crobatoUS Navy seldom reveals its SSN operations either, so equally unlike the 110db claim is from USN, and one SSN in operation state is hard to measure another SSN’s accurate noise level. But we do know, if Western Navies does detect a Chinese Submarine, usually, it will catch the headline, for example, when a PLAN 091 SSN being detected near the Japanese controlled isles in 2004, it did stir the western media for quite a while.
The 091 went full speed in shallow depth. That sounded more like a deliberate attempt to be heard and send a message.
I gather that the USN did detect the 093s, well enough to publicly reveal the existance and launching of the sub (subs) and presume that there may be 2 to 3 out there. They probably did detect the 094 too, which is why like the 093, they made it clear in their literature that it exists and presumably when it was launched, even though Chinese internet observers have yet to glance a picture of the submarines in question.
What they didn’t detect was the Yuan, and that was quite a surprise for them for it to come out in in the internet first. And that’s quite odd too, because in hindsight, the Yuan was reported to have an odd noise pattern coming from the hull, which delayed further introduction of the type, though appeared to have been settled by last October.
crobatoWell, I would have to agree with most here that the F-4 was more versatile. Which, really is a American trait in Fighter Plane since WWII. Unlike the former USSR the US has not put much faith in Interceptors as a whole. Though during the cold war years a few like the F-101, F-102, F-104, and F-106 had a brief career. That said, the F-104 was a exception flying up until just recently in Italian Service. Of course few really flew in a pure interceptor role. Most operated in the latter years as fighter-bombers. As we now refer to as Strike Fighters.
Actually the US did put a lot of faith in interceptors just as the Soviet Union did, since the prevailing air scenario at that time (and rightly so) was Dr. Strangelove. Watch that movie to see what I mean. Things changed because the US got involved in a limited tactical conflict (Vietnam).
The Soviet Union is basically two airforces, one a tactical arm with shorter ranged fighters and strikers, and the another, a strategic arm with longer ranged interceptors. The concept of Sukhoi Fitters vs. Flagons deeply illustrate those twin concepts.
In the height of the Cold War, there prevails a strange nuclear Kamekaze think. You can understand this is the reason behind the F-105 Thunderchief. If you’re not an interceptor, you’re a bomber. People are literally prepared for a one way strike with a nuke under their bellies, in which you either don’t go home after you nuke your target, or expect to go home to a radioactive place yourself, making returning home a rather moot issue.
From a nuclear standoff, the situation evolved into limited proxy wars. Instead of direct confrontation, you have your satellite allies waging wars for you. This again pushed the tactical into the forefront of requirements.
crobatoFirst flight of P/F-86 in 1947.
First flight of F-100 in 1953.
First flight of F-104 in 1954 with J-65.
First flight of F-4 in 1958.
So much about same generation!
So? Time is not the criteria for ‘generation’. The main criteria has been 1.) Doctrine, 2. Aerodynamic technology, 3. Construction technology, 4. Engine technology, 5. Radar and avionics technology. In all these aspects, the F-4 and F-104 are practically contemporaries. A true next generation fighter did not happen UNTIL the lessons from Vietnam + John Boyd’s theories combined.
crobatoThe F-4 is not a generation ahead of the F-104. Only two years separate the two as they entered service, making it impossible for one to incorporate the lessons of the other into its design phase. As a matter of fact, both came in at the time when there are two dominating requirements in all fighter aircraft. The first is the minimum ability to carry a nuclear weapon. The second is to be able to intercept those carrying those nuclear weapons. This means like every aircraft of their contemporary, speed, climb, altitude and interception ability is paramount.
Both are also designed around the same engine, and construction wise, are contemporaries.
The F-4 wasn’t originally designed as a multirole jet. It was meant as a fleet defense fighter for the Navy. Thankfully, it was over engineered and proved to be adaptable beyond its original purpose.
The F-104 was also meant as a supersonic interceptor. Later it was drafted into different roles. However unlike the F-4, the small wings of the F-104 meant high wing loading which is the primary cause of lethal accidents and crashes. Despite this, the plane’s high wing loading also means the plane is also a jackrabbit down the deck, making less affected by low altitude turbulence and hard to catch. This, despite the dangers, makes the Starfighter a potent low altitude strike jet, where a smooth stable ride down low is vital.
The “export success” of the F-104 itself is mired by bribery scandals in Germany and Japan. So its hard to say how much of the plane sold by its merits, and how much is due to corruption.
There is nothing pathetic about the F-104’s radar. It’s one of the few small planes around that could hold a fairly sized radar due to its interceptor requirements, and that feature is well capitalized. As a matter of fact, the F-104 can carry radar bigger than other single engined jets, including the F-8 Crusader, MiG-21 and F-5E.
The combat record of the F-104 is rather mixed. In exercises, well flown, it can give even teen fighters a generation ahead, some nasty surprises. On the other hand, its actual combat record seems to put it in the losing end to MiGs. It did however, put in a lot of missions over Vietnam, where ironically, it proved to have a very low attrition rate, where it seems safer over Vietnam than it was over Europe. Out of over 5,000 missions, only 14 jets were lost. You can thank partly due to its zipping speed that the plane can get out of trouble so quickly.
Overall, if the F-104 had a more generous wing area, at least to the same extent as a Mirage III, it would probably end up as one of the most successful single engined fighters.
crobatoMajor intel harvest here.
KS-1A is now officially the HQ-12, which also means its officially adopted by the PLA.
crobatoI’m not so sure, those fins are pretty small and I don’t think they would be enough to give you the sort of delicate control you would need to allow a M6 projectile to hit a moving warship, even one as large as a carrier. Having terminal guidenence does not automatically mean an anti-ship version.
