Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech? | WSJ U.S. vs. China

[@SubBrief]

Truth is no one knows how capable the Type 096 will be until its in the water. However, China has made astonishingly rapid improvements in their combat system capability in the last 10 years. If that trend is an indication of what China is capable of in submarine construction quality, then we have a peer competitor in Asia. In submarine warfare, quality of construction and the training of the sailor is everything.

[@amatvkhmer]

Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech?

[@stickiedmin6508]

​@@amatvkhmer Why bother catching up? Seems all they need to do is copy.

[@SoonerStoneAI]

@@stickiedmin6508 Its one thing to steal a design, its another to have the manufacturing and metallurgical skill to make it work. The Russians made nuclear subs, but they never could make them quiet. When you are trying to make something silent the difficulty is infinitely higher, every bearing, motor coupling, machine guard, mounts, pump impellers etc., has to be perfect. The Chinese don't do perfect, in any level of manufacturing, they do cheap, and plentiful. In short, you will have a machine that may look similar to a US boat, with pumps that cavitate, bearings that rattle and a cheap DC power supply buzzing against the hull.

[@George196207]

174,000 students sent to Canada all CCP spies and job is to get access to all new research and capabilities. Canada under our bought and paid for dictator has Benn happy to have these 'student' placed in summer work that gives full access to secret and classified trade research that can be ported to military use . Canadian forestry research believe it or not has tech which is same as many military applications. Monitoring and mapping.......

[@corners3755]

" China has made astonishingly rapid improvements in their combat system capability in the last 10 years" How so?

[@5133937]

SSBNs are among the most closely guarded secrets in any nation’s military. It’s difficult or impossible to get any real info on these things, making comparisons like this difficult.

[@Crashed131963]

Does it matter about the Sub? Sounds like the Trident -2 can nuke any country with the sub tied at the dock.

[@jefasoAk47]

u have to believe everything you see or read on the internet. - Abe Lincoln

[@Brendissimo1]

@@Crashed131963 Yes, very much so. If the sub is sitting in port it has no more deterrence value than any number of the underground silos that house ICBMs. The primary purpose of the submarine is not to extend the range of the SLBM, but to hide the arsenal, somewhere under the ocean, so that even if the enemy achieves a totally successful surprise first strike and destroys our entire bomber fleet on the ground and all of our silos, they can be assured that we WILL strike back. This is how second strike capability works. And how you counter it, typically, is to use your attack subs and surface anti-sub assets to attempt to locate and track the enemy's SSBN's (ballistic missile subs) during peacetime. So that if war breaks out you can quickly destroy a number of them and neutralize their second-strike capability. This is why a sub's stealthiness is so critical. An SSBN that can't be detected means nuclear retaliation is assured. Which reduces the risk of the enemy launching a nuclear attack in the first place.

[@stuarthamilton5112]

You're right, which is why I have a source. I have personally spoken to USN fire control technician that has personally been on an attack submarine tasked with tailing Jin class boats, and he says they're about as loud as a Soviet Akula, easily tracked, and we know exactly where each and every single one of them are at any given time. In the SSBN game China isn't just lagging behind, they're not even on the board yet. All it would take to immediately sink their entire SSBN fleet is one order, and they have no idea that our boats are near. If they attack Taiwan, among the first instant casualties they will suffer is the loss of the bulk of their entire nuclear arsenal in one fell swoop. This is called overmatch.

[@cubsfan910]

@@stuarthamilton5112 You are clearly insane. You make it sound as if the USA would not suffer a nuclear strike at all in the event of all-out war with China. Many Chinese missles would get through and kill millions. I have done a tour on a 'Boomer', then spent my naval career in the ASW field. It would be horrific for both sides

[@proogenji7526]

The more proper comparison is between the SSBN of one country and its opponent's detection ability. You don't need to be quieter than your opponent's SSBN, but just quiet enough to evade detection.

[@KevinEnjoyer]

As soon as China's subs ditches its Soviet roots, it's going to become competitive. Currently, the Jin class is still derived from the USSR's Delta class. Cutting edge against American Skipjack-derived SSBNs like the George Washington, but woefully obsolete against America's modern SSNs and upcoming Columbia-class SSBNs in terms of quieting and stealth. Underneath the newer sensors and deadlier missiles, the Jin-class is still just a fresher Delta IV, and that isn't going to hide itself from American attack submarines trying to sniff it out.

[@stupidburp]

Some Delta class SSBN are still in service and still present a legitimate threat. They are not going to be super stealthy. But it is conceivable that they could shake off a tailing attack sub long enough to launch from the mid ocean.

[@douglassauvageau7262]

How frequently do we upgrade our SOSUS sensors? How secure (actually) are our surface terminals?

[@douglassauvageau7262]

Does that even matter if adversarial espionage has resulted in 'near-peer' qualities in propulsion-engineering (Propeller design, Battery capacity, etc.), hull-design (laminar-flow, acoustic isolation, etc.), and deception techniques?

[@Coxman]

@@douglassauvageau7262 In sub tech, the Chinese are not a peer competitor. China's subs are too loud, and has no range. China have alaways underestimated the capabilities of the US navy.

[@maxloewe9162]

Thanks WSJ for calculating the survivability of submarines in a nuclear war.

[@willengel2458]

China can never match US sub hitting unknown object in South China Sea.

[@wisenG771]

@@willengel2458 stop clowning

[@stupidburp]

Their purpose for existence is to be capable and ready enough that they present a credible deterrent and are never used for nuclear war.

