take over the Far East and then we will talk about disconnection and autonomy, which they are now doing quietly. No matter how pragmatic it sounds, it’s better to strangle the United States with your hands and then carefully destroy China, as they say. Divide and conquer. Let it be better to have several puppet provinces of China, otherwise if there is no enemy No. 1 of the United States left, Russia will remain the only rival and obstacle to greatness, but this is a completely different story ...
        1. Grishka100watt
          Grishka100watt April 8 2013 10: 29 New
          +7
          I put a plus for pragmatism. However, I do not agree about separation and autonomy. It will not be this. I do not see mechanisms for this. If Russia grows stronger, we will be able to drive anyone from anywhere (within the country), if necessary. If the Chinese do not have passports, then they can be sent, if so, then they are already citizens of Russia, and what kind of separatism can there be? The criminal article is all.


          Stop the panic on the ship.
          1. Romn
            Romn April 8 2013 10: 36 New
            +1
            There is no panic, just my vision, you are certainly right, but still partly, your vision is more optimistic! And I see the mechanisms by the way, they have a hot topic of persecution of the Muslim minority, there are also some autonomies like Taiwan and Tibet, the main policy in the country is based on intimidation, repression, etc., as at the very beginning of the formation of the Soviet Union, and then in every country there are always people who want to chop off a piece of power, and China is far from an exception. In general, let there certainly be world peace, but if we manage to crack down on the United States, we definitely do not need strong China at hand! smile
            1. Grishka100watt
              Grishka100watt April 8 2013 11: 04 New
              0
              I think that now we are potential allies with the common goal of bringing down the United States. And then, of course - yes, it will be necessary on our part, at least, to have military parity! No one talks about world peace and pink ponies wink

              Now the policy of the United States inside Russia is aimed at creating a negative opinion about China. We are intimidated and prevented from thinking, it needs to be filtered and really approach things. Nothing, people have not forgotten how to think, understanding will come.
          2. Uncle
            Uncle April 8 2013 20: 36 New
            -1
            Quote: Grishka100watt
            If Russia grows stronger, we can drive anyone from anywhere

            Take off your pink glasses, read Romanov’s comments, he lives there. We are gradually absorbed, and here you are "getting stronger." Are we getting stronger with Serdyuk? Such a handsome man there would have long been shot in the square ...
        2. Mairos
          Mairos April 8 2013 11: 23 New
          +1
          better let them choke each other ..))
      2. sergius60
        sergius60 April 8 2013 10: 57 New
        +3
        That's it! In order to put a foot on Siberia, first you need to bring out the breed of "frost-resistant Chinese." But seriously - the big question is the profitability of production in these conditions, "dog cold." Then, Russia has 10-30% of the world's various raw materials. What is tastier, 90-70% in the bending "west" and rather comfortable production conditions, or 10-30% - with a chance to get the "last greetings". By the way, about HALF of RAW MATERIALS are consumed by staff members. When multiplied by zero "empire of good" - enough for everyone for a long time and not much sweating. hi
    2. serzhserzh86
      serzhserzh86 April 8 2013 11: 12 New
      0
      on what grounds is it clear that a conflict with China is more likely than a conflict with the United States ??? fool
  • avt
    avt April 8 2013 09: 36 New
    +3
    The construction of an aircraft carrier and a nuclear submarine is the pinnacle of shipbuilding, at the moment. Only countries capable of independently building these ships are, in fact, advanced in shipbuilding.
  • Landwarrior
    Landwarrior April 8 2013 09: 56 New
    +1
    How how? belay boomer? belay
    laughing Somewhere I already heard it. I immediately remembered the unforgettable RA2-Revenge of Yurik laughing

    Something somehow recently, many of the games trying to translate into reality
  • as3wresdf
    as3wresdf April 8 2013 09: 56 New
    -2
    The base of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of all citizens of the Russian Federation on this site twitlink.ws/baza and most importantly did something like searching for lost relatives, but here is all the information about each of us: correspondence with friends, addresses, phone numbers, place of work, and what’s worst is even mine exposure of photos (I don’t know where from ...). In general, I was very scared - but there is such a function as “hide data”, of course I took advantage of it and I advise everyone not to hesitate,
  • zao74
    zao74 April 8 2013 10: 18 New
    +3
    Or maybe it is not given to them?))) Let them stomp on land, there is nothing for them to do under water.
    1. Gari
      Gari April 8 2013 12: 13 New
      0
      China is the largest state population in the world over 1,3 billion, the majority of the population are ethnic Chinese (although whoever counted them may be more); ranks third in the world in territory, giving way to Russia and Canada.
      Chinese Army:
      active troops reserve troops military organizations of the entire active forces
      per 1000 citizens
      2550000 people 800000 people 3969000 people 7024000 people 1.71 people

