Insightful Tour of China's Submarine Hunting Corvette

[@MrStevemur]

Your videos give me a better appreciation of how ridiculous it is when Western media compares the US and Chinese navies based only on their numbers of aircraft carriers. Small fast ships like this have obvious advantages for their task.

[@jnishar]

you dont make any sense? why dont you google "compare the US fleet vs the chinese fleet"?

[@patrolmanracv]

@@jnishar well the US fleet hasn't actually won any wars in the last 70 years ..despite the US being in plenty of them against poverty countries .Afghanistan ..20 years running away ...Vietnam .again .ran away ..i'd be a bit embarrassed trying to make all this US military stuff look good ..when it never really wins anything ..

[@jnishar]

@@patrolmanracv thats just your opinion. they did take afghanistan and left it because it really wasent worth it, after they did what they came for. Neither russia, china or any other superpower have achieved anything looking at it like you do.

[@Americaisgreat12]

​@@jnisharthank you they all said the same thing "we didn't win the war in Afghanistan " we did exactly what we came for and all of equipment performed very well.

[@wang-rw6cd]

@@jnishar When you say that the United States has achieved its goals in Afghanistan, do you mean that U.S. imperialism uses U.S. taxpayers’ money to kill Afghans and Americans to create profits for the military-industrial complex of Jewish capital? 250,

[@Excalabur50]

There's a very good reason for them bluring it out on the Type 056A and not the destroyer could be as these are a more modern and dedicated sub hunter it could be a more modern system and therefore it would be needed to be blured.

[@johnsmith1953x]

Most AI systems can unblurr photos!!

[@Excalabur50]

@@johnsmith1953x Maybe so, but it still might be degraded, who knows. I'm only guessing with my thoughts anyway.

[@RectalRooter]

@@Excalabur50 Please stop your thinking -- it's hurting peoples brains.

[@Excalabur50]

@@RectalRooter At least I'm capable of thinking.

[@RectalRooter]

@@Excalabur50 lol Thats subjective too all of us 😁

[@gorlestondoug]

Very interesting video, I recently constructed a model of the type 056, its a very nice looking ship imo. Thanks for the video.

[@BruceSarbi]

O56A detection of enemy sub could transmit data linked to nearby 054A to launch YU-8 rocket propelled ASW torpedo.

[@RectalRooter]

Don't forget the Unicorn Shit Launchers that are optimized with AI for searching and destroying unarmed merchant vessels.

[@dawnlightening]

Excellent documentary- detailed, to the point and interesting. Thank you!

[@jorual12]

Congratulations, for another good video.

[@johnsmith1953x]

The order is roughly : Carriers > Cruisers > Destroyers > Frigates > Corvettes > Patrol Boats > Missile boats > Drones It seems China seems to condense this down to four categories: Carriers > (Cruisers, Destroyers) > (Frigates, Corvettes, Patrol Boats) > ( Missile boats, Drones) ?

[@douginorlando6260]

All ships need to consider defending against mini drone swarms. Even one mini drone with an antitank shaped charge and able to image recognize vulnerable parts could damage/destroy the ship (imagine what happens if a shaped charge penetrates a warhead). Honey Badgers are known to target sensitive body parts of larger animals

[@phils4634]

Cheap to run, crew and maintain, as well as providing excellent platforms for entry level mariner training, with the ability to provide experience on most of the systems used by their larger vessels. Of course they also provide an excellent coastal / short range defence layer, in conjunction with those small (but very fast) missile boats. Lots of similarities between the Chinese layered maritime defence model and the Russian layered air defence model.

[@wx7742]

On the naming of ship classes though: In Chinese Frigate - 护卫舰 Corvette - 轻型护卫舰, literally light Frigate so that one can indeed argue that light frigate or light escort ships in Chinese should be translated as a whole into corvette. But then these classifications date back to age of sail and China as a nation without a naval tradition so old is not very keen on playing the verbal games. You are right that it is OK to call it whatever you like since for the PLAN it would simply mean some escort warships that are smaller than destroyers.

[@nicb.1213]

The US Submarine entering the Asian or SCS water has difficult chance of survival, it will be blown out of water before it commence its action in the said water.