[@johnsmith-cw3wo]

@@stupidburp if US would be just as busy in catching China's TRAIN tech, would be much better.

[@0xBasedChang]

it's psychotic how MSM is pushing war with china and also "China is an easy win" No one wins in nuclear war

[@binhe6500]

This is crazy. Trade, not war!

[@dravenvea2605]

the ability of ensuring mutual destruction is key to global security. the nuclear triangle of China Russia and US is the best thing we have.

[@amatvkhmer]

Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech?

[@dravenvea2605]

@@amatvkhmer no. but 50 % of US nuclear ability , together with Russia's 70% , that will be enough

[@katprowler6805]

USN SSBNs or even SSNs are at least 1.5X-2X Gen ahead of PLANs but of course when it comes to weapon systems the old adage still holds true. A 1700s musket can potentially inflict as much damage as a 21st century rifle. Either way let's pray these are nvr put to use in anger and may cooler heads prevailed.

[@raymondtay3532]

Yes China PLAN can catch up with US Nuclear submarines and have the most advanced powerful Nuclear submarines in the world. 💪💪👍👍👏👏💯💯♥️♥️

[@jasonyu4380]

they are ahead in weather balloon tech too.

[@Djamonja]

Obviously having SSBNs has an important deterrence value, but it's really not going to change much if the nuclear missiles start flying (we'll all be in bad shape). So unless you can take out every enemy SSBN plus intercept every enemy ICBM, you're still in a world barely worth living in.

[@Gbiese]

Mutually assured destruction

[@babyrob7777]

Hopefully US can mass-produce an army of AI drone swarms to mitage the risk of getting his by a Nuke. Would feel much safer with 500 million plus drones swarming the sky bat all times scanning for missiles and providing a dome of security around the entire country.

[@duncancole5687]

Good thing the U.S. can most likely intercept everything. Although, I have heard of an upper stratosphere Russian version that is completely stealth.

[@Hyperpandas]

The deterence is the point. Vengeance, or "winning" a nuclear war, not so much.

[@Dan-lg2by]

​@@duncancole5687what are u talking about the usa has only about 44 ground based interceptors for ICBMs and the sm3iia can only intercept a simple icbm under the most favorable circumstances, and even then the ground based interceptor only have about a 50 percent success rate the vast majority would make it through defenses

[@dylandigby1776]

Godspeed to the PLA 🇨🇳🫡

[@RacerX1971]

Yes, they can...

[@tonyfondacaro1980]

Having a fleet of capable submarines is one thing. Having a Navy of proficient sailors who can employ all that capability is quite another.

[@tofuyam7361]

haven't us ships been crashing into each other and being set on fire by the crew?

[@JorgeMendoza-415]

@@tofuyam7361 Ships yes, Subs no. however there was a incident where a sub ran into a undersea mountain

[@kiabtoomlauj6249]

@@tofuyam7361 Yes, and there is NO MAGIC around such learning curve. If the US has been building & fielding these since the 1950s --- with giant strike groups including a 100,000 ton carrier since the 1940s --- and it's been struggling, with the Chinese ONLY getting on the act since the 1980s and 90s, with 6 nuclear subs and 1 training carrier (a refurbished one bought from Ukraine, built in the USSR days)... you think the Chinese were BORN superior in the handling of massive ships on the high seas? These are modern, NUCLEAR SHIPS, not the cloth-based sailing trawlers the Great Chinese Admiral Zheng He sailed to Africa in the 1300 - 1400s, before the adventures of Christopher Columbus from Europe! LOL With those Bronze Age ships, yes, Chinese DID have more experience than the Americans --- who didn't even exist at the time. But that's what?, 600 - 700 years ago?

[@95ellington]

Having the crew start with getting a Sub.

[@johntucker5489]

Looks like a big target to me, imagine the maintenance and operating that thing.

[@manutdestifanos3815]

Can you tell me how u come up with these state secrets??🤔🤔

[@Wbliss]

One of the technological advancement in marine warfare, that needs to address is the tracking system of enemy subs. operating in a specified area, and developing highly mobile marine missiles to track & destroy that particular target upon detection. Such systems could be in the testing phase & how well it works in operational terms, has yet to be determined.

[@roc7880]

thumbs up for the reporting not the threat.

[@HuyLe-qc8jc]

The START treaty has been suspended and isn't in effect any longer. It also only covers the US and Russia so China does not need to comply. Future nuclear weapon limitation treaties will need to include all three countries, at minimum. I believe that 4 subs in the Ohio class SSBN have been retired as ballistic missile subs - including the Ohio. They have been converted in to cruise missile launchers (SSGN).

[@AnonymousSong]

Treaties will not be signed until China has the same amount of Nukes compare with US and Russia. :)

[@colsbleu-ty6oi]

What is really meaningful is whether a country's nuclear submarine can meet the strategic goals of each country...while the goal of the United States is to "govern" the world, and China's goal is to protect hiself...after all, no matter how advanced Nuclear submarines can't avoid 9/11, nor prevent a lunatic like Trump become the person who "presses the nuclear bomb button"

[@WellBehavedForeigner]

First of all, they depicted the Chinese flag incorrectly. The Chinese flag is a rectangle, not a parallelogram with non-right angles. It's not exactly confidential information. Each angle is 90 degrees.

[@williamzk9083]

START never applied with China.