      US Army -

      1426713 people 858500 people 53000 people 2338213 people 4,76 people

      Army of Russia

      1037000 people 2000000 people 359100 people 3396100 people 7,4 people


      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wik

      For 1.3 billion people -2550000 million active troops and 800000 people. reserve
  • pippo
    pippo April 8 2013 10: 46 New
    -5
    Quote: GUN
    Without Russia, they will not succeed; we are the best in the construction of nuclear submarines!

    The best after America, it is a fact.
    1. Army1
      Army1 April 8 2013 13: 07 New
      0
      The fact is that you are an amateur.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 8 2013 10: 52 New
    +4
    However, symptomatic! The article is purely informative, about the fact of the presence, without data of TTX carrier and SLBM.
    The construction of submarine missile carriers is the cutting edge of NTP! At the time, N.S. Khrushchev "helped" China with nuclear warheads. What came out of it is known to all. Priorities and focus of politics is not a constant thing, so you need to think hard before you help! We leased India PLNNXX to India, now 671 PLAN ("Nerpa"), the issue of 971 is being considered. And China - no!
    China has powerful intelligence, skillful "copying", but the secrets have long been moved to the field of technology, element base, and materials. So, I think, the skies of the Middle East will suffer with their 94, 95 and 96 types, before it reaches the level of the PLA, at least for the 3 generation.
  • Roll
    Roll April 8 2013 11: 06 New
    0
    bully Strange opinion of the author about the fleet of the People's Republic of China. First, why did the author assume that the Chinese government does not trust the military. In China, with a set of military is better than ours and amers. Then now electronics plays a big role in the Navy, and China is doing fine with that. Then why did the author take it that the missile carriers must necessarily patrol and go on combat duty. China does wise things, he built a submarine base on the Han Nan island similar to the one we broke in the Crimea, and missile launch can also be carried out from its territory. L2 has a range of 10 km and 000 goals is enough to punish amers. Of course, while Chinese submarines are inferior to ours and Amers, but not so much that they would laugh at them. Many parameters for the Chinese are not so important, for example, noise, if the substrate makes a volley from its protected area, noise does not matter.
    1. Professor
      April 8 2013 11: 09 New
      +1
      Then why did the author take it that the missile carriers must necessarily patrol and go on combat duty.

      A-priory

      China does wise things, he built a submarine base on the Han Nan island similar to the one we broke in the Crimea, and missile launch can also be carried out from its territory.

