Indian Ocean Developments
- Thread starter S.A.T.A
- Start date
Adux
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 4,022
- Likes
- 1,707
No you idiot it is called Globalization.
We have the damn EADS calling for India as partner country, while you get 3rd rate Russian stuff which even they dont use.
Bullshit, It is complex and dynamic country with the most advanced Adobe Photoshop version and good printing presses printing advanced brouchers. If those tincans in georgia split up, I am just going to sit and wait out how those failed Russian design outsourced to China, type-99 and all is going to fare. ****sake, You got a Su-30MKK and made a inferior copy in the J-11B, I mean who the helll does that?
re
J-11B is in all respect superior to Su-30mkk. Do you know what kind of radar Su-30mkk uses?
Type-99 has heavier armour than t-72. Expect a much better one on the 1st of October.
J-11B is in all respect superior to Su-30mkk. Do you know what kind of radar Su-30mkk uses?
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
So, China produces everything indigeniously??. Gimme a break, it steals most of the technology and pirates the military hardware.
China is neither complex nor dynamic, everything is under control of CCP:blum3:. Tell me one revolutionary thing that came out of China.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
Here is an 2 yrs old article which talks about different listening posts that Indian Navy has in the Indian Ocean region. Nice article.
India's quiet sea power
By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - India's new listening post in Madagascar has reportedly begun operations. Under construction for more than a year, the monitoring station will provide India with electronic eyes and ears in the southwestern Indian Ocean.
Located in northern Madagascar, the monitoring station "was quietly made operational" in early July, according to a report in The Indian Express. It will be linked with similar facilities in Kochi
and Mumbai "to gather intelligence on foreign navies operating in the region", the report said. Mumbai and Kochi, which are on India's west coast, are headquarters of the Indian Navy's Western and Southern Commands, respectively.
Madagascar, a large island off Africa's east coast, is among a growing number of Africa's Indian Ocean shores with which India is building naval and other ties. The Indian Navy took charge of Mozambique's sea security during the African Union summit there in 2003 and during the World Economic Forum summit the following year.
To Madagascar's east lies Mauritius. In 1974, India laid the foundation of its naval security cooperation with Mauritius with the gift of the Indian Naval Ship (INS) Amar. India later provided Mauritius with an interceptor patrol boat, INS Observer, in 2001 and a Dornier Do 228 maritime surveillance aircraft in 2004. The Indian Navy has patrolled waters off Mauritius a few times.
Media reports last year spoke of a possible larger profile for India in Mauritius. According to reports, Mauritius offered its Agalega Islands to India on a long-term lease ostensibly for development as tourist destinations. The Agalega Islands are 1,100 kilometers from Mauritius, 3,000km from India and 1,800km from the US base at Diego Garcia.
Both India and Mauritius quickly denied the lease report - the leasing of a predominantly Creole island to India would be a touchy issue in a country with a delicate ethnic balance between the francophone Creoles and the Indo-Mauritians. However, according to the Indian Express report, "India is looking at developing another monitoring facility at an atoll it has leased from Mauritius [Agalega] in the near future." The report said that while the government is silent on the issue, "sources say some forward movement has recently been made on the project".
Across the channel to Madagascar's west lies Mozambique. Last year, India signed a memorandum of understanding with Mozambique that envisaged maritime patrolling of the waters off the latter's coast, supplying military equipment, training personnel, and transferring technical know-how in assembling and repairing military vehicles, aircraft and ships.
India's long-standing ties with Seychelles were further strengthened in 2005 when Delhi gave the latter's coast guard a fast-attack vessel, INS Tarmugli. India has given a few helicopters to Seychelles over the years and Indian naval ships routinely visit the archipelago.
India's naval foray into the southwestern Indian Ocean has gone by largely unnoticed. In contrast, its naval presence and activity near the Malacca Strait to its east and the Gulf of Oman to its west has been widely reported. The Indian Navy has been conducting exercises with the Republic of Singapore Navy for more than a decade, with the Indonesian Navy since 2004, and with the Royal Thai Navy since last August. Next month, the navies of five countries - India, Singapore, the United States, Japan and Australia - will participate in a huge naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal. To its west, India has been holding joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman, the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea with such countries as Oman, Iran and France.
India's naval profile in the southwestern Indian Ocean is smaller but growing quietly. Naval exercises with South Africa - the only medium naval power in Africa - and Brazil are expected to take place next year.
Indian Navy officers say that India's gifts of patrol boats and other equipment to countries in its immediate and distant neighborhood are to "help them identify and isolate more effectively fast-moving surface craft that may be carrying terrorists, gun-runners or smugglers. By providing these countries with better equipment, India is not only helping them secure themselves but also hoping that this will halt the flow of arms, ammunition and contraband into India."
There is the problem of piracy, too, in the waters off Africa that has affected India's trade. To the north of Madagascar lies Somalia, whose coastline has been identified by the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) as the area with the highest piracy risk in the world. According to the latest IMB report, there were 15 reported attacks on vessels in or near Somalia's waters in the first seven months this year, compared with 10 incidents during all of last year. An Indian merchant ship was seized by Somali pirates this May and held for a month.
For India, monitoring the waters off Africa's east coast is an essential part of its effort to secure sea lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean. Most of India's trade is by sea - nearly 89% of India's oil imports arrive by sea. These sea lanes are thus lifelines for the Indian economy and any disruption can have disastrous consequences for its economic and energy security.
India has been acting to secure sea lanes in the Indian Ocean, and the monitoring station in Madagascar is part of this larger naval and maritime strategy.
India is reaching out far into the Indian Ocean, way beyond its shores, as it sees this ocean as its domain. In an article published last year in the Naval War College Review, Donald L Berlin, professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu and an expert on Indian Ocean strategic issues, wrote:
New Delhi regards the Indian Ocean as its back yard and deems it both natural and desirable that India function as, eventually, the leader and the predominant influence in this region - the world's only region and ocean named after a single state. This is what the United States set out to do in North America and the Western Hemisphere at an early stage in America's "rise to power". American foreign policy throughout the 19th century had one overarching goal: achieving hegemony in the Western Hemisphere.
Similarly, in the expansive view of many Indians, India's security perimeter should extend from the Strait of Malacca to the Strait of Hormuz and from the coast of Africa to the western shores of Australia. For some Indians, the emphasis is on the northern Indian Ocean, but for others the realm includes even the "Indian Ocean" coast of Antarctica.
Of major concern to India is China's steady influence in the Indian Ocean through its naval and other ties with India's neighbors, including Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. China has a major role in the Gwadar port in Pakistan at the mouth of the strategic Persian Gulf, about 400km from the Strait of Hormuz, a major conduit for global oil supplies.
Concern mounted in India in January when Chinese President Hu Jintao rounded off his eight-nation trip to Africa with a stop at Seychelles. It was to preempt a Chinese offer of naval assistance to Seychelles that India quickly gave INS Tarmugli to the Seychelles Coast Guard. Hu's visit - the first by a Chinese president to an island state in the southwestern Indian Ocean - underscored the looming challenge that China poses to India's influence in this region.
Raja Mohan, an Indian strategic-affairs expert, pointed out: "No one doubts India's desire to retain its foothold in these geopolitically crucial island states. But question marks remain on whether India has a strategy to cope [with] China's dramatic entry into the western Indian Ocean."
Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore.
India's quiet sea power
By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - India's new listening post in Madagascar has reportedly begun operations. Under construction for more than a year, the monitoring station will provide India with electronic eyes and ears in the southwestern Indian Ocean.