[@EastAsiaCreativeMedia]

sorry but we will not play this game. any attempt at arms limitation is nothing but the west, particularly USA's shameless effort at controlling other countries so they remain the hegemon. look at how the US is already portraying China as a threat even though the US spends many times more to invade other countries.

[@Hendramail2000]

Good post

[@salvadorcarbajal]

Mrs Christina the bitcoin trader is legit and her method works like magic I keep on earning every single week with her new strategy

[@mahirdikmen]

I'm glad to see Christina mentioned here, my spouse recommended her to Me after investing $4000 and she has really helped us financially in times of COVID - 19 lock down here in Australia 🇦🇺

[@julioalmeida-2474]

Thanks for the recommendation I just contacted her and she attends to me nicely ❤️

[@christiangrasso1424]

I am happy today because of Mrs Christina I remember friends calling me crazy when I started but now I shut up them with my four figure weekly returned

[@luigivitali1020]

She’s technical analysis is dope and her interpretation/projections of the market is so accurate I sometimes ask myself if he is human haha. Point is, marueen is the perfect trader to follow for advise and daily signals

[@valentindoring]

She's the key to crypto She really made name for herself

[@hum2020]

It's a mad world out there.

[@ronmaximilian6953]

Right now, using the JL-3, China can try to replicate the Soviet bastion model of having their ballistic missile submarines in areas that are difficult for American submarines to operate in. While we often think of the first island chain as encircling China, it also creates an area that they completely dominate. It would be fool hardy to think that the Chinese do not already have or are not planning to lay passive and active sensors at different heights along the entrances to this area, especially around choke points. They also have anti-submarine warfare aircraft and helicopters. They have dozens of frigates and our building newer classes. Quiet submarines are very well protected against passive sonar, which are listening devices. As long as the submarine is as quiet or quieter than the surrounding water, they are quite safe from this. But there are other ways of detecting submarines. There is active sonar, which can use short range high frequency, or longer range low frequency sonar sets. Submarines are made of metal and unless properly coated or demagnetized, they can be detected through a magnetic anomaly detector. Finally, there is some conjecture that submarines can be detected by using a laser beam to constantly monitor the surface of the water. No matter how deeply It is operating, a 20,000 or even 10,000 ton submarine is going to displace water. The British and Germans are starting to design submarines to be stealthy against active sonar. I hope that the Columbia class and our next attack submarine class will likewise make use of stealthy hull technology.

[@willengel2458]

US has retreated to the second island chain and beyond. it allowed Japan to re-armed and become the cannon fodders for the declining empire.

[@ronmaximilian6953]

@@willengel2458 Japan is currently spending about 1% to their GDP on the defense forces. That's not rearming. In fact, slowly going up to 2% isn't really rearming either.

[@willengel2458]

@@ronmaximilian6953 japan will be buying tons of tomahawks, the last i heard was more than the 2% you stated. us is unleashed the neutered attack dog on china.

[@prasanth2601]

@@ronmaximilian6953 So you are saying no matter how stealthy a sub is it can be detected via active sonar and other stuff like laser etc.

[@0157matt]

Yes . China can .

[@qaz120120]

Kinda strange that the biggest nation does not have the biggest fleet. Hope that changes soon

[@michaelcaprio311]

We NEED too invest in not only “unsexy” military infrastructure, but also, shipyards and iron out the problems in the U.S. military stuff like bad leadership, non stop shifts, holding bad leaders accountable, be able too provide good medical/mental illness services, and also invest in good/effective training, also allow ships too be fully maintained. There’s many, many, many problems that’s the military and our nation is facing but acknowledging that there are problems is the first step. Also the arsenal of democracy has too be lit back up again, and generally speaking American manufacturing and reinvestment in the U.S. itself generally speaking. These are scary times, but, it’s just that we must stand together/work together as a team, a people, and our country.

[@qaz120120]

@@michaelcaprio311 the USA needs to reduce its military a bit. It is a bit stupid that a country only one third the population of china gets to dictate what is happening in asian waters

[@michaelcaprio311]

Yes I acknowledge that I am late, but, your response makes me think about U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell speech warning the American public about the dangers of military industrial complex, as it reads from the Google: Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. In the councils of American government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, wether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Also another quote from U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower that is related to current affairs regarding the immense amount of power the military-industrial complex has on councils of American government. “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, and the hopes of its children.”

[@unknowndoe4396]

Are you going to do an epidoe on destroyers next? Comparing type 055 with arleigh burke class

[@nostradamus2642]

What's most dangerous to US SSN are Chinese AIP SSK armed with 50+ knots YU-10 torpedo (comparable to MK48 lastest variant). These subs are virtual silent and undetectable as they lay in ambush. As for SSBN the next gen 096 will soon be launched with pump jet and electric drive.

[@famousjlife8379]

you're funny

[@Parapresdokian]

If these countries come to an coexisting agreement, then WSJ would out of business.

[@MetaView7]

What makes you think China is behind?

[@romeoETmike]

The microchip making. One reason why they want Taiwan.

[@MetaView7]

@@romeoETmike China is getting all the chips they need. It is a lot cheaper to buy chips than to invade Taiwan. China-Taiwan has enjoyed decades of peaceful symbiosis co-existence. All this war rhetoric is manufactured by the Americans.

[@romeoETmike]

@@MetaView7 Like China manufactures their lies. A few more months ang China will be in economic troubles. They already started.