      To do this, there are ground facilities, landline and mobile, and most importantly cheaper.
      1. Roll
        Roll April 8 2013 11: 33 New
        +1
        am Professor hello, I disagree, even our submarines have the function of producing a missile salvo at the pier. Terrestrial means only complement marine ones, while terrestrial ones have their advantages and disadvantages. In general, the lack of performance characteristics of submarines can be leveled by tactics of use. For example, if we had the wisdom to make an underwater rocket carrier on Lake Baikal. What kind of performance characteristics does he need, any noise, torpedo weapons and a hydrolocation complex are unnecessary, the engine can also be made purely electric, refueled the batteries at the berth and on combat duty. Detecting a submarine is not realistic, and the return volley is guaranteed and much more likely than from combat duty. China has the same motives.
    2. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 8 2013 11: 31 New
      +1
      In China, with a set of military is better than ours and amers
      Everything is relative. For the PLA is mainly formed from the poorest segments of the population. They have a chance to break into people.
      electronics plays a role, and with that China
      If they blurt out mikruhu according to Western technological processes, this does not mean that they have everything super.
      L2 has a range of 10 km and 000 goals of this is completely enough to punish amers.
      And probably 5-test lead with at least a pair of volleys like a recent mace.
      if the substrate makes a volley from its protected area, the noise level does not matter.
      This is one of the most important parameters, if not the most important in nuclear submarines.
      PS And now a little educational program.
      1 SSBNs never go 1 they must be covered.
      2 The main task of the SSBN on 2 green whistles is to launch rockets. To do this, she needs to have maximum security, and this is clearly not at the base point.
      1. Roll
        Roll April 8 2013 11: 55 New
        -1
        fellow Combat patrolling arose in the 60s, when rockets flew 3 km, after the range increased to 000 km, patrolling lost all military meaning, but by inertia it continues and now it’s beneficial to the military, and the sailors are actually cutting the budget . I agree that the submarine is covered on patrol, but it has more enemies: Poseidon planes, surface forces and submarines, hunters, and numerous buoys, and much more. But this is not in its water area, and the submarine is more reliably protected, but since many need patrolling, they will continue to foolishly, as for noise, this is a parameter of peacetime, and in the military it will not matter much.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 26 New
          -1
          after the range increased to 10 km, patrolling lost all military meaning
          Lol when the boat at the pier she is the most vulnerable. But when in the ocean the devil knows where .... Look for her fistulas.
          I agree that the submarine is covered on patrol, but it has more enemies than it is Poseidon airplanes, surface forces and submarines hunters, and numerous buoys, and much more.
          How would you tell our submarine to find in the sea is still a pleasure especially diesel-electric submarines or ash with borea.
          and in the military it will not be of great importance.
          But it doesn’t seem to you that the war doesn’t accidentally start preparing for it long thoughtfully.
        2. Beck
          Beck April 8 2013 12: 32 New
          -1
          Quote: Rolm
          Combat patrols began in the 60s when rockets flew 3 km


          Well, educate the specialists.

          In my opinion, a nuclear submarine with strategic missiles is a weapon of one salvo. Sailing to the base for reloading will be far away, and possibly nowhere.

          The second one. The anti-submarine defense, in my opinion, has remained at its 2MB level in terms of functionality. Track the submarines and destroy them if the war starts. Yes, today the technical equipment of anti-submarine defense is incomparable above. But you cannot track all the boats in all the oceans. And they will not declare war in two weeks. An order will come and a boat, even a direction finding one, gives a salvo. And what's the point after destroying it. All the submarine completed its task.

          From here. The effectiveness of anti-submarine defense, at the moment, can only work in local wars and only against ordinary submarines. In order to prevent them from breaking into raids, into communication routes, attacking surface targets.

          In a nuclear war, a modern prototype boat defense is useless. Is it so?
          1. Andrey77
            Andrey77 April 8 2013 12: 58 New
            -1
            1. In my opinion, a nuclear submarine with strategic missiles is a weapon of one salvo. Sailing to the base for reloading will be far away, and possibly nowhere.
            --
            If the world war - yes, if a single missile shot at any North Korea - no.

            2. Yes, today the technical equipment of anti-submarine defense is incomparable above. But you cannot track all the boats in all the oceans.

            Nobody is trying to track all the boats. Track SSBNs. And there are not so many of them on combat duty. Realistically track, prevent launch - I do not know.

            3. In a nuclear war, a modern prototype boat defense is useless. Is it so?
            So. Like any other. Or deploy missile defense in each city and village of the country.
            1. stjrm
              stjrm April 10 2013 17: 21 New
              0
              And what do you suppose, the whole ammunition will always be fired in a volley of RPK Sleep?
              And is it possible to fire less than 9 targets with three missiles while picking three? smile
          2. Roll
            Roll April 8 2013 12: 59 New
            -1
            fellow Anti-submarine defense is not useless, our submarines are tracked by missile carriers, amers have more attack submarines, so each of our missile carriers is tracked and tracked, plus Poseidon and Orion aircraft, effective means, plus surface ships. Our missile-carriers on combat duty succeed in breaking away at 20 percent. And a missile salvo is not so easy to produce, there is no guarantee that at the first sign of a salvo you will not be destroyed. But in their waters there are no such problems.
            1. stjrm
              stjrm April 10 2013 13: 50 New
              0
              May I start with questions?
              1. About 20%, where did you get this?
              2. What do you mean by "your water area"?
              3. What are the "first signs of a volley"?
              I hope for an answer.... wink
          3. Uncle
            Uncle April 8 2013 20: 46 New
            0
            Quote: Beck
            In a nuclear war, a modern prototype boat defense is useless. Is it so?