Located in northern Madagascar, the monitoring station "was quietly made operational" in early July, according to a report in The Indian Express. It will be linked with similar facilities in Kochi
and Mumbai "to gather intelligence on foreign navies operating in the region", the report said. Mumbai and Kochi, which are on India's west coast, are headquarters of the Indian Navy's Western and Southern Commands, respectively.
Madagascar, a large island off Africa's east coast, is among a growing number of Africa's Indian Ocean shores with which India is building naval and other ties. The Indian Navy took charge of Mozambique's sea security during the African Union summit there in 2003 and during the World Economic Forum summit the following year.
To Madagascar's east lies Mauritius. In 1974, India laid the foundation of its naval security cooperation with Mauritius with the gift of the Indian Naval Ship (INS) Amar. India later provided Mauritius with an interceptor patrol boat, INS Observer, in 2001 and a Dornier Do 228 maritime surveillance aircraft in 2004. The Indian Navy has patrolled waters off Mauritius a few times.
Media reports last year spoke of a possible larger profile for India in Mauritius. According to reports, Mauritius offered its Agalega Islands to India on a long-term lease ostensibly for development as tourist destinations. The Agalega Islands are 1,100 kilometers from Mauritius, 3,000km from India and 1,800km from the US base at Diego Garcia.
Both India and Mauritius quickly denied the lease report - the leasing of a predominantly Creole island to India would be a touchy issue in a country with a delicate ethnic balance between the francophone Creoles and the Indo-Mauritians. However, according to the Indian Express report, "India is looking at developing another monitoring facility at an atoll it has leased from Mauritius [Agalega] in the near future." The report said that while the government is silent on the issue, "sources say some forward movement has recently been made on the project".
Across the channel to Madagascar's west lies Mozambique. Last year, India signed a memorandum of understanding with Mozambique that envisaged maritime patrolling of the waters off the latter's coast, supplying military equipment, training personnel, and transferring technical know-how in assembling and repairing military vehicles, aircraft and ships.
India's long-standing ties with Seychelles were further strengthened in 2005 when Delhi gave the latter's coast guard a fast-attack vessel, INS Tarmugli. India has given a few helicopters to Seychelles over the years and Indian naval ships routinely visit the archipelago.
India's naval foray into the southwestern Indian Ocean has gone by largely unnoticed. In contrast, its naval presence and activity near the Malacca Strait to its east and the Gulf of Oman to its west has been widely reported. The Indian Navy has been conducting exercises with the Republic of Singapore Navy for more than a decade, with the Indonesian Navy since 2004, and with the Royal Thai Navy since last August. Next month, the navies of five countries - India, Singapore, the United States, Japan and Australia - will participate in a huge naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal. To its west, India has been holding joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman, the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea with such countries as Oman, Iran and France.
India's naval profile in the southwestern Indian Ocean is smaller but growing quietly. Naval exercises with South Africa - the only medium naval power in Africa - and Brazil are expected to take place next year.
Indian Navy officers say that India's gifts of patrol boats and other equipment to countries in its immediate and distant neighborhood are to "help them identify and isolate more effectively fast-moving surface craft that may be carrying terrorists, gun-runners or smugglers. By providing these countries with better equipment, India is not only helping them secure themselves but also hoping that this will halt the flow of arms, ammunition and contraband into India."
There is the problem of piracy, too, in the waters off Africa that has affected India's trade. To the north of Madagascar lies Somalia, whose coastline has been identified by the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) as the area with the highest piracy risk in the world. According to the latest IMB report, there were 15 reported attacks on vessels in or near Somalia's waters in the first seven months this year, compared with 10 incidents during all of last year. An Indian merchant ship was seized by Somali pirates this May and held for a month.
For India, monitoring the waters off Africa's east coast is an essential part of its effort to secure sea lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean. Most of India's trade is by sea - nearly 89% of India's oil imports arrive by sea. These sea lanes are thus lifelines for the Indian economy and any disruption can have disastrous consequences for its economic and energy security.
India has been acting to secure sea lanes in the Indian Ocean, and the monitoring station in Madagascar is part of this larger naval and maritime strategy.
India is reaching out far into the Indian Ocean, way beyond its shores, as it sees this ocean as its domain. In an article published last year in the Naval War College Review, Donald L Berlin, professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu and an expert on Indian Ocean strategic issues, wrote:
New Delhi regards the Indian Ocean as its back yard and deems it both natural and desirable that India function as, eventually, the leader and the predominant influence in this region - the world's only region and ocean named after a single state. This is what the United States set out to do in North America and the Western Hemisphere at an early stage in America's "rise to power". American foreign policy throughout the 19th century had one overarching goal: achieving hegemony in the Western Hemisphere.
Similarly, in the expansive view of many Indians, India's security perimeter should extend from the Strait of Malacca to the Strait of Hormuz and from the coast of Africa to the western shores of Australia. For some Indians, the emphasis is on the northern Indian Ocean, but for others the realm includes even the "Indian Ocean" coast of Antarctica.
Of major concern to India is China's steady influence in the Indian Ocean through its naval and other ties with India's neighbors, including Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. China has a major role in the Gwadar port in Pakistan at the mouth of the strategic Persian Gulf, about 400km from the Strait of Hormuz, a major conduit for global oil supplies.
Concern mounted in India in January when Chinese President Hu Jintao rounded off his eight-nation trip to Africa with a stop at Seychelles. It was to preempt a Chinese offer of naval assistance to Seychelles that India quickly gave INS Tarmugli to the Seychelles Coast Guard. Hu's visit - the first by a Chinese president to an island state in the southwestern Indian Ocean - underscored the looming challenge that China poses to India's influence in this region.
Raja Mohan, an Indian strategic-affairs expert, pointed out: "No one doubts India's desire to retain its foothold in these geopolitically crucial island states. But question marks remain on whether India has a strategy to cope [with] China's dramatic entry into the western Indian Ocean."
Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore.
Adux
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 4,022
- Likes
- 1,707
T-72 is not even comparison for us; Heck we have moved beyond them in later 1990's. We are building nearly 1500 T-90S, just by putting a number greater90 after T, doesnt make it superior.
J-11B is superior according to whom; Ofcourse the cCP will say so. Nothing China has is superior to both BARS N-011M or RDY-3 India has. The Techcomparison is not even funny, China talks and talks but it has nothing on paper,like its submarine force.
re
The ones splitting up in Georgia are T-72s. So I was replying to Adux about type-99 is as bad as T-72.
The slotted array on J-11b is a generation ahead of the twist cassegraine antenna on Su-30mkk. Plus it has lower RCS.
I'm not the one baiting.
The ones splitting up in Georgia are T-72s. So I was replying to Adux about type-99 is as bad as T-72.
The slotted array on J-11b is a generation ahead of the twist cassegraine antenna on Su-30mkk. Plus it has lower RCS.
S.A.T.A
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 2,569
- Likes
- 1,560
Who dominates the Indian ocean currently is an easy question to ans were,who will might be bit speculative.The conventional thinking has been that the largest land-demographic mass with significantly higher centers of economic production and hence with the greater stake,would be in a position to dominate and control great water bodies like the Oceans.
Even in its hey days the Royal navy which dominated the Indian ocean,was able to maintain its stranglehold more so because of its presence in the Indian subcontinent.Maintaining an overwhelming control of the Indian ocean or any ocean for that matter requires tremendous resources and even greater strategic maneuvering.