At high speeds, even small fins can generate more than enough control authority. Especially at the range of speeds you would expect an SRBM to make.
OMG, all these pics are going to make Richard Fisher, Bill Gertz and the entire neocon foundation working overtime.
crobatoWow so much goodies on show on the 80th aniiversary of PLA exhibition!
DF-15 Anti ship version, Type-93 SSN that looks like trafalgar/LA instead of the speculated russian SSN, and the following goodies for the PLAAF:
Wow, look at the second picture closely—the one on first row to the right.
Notice the two aircraft behind the first two J-11Bs being assembled. Hoho, these are two seaters.
crobatoTwo types of seekers?
One radar and another employing TV guided?
Yes. One probably a SLAM type and the other an AshM type.
crobatoTashkent, I think…
http://kashnich.livejournal.com/9730.html
Look at the photo number 12 from above…
Regards from Spain.
I’m sorry but the interior photos and the outside environs don’t match between the Chinese and the Tarkshent pictures.
crobatoDo you guys remember this one?
Its not Yuan, Han, 092/094 and now we know its not the 093 either…..So what is this one?
I have to say its still 093 but an early version. The sail seems identical except for the diving planes. The planes may have been removed in later sub or subs, just like the plane is said to be removed on the latest Song class.
crobatoLooks like a lot of transparency revealing for the PLA’s 80th anniversary.
crobatoHow come a prototype stage aircraft even uncertain about what radar being selected, is able to talk about “ integrating American weapons” well?
You have to define the infrastructure first before you lay the house.
crobatoSo finally they have decided to declassify it. At least some good coming out of Fallon-Pace-Eaton visits to the PLA.
Notice the sail on the sub. I think its the same as the one Hui Tong posted in his website.
The 094 is supposedly based on the 093, and I would assume the 094 would have to use the same sail. The boomer sub seen in Google Earth looks more like an expanded Xia class (possible 092A?) rather than what I would expect of the 094.
Addendum.
There is more. Sina’s own report.
http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/p/2007-07-16/2008454826.html
translated in the CDF using google.
Domestic new 093 / 091 modified nuclear attack submarines debut
July 16 morning, commemorating the 80th anniversary of the founding of the exhibition theme, “our team to the sun — since the founding of New China on national defense and army building into on the exhibition “Chinese People’s Revolutionary Military Museum officially opened.
Defense Exhibition in addition to the outdoor display 20 new domestically produced main battle equipment, in the indoor exhibition hall also displays a great deal of our achievements in 80 photographs, including equipment, logistics, communications, Special Forces and other details of the 80th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army to the minor. Photo equipment which is coming out more, including 093 nuclear-powered attack submarines, the army in recent years a large number of the major new equipment weapons.
Exhibition from the video and photos speaking 093 nuclear attack submarines in the rudder command no Han-class nuclear submarine’s rudder level , ship-bow sonar antenna similar to the special body on the distance-more than 091 command near the rudder, unlike Han-class sonar antenna in the bow-front, this should be a distinction between two 093 Han-class and the main features.
093 nuclear attack submarines is the latest one nuclear-powered attack submarines, according to Jane’s Defense briefing, 093 underwater displacement : 8,000 tons; Length : 106 meters; body width : 11 m; submarine depth : 10 m; the largest submarine depth : 400 m; Noise order to 110 decibels; sustainability for 80 days.
Main tasks of : antisubmarine missiles and nuclear submarines to safely escort major weapons for four 533 mm torpedo launchers, capable of launching various types of torpedoes and submarine-launched anti-ship missiles; missions for the anti-surface ship / ground targets, can piggyback launches long-range supersonic anti-ship missile (AShM) and offensive missile (SLCM). Precision mined (GPS navigation), and electronic countermeasures.
Noise values : Russia’s technology incorporates the design of the 093 noise production value reached with the United States, “Los Angeles” class SSN early-levels, in the attack on the basic capabilities of the former Soviet Union to achieve the ploidy and acumen. This was mainly from a variety of Russian-made heavy torpedoes imitation to decide. It is said that the speed of up to 093 50, if true, may be 093 is the world’s fastest SSN.
The appearance of the modified 091 Han-class nuclear submarine with the network model popular 091 Han-class nuclear submarine is somewhat different. This appearance for the modified 091 Han-class nuclear submarine model of the upper rudder command and measuring parallel, Early 091 Han-class nuclear submarine rudder command a clear upper slopes. If this is the case that this change will be to distinguish modified Han-class and early Han-class – one of the main features. It could also be the perspective of the issue do not see the slope model. This is just conjecture authors express their personal opinions and do not represent Sina military confirmed reader since!
crobatoIMO, “Sings in foreign language so well” means the 08 version modified J-10 will not only follow Chinese own GB military standards but also most likely the western particularly American MIL-standards ( As pointed by Hydropod, 美means America), which means the 08 Stealthier version J-10 could well be the 1st ( or 2nd after J-11B ?) to adopt western Mil-standards for design and development)
That’s should not be correct. The F-8IIM, the JH-7A, the JF-17 and even the first J-10s are said to follow western MIL standards like 1553B. Unless you want to talk about higher bandwidth standards like 1760.
crobatoI’d expect a major facility like that to handle the conversion and fitting even if complete airframes were delivered by Russia
Looking at that picture, not only does it have primered sections but panels that are still bare metal and composite. If that’s a refit, its certainly getting new skin.
Sings in foreign language: I actually didn’t quite get this one myself either
It probably means export possibilities, as with compatibility with foreign avionics and missiles through open standard architectures or buses.
Sign In