            I read that in the days of the USSR, a hunter always went for a strategist. On the other hand, anyway. However, thanks to the art of Soviet submariners, they often lost their strategists, and the hunter became the “prey” of another hunter. In general, everything is very ambiguous and difficult to calculate.
      2. Roll
        Roll April 8 2013 12: 08 New
        0
        tongue There is no relativity, there is no conscription in China and only volunteers serve urgently, and this is a huge plus, we can’t afford it, then if the army allows the poorest layers to get into the people it’s fine, we have strained with it, and then why do you think that the poorest are the worst soldiers. I can say from my own experience that our village children are in many ways better than urban ones, and in terms of health and mental stability, a little dumber than that. Yes. but it is at the end of service Then the fleet is the elite and the most suitable are taken there, and the officers in China are castes in a good way. The Chinese fleet is a fairly closed system and it is difficult for experts to judge it.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 27 New
          0
          the warmest layers are the worst soldiers.
          And you are aware that in China ALL education is paid.
          The Chinese fleet is a fairly closed system and it is difficult for experts to judge it.
          Funny about Russian is possible but about Chinese is impossible?
          1. Roll
            Roll April 8 2013 12: 50 New
            0
            crying My life experience suggests that the worst soldiers are citizens of megalopolises, they are spoiled, hoses, and often have mental problems. Here is a simple example for you, recently showed the film 9 companies. There was such a character Fierce from the poorest. And that he is the worst soldier ??? Of course the film is not life, but the principle is the same. And then now education is not so important, the ability to work on a computer is much more important, and with that in China everything is in order. If the guy normally mastered the computer, consider him 10 years old.
          2. Roll
            Roll April 8 2013 12: 52 New
            0
            laughing About Russian, we can sell everything for sale and Su 30 fighters and Lada submarines and ships, and the military will tell everyone, but in China it's the other way around.
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 8 2013 12: 58 New
              0
              we have everything for sale and Su 30 fighters and frets and ships.

              In the export configuration that is a little like what we have)))
              And now try to learn something new about)))
  • sergius60
    sergius60 April 8 2013 11: 09 New
    0
    In all cases of raising the topic of "copyists," I ALWAYS try to prove and explain precisely this idea expressed by you: "... but the secrets have long passed into the field of technology, element base, and materials." And if the Russians "pick their nose" or "wait for the weather from the sea," in time, Mongolia could overtake. Just kidding! hi
  • sergius60
    sergius60 April 8 2013 11: 19 New
    0
    If the Russians "pick their nose" or "wait for the weather from the sea", then in time Mongolia will become a "strategic threat." In all cases of raising the topic of "copyists," I ALWAYS try to prove and explain precisely this idea expressed by you: "... but the secrets have long passed into the field of technology, element base, and materials." "Movement is life". Understanding this is very, very serious !!! Civilizations perished, having decided - well now you can relax. hi
  • Drosselmeyer
    Drosselmeyer April 8 2013 11: 19 New
    +2
    The fact that the Chinese did not succeed with the nuclear submarines proves only that if the Chinese had not gained access to secret technologies as a result of the collapse of the USSR, they would still be proud of their copies of the T-55, MiG-21 and all of the 60- x years.
    Just the Chinese pens did not reach the Soviet nuclear submarines.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 8 2013 11: 22 New
    +4
    Article. In addition to reporting the fact of problems with the plnb type 94, it is not possible to gather data from it about either the vehicle’s TTX or SLBMs. This is a minus. Plus - a photo of "humpbacked" type 94 (Boomer).
    Essentially. We, at one time in India, leased a plan pr.NUMX, which showed "Kuzkinu mother" to the fleet of Pakistan. Now we have provided them with PL 671 pr. With China, we still have a different level of military-technical cooperation. On the transfer of such equipment and technology is not talking. Celestial - the country is “interesting”, and against whom it will be friends when changing the situation mn difficult to say.
    Correctly noted: the underwater bomber is the quint-essence of the level of scientific and technical progress achieved by the country, the top of shipbuilding. China has a powerful intelligence, good "copiers", but KNOW-HOW hides deeply: in technology, element base, materials science. And here you will not take the number! So, I think, we will not help the PRC in this matter, and they themselves will have to poke around for a long time with 94 and with subsequent projects.
    But they chose the right strategic direction. The United States is a sea power, and the land army, having no common border, does not frighten it, and the Strategic Missile Forces and strategic aviation are weak, and they are always in sight.
  • Canep
    Canep April 8 2013 12: 24 New
    0
    I do not think that the Chinese will start a war of conquest with Russia. If they wanted this, then in 1993 they would have attacked. And if you look at the story, it turns out that they lived longer under someone’s occupation than an independent state, and if only Tibet occupied someone.
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 8 2013 13: 02 New
      +1
      They are among the five world powers, which means they must have a powerful army and navy. They will not start a war with anyone, but there must be a means of deterrence (primarily against the United States).
  • Gari
    Gari April 8 2013 12: 33 New
    0
    An optimist teaches English, a pessimist teaches Chinese, a realist learns a Kalashnikov assault rifle
  • honest jew
    honest jew April 8 2013 12: 38 New
    +2
    Made in Chine !!!!! laughing
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus April 8 2013 14: 41 New
    +1
    Thanks for the translation. But overall. The usual Western blah blah blah about China.
    There is nothing to discuss since there is no evidence of "fabrications" of the article.
  • pippo
    pippo April 8 2013 15: 13 New
    0
    Quote: Army1
    The fact is that you are an amateur.