American may not be ona retreat,but the emergence of new powers in different parts of the world have made America to rethink its priority,because maintaining the same degree of dominance on the worlds oceans,in the future will require significantly greater expense on resources.America will be forced to rationalise its priorities.
The Pacific ocean which for a long time had been the backwaters of America will be hotly contested in the future,China and Russia both have stakes in ensuring that Pacific ocean does not remain a American bastion and these power will be locked in long drawn tug-of-war over the Asia Pacific.
This clearly means a significant American retreat from the Indian ocean is inevitable in the foreseeable future and the above mentioned reasons,China being a largely pacific based power,will be locked in the Asia-Pacific theater(speaking in terms of both resource and strategy).
This does mean India will be the sole dominant hegemon of the Indian ocean,but any vacuum of power in the Indian ocean will only benefit India,which can hope to quickly hope to occupy the space.
Even in its hey days the Royal navy which dominated the Indian ocean,was able to maintain its stranglehold more so because of its presence in the Indian subcontinent.Maintaining an overwhelming control of the Indian ocean or any ocean for that matter requires tremendous resources and even greater strategic maneuvering.
American may not be ona retreat,but the emergence of new powers in different parts of the world have made America to rethink its priority,because maintaining the same degree of dominance on the worlds oceans,in the future will require significantly greater expense on resources.America will be forced to rationalise its priorities.
The Pacific ocean which for a long time had been the backwaters of America will be hotly contested in the future,China and Russia both have stakes in ensuring that Pacific ocean does not remain a American bastion and these power will be locked in long drawn tug-of-war over the Asia Pacific.
This clearly means a significant American retreat from the Indian ocean is inevitable in the foreseeable future and the above mentioned reasons,China being a largely pacific based power,will be locked in the Asia-Pacific theater(speaking in terms of both resource and strategy).
This does mean India will be the sole dominant hegemon of the Indian ocean,but any vacuum of power in the Indian ocean will only benefit India,which can hope to quickly hope to occupy the space.
S
SammyCheung
Guest
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
Here is a well researched article by Donald Berlin in Naval War College Review. It talks about the current and future roles of Indian Navy in Indian Ocean.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/2000s/Donald.pdf
Alternatively, the article in PDF format on Bharat Rakshak.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/2000s/Donald.pdf
re
Hahahahahahahahaha. You want to assume Chinese people are dumb. That they spent the R&D money in vain. Now that's top notch bull.
What are you talking about? The PLAN has nine nuclear SSNs & SSBNs and 1 AIP sub ALREADY in operation. Even the Arihant is THREE years away from being fielded!!
S
SammyCheung
Guest
Currently, only the Type 093 is strategically significant in the Indian ocean. There are only about three Type 093, entered service in 2006. But more are being built.
p2prada
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,015
The assistance was basic. It did not involve tech transfer. They helped you build some technologies at home and were your design consultants. Whereas, the Americans taught the Israelis to build advanced weapons systems from scratch since the 60s and 70s.
Design consultancy. Similar to what we received from Russia for our SSBN and Italy for our carrier. Any kind of transfer of technology is banned.
You can't simply pour money into something and expect to turn lead to gold. Countries like France, Israel and US have been experimenting and designing stuff since decades. That kind of experience will not come easy.
True. It could be possible. But, they cannot help you as good as the Europeans, Israelis and Americans can when it comes to electronics.
You have the money. But, you don't have the expertise. Give it another decade, you will see your country changing when it comes to military technology. Had Tiananmen Square never happened China would have had a much more capable military by now.
In our case, our exposure with Israeli technology has helped a lot. The Israelis built a much more capable system than the Greenpine in India in early 2000. Our BMD is based on that technology. Right now, the Swordfish(our Greenpine) can track 200 targets at a range of 600km. And this is not some CCP BS. Perhaps our new radar will be a derivative of the Swordfish for our AWACS(speculation). We got the capability to build the Swordfish from scratch in early 2004.
Right now, the IN has given specifications to our shipyards to build stealth ships that are of similar or greater capability than current European stealth ships like the La fayette and also to employ modular construction.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
This article talks about the Chinese undersea deterrence and challenges it is facing in this quest.
An Undersea Deterrent?
U.S. NAVY
Two Chinese trawlers stop directly in the path of the USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23) forcing the ship to an emergency "all stop." This and other actions on 8 March represented a coordinated effort to dissuade the United States from monitoring China's latest nuclear-powered submarines and their area of operations.
By Andrew S. Erickson and Michael Chase
China's investment in a nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine force and the accompanying infrastructure indicates a major effort to take the boats to sea.
Increasingly aggressive Chinese harassment of U.S. survey vessels came to a head on 8 March when five Chinese ships surrounded the ocean surveillance ship USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23), with one Chinese crew member even apparently attempting to snag her towed array with a grappling hook. The Impeccable was operating in international waters 75 miles south of China's new Yalong Bay submarine base on Hainan Island, prompting speculation that the Chinese actions represented a coordinated effort to dissuade the United States from monitoring China's latest nuclear-powered submarines and their area of operations. According to Xiamen University South China Sea expert Li Jinming, "It is well known that the submarine base was established [at Hainan], so it is unacceptable for China to have the U.S. Navy snooping around so close." This incident suggests that Beijing may be particularly sensitive about U.S. activities in this region, in part because it appears poised to become the home base of China's second generation of nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarines (SSBNs), the Type 094, or Jin-class.
The emergence of the Jin appears to represent a substantial improvement over its first-generation Type 092 Xia SSBN. China may build five Type 094 SSBNs, each of which will be outfitted with 12 developmental JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) that have an estimated range of at least 7,200 km and are equipped with penetration aids.1 China's single Xia is equipped with short-range (1,770 km) JL-1 SLBMs and it is thought to never have conducted an extended patrol.
Although the transition to the new SSBN is ongoing, recent Internet photos depicting at least two Jin SSBNs suggest that China has reached an unprecedented level of confidence in the sea-based leg of its strategic nuclear forces. Indeed, China's 2008 Defense White Paper states that the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is enhancing its "nuclear counterattack" capability.2 With the introduction of the DF-31 and DF-31A road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and the JL-2 missiles on Jin SSBNs, China is thus on the verge of achieving a credible nuclear deterrent based on a survivable second-strike capability.
Recent Developments
While the exact trajectory and scope of China's SSBN development remains unclear, a variety of data points are emerging. The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) assesses that although China built only a single Xia SSBN, it will build a "fleet of probably five Type 094 SSBNs . . . to provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea presence."3 A variety of Chinese publications suggest that the SSBN forces of France and Britain—which have four vessels each, with one at sea at all times, two in refit, and one under maintenance—may serve as models for China and hence possible indications of its plans.4 One Chinese source, however, suggests that China will field six 094 SSBNs, divided into patrolling, deploying, and refitting groups.5 Consistent with this projection, another source suggests that these groups will comprise two SSBNs each.6
It is clear that at least two different hulls have already been launched, based on unusually high-resolution Internet and commercial satellite images that have emerged of one Jin in port at Xiaopingdao, two Jins in the water and perhaps one emerging from production at Huludao, and one at a newly-constructed submarine facility at Yalong Bay near Sanya on Hainan Island.7
Exactly how many different hulls are depicted in these photos remains uncertain, but the images of the facility on Hainan Island appear to provide some hints as to the PLAN's SSBN basing plans. The photo of the Jin at Yalong Bay suggests that the facility may be the base for China's future SSBNs. Images available on Google Earth suggest that the Hainan facility, with its more than 23-meter-wide and over 19-meter-high cave entrance, was designed to accommodate larger submarines such as the Jin, which appears to be about 148 meters long and 12 meters wide. Google Earth imagery of China's nuclear-powered submarine base at Jianggezhuang (with its approximately 13-meter-wide cave entrance) suggests that its maintenance tunnel may be too narrow to accommodate the Jin. There also appear to be few convenient pier locations at other ports for additional submarines. The Hainan facility, by contrast, has three piers and a possible degaussing facility, perhaps offering further rationale for its development as China builds additional submarines.8
China's Motives
Many analysts have focused on the survivability issue as the main reason for China's decision to proceed with the development of the Jin and the JL-2. Given the potential vulnerability of Chinese SSBNs to detection by adversary attack submarines and the challenges of locating dispersed road-mobile missiles, however, it would certainly seem that Chinese decision-makers must also have been considering other factors, including countering missile defense, increasing international nuclear prestige, and inter-service politics.