[@waludalu5102]

@@romeoETmike China knows how to make their own microchips. That's just a simple fantasy the US created for their simple minded people

[@NeidlichesSchwert]

Lol. "...read the news today-oh, boy."

[@qifee1]

Why is US so anxious about China? You don't need to, as China is still a developing country, billion of people are living in slums, and most of them are sleeping in the street tents !

[@mayowa60]

I don't get why the analysts are comparing how quiet both subs are against each other. What they should be worried about is if the Chinese subs are quiet enough to do what they are required to do. An ak 47 can kill u the same way a pistol can. Use is what matters

[@CaseyChesshir]

for deterrence. would you act differently if you knew there might be an invisible silent ak 47 pointed at your head?

[@ytn00b3]

Japanese journalists used fishing sonar to detect where Chinese submarine was and waited until Chinese submarine merged from the sea and once the Chinese opened the hatch, Japanese journalist took photograph of them. Just showing how quiet Chinese submarines are.

[@Brendissimo1]

Because they have a hard time tracking ours, and theirs are relatively easy to track. Meaning theirs can be more easily neutralized by attack subs or ASW helicopters, and ours are much harder to find and kill. The only way to counter an SSBN's second-strike capability is to destroy the sub. Ballistic missile interceptors are not good enough yet to be relied on entirely. So stealth is arguably even more important for SSBN's than it is for attack subs.

[@ms3862]

@@ytn00b3 yep - currently its impossible for Chinese subs to leave the south China sea undetected by the US

[@CulturalXplorer19]

@@Brendissimo1 that is not true. Look up the information about China's underwater sensors all over South China sea and in the Pacific. China has deployed underwater sensors that allow it to monitor US submarine activity as far as Guam

[@peteconradjr.8605]

They are not the same. One is for good. The Chinese is for evil.

[@zhli4238]

Quietness depends on how far it can be heard, and that in turn depends on the operations. China’s nuclear subs are mostly in the South China Sea. Once a nuclear boomer slips through the Philippines into the Pacific, it would hard to track it.

[@ms3862]

They are loud enough that they cannot leave the first island chain without the U.S. knowing about it and following them. This is why China wants the USA out of the South Asia Sea so it can enter global oceans undetected

[@stuarthamilton5112]

We have a very dense sonar net in the Pacific, and these nets have no need to be stealthy. They employ passive and active sonar.

[@UptownDegree]

That's the thing. They have to slip through an island chain. We don't.

[@Western_Decline]

@@UptownDegree and there lies the importance of maintaining Taiwan as a colony of the United States.

[@UptownDegree]

@@Western_Decline Calling Taiwan a colony is pretty hilarious.

[@tomwoehle3519]

They have the plans.

[@readjordan2257]

They already can sneak up on our fleets without warning.

[@tompell3032]

Why not??? China has the resources and minds to do it. Besides, there are more chinese engineers in China than they are chinese engineers in the US.

[@julianchee2894]

Sure it might not be as good as the American subs. But what else is China supposed to do other than continue to make progress?

[@shinobi2119]

With the help of their Russian friends they will surpass the Americans

[@Noodleanrgry]

simple yes in a few decades

[@stupidburp]

The PLA Navy is acquiring their next generation nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines just as the US Navy is acquiring their next generation ballistic missile submarines too. While the US new Columbia class SSBN are doubtless impressive and superior overall in capabilities, the PLA Navy new Type 096 will be capable enough to do the job. Type 096 is rumored to be significantly quieter than the preceding Type 094 Jin class which are rather noisy. This might make them roughly equivalent to the Soviet Union’s 1970s era Delta I class submarines. That puts them behind the US but still potentially capable enough to get within striking distance of the US coasts.

[@robertcktham5056]

So who poses higher & bigger threats to other?

[@stenyethanmathews945]

China doesn't have to catch up to the us regarding nuc sub tech... they're stated overall naval and military objective is different than the us lol. From the looks of it they're strictly focused on coastal defense, not world wide power projection like the US. This is because, arguably, China is not an imperial power, America is. Take that to heart and let that sink in. For the purposes of coastal defense China is setting up a gauntlet of death for whoever wants to try take them on (cough the u.s). Anyways good luck to all of us regular people once world war 3 starts, I predict there will be a military draft in my lifetime...

[@DennisMerwood-xk8wp]

China is eating the US's lunch by any criteria Steny. They are winning the "war" without firing a shot.

[@taijistar9052]

That comparison is out of question. It is the same comparison as the number of nuclear bombs. One has 5000 and the other has 500, do you want to try to see if you who can survive? Crazy !

[@50ssb82]

Short answer: yes.

[@peredavi]

Quantity has a quality all on it's own.

[@yemail5555]

No need to worry too much, we will get there and we already have pretty reliable systems such as DF41. Just build a few more hundreds of them. Not a big deal.

[@donkey459]

America has the b 21

[@subasthapa8323]

Yes

[@Joggly420]

Meanwhile in Australia we sell our Ports to China to help pay for submarines to protect us from china …

[@kab6754]

That sounds like one heck of an ouroboros to have

[@Mr.mysterious76]

That's a pretty good deal

[@yuapanda]

It's not a sale and it's a minor commercial port

[@xiangshi460]

given that a small boat can destroy the key infrastructure in NATO controlled area, according to WSJ's new report on Nord Stream, why do you think these submarines will work?

[@Warhorse469]

selling stuff to china to pay for the things that will most likely ended china seems like are pretty good deal to me.