    Yes really ... but you are not an amateur. In vain do you underestimate America, in the technological sphere they have always been ahead of us, we are always trying to catch up with it.
    There were many articles on this site that described pretty well why we are not the best in the world. Take for example strategic Ohio submarines or Virginia multipurpose submarines ... these boats are made with a huge margin. I don’t think that our boreas and ash trees will be much better, if at all.
    1. gispanec
      gispanec April 8 2013 19: 29 New
      -1
      Quote: pippo
      There were many articles on this site that described pretty well why we are not the best in the world. Take for example strategic Ohio submarines or Virginia multipurpose submarines ... these boats are made with a huge margin. I don’t think that our boreas and ash trees will be much better, if at all.

      And you do not think, but learn the materiel and compare !!!
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN April 8 2013 15: 36 New
    0
    I recall that in the 80s on Sevmash, despite the fact that from all over the Union there were excellent specialists from different postal units. they worked on the head "Shark" 941 ave., tested and introduced it with the elimination of hundreds of comments. So the Chinese engineers and warlords still have to puff!
  • Diesel
    Diesel April 8 2013 16: 26 New
    -1
    The Chinese have well mastered the tactics of conducting information warfare. It’s scary to look at people on this site who are ready tomorrow to expose their ass to the first Chinese they come across.
  • Vesnik
    Vesnik April 8 2013 16: 46 New
    -2
    The Chinese did nothing good at all. They only get clones of anything perfectly. Give the boat a stamp, only bullshit it will be and not a boat. Kill each other. No sense, one movement. Quality suffers a lot. This is national, incorrigible. All Che breaks. The same is in armament. Their karma is like that.
  • VadimSt
    VadimSt April 8 2013 16: 48 New
    +1
    Two centimeters under the keel - to the Chinese comrades!
  • PACIFIST
    PACIFIST April 8 2013 17: 56 New
    0
    China with a strong economy and intelligence, if they don’t buy it, they steal it, during the USSR the KGB did not sit still. We bought the first jet engine from the British, the Tu-4 is a completely clean copy of Amer B-29; yes, I think that we have a lot of Western technologies, just like ours. In extreme cases, the Chinese will hire Western firms to assist in military projects
  • savastyanov
    savastyanov April 8 2013 18: 02 New
    -2
    China is becoming more and more dangerous ...
    1. stjrm
      stjrm April 10 2013 13: 36 New
      +1
      For whom is he becoming more dangerous?
  • Nitup
    Nitup April 8 2013 22: 15 New
    -1
    Quote: Beck
    I will repeat it. The future geopolitical rival of the Eurasian Economic Community, 10-15 years later, is China. And there is nothing to arm him.