Chinese strategists appear to calculate that a nuclear dyad—composed of land-based strategic missiles and SLBMs—is required to enhance the credibility of China's nuclear deterrent in line with the requirements of the "effective counter-nuclear deterrence" posture discussed in recent Chinese publications. As "the most survivable type of (nuclear) weapon," an SSBN can allow China to deter third-party intervention in a regional conflict.9 Citing the development of the Jin, one Chinese source states, "If a war erupts across the Taiwan Strait one day, facing the danger of China waging nuclear war, it will be very difficult for America to intervene in the cross-strait military crisis."10
For more than four decades, China's stated policy has been that it will never use nuclear weapons first. Although recent statements by some Chinese commentators suggest that this may be under debate, it has nonetheless been reiterated consistently in several major publications on military strategy and doctrine. Accordingly, we interpret the Chinese comments here to mean not that China would be likely to launch nuclear weapons first in response to U.S. intervention in a China-Taiwan conflict, but rather that Chinese analysts believe strong SSBN capabilities would enhance deterrence by causing Washington to think twice about intervening in a conflict in which escalation control might be difficult.
Another explanation for the Jin is that Chinese planners believe SLBMs launched from certain patrol areas might complicate U.S. missile-defense interception efforts "by being able to launch . . . along azimuths outside the [systems'] engagement zones."11 Toshi Yoshihara of the Naval War College contends that "for at least the next two decades, missile defense . . . will have no answer to a capable SSBN patrolling the open ocean."12 A Chinese analysis likewise states that SSBNs "are more capable of penetrating [missile] defenses."13
Yet another explanation for the decision to deploy the Jin is that Chinese leaders may view the ships as symbols of the PRC's emerging great-power status. The other permanent members of the UN Security Council—France, Britain, Russia, and the United States—all have modern SSBNs in their fleets, and Beijing may see the deployment of its own as a way to enhance its international prestige. This certainly appears to be true of nuclear-powered submarines in general. One Chinese-published analysis emphasizes the precise correlation between membership in the UN Security Council and the development of nuclear-powered submarines.14 Similarly, former PLAN Commander Admiral Liu Huaqing and others state that such submarines represent one of China's clearest claims to status as a "great power."15
Another possible explanation that should not be discounted is inter-service politics. Little or no empirical information on this topic is available since the politics of China's defense budget process are opaque to outsiders. But, it seems reasonable to speculate that the PLAN leadership may have pushed for the development of the Jin-class to ensure that the navy would have a role to play in the strategic nuclear-deterrence mission, thereby increasing its share of defense spending.
Operational Challenges
Notwithstanding the considerable progress reflected by the launching of at least two Jin SSBNs, the PLAN still faces at least three key challenges before it realizes a secure seaborne second-strike capability: reducing the probability of detection; at sea training of commanders and crew members; and coping with the nuclear command-and-control issues associated with the operation of SSBNs.
Chinese observers are well aware of the challenges of avoiding detection, as reflected by their analysis of capabilities allegedly demonstrated during the Cold War vis-a-vis Soviet submarines. With respect to China's assessment of the Cold War at sea, one particularly noteworthy publication is the Chinese translation of a Russian book, Secrets of Cold War Undersea Espionage, which alleges that "U.S. nuclear and conventional submarines would often lurk along the routes of Soviet warships . . . conducting intelligence activities." This volume also claims that "the SOSUS [Sound Surveillance] system substantially helped the U.S. to cope with the capabilities of the Soviet submarine force," and credits the United States with building an "acoustic signature catalogue (resembling a fingerprint) for Soviet submarines."16
China must recognize that acoustic liabilities hampered Soviet SSBNs' effectiveness, so there is reason to believe that it has worked to address these issues. A variety of evidence—including Chinese research on acoustics, sound isolation couplings, and advanced composite materials; development of a relatively advanced guide-vane propeller by the late 1990s; and employment of advanced seven-blade propellers with cruciform vortex dissipaters in both its indigenous Song-class and imported Kilo-class diesel-powered submarines—suggests that the Jin may have significantly improved propellers and other quieting technology.17
Google Earth photos reveal the Jin to be larger in diameter than the Xia, and larger submarines have historically been quieter because noise reducing efforts and machinery occupy more volume.18 Moreover, subsequent-generation submarines are generally significantly quieter than those of earlier generations, so it may be expected that China has made progress in quieting its submarines as well. Nevertheless, the Jin is still a second-generation SSBN, and those of other nations have faced significant acoustic difficulties. Indeed, despite Russian technology and assistance, China is unlikely to have yet fully exploited all possible technologies given the major challenges involved.