[@johnsmith1953x]

Or hit an underwater sea mountain....

[@catrojana3694]

Ask USS Connecticut 😅😅😅

[@RectalRooter]

hahahahahahaha we all love fairy tails

[@nicb.1213]

​@@RectalRooter Irrespective fairy tales or not, why don't you ask the US Fleet to fire at China or her navy and see what happened, whether the US Fleet sank to the bottom of the sea. For you info, The US Blue Fleet Navy dare not antagonize Chinese Navy Directly for fear going to the bottom of the sea. China gave serious warning to two US AC and they fled to Guam and Okinawa for shelter. Chinese Navy never boast its arsenal but it was the western media keep exposing it.

[@douginorlando6260]

I would think a sub Hunter ship would include some small drone subs that can be released & retrieved. Even if the drone subs are optimized for searching and target designating enemy subs (both manned and drones) whether they be moving or hiding on the seabed.

[@RectalRooter]

Don't forget the Unicorn Shit Launchers that are optimized with AI for searching and destroying unarmed merchant vessels.

[@賴志偉-d7h]

What can a submersible drone do that a towed-array sonar cannot? And how does it communicate once submerged?

[@douginorlando6260]

@@賴志偉-d7htowed arrays can have blind spots depending on thermoclines. A drone sub can compliment the ship’s towed array to compensate (first by measuring thermoclines, second by having their own sonar including possibly a shortened towed array). Towed arrays are linear (an array of 1 dimension). Sonar sensors outside this linear string can make the array 2 or 3 dimensional which will be more effective. The drone subs can patrol close to any suspected targets. This is particularly important for targets hidden on the seabed. A drone sub can include a magnetic anomaly detector and verify a suspected seabed anomaly is magnetic and not just a rock outcropping. Communication is not a problem because the ship’s towed array can use sonar to transmit and receive command signals and any findings from the drone subs.

[@RectalRooter]

@@賴志偉-d7h You know AI powered Lizard people don't need communications because they can read minds.

[@douginorlando6260]

⁠@@賴志偉-d7hcommunication is not a problem. The surface ships’s sensitive sonar will detect sound signals from its’ underwater drone subs. Drone subs would be ideal for detecting any subs(or mines) concealed on the seabed. They can search the ocean floor up close and differentiate between a submersible and just a big rock by using Magnetic Anomaly detectors.

[@fernandofernandito3055]

A small submarines drones can be use for under water vision and ocean floor flushed...make sure there isn't an unidentified swimming objects and bumps/rocks approaching...

[@SoCalFreelance]

4:26 I'm guessing this PLAN Lieutenant Commander is the CO of the ship. *Edit: Yes, the text in this clip 13:08 confirms Wu Xuebiao is the commanding officer of the Hanzhong Ship.

[@PeterXiao1]

That officer is a Major

[@SoCalFreelance]

@@PeterXiao1 Not according to Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranks_of_the_People%27s_Liberation_Army_Navy

[@PeterXiao1]

@@SoCalFreelance The US naming convention. In China his commanding position is Capitan of the ship and his Rank Major

[@catrojana3694]

Political Commissar.

[@tonyyin8524]

Thanks for the nice intro on the 056As, a few questions not covered in the presentation: 1) Is 056s published speed of 25 knots too slow to hunt the very fast and agile Sea Wolf SSN (the likely opponent in Sino-American standoffs)? 2) Do 056As typically work solo or in pairs/threes? 3) What kind of datalink do the 056As use? Are they capable of being *efficiently* led by 054Bs or 052Ds to form anti-submarine packs? 4) What kind of EW suits do 056As have (importance demonstrated in supposed PLAN victories in multiple EW scuffles with the USN)? 5) Is there room for further development of the 056s or are the platforms too small? By development, I mean things like dedicated EW and anti-submarine-drone-carriers. 6) Finally, given development of ships like the 054Bs, and the scale Chinese shipyards can efficiently and economically build warships, is PLAN better off developing 054Bs as dedicated anti-submarine warfare (054C)? Or should PLAN stay with the slow and less capable 056s, but use more of them to zerg Sea Wolves?