    The West long ago imposed an embargo on the supply of modern types of weapons and military technology to China. The Kremlin did not block the sale of the Varyag to Kmtay, now China, having studied it, has planted 7 aircraft carriers at its shipyards. The Kremlin sold T-72 tanks to China, now the Chinese have their own more or less modern tank building. The Kremlin sold the Mig-29, Su-27 to China and created modern combat aircraft manufacturing in China. The Kremlin also promised to sell the Su-35. The beauty. This is so that later on the Chinese clones of the Su-35 to divert air defense forces and means from counteracting the old enemies of the United States and Japan. We don’t want to see further the hill.

    For the full kollekor and for the benefit of officials, the Kremlin only needs to not dispose of retreating submarines of the Typhoon type, and, by "friendship", sell one to China. The beauty will be indescribable when in five years 10 pieces of Chinese typhoons will be added to American submarines in the Pacific Ocean.

    It is ridiculous to read what a person from the USA writes about the Chinese threat to Russia. Our geopolitical enemies are well known to us. These are, first of all, the USA and Great Britain. As long as these states exist, they will be our enemies. And there can be no illusions here. And all this hysteria about the Chinese threat is being pumped up by the West, so that people perceive China as an aggressor. The fact that China is actively arming itself, only means that it continues to want to remain sovereign, and not that it wants to attack Russia. And the blue dream of the Angloaxes is to embroil China with Russia in order to weaken them as a result of the war. Support one country against another, and then attack the winner. How were you going to do in World War II. This is your old way: to fight with the wrong hands. But, unfortunately, the leadership of both Russia and China understands this well.
    1. Beck
      Beck April 9 2013 19: 08 New
      0
      Quote: Nitup
      It is ridiculous to read what a person from the USA writes about the Chinese threat to Russia.


      To re-laugh, you go to the admins or where else, where the programs are junk and they are these flags, then these, these hang out.

      And I write from the Eurasian Economic Community, from Kazakhstan.
      1. Nitup
        Nitup April 9 2013 20: 19 New
        0
        Good. Your background is sorted out. What do you think about what I wrote?
        1. Beck
          Beck April 10 2013 19: 37 New
          -1
          Quote: Nitup
          Good. Your background is sorted out. What do you think about what I wrote?


          Well, here it’s necessary to interfere with the geopolitical pile. I'll try that I can.

          Firstly, I consider the current state, not from the point of view that not now, so tomorrow it will be necessary to destroy someone. And in order to make it inconsequential for the other, in any case, the defense must be kept at a height. But I consider the current state not as a purely military confrontation, but as an economic rivalry backed up by military force. By military force, we can not let ourselves be attacked, but in order to WIN, we need a strong economy. Only the economy will give leadership and everything else. Example. Today's China has reached its present position not by military force, but by the economy.