Training is another potential challenge for China's emerging SSBN force. Although digital training and simulations can be useful, the only way other nations have become proficient at submarine operations is to take the boats to sea. Chinese exercises have increased in sophistication in recent years and currently encompass such categories as command and control, navigation, electronic countermeasures, and weapon testing.19
The PLAN has for some time pursued occasional nuclear-powered submarine missions of extended duration. In his memoirs, Admiral Liu Huaqing relates that he raised the priority of long-duration exercises for PLAN nuclear-powered attack submarines to test all parameters of new capabilities.20 Apparently as part of these expanded activities, the author of a recent Chinese publication on the development of the PLAN's nuclear-powered submarine force asserts that the current PLAN Assistant Chief of General Staff, two-star Admiral Sun Jianguo, commanded the nuclear-powered attack submarine Han 403 during a mid-1980s mission of 90 days.21 Another Chinese source states that this mission broke an 84-day undersea endurance record previously held by the USS Nautilus (SSN-571).22
Notwithstanding such reported achievements, and frequent shorter missions, Chinese submarine patrols have been relatively infrequent in most years—though the PLAN conducted 12 patrols in 2008, twice the number of patrols in 2007.23 As Jane's Navy International explains, "A patrol in this vernacular would seem to equate to a sustained seagoing deployment—lasting weeks at a time—to perform a specific task or mission, for instance: to 'track and trail' other submarines; participate in naval defense operations in coastal or extra-coastal areas; collect intelligence; or shadow surface units."24
This increase in patrols and the overall priority accorded to China's submarine force development suggest that the PLAN's submarines are now able to range farther afield on a more frequent basis. Indeed, the evolving missions and growing capabilities of the Chinese submarine force "create the conditions for Beijing to opt for an increased submarine presence in the Western Pacific east of the Ryukyu Island chain."25
While the trajectory of training specifically relevant to deterrent patrols remains opaque, the PLAN is striving to improve the rigor and realism of education and training across the board. Within this context, submarines have clearly been an area of emphasis and the PLAN is using a variety of methods to prepare its sailors for future wars. Official Chinese publications note, for example, that various types of simulators have been used to improve submarine training.26
Communications Hurdle
Establishing and maintaining secure and reliable communications with SSBNs constitutes a major challenge for any country that desires a sea-based deterrent. Chinese military publications emphasize that the central leadership must maintain strict, highly-centralized command and control of nuclear forces at all times and under all circumstances, a principle Beijing will undoubtedly seek to apply to its SSBNs as well as its land-based nuclear forces.27
The Central Military Commission (CMC), the PRC's highest-ranking military decision-making body, which is currently chaired by Hu Jintao, the President of China and general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, exercises direct command and control over China's strategic missile forces through the Second Artillery Corps. Presumably, the CMC would also exercise direct command and control over deployed SSBNs through the General Staff Department or PLAN headquarters. Indeed, China's 2002 Defense White Paper states that submarines capable of assuming the "strategic nuclear counterattack mission" are under the "direct command" of the CMC.28 Moreover, according to authors John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, China's SSBN force, like all other nuclear units, is overseen and coordinated by the Strategic Forces Bureau, under the Operations Department of the General Staff Department. This is intended to ensure that "Only the [Central Military Commission] Chairman . . . has the authority to launch any nuclear weapons after getting the concurrence of the Politburo Standing Committee and the [Central Military Commission]."29
China's submarine force has reportedly employed high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and very-low-frequency (VLF) communications.30 Researchers are working on a number of technologies that could be useful for secure communications with submarines, as reflected by recent publications discussing the prevention of enemy detection of transmissions between submarines and shore-based headquarters units.
In addition, Chinese analysts have also shown interest in the practices of the U.S. Navy's highly survivable TACAMO (Take Charge and Move Out) air fleet, which uses a wide range of frequencies to receive, verify, and retransmit emergency action messages between the U.S. national command authority and the nuclear triad.31 It remains unclear, however, to what extent centralized SSBN command, control, and communication is possible for China across the range of nuclear scenarios. This suggests another critical problem for the PLAN: ensuring the ability to communicate with SSBNs in an environment in which its command-and-control system has been degraded.
Beyond the problem of ensuring secure and reliable communications, the deployment of SSBNs also entails use-control challenges. Given the strong emphasis on centralized control of nuclear forces that is evident in official Chinese military and defense policy publications, it seems highly unlikely that the PLAN would conduct deterrent patrols without effective use controls. Presumably, China will strive not only to develop a communications capability that is robust enough to ensure at least one-way wartime connectivity between Beijing and the Jin-class SSBNs, but also to minimize the possibility of an accidental or unauthorized launch by implementing some combination of technical and procedural controls.
Notwithstanding the recent series of revelations about China's emerging SSBN force, a number of unanswered questions that have major implications for the future of China's sea-based deterrent remain. Three stand out as particularly important. First is the issue of how many SSBNs China will ultimately build, which will determine deterrence patrol tempos. Second, it remains unclear whether China will attempt to create bastions for its SSBNs in areas close to the mainland or deploy them to more distant patrol areas-a decision which will no doubt be informed in part by the capabilities of the JL-2 SLBM, which remains under development. Third, China is unlikely to reveal any information about its plans for coping with the command-and-control challenges associated with the deployment of a sea-based deterrent force, which could influence crisis stability and the security of China's retaliatory capability.
While these uncertainties remain, the investment already made in SSBN hulls and shore facilities indicates that the program represents a major effort to move beyond the ill-fated Xia and take China's deterrent to sea. In addition, the emergence of photos of at least two Type 094 submarines—and the apparent willingness to allow Western analysts to see them—appears to signal a new level of confidence on Beijing's part, and perhaps even a nascent recognition that modest increases in transparency could actually support China's strategic interests. Continued progress in this direction may be essential to avoiding a repeat of the Cold War at sea waged by the U.S. and Soviet navies in part to secure the undersea portion of their nuclear triads.
An Undersea Deterrent?
U.S. NAVY
Two Chinese trawlers stop directly in the path of the USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23) forcing the ship to an emergency "all stop." This and other actions on 8 March represented a coordinated effort to dissuade the United States from monitoring China's latest nuclear-powered submarines and their area of operations.
By Andrew S. Erickson and Michael Chase
China's investment in a nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine force and the accompanying infrastructure indicates a major effort to take the boats to sea.
Increasingly aggressive Chinese harassment of U.S. survey vessels came to a head on 8 March when five Chinese ships surrounded the ocean surveillance ship USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23), with one Chinese crew member even apparently attempting to snag her towed array with a grappling hook. The Impeccable was operating in international waters 75 miles south of China's new Yalong Bay submarine base on Hainan Island, prompting speculation that the Chinese actions represented a coordinated effort to dissuade the United States from monitoring China's latest nuclear-powered submarines and their area of operations. According to Xiamen University South China Sea expert Li Jinming, "It is well known that the submarine base was established [at Hainan], so it is unacceptable for China to have the U.S. Navy snooping around so close." This incident suggests that Beijing may be particularly sensitive about U.S. activities in this region, in part because it appears poised to become the home base of China's second generation of nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarines (SSBNs), the Type 094, or Jin-class.
The emergence of the Jin appears to represent a substantial improvement over its first-generation Type 092 Xia SSBN. China may build five Type 094 SSBNs, each of which will be outfitted with 12 developmental JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) that have an estimated range of at least 7,200 km and are equipped with penetration aids.1 China's single Xia is equipped with short-range (1,770 km) JL-1 SLBMs and it is thought to never have conducted an extended patrol.
Although the transition to the new SSBN is ongoing, recent Internet photos depicting at least two Jin SSBNs suggest that China has reached an unprecedented level of confidence in the sea-based leg of its strategic nuclear forces. Indeed, China's 2008 Defense White Paper states that the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is enhancing its "nuclear counterattack" capability.2 With the introduction of the DF-31 and DF-31A road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and the JL-2 missiles on Jin SSBNs, China is thus on the verge of achieving a credible nuclear deterrent based on a survivable second-strike capability.
Recent Developments
While the exact trajectory and scope of China's SSBN development remains unclear, a variety of data points are emerging. The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) assesses that although China built only a single Xia SSBN, it will build a "fleet of probably five Type 094 SSBNs . . . to provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea presence."3 A variety of Chinese publications suggest that the SSBN forces of France and Britain—which have four vessels each, with one at sea at all times, two in refit, and one under maintenance—may serve as models for China and hence possible indications of its plans.4 One Chinese source, however, suggests that China will field six 094 SSBNs, divided into patrolling, deploying, and refitting groups.5 Consistent with this projection, another source suggests that these groups will comprise two SSBNs each.6
It is clear that at least two different hulls have already been launched, based on unusually high-resolution Internet and commercial satellite images that have emerged of one Jin in port at Xiaopingdao, two Jins in the water and perhaps one emerging from production at Huludao, and one at a newly-constructed submarine facility at Yalong Bay near Sanya on Hainan Island.7
Exactly how many different hulls are depicted in these photos remains uncertain, but the images of the facility on Hainan Island appear to provide some hints as to the PLAN's SSBN basing plans. The photo of the Jin at Yalong Bay suggests that the facility may be the base for China's future SSBNs. Images available on Google Earth suggest that the Hainan facility, with its more than 23-meter-wide and over 19-meter-high cave entrance, was designed to accommodate larger submarines such as the Jin, which appears to be about 148 meters long and 12 meters wide. Google Earth imagery of China's nuclear-powered submarine base at Jianggezhuang (with its approximately 13-meter-wide cave entrance) suggests that its maintenance tunnel may be too narrow to accommodate the Jin. There also appear to be few convenient pier locations at other ports for additional submarines. The Hainan facility, by contrast, has three piers and a possible degaussing facility, perhaps offering further rationale for its development as China builds additional submarines.8
China's Motives
Many analysts have focused on the survivability issue as the main reason for China's decision to proceed with the development of the Jin and the JL-2. Given the potential vulnerability of Chinese SSBNs to detection by adversary attack submarines and the challenges of locating dispersed road-mobile missiles, however, it would certainly seem that Chinese decision-makers must also have been considering other factors, including countering missile defense, increasing international nuclear prestige, and inter-service politics.