[@arjunchatterjee875]

Submarines have proven their capacity as being the best choice for offensive operations over 5,000 miles away.... They are known as an effective vehicle for lauching ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads over 5,000-10,000 km in range...

[@SorminaESar]

Wow, great news WSJ, thanks so much 🙏🙏🙏

[@davidthompson4383]

Forget US and China, I'm looking forward to the British submarines coming out of the AUKUS deal.

[@petersinclair3997]

The UK will supply the stealth hull. All three AUKUS countries, next generation technologies.

[@davidthompson4383]

@@petersinclair3997 It looks like a beauty.

[@Xiaogao8231]

WSJ basically assures Americans(and self-congratulating): don't worry, no matter what, we can still beat China in a nuclear war. Heh, nothing is too difficult for others if American can do. Soviet used to have equally advanced subs if not more. China is late comer to the club, but logically, there is nothing to prevent them to catch up on this, it wo't be too long, if you consider how fast them have developed.

[@riverman83]

10 seconds in i knew what submarine would win this.

[@eddiecorleone5788]

Why would you go nuclear sub when you can go straight to space hypersonic nuclear missiles orbiting the Earth ready to come down anytime? After the first nuke, we can assume that all nukes will be flying everywhere making Earth uninhabited.

[@Pai_2005]

nuclear sub can't be detected no matter where there maybe some Chinese sub near the california coast or us sub in the south china sea and their capacity is very deadly bro

[@804MRMAN]

Dude all nuclear missles go hypersonic 🤣🤣🤣 They literally leave earth and orbit earth until they're ready for reentry to its destination. Which usually takes about 8 minutes.

[@amatvkhmer]

Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech?

[@Boomkokogamez]

There is an UN law prohibiting all nation from making orbital weapons and that space will onyl be used for peaceful purposes

[@SimonBrisbane]

Far more expensive, complex, prone to failure and difficult to maintain. The risk of things going wrong is magnified many times over. Also orbiting weapons take more time to change attitude for re-entry and are more easily tracked.

[@sonicwavemeditation]

Just don't forget, they are the Author of the Art of War

[@Jodoe243]

Rest assure, it is a matter of time. In space, in tech, in influence, military, in trade, are few examples.

[@alfiey5783]

Just like the astroids that ended the dinosaurs, its a matter of time. Just one of the few examples.

[@alanOHALAN]

Truck launched hypersonic nuclear missiles making those subs obsolete.

[@Commievn]

China SSBN being loud is intentional. 1. It is to scare away marine animals away from the ship, so they don't dmg the ship. 2. SSBN is an outdated military tactics, in the past, most balisitic missiles cannot reach half of the world, so they have to get closer for an effective range. But with the modern technology of ICBM. Most ICBM now have over 10,000 KM range, capable to circle the world. China's Dongfeng 41 (CSS-20) for example, has an estimated range of 12,000 to 15,000 KM. The longest-range ICBM in the world. This is also why the PLA has their own Rocket branch and invested heavily to this fields instead of highly expensive operation-cost like supercarriers or SSBN.

[@na8332]

You missed the point even if the point of SSBN's was reiterated multiple times in the video. Watch it again. Listen and learn.

[@paulmaxwell8851]

You are wrong, wrong, wrong. NO-ONE intentionally builds noisy ships or submarines. That's just silly. And no marine animal, even a blue whale, would survive an impact with a ballistic missile submarine. If you had watched the video, you would understand that the purpose of a SLBM submarine is to survive undetected long enough to launch its missiles and destroy enemy cities. Its mobility and stealthiness are its upper hand. Land-bases missile systems are just too easy to target and destroy.

[@S_K_J]

But China wants both, yes they have a rocket force, but they also want to operate 10 carriers just like the US, but all it comes down is the quality & tech put in behind the vessels. Pakistan bought frigates from China but are facing multiple failures & damges inside the ship, since it's Pakistan it needs assistance from China, the news gets out, but whatever happens in Chinese navy it's stays there, so in time of needs don't know how many Chinese ships may be productive & work efficiently. Hope that day never comes.

[@golonawailus4312]

unmanned submarines will forever change the world

[@factsdc3719]

They can catch up with the technology but the U. S. has actually been using an active Navy since John Paul Jones. That’s a lot of years of experience.

[@1000xtati]

when it is about war and destruction no one beats the US, right?

[@vlhc4642]

If you're gonna count obsolete naval experience, well China had an active navy since 960AD, that is >1,000 years of "experience"

[@Dept246]

There is no limit in the yield of nuclear bombs. 1 megaton, 10 megaton, 200 megaton nukes are possible. What good is experience when dealing with radiation?

[@jonathanjordan5143]

They won't catch up with USA technology. They have a copy and paste mindset in schools and tech. It hinders innovation

[@corners3755]

@@vlhc4642 Modern military experience is what really matters .

[@josephtempongko8914]

Has already surpassed the US in technology in detection.

[@leoncampa]

Yeah… look. Once countries have nukes, none of them would realistically seek to use them regardless of how quiet their subs are. Would they want to risk a nuclear war with the enemy? Nobody wins in a nuclear war. Even if one has stealthier nukes than the other, a single missed silo, strategic bomber, submarine or mobile missile launcher could spell doom for the attacking nation.

[@Tiberii1832]

The logic does not apply to some islamic countries.

