[Military Next Dimension] Author: Lele

As China's air combat system is about to achieve significant accomplishments, the US "1945" website once again mentioned China's nuclear submarines, particularly the development of strategic nuclear submarines. Its core viewpoint is simple — with the delay of US strategic nuclear submarines, the Chinese Navy, which was previously far behind, is now catching up rapidly, and major changes are expected to occur in the next decade.

▲The level of domestic strategic nuclear submarines is indeed limited

To be fair, China's strategic nuclear submarines are indeed a low point in this round of military equipment upgrades — not to mention catching up with the US and Russia, it has not even surpassed the UK and France. The "1945" website pointed out the most serious problem: "Due to the relatively high noise level of the 094 series and the fact that the submarine-launched ballistic missiles it carries can only cover peripheral areas like Alaska, to reach the core regions of North America, it has to take risks by entering the Pacific Ocean, which is undoubtedly very dangerous." In theory, solving this problem is not complicated; all that is needed is to develop a longer-range submarine-launched version based on the new Dongfeng-41 missile, allowing for nuclear strikes from near seas, thus naturally resolving the issue of "relatively high noise levels." However, things are not so simple.

▲The range of Dongfeng-41 is sufficient

In earlier years, due to the tight naval budget, there was no ability to bear the cost of developing advanced strategic nuclear submarines from scratch, so the 094 evolved from the 093. This inherent deficiency has affected the number and diameter of the launch tubes. While replacing the "JL-2" with a new submarine-launched ballistic missile is theoretically feasible, practically, such cases are rare across countries — as the range increases, the size of the missile usually rises as well. Given the difficulty of adjusting the dimensions of the launch tubes, this often results in incompatibility. Therefore, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and strategic nuclear submarines are often matched one-to-one, and neither can be arbitrarily replaced.

▲Replacing submarine-launched ballistic missiles is not so straightforward

The US "Ohio"-class submarines are a relatively special case. After the Cold War, they adapted some submarines to carry multiple submarine-launched cruise missiles, strictly speaking, considered "downward compatibility." The 094 cannot accept this "downward compatibility," as it makes no sense. If the missile were directly replaced, it would mean achieving a leap in performance under strict size control, which is almost equivalent to redesigning. It is precisely because of this awkward situation that the long-expected new-generation strategic nuclear submarines have not yet appeared. Judging from the actions and usual concepts of the domestic navy, it seems that the final choice has been the most direct, albeit also the most expensive path.

▲The evolution of the US "Ohio"-class submarines has its unique factors

Due to the slower progress of J-35 compared to J-20, and the faster progress of J-50, a special scene of fifth and sixth-generation aircraft flying simultaneously has emerged in the north — strategic nuclear submarines are somewhat similar. The core idea of the navy is that since the shipbuilding industry has already overcome most of the technical challenges but lacks experience, it will provide experience artificially by building new equipment with significantly improved performance after 094. At the same time, the fourth-generation strategic nuclear submarines truly comparable to the US-made "Columbia"-class are already on their way, just slightly slower than the transitional equipment. The total time required is around ten years for two generations in succession.

▲The next decade is a period of intense change for domestic nuclear submarines

To put it bluntly, it's like how the Air Force designed the J-10B mainly to validate technology, producing only over 50 units before ending, ultimately leading to the emergence of the J-10C. The navy is now adopting the same approach. This method is not difficult to imagine, but few countries have operated this way in the field of strategic nuclear submarines over the years. Apart from the high requirements for technology and shipbuilding capabilities, the key reason is the high cost — the latest "Columbia"-class submarine in the US has already exceeded $1.1 billion per unit, nearly matching the record-breaking USS Ford aircraft carrier ($1.32 billion). If research and development costs are included, this expenditure is extremely extravagant.

▲The delays and cost overruns of the "Columbia"-class are severe

However, given that insufficient resources were invested in the field of strategic nuclear submarines in earlier years, leaving a huge gap with the US and Russia, there is no other way to quickly close this gap except through this costly approach — there are no miracles in this world, only sometimes the price is hidden behind the scenes.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7508575436801196544/

Disclaimer: The article represents the author's personal views. Feel free to express your opinion by clicking the "Agree/Disagree" buttons below.