Chinese strategists appear to calculate that a nuclear dyad—composed of land-based strategic missiles and SLBMs—is required to enhance the credibility of China's nuclear deterrent in line with the requirements of the "effective counter-nuclear deterrence" posture discussed in recent Chinese publications. As "the most survivable type of (nuclear) weapon," an SSBN can allow China to deter third-party intervention in a regional conflict.9 Citing the development of the Jin, one Chinese source states, "If a war erupts across the Taiwan Strait one day, facing the danger of China waging nuclear war, it will be very difficult for America to intervene in the cross-strait military crisis."10
For more than four decades, China's stated policy has been that it will never use nuclear weapons first. Although recent statements by some Chinese commentators suggest that this may be under debate, it has nonetheless been reiterated consistently in several major publications on military strategy and doctrine. Accordingly, we interpret the Chinese comments here to mean not that China would be likely to launch nuclear weapons first in response to U.S. intervention in a China-Taiwan conflict, but rather that Chinese analysts believe strong SSBN capabilities would enhance deterrence by causing Washington to think twice about intervening in a conflict in which escalation control might be difficult.
Another explanation for the Jin is that Chinese planners believe SLBMs launched from certain patrol areas might complicate U.S. missile-defense interception efforts "by being able to launch . . . along azimuths outside the [systems'] engagement zones."11 Toshi Yoshihara of the Naval War College contends that "for at least the next two decades, missile defense . . . will have no answer to a capable SSBN patrolling the open ocean."12 A Chinese analysis likewise states that SSBNs "are more capable of penetrating [missile] defenses."13
Yet another explanation for the decision to deploy the Jin is that Chinese leaders may view the ships as symbols of the PRC's emerging great-power status. The other permanent members of the UN Security Council—France, Britain, Russia, and the United States—all have modern SSBNs in their fleets, and Beijing may see the deployment of its own as a way to enhance its international prestige. This certainly appears to be true of nuclear-powered submarines in general. One Chinese-published analysis emphasizes the precise correlation between membership in the UN Security Council and the development of nuclear-powered submarines.14 Similarly, former PLAN Commander Admiral Liu Huaqing and others state that such submarines represent one of China's clearest claims to status as a "great power."15
Another possible explanation that should not be discounted is inter-service politics. Little or no empirical information on this topic is available since the politics of China's defense budget process are opaque to outsiders. But, it seems reasonable to speculate that the PLAN leadership may have pushed for the development of the Jin-class to ensure that the navy would have a role to play in the strategic nuclear-deterrence mission, thereby increasing its share of defense spending.
Operational Challenges
Notwithstanding the considerable progress reflected by the launching of at least two Jin SSBNs, the PLAN still faces at least three key challenges before it realizes a secure seaborne second-strike capability: reducing the probability of detection; at sea training of commanders and crew members; and coping with the nuclear command-and-control issues associated with the operation of SSBNs.
Chinese observers are well aware of the challenges of avoiding detection, as reflected by their analysis of capabilities allegedly demonstrated during the Cold War vis-a-vis Soviet submarines. With respect to China's assessment of the Cold War at sea, one particularly noteworthy publication is the Chinese translation of a Russian book, Secrets of Cold War Undersea Espionage, which alleges that "U.S. nuclear and conventional submarines would often lurk along the routes of Soviet warships . . . conducting intelligence activities." This volume also claims that "the SOSUS [Sound Surveillance] system substantially helped the U.S. to cope with the capabilities of the Soviet submarine force," and credits the United States with building an "acoustic signature catalogue (resembling a fingerprint) for Soviet submarines."16
China must recognize that acoustic liabilities hampered Soviet SSBNs' effectiveness, so there is reason to believe that it has worked to address these issues. A variety of evidence—including Chinese research on acoustics, sound isolation couplings, and advanced composite materials; development of a relatively advanced guide-vane propeller by the late 1990s; and employment of advanced seven-blade propellers with cruciform vortex dissipaters in both its indigenous Song-class and imported Kilo-class diesel-powered submarines—suggests that the Jin may have significantly improved propellers and other quieting technology.17
Google Earth photos reveal the Jin to be larger in diameter than the Xia, and larger submarines have historically been quieter because noise reducing efforts and machinery occupy more volume.18 Moreover, subsequent-generation submarines are generally significantly quieter than those of earlier generations, so it may be expected that China has made progress in quieting its submarines as well. Nevertheless, the Jin is still a second-generation SSBN, and those of other nations have faced significant acoustic difficulties. Indeed, despite Russian technology and assistance, China is unlikely to have yet fully exploited all possible technologies given the major challenges involved.
Training is another potential challenge for China's emerging SSBN force. Although digital training and simulations can be useful, the only way other nations have become proficient at submarine operations is to take the boats to sea. Chinese exercises have increased in sophistication in recent years and currently encompass such categories as command and control, navigation, electronic countermeasures, and weapon testing.19
The PLAN has for some time pursued occasional nuclear-powered submarine missions of extended duration. In his memoirs, Admiral Liu Huaqing relates that he raised the priority of long-duration exercises for PLAN nuclear-powered attack submarines to test all parameters of new capabilities.20 Apparently as part of these expanded activities, the author of a recent Chinese publication on the development of the PLAN's nuclear-powered submarine force asserts that the current PLAN Assistant Chief of General Staff, two-star Admiral Sun Jianguo, commanded the nuclear-powered attack submarine Han 403 during a mid-1980s mission of 90 days.21 Another Chinese source states that this mission broke an 84-day undersea endurance record previously held by the USS Nautilus (SSN-571).22
Notwithstanding such reported achievements, and frequent shorter missions, Chinese submarine patrols have been relatively infrequent in most years—though the PLAN conducted 12 patrols in 2008, twice the number of patrols in 2007.23 As Jane's Navy International explains, "A patrol in this vernacular would seem to equate to a sustained seagoing deployment—lasting weeks at a time—to perform a specific task or mission, for instance: to 'track and trail' other submarines; participate in naval defense operations in coastal or extra-coastal areas; collect intelligence; or shadow surface units."24
This increase in patrols and the overall priority accorded to China's submarine force development suggest that the PLAN's submarines are now able to range farther afield on a more frequent basis. Indeed, the evolving missions and growing capabilities of the Chinese submarine force "create the conditions for Beijing to opt for an increased submarine presence in the Western Pacific east of the Ryukyu Island chain."25
While the trajectory of training specifically relevant to deterrent patrols remains opaque, the PLAN is striving to improve the rigor and realism of education and training across the board. Within this context, submarines have clearly been an area of emphasis and the PLAN is using a variety of methods to prepare its sailors for future wars. Official Chinese publications note, for example, that various types of simulators have been used to improve submarine training.26
Communications Hurdle
Establishing and maintaining secure and reliable communications with SSBNs constitutes a major challenge for any country that desires a sea-based deterrent. Chinese military publications emphasize that the central leadership must maintain strict, highly-centralized command and control of nuclear forces at all times and under all circumstances, a principle Beijing will undoubtedly seek to apply to its SSBNs as well as its land-based nuclear forces.27
The Central Military Commission (CMC), the PRC's highest-ranking military decision-making body, which is currently chaired by Hu Jintao, the President of China and general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, exercises direct command and control over China's strategic missile forces through the Second Artillery Corps. Presumably, the CMC would also exercise direct command and control over deployed SSBNs through the General Staff Department or PLAN headquarters. Indeed, China's 2002 Defense White Paper states that submarines capable of assuming the "strategic nuclear counterattack mission" are under the "direct command" of the CMC.28 Moreover, according to authors John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, China's SSBN force, like all other nuclear units, is overseen and coordinated by the Strategic Forces Bureau, under the Operations Department of the General Staff Department. This is intended to ensure that "Only the [Central Military Commission] Chairman . . . has the authority to launch any nuclear weapons after getting the concurrence of the Politburo Standing Committee and the [Central Military Commission]."29
China's submarine force has reportedly employed high-frequency (HF), low-frequency (LF), and very-low-frequency (VLF) communications.30 Researchers are working on a number of technologies that could be useful for secure communications with submarines, as reflected by recent publications discussing the prevention of enemy detection of transmissions between submarines and shore-based headquarters units.