[@agrajyadav2951]

​@@Tiberii1832 terroristan is the only islamic country with nukes

[@Tiberii1832]

@@agrajyadav2951 for now. Just wait until England and France complete their transition towards islam

[@amatvkhmer]

Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech?

[@SimonBrisbane]

Assuming sane leaders remain in power. With Authoritarian leaders in their echo chambers bereft of dissenting or opposing voices, there is a fertile formula for reckless decisions which will result in nuclear war.

[@jocelynnowen3078]

This our boat in the day😀🇺🇸

[@acidicock3036]

庆幸科技掌握在文明手里，中国永远无法在事实上追上美国，因为美国将成为历史活在北美人民的心中

[@timchapman5567]

The answer is no. But offsetting that is weight of numbers, human and material. As with the Soviets, the West has to outspend the CCP, and in addition reduce trade dependence.

[@903IDFOLEY]

A direct comparisons between SSBNs is kinda pointless, SSBN are not designed to face off against each other. Even if China's current SSBN are noisy with limited missile range, as long as they can potentially lay waste to the west coast, then they can successfully discourage an all out nuclear attack on their host nation. M.A.D. does not require either side to offer complete destruction, just the risk of retaliation causing sufficient destruction that it simply makes the entire endeavor not worth it.

[@arthas640]

Nothing exists in a vacuum and it's much harder for a Chinese sub to get to the American west coast undetected then it is for the US to get within range of China's coast. By the time things reach that point the world is boned regardless but almost all of China's population centers and all of their ports exist on a single coastline, and they dont have as many inland population centers whereas the US has population centers and major ports along 3 coasts. That means if China wanted to devesate the US they'd need a 3 pronged assault to reach major ports and cities whereas the US only needs to worry about a single coastline, it will be far harder for China to get to even the easiest to reach coast than it is for the US to reach China's coast, and the US has the benefits of both close by allies and ports in Japan, Philipines, and South Korea as well as their own large naval base in Hawaii, not to mention Guam and Samoa whereas China needs to sneak past the island chains and Hawaii on their own.

[@903IDFOLEY]

@@arthas640 SSBNs don't need to go anywhere near their intended targets. JL-3 SLBM has a range of +5000km, which is sufficient to hit the west coast as soon as the SSBN leaves it's port in China. What you are imagining is a first-strike scenario where SSBNs sneak in close to their targets in order to reduce the enemy's time to respond to a disarming attack. But this is moot because China doesn't have a first-strike capable nuclear force in the first place, nor does it ever intended to have one. China's land based nuclear arsenal is far too small and their SSBN as mentioned is far too noisy to even think about "winning" a nuclear war.

[@MA-nl6js]

@@arthas640 That is assumption US analyst like to play. In fact chinese submarine had stalked USS Kitty Hawk and USS Ronald Reagan undetectedly, this destroy those reckless assumptions.

[@qiyuxuan9437]

​@@arthas640 You mean east coast? With JL-3, China's SSBN can cover the entire U.S west coast from home port.

[@angeldomingojr.7538]

Can you tell how your noisy chinese submarine come near US coast...chinese cannot be comparable to US subs and cannot compete whatever type the chinx has to bring out...chinx even in the early ages are proven good pirate sailors...but never a good navy sailors😂😢😮

[@reel1tv587]

There are a lot of things in this report that are misleading.

[@artygeezy80082]

Is this foreshadowing? 😂

[@Chironex_Fleckeri]

I hope so. Would be interesting

[@alanzhu8117]

😀

[@JeanLucCaptain]

At this point I would just assume the answer is YES.

[@mykhelboquecosa]

what to catch up with? that china already has nuclear submarines

[@okbutthenagain.9402]

Crew training, capabilities, systems, stealth...Just to name a few

[@romeoETmike]

It doesn't men that they are battle tested.

[@NeidlichesSchwert]

It was just a matter of time. Prepare to read more and more stories like China's famous sinking submarines.

[@alexroldan4031]

No matter how high tech the submarines are... the waters in the south china seas is shallow.. they can be monitored thru satelites..

[@mytube30005]

The question is not "can", but "when".

[@fleta9432]

wsj working overtime recently fr

[@Chris_at_Home]

I see the shape of the Chinese submarine as having a lot of hull noise moving through the water. There is a reason US submarine keep a smooth hull. I worked at the shipyard that build the Ohio and saw the first hull sections come together.

[@ericluk68]

l am am interested to know how you conclude the nosiness of the hull caused by movement through water by seeing the hull.

[@michaellim4165]

Don't answer Eric's question. Know that you are still under nondisclosure terms.

[@Chris_at_Home]

@@michaellim4165 I was an ASW tech in the Navy, anyone with a basic knowledge of things moving through water knows these things. One weld can actually change the hull frequency moving though the water.

[@prasanth2601]

@@Chris_at_Home I wonder why the chinese don't upgrade hulls then? I'm not an expert but relative to other complex things involved in subs designing stealthy hulls doesn't sound like a big task

[@Chris_at_Home]

@@prasanth2601 I don’t know why they don’t. It is a hard thing to do. I know when I was in the service when the USSR launched a new submarine we would gather data on it as soon as it came into the Mediterranean where I was supporting these aircraft. There is a data base on unique frequencies of each submarine. This why our ballistic missile submarines just go park somewhere and be quiet. My oldest brother was a sonar technician on submarines for years as was a brother in law.

[@davidfognini8526]

We US are so finished vs The present and future of this planet: CHINA ❤

[@NeidlichesSchwert]

Go read about China's sinking submarines.