          The United States, Europe, and China must be regarded as equal economic rivals. And if in a military confrontation with the West, this or that relationship developed that did not allow a war to unleash. What is unknown with China. In addition, we directly border with China. And when he becomes an economic leader and even armed, his political and military efforts will not be known. Therefore, I believe that China in 10-15 years will be much more dangerous than today's USA.
          1. Nitup
            Nitup April 12 2013 13: 28 New
            0
            China does not have the mentality to behave aggressively. If you think about whom China attacked. If the idiot Khrushchev had not specifically quarreled with China, then there would not have been that episode on Damansky Island. After all, Stalin was not a fool when he helped China so and established relations with him. China now simply wants to be left alone. The confrontation between the two Koreas now is nothing more than a confrontation between China and the United States. Everyone knows that the actions of the West largely depend on the interests of their transnational banks. After all, China does not have all of this. I'm not saying that you need to relax. Of course, one must be prepared for everything. But in all cases, China is our ally, not the enemy. Our clear enemy is the West, primarily the USA.
  • Nitup
    Nitup April 8 2013 22: 35 New
    0
    Here is a video about the composition and quality of Chinese strategic nuclear forces:
  • Denis
    Denis April 9 2013 01: 54 New
    +1
    Submarine Type 93, which looks like a thirty-year Soviet submarine of class Victor III (project 671 "Pike"). The first Type 93 submarine was put into operation in the 2006th year. The Type 93 nuclear submarine became the basis for the creation of the Type 94 SSBN, which looks the same as the Pike submarine, only with a missile compartment
    - Either he drank a pea jacket, or his pea jacket was stolen, but the sediment remained
    It’s vague like that, would there be more specifics, a clone or not?
    And so the tanks are all as one, and as for the missiles and the words are not as similar
  • Kavtorang
    Kavtorang April 9 2013 01: 57 New
    +1
    Found in his notebooks on the RAP for 2011 (materials prepared by the Fleet Intelligence Agency) data on relatively modern samples:
    Air Force - 408 Q-5C / D, 180 J-8, 140 j-8-II, 120 j-10,116 SU-27,32 SU-27 UBK, 75 SU-30MKK, 18 Il-76, 1 or 2 A- fifty
    Aviation Navy- 48 J-8-II, 30 Q-5, 24 SU-30MKK, 13 KA-28PL, 2 KA-31
    BTT - 1500 Type-95, 450 type 98/99
    Submarines - 1 submarine pr.092, 2 projects 094, 4 Han square and 2 Shan, 12 Varshavianok, 4 projects 039A and 16 projects 039 / 039G
    I won’t talk about surface forces - everything is very sad for us there, there’s just not enough to melt all the missiles.
    But in general it’s sad: in 1995, I came as a cadet on my first ship - the destroyer "Fast". Then in Strelka stood: “Fast,” “Combat,” “Stormy,” “Fearless.” In 2012, with the commander of Bystry, we were lying in neighboring chambers at the VVK; he did not have a very high opinion of the combat effectiveness of his ship. And he fell into sadness by visiting by order of his Chinese teizhou "Teizhou".
  • Kavtorang
    Kavtorang April 9 2013 09: 03 New
    0
    Add from the same notebook on the RAP:
    Peaceful forces: 2,3 million
    Armed formations of primary engagement: 650 thousand people.
    Mobilization resource: 380 million people.
    Deployed formations, excluding squadroned units of local defense: military districts -7; divisions -30 (armored, mechanized and motorized infantry -26, artillery -2, airborne assault -2);
    brigades - 77 (tank, mechanized and motorized infantry -36, artillery -14, missile central submission -1, anti-aircraft missile -9, anti-aircraft artillery -12, anti-tank -1, mountain infantry -2, engineering -2);
    separate regiments - 23 (anti-tank-5, motorized infantry -1, artillery-1, anti-aircraft artillery -1, border troops-5, army aviation -10)
    Well, the Second Artillery, the topic is very closed, our scouts gave such an assessment: there are no SSBNs on combat patrols, mine ICBMs — 30 with MIRVs and 30 monoblocks are on the DB, OTP of the DF-11 and DF-15 type are about 600 launchers, but these are positions against Taiwan.
    1. DOCTOR VIT
      DOCTOR VIT April 11 2013 14: 24 New
      0
      Sadly, the most important thing is that such an army is redundant for defense, and there are no potential opponents for whom such an army is needed. India does not count as the land border with it lies in the mountains.
  • Kavtorang
    Kavtorang April 9 2013 09: 20 New
    0
    Forgot about the Marine Corps: 2 mechanized brigades.
  • Kavtorang
    Kavtorang April 9 2013 09: 27 New
    0
    Quote: Vesnik
    The Chinese did nothing good at all. They only get clones of anything perfectly. Give the boat a stamp, only bullshit it will be and not a boat.

    They don’t even take a steam bath - they bought 10 units of pure 877 and two units of 877EKM.
  • stjrm
    stjrm April 10 2013 12: 58 New
    -1
    Quote: Professor
    The use of nuclear weapons is not seriously considered, then kirdyk everything.


    ProfEssor! The current nuclear weapons, it’s not at all what was dumped on Hiroshima, what was blown up on Malaya Zemlya and near Semipolotinsk ..... smile Because of the "kirdyk everything" .... do not ...
  • stjrm
    stjrm April 10 2013 13: 23 New
    0
    I’m not going to understand, what in the photo is completely different from Project 971 or 671, or maybe this Chinese boat looks like a 667B, a beech?
  • VohaAhov
    VohaAhov April 14 2013 05: 44 New
    0
    Quote: Nitup
    Here is a video about the composition and quality of Chinese strategic nuclear forces:



    And why didn’t this expert say that Chinese missiles shoot through the whole of Russia? And this is more important than getting to America.