In addition, Chinese analysts have also shown interest in the practices of the U.S. Navy's highly survivable TACAMO (Take Charge and Move Out) air fleet, which uses a wide range of frequencies to receive, verify, and retransmit emergency action messages between the U.S. national command authority and the nuclear triad.31 It remains unclear, however, to what extent centralized SSBN command, control, and communication is possible for China across the range of nuclear scenarios. This suggests another critical problem for the PLAN: ensuring the ability to communicate with SSBNs in an environment in which its command-and-control system has been degraded.
Beyond the problem of ensuring secure and reliable communications, the deployment of SSBNs also entails use-control challenges. Given the strong emphasis on centralized control of nuclear forces that is evident in official Chinese military and defense policy publications, it seems highly unlikely that the PLAN would conduct deterrent patrols without effective use controls. Presumably, China will strive not only to develop a communications capability that is robust enough to ensure at least one-way wartime connectivity between Beijing and the Jin-class SSBNs, but also to minimize the possibility of an accidental or unauthorized launch by implementing some combination of technical and procedural controls.
Notwithstanding the recent series of revelations about China's emerging SSBN force, a number of unanswered questions that have major implications for the future of China's sea-based deterrent remain. Three stand out as particularly important. First is the issue of how many SSBNs China will ultimately build, which will determine deterrence patrol tempos. Second, it remains unclear whether China will attempt to create bastions for its SSBNs in areas close to the mainland or deploy them to more distant patrol areas-a decision which will no doubt be informed in part by the capabilities of the JL-2 SLBM, which remains under development. Third, China is unlikely to reveal any information about its plans for coping with the command-and-control challenges associated with the deployment of a sea-based deterrent force, which could influence crisis stability and the security of China's retaliatory capability.
While these uncertainties remain, the investment already made in SSBN hulls and shore facilities indicates that the program represents a major effort to move beyond the ill-fated Xia and take China's deterrent to sea. In addition, the emergence of photos of at least two Type 094 submarines—and the apparent willingness to allow Western analysts to see them—appears to signal a new level of confidence on Beijing's part, and perhaps even a nascent recognition that modest increases in transparency could actually support China's strategic interests. Continued progress in this direction may be essential to avoiding a repeat of the Cold War at sea waged by the U.S. and Soviet navies in part to secure the undersea portion of their nuclear triads.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,615
- Likes
- 5,772
(Continued from above...)
1. See Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2008, p. 56.
2. "China's National Defense in 2008" (Beijing: State Council Information Office, January 2009), http://merln.ndu.edu/whitepapers/China_English2008.pdf.
3. Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), "Seapower Questions on the Chinese Submarine Force," 20 December 2006, http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/ONI2006.pdf.
4. See, for example, Ming Zhou, "In Direct Proximity to French Nuclear Submarines," Naval & Merchant Ships No. 9 (2005), pp. 18-21.
5. Jian Jie, "The Legend of the Virtuous Twins," World Outlook, no. 448 (August 2002), p. 23.
6. Lin Changsheng, "The Combat Power of China's Nuclear Submarines," World Aerospace Digest, no. 103 (September 2004), p. 33.
7. Hans M. Kristensen, Strategic Security Blog; "A Closer Look at China's New SSBNs," 15 October 2007; "Two More Chinese SSBNs Spotted," 10 October 2007; "New Chinese Ballistic Missile Submarine Spotted," 5 July 2007.
8. Hans Kristensen, "New Chinese SSBN Deploys to Hainan Island," 24 April 2008, Strategic Security Blog.
9. Zhang Feng, "Nuclear Submarines and China's Navy," Naval & Merchant Ships (March 2005), p. 12.
10. "China's at Sea Deterrent," Military Overview, no. 101, p. 53.
11. Michael McDevitt, "The Strategic and Operational Context Driving PLA Navy Building," Roy Kamphausen and Andrew Scobell, eds., Right-Sizing the People's Liberation Army: Exploring the Contours of China's Military (Carlisle, PA: Army War College, 2007), p. 512.
12. Toshi Yoshihara, "U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense and China's Undersea Nuclear Deterrent: A Preliminary Assessment," in Erickson, Lyle Goldstein, William Murray, and Andrew Wilson, eds., China's Future Nuclear Submarine Force (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2007), p. 340.
13. Wang Yifeng and Ye Jing, "What the Nuclear Submarine Incident Between China and Japan Tells Us About the Ability of China's Nuclear Submarines to Penetrate Defenses, Part 1," Shipborne Weapons (January 2005), pp. 27-31.
14. Lin Changsheng, p. 27.
15. Liu Huaqing, The Memoirs of Liu Huaqing (Beijing: People's Liberation Army Press, 2004), p. 476.
16. Zykov and Baikov, Secrets of Undersea Espionage (Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Press, 2006), pp. 10-12.
17. Gao Yun, "The Strengths and Weaknesses of Nuclear Submarines," National Defense, no. 6 (1996), p. 45. Zhao Hongjiang, "Study of Replacing Techniques for Flexure Joint-Pipe of Main Circulating Water-Piping," China Ship-Repair, no. 6 (1997), pp. 21-23. Ren Yongsheng and Liu Lihou, "Advances in Damping Analysis and Design of Fiber Reinforced Composite Material Structures," Mechanics & Engineering 26, no. 1 (February 2004), pp. 9-16. Shen Hongcui et al., "Submarine Guide Vane Propeller for Increasing Efficiency and Reducing Noise, Journal of Ship Mechanics 1, no. 1 (August 1997), pp. 1-7.
18. See Tom Stefanick, Strategic Anti-Submarine Warfare and Naval Strategy (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1987), p. 274, Figure A6-5.