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks Tony, here are my thoughts: 1. Yes the speed is rather slow compared to the top speeds of latest US SSNs, and it should be a disadvantage. However, the main ASW weapon should be the fast-moving helicopter, and the 056A is there to assist with its takeoff and landing. Another factor is that SSNs might want to move at far below its top speed to reduce its acoustics, particularly if it isn't aware it has been detected. 2. Not certain on this one, but I believe they operate in groups. Chinese ASW tactics envisage multiple aerial assets working together, so it makes sense for the corvettes to work alongside each other and the frigates leading to more helicopter types being carried. 3. They use the 906 datalink and the navy integrated datalink, plus the domestic ZKJ-5 second-generation combat system. This should allow coordination with larger surface combatants. However, no CEC as far as I'm aware (unsurprising given lack of long-range weapons). 4. It has the standard radar/infrared countermeasures in the form of chaff and flares. However, I'm not aware it has electronic 'attack' measures. 5. Seems too small to add more features. There isn't the space to incoporate a hangar already, which would massively help with operating a helicopter. 6. The 056A and 054B (and 054A to an extent) are intended for different roles. The 056A does not generally escort large naval formations, for example. They are not designed for blue water deployment. However, the 054A and B are both intended to escort high-value assets like carriers, and potentially to faraway places. The 056A is needed to conduct ASW patrols in the near seas, which frees up the 054B to escort capital ships. They are both necessary in an optimal high-low mix. I do think the PLAN has enough 056A already, so they probably will just keep what they already have and not build more at this stage.

[@Amidat]

Good questions... Note that if a submarine is traveling at it's top speed or near it - then it becomes more traceable.

[@robertlackey7212]

I have also been keenly interested in how large that missile launcher is as it never seems to be pictured with a person and in one picture at a trade show it is next to a scale model or perhaps both were models.

[@Bob-wh6qr]

I think it is wise for China to invest in large numbers of easily manufactured more inexpensive anti-submarine ships in addition to submarines themselves. These are what you need to break a blockade. The age of large expensive aircraft carriers is over.

[@alexpeli2449]

I always thought these would be PLAN's saving grace in the taiwan straight. Let the frigates go out further and combine these with land based aircraft and submarines are going to have a tough time getting to the amphibs

[@shengzhong2662]

056还是凑合用。 反潜还是要飞机

[@SenorBastardo1348]

My guess re blurring is some scared producer erring on the side of caution. Cant blame them.

[@clausjensen5658]

Funny how, if you see for example the Danish Navy doing battlestations or combat drills , they all wear flagwests and helmets. fireproof clothing etc. Here, and also in russian videos , only the firefighter teams appear to actually be kitted for combat.

[@CrocdileLee]

There are videos showing PLAN soldiers wearing fire-proof hood during a drill when operating a battleship.

[@clausjensen5658]

@@CrocdileLee fair enough. I have´nt seen any. but one would think it happened. Just seems to not be the norm.

[@CrocdileLee]

@@clausjensen5658 kzbin.infoNLmx2josNWM?si=DTQZxrteXuYpVeta Yes, it is rare to be seen in videos. And in another video, PLAN soldiers also wear thick gloves

[@賴志偉-d7h]

@@clausjensen5658 How many videos have you seen to assert what the norm is?

[@clausjensen5658]

@@賴志偉-d7h I´d say a fair enough amount to ponder why this difference is there. IF or if not this is the norm or because it´s for show due to being filmed I cannot say. It´s a bit like 99 out of 100 videos of western tanks their gun stabilisers are active and working and 99 out of a 100 of russian tank vids the stabiliser is not active and the gun is fixed in place. We all know the gun has a stabiliser it´s just not being shown. I suppose that is the same with this. Why ? Am I not allowed to point out things/differences I notice ?

[@avus-kw2f213]

2:22 interesting information 👍

[@muzammilahmad6768]

China and Russia are now in big leagues !! Well lets see what US and NATO got !

[@taiwanstillisntacountry]

81-genders and a merry-army

[@muzammilahmad6768]

@@taiwanstillisntacountry 🤣😂

[@Americaisgreat12]

​@@taiwanstillisntacountrythat's funny as an American 😂 it's crazy majority of Americans don't believe in it and think it's ridiculous.