[@HistoryOfRevolutions]

“We have only one thing to learn from the barbarians (Europeans), and that is strong ships and effective guns.” - Feng Guifen, 1861

[@hansgruber788]

that's two

[@sabisingh9635]

Hahha

[@jackjhmc820]

Barbarians indeed as they just happened to colonise almost every country on earth.

[@Grenadier311]

Foolish and short-sighted.

[@hughmungus2760]

@@jackjhmc820 Like a conquering horde.

[@emzeperiksz8138]

the first nuc sub is the NAUTILUS NOt the Georg Washinton.

[@Eric-kn4yn]

No George Washington first ballistic nuke missed sub nautilus 1953 was pure research nuke powered sub ok

[@ManuPrakash15]

Most important thing is that by the time this video is over China would advance to its next level technology. While us democracies will sit on those designs and political and bureaucratic bottlenecks for decades.

[@amatvkhmer]

Can China Catch Up With U.S. Nuclear Submarine Tech?

[@ManuPrakash15]

@@amatvkhmer That is the speculation. If not now probably in one or two decades.

[@amatvkhmer]

@@ManuPrakash15 You are very old

[@two02ful]

Indefinitely! China are moving forward on all discipline while america are not only falling behind but everything are collapsing all around.

[@逍遥鸿]

Dr. Zhao, do you really know the latest submarines in China? Let's take a look at the engine propellers of the submarine.

[@hylimm]

Waste of money! None used! Waste of money n resources! Should strive for peace instead of war.

[@snapfinger1]

I hear 1.5 billion voices singing we all live in a yellow submarine.

[@akka2011hk]

U guys better update your info. The type 096 not only uses a electric propulsion system but also shaftless electric propeller in additional to natural circulation nuclear reactor. I doubt the Columbia class will be quieter than the type 096. Also the JL3 has a range of 12K km which is sufficient to target the entire US from the S China seas.

[@IRBry]

are you suggesting alaska is not apart of the same continent as the united states? do you think canada is an island? new york news should have probably 0 questionable points

[@williambyast7791]

Bring it on! High time mankind with their Evil are wiped out! God help us All!

[@carlomikhailreid4365]

China has electric subs too

[@lazaropeedro8881]

That won't do any good does Chinesey may get electricuted lol 😅

[@johnsilver9338]

So does Japan, South Korea, and even Southeast Asian countries as they are the cheapest to build. However it doesn't mean they are equal, but Japanese subs are certainly the most stealthiest of them all.

[@okbutthenagain.9402]

@@jack99889988 Yet they are still noisy.

[@puzzlebox420]

doubt it

[@sashadala346]

In November of 2006, one of China’s Song-class diesel electric submarines surfaced just five miles away from the USS Kitty Hawk off the coast of Okinawa. At the time, the carrier group was in a protective formation, using anti-submarine defenses and aircraft. The appearance of a Chinese submarine no doubt surprised everyone in the fleet.

[@danilomarvel5657]

OKAY...

[@sashadala346]

@@danilomarvel5657 Yes

[@danilomarvel5657]

@@sashadala346 no its not yes.. its fake news from you OKAY

[@Jkl62200]

​@@danilomarvel5657from The Diplomat... By October 20, 2011 It was the US Navy’s biggest jolt in years. On October 26, 2006, a Chinese Song-class attack submarine quietly surfaced within nine miles of the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk as the 80,000-ton-diplacement vessel sailed on a training exercise in the East China Sea between Japan and Taiwan. The Song-class vessel, displacing 2,200 tons, was close enough to hit the Kitty Hawk with one of its 18 homing torpedoes. None of the carrier’s roughly dozen escorting warships detected the Song until it breached the surface. The Song’s provocative appearance was, for the Americans, ‘as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik,’ one NATO official told Britain’s Daily Mail newspaper, referring to the Soviet Union’s launch of the first-ever space satellite in 1957. ‘This could well have escalated into something that was very unforeseen,’ said Adm. Bill Fallon, then commander of US Pacific forces. The incident underscored the then explosive growth of the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s undersea force, as well as Beijing’s apparent intention to wrestle the Western Pacific away from the once-dominant US Navy. ‘The Chinese are building a credible submarine force which will make it very difficult for the US Navy to maintain sea control dominance in or near coastal waters off of China,’ warned Rear Adm. Hank McKinney, former commander of the US Pacific Fleet’s submarine force.

[@KevinEnjoyer]

@@Jkl62200 Okay alarm bells are ringing for me. Unless there were special circumstances, that Song should never have gotten that close. If there was a storm, then sure, the ambient noise level would have been quite a lot and allowed the Song to venture closer without risk of detection. Same goes for if the US ASW ships simply didn't have their active sonars turned on. Then, they'd have been handicapped in detecting the Song. Still. "Best navy in the world". I'm worried that a generic SSK managed to get so close to one of their battlegroups.

[@vkqtran4721]

First they need a Nuclear program/school on par with us. The US Naval Nuclear Program led under Admiral Rickover has never had a nuclear related incident and still don’t due to extremely high standards. We literally set the bar on standards. Safety and seriousness is priority.

[@Erik-gg2vb]

What ever is going on more defense spending is needed.

[@randomguy7175]

Let population starve, but we need mighty military 🤦

[@yuj2251]

of course not. Bcz China 🇨🇳 has been collapsing for decades.