19. Office of Naval Intelligence, Handbook on China's Navy 2007, p. 34.
20. Liu Huaqing, pp. 474-77, 494.
21. Peng Ziqiang, The Research and Development of Chinese Nuclear Submarines (Beijing: Central Party School Press, 2005), p. 286.
22. Huang Caihong et al., Nuclear Submarines (Beijing: People's Press, 1996), p. 91.
23. Hans Kristensen, "Chinese Submarine Patrols Doubled in 2008," Strategic Security Blog, 3 February 2009, Chinese Submarine Patrols Doubled in 2008 « FAS Strategic Security Blog.
24. Richard Scott, "China's Submarine Force Awaits a Cultural Revolution," Jane's Navy International, 1 January 2008, Jane's Information Group.
25. ONI.
26. Liu Jian, "Submarine Academy Emphasizes Teaching and Training Under Complex and Emergency Conditions," People's Navy, 15 December 2006, p. 1.
27. Wang Houqing and Zhang Xingye, ed., The Science of Campaigns (Beijing: National Defense University Press, 2000), pp. 369-71.
28. "China's National Defense in 2002" (Beijing: State Council Information Office, December 2002), Govt. White Papers - china.org.cn.
29. John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, Imagined Enemies: China Prepares for Uncertain War (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), p. 120.
30. Garth Hekler, Ed Francis, and James Mulvenon, "Command, Control, and Communications in the Chinese Submarine Fleet," in Erickson, Goldstein, Murray, and Wilson, pp. 212-28.
31. Wang Xinsen, "The Call of the Devil: Submarine Communications Aircraft," Naval & Merchant Ships, no. 287 (August 2003), pp. 42-45.
Dr. Erickson is an associate professor at the China Maritime Studies Institute, Naval War College. He is coeditor of the Naval Institute Press books China Goes to Sea (July 2009), China's Energy Strategy (2008), and China's Future Nuclear Submarine Force (2007). Dr. Chase is an assistant professor in NWC's Strategy and Policy Department. He is the author of Taiwan's Security: External Threats and Domestic Politics (Lynne Rienner, 2008).
1. See Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2008, p. 56.
2. "China's National Defense in 2008" (Beijing: State Council Information Office, January 2009), http://merln.ndu.edu/whitepapers/China_English2008.pdf.
3. Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), "Seapower Questions on the Chinese Submarine Force," 20 December 2006, http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/ONI2006.pdf.
4. See, for example, Ming Zhou, "In Direct Proximity to French Nuclear Submarines," Naval & Merchant Ships No. 9 (2005), pp. 18-21.
5. Jian Jie, "The Legend of the Virtuous Twins," World Outlook, no. 448 (August 2002), p. 23.
6. Lin Changsheng, "The Combat Power of China's Nuclear Submarines," World Aerospace Digest, no. 103 (September 2004), p. 33.
7. Hans M. Kristensen, Strategic Security Blog; "A Closer Look at China's New SSBNs," 15 October 2007; "Two More Chinese SSBNs Spotted," 10 October 2007; "New Chinese Ballistic Missile Submarine Spotted," 5 July 2007.
8. Hans Kristensen, "New Chinese SSBN Deploys to Hainan Island," 24 April 2008, Strategic Security Blog.
9. Zhang Feng, "Nuclear Submarines and China's Navy," Naval & Merchant Ships (March 2005), p. 12.
10. "China's at Sea Deterrent," Military Overview, no. 101, p. 53.
11. Michael McDevitt, "The Strategic and Operational Context Driving PLA Navy Building," Roy Kamphausen and Andrew Scobell, eds., Right-Sizing the People's Liberation Army: Exploring the Contours of China's Military (Carlisle, PA: Army War College, 2007), p. 512.
12. Toshi Yoshihara, "U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense and China's Undersea Nuclear Deterrent: A Preliminary Assessment," in Erickson, Lyle Goldstein, William Murray, and Andrew Wilson, eds., China's Future Nuclear Submarine Force (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2007), p. 340.
13. Wang Yifeng and Ye Jing, "What the Nuclear Submarine Incident Between China and Japan Tells Us About the Ability of China's Nuclear Submarines to Penetrate Defenses, Part 1," Shipborne Weapons (January 2005), pp. 27-31.
14. Lin Changsheng, p. 27.
15. Liu Huaqing, The Memoirs of Liu Huaqing (Beijing: People's Liberation Army Press, 2004), p. 476.
16. Zykov and Baikov, Secrets of Undersea Espionage (Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Press, 2006), pp. 10-12.
17. Gao Yun, "The Strengths and Weaknesses of Nuclear Submarines," National Defense, no. 6 (1996), p. 45. Zhao Hongjiang, "Study of Replacing Techniques for Flexure Joint-Pipe of Main Circulating Water-Piping," China Ship-Repair, no. 6 (1997), pp. 21-23. Ren Yongsheng and Liu Lihou, "Advances in Damping Analysis and Design of Fiber Reinforced Composite Material Structures," Mechanics & Engineering 26, no. 1 (February 2004), pp. 9-16. Shen Hongcui et al., "Submarine Guide Vane Propeller for Increasing Efficiency and Reducing Noise, Journal of Ship Mechanics 1, no. 1 (August 1997), pp. 1-7.
18. See Tom Stefanick, Strategic Anti-Submarine Warfare and Naval Strategy (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1987), p. 274, Figure A6-5.
19. Office of Naval Intelligence, Handbook on China's Navy 2007, p. 34.
20. Liu Huaqing, pp. 474-77, 494.
21. Peng Ziqiang, The Research and Development of Chinese Nuclear Submarines (Beijing: Central Party School Press, 2005), p. 286.
22. Huang Caihong et al., Nuclear Submarines (Beijing: People's Press, 1996), p. 91.
23. Hans Kristensen, "Chinese Submarine Patrols Doubled in 2008," Strategic Security Blog, 3 February 2009, Chinese Submarine Patrols Doubled in 2008 « FAS Strategic Security Blog.
24. Richard Scott, "China's Submarine Force Awaits a Cultural Revolution," Jane's Navy International, 1 January 2008, Jane's Information Group.
25. ONI.
26. Liu Jian, "Submarine Academy Emphasizes Teaching and Training Under Complex and Emergency Conditions," People's Navy, 15 December 2006, p. 1.
27. Wang Houqing and Zhang Xingye, ed., The Science of Campaigns (Beijing: National Defense University Press, 2000), pp. 369-71.
28. "China's National Defense in 2002" (Beijing: State Council Information Office, December 2002), Govt. White Papers - china.org.cn.
29. John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, Imagined Enemies: China Prepares for Uncertain War (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), p. 120.
30. Garth Hekler, Ed Francis, and James Mulvenon, "Command, Control, and Communications in the Chinese Submarine Fleet," in Erickson, Goldstein, Murray, and Wilson, pp. 212-28.
31. Wang Xinsen, "The Call of the Devil: Submarine Communications Aircraft," Naval & Merchant Ships, no. 287 (August 2003), pp. 42-45.
Dr. Erickson is an associate professor at the China Maritime Studies Institute, Naval War College. He is coeditor of the Naval Institute Press books China Goes to Sea (July 2009), China's Energy Strategy (2008), and China's Future Nuclear Submarine Force (2007). Dr. Chase is an assistant professor in NWC's Strategy and Policy Department. He is the author of Taiwan's Security: External Threats and Domestic Politics (Lynne Rienner, 2008).
