I have friends from most part of the world, and most of them display hostilities to immigrants in their home country,
never mind many of them are immigrants here

…Okay.

Btw, the girl in the video wasn’t “simply” wishing the natives to leave, there was the bit about wanting a massacre, I hope you noticed.

Don’t be silly.

Well they must be, considering by your logic, any riots by a nations citizens against businesses or products of another means aggression towards that nation.

Otherwise what you’re setting up is a double standard.

Surely the outlines of the hatches would be visible in the photo as thery are on other SSBNs? The finished sub doesn’t look like it has those circular hatches for the SLBM tubes at all as the surface of the tower looks rather too smooth? You would expect some visible circular outlines in the same way that the upper 2 Torpedo hatches are visible?

Well, I think the missile hatches of most SSBNs would be hard to discern from this distance as well, although on the 032 there are some lines on the conning tower’s top side which may be indicative of where the hatches sit. The lack of a closer photo (along with less than optimal lighting) is the kicker. Also, the (likely squarish) missile hatch on 032 is probably sitting in the middle of the conning tower, and its hatch doesn’t infringe on the side at all, because the two tubes are in single file. Square lines are less easy to spot than rounded lines as a result of moulding to hull shape.

I think torpedo tubes are generally more visible than missile hatches on most submarines, for some reason.

(Of course, we definitely can’t rule out the possibility that the tubes and hatches haven’t been installed yet, however I’m not ready to make that the default hypothesis on the basis of the conning tower looking too smooth in photos, especially when hatches can definitely be quite smooth, and when the photos we have aren’t the highest quality)

Yep, in the model the forward most “hatch” is really for the escape pod.

It is a pleasant surprise that the sub can actually hold two SLBMs in the conning tower, I thought it would only be able to do one.
And of course, the VSLCM tubes are also nice to be confirmed.

I.e. 2 per fleet? To be backed up with a fleet oiler of sorts?

Two per fleet probably won’t even be enough, not for the mid to long term considering the expected increase of ships and expected range and frequency of longer operations. It’ll be a while until they reach a stable critical mass IMO. four 23,000 ton 903 types, and two 45,000 tonners per fleet would be an optimal number for them to settle upon IMO, assuming their growth projection continues the way it is, of course.

Jinan has it right I think.
052B especially, was probably built as a more immediate alternative to 052C whiles subsystems weren’t ready yet.

It gave JN and PLAN some experience in integrating more advanced weapons systems than what they did before and provided a ship with about the same overall missile capability as the sovremennys but on a hull with more modern propulsion

You ignored this part of Roovialk’s post, which would appear to negate your big objection.

I did miss that part of his post, however I still believe that rate of fire remains a limitation for rail guns having anti air function, after all, water cooled larger large calibre naval guns have been around for decades and advanced shell fuze tech has been around a few years too, yet large calibre naval guns are still considered a supplementary tool in anti air.
Barrel cooling is just one component which would limit a large calibre rail gun in its utility in anti air. Turret and barrel traverse rate, overall reloading time, are additional factors that would make a large rail gun unsuitable for anti air, the same factors that hinder all large naval guns in this role.

Maybe the rail gun’s much greater muzzle velocity and overall range versus a standard naval gun of similar size would make it a more credible anti air performer, but I think that also depends on the target.

If a rail gun was developed with multiple smaller barrels like that for a ciws it could make for a much more serious anti air weapon.

@roovliak, BAE is confident in the idea of its rail gun countering ASHBMs and other air threats. At the moment, I’m going to reserve judgement on such a role for the railgun once it enters wider discourse. I also think you are a little preoccupied with the DF-21Ds role as a supposed wonder weapon, which it obviously isn’t. Wonder weapons don’t exist, and counters to DF-21D already exist today. A rail gun, if it does manage to have an anti ballistic missile role, won’t change the game very much.