[@colsbleu-ty6oi]

From the launch of China's first nuclear submarine in 1974 to now, China has only built about 24 of them, including attack nuclear submarines and ballistic missile submarines, while the U.S. Navy has built more than 250 nuclear submarines of various types scince1958, from hundreds-tons mini sub to tens-of-thousands-tons SSBN... So, technically comparing the 094 class with the Ohio class is meaningless, just like comparing the driving skills of a novice driver with a 30-year-old professional driver...The result is obvious ... What is really meaningful is whether a country's nuclear submarine can meet the strategic goals of each country...while the goal of the United States is to "govern" the world, and China's goal is to protect himself...after all, no matter how advanced US Nuclear submarines is, it can't avoid 9/11, nor prevent a lunatic like Trump become the person who "presses the nuclear bomb button"

[@sleepyjoe4529]

lol US can't even stop a Chinese balloon And they got chased out of Afghanistan/Vietnam by cave dwellers/farmers with AK47s

[@Uccidiamoilchiarodiluna]

The comparison is to MAKE "China is a threat they're catching up", we need more wars otherwise the people will focus on the government work.

[@a.rygertor6926]

I think it's obiden whose the lunatic his the reason all this Ukraine war and war between China and USA.trumps term was peace and no war it's you that the lunatic.

[@chltmdwp]

​@@sleepyjoe4529 you sound very sad in life.

[@-p2349]

@@sleepyjoe4529 how did the “farmers in Vietnam” get SAM batteries if they were just farmers

[@ronniejohnson317]

I don’t know. As long as “The Big Guy “ gets his 10%.

[@nsebast]

No one can catch up with the Lord of War: USA

[@lngkfan]

Unless there is real encounters you won't be able to know your true opponent.

[@inconvenientTruther]

Just cause the question was even posed, that basically means they can, just a matter of time

[@auro1986]

why not if wsj keeps showing everything about submarine technology?

[@nicksonsicnawa9607]

China is the best in electronic technology/battery' so.

[@prasanth2601]

Source?

[@nicksonsicnawa9607]

@@prasanth2601 CATL'BYD

[@nicksonsicnawa9607]

@@prasanth2601 I. D. I. O. T

[@aurorajones8481]

Personally if i had any control id arm sound emitters to all my subs of various frequency/modulation only to then turn off in case of war. That way your enemy is "tracking" you in peace time thinking they know everything.

[@RALnMeow]

What about those submarines to take down enemy’s subs?

[@AnonymousSong]

That's the duty of Attack subs.

[@johniii8147]

The US has a large fleet of those. around the globe.

[@S_K_J]

They are attack subs, mainly Virginia cls subs for US. Now australia has signed the deal for Virginia cls subs to it's detergent against China & UK will also follow with the orders in future.

[@alex-shanghai]

The advantage of the US is that they can spend 800B every year on the military, about 3.5% of GDP, while China can only spend 225B (2023 budget) on the military. The reason is that the US does not need to care about infrastructure or social welfare, for example, broken railroad or homeless problem. On the other hand, China has spent huge amount of money to build infra, for example, more than 40k km of high speed rail, and tons of new airport, stations, ports, etc...

[@netgiant2592]

A large percentage of US military spending is used for funding its 1000+ offshore bases and its many overseas contingency operations(ie regime change wars, sponsoring of terrorist groups, installing puppet govts, etc). Just look at how much they’ve given to Ukraine. China on the other hand doesn’t have to incur such costs as it is not trying to police the globe. Therefore their spending can go directly to improving its military tech and arsenal. On top of that manufacturing and production costs in China are probably half that of the US so a dollar goes much further in China.

[@Buckzoo2030]

True, until you factor in how much it costs a toilet seat in defense contract.

[@sharketm7655]

How much cost a Chinese worker VS a US Worker. And Chinese has one averages 5 point IQ above Whites. And China produce 60 millions engineers each year now. Ashkenazi Jews like Einstein or Newton have average 5 point IQ above eastern Asians. But they are a tiny minority. And the major difference between Chinese and the West, is that the Chinese are hungry to better their lives and not distracted by western medias.

[@aa1944-k2r]

unclear ballistic subs is where china is lacking behind, but china is very advanced in conventional AIP subs. and also, the US economy should enter a recession, although we dont know how serious it will be, but we already seeing banks failures, usually, defense budget will take a hit during economic hardships, meanwhile in china, they get steady funding. still, it takes a lot of time to close the gap but ballistic sub is ballistic sub

[@alexm890]

Not only nuclear submarines but Air Force they are lacking many side Chinese are just training they have to test in real battlefield

[@sirius5159]

@@alexm890 Yes, since World War II, the U.S. military has accumulated a lot of actual combat experience through aggression and massacres against other countries. However, it will not go to war with China. America is just a barking dog and will not go to war with any country with nuclear weapons.

[@joeycavanaugh6229]

Submarine construction never slowed down during 2008, so short of anything catastrophic, I’d be very surprised if a recession had any negative impact on how much the US spent on its submarines. In general, these are some of the highest priority expenditures from one of the highest priority expenditure categories in the entire country’s budget.

[@romeoETmike]

You are talknig the opposite. As of now, China's economy is in trouble. You are probably reading the Chinese propaganda. They are the one's in trouble. Even the de-dollarization is not even true. It's the work of Chinese-paid media.

[@tanengjuay5410]

3

[@eugenewu2202]

Space station is already sent in the sky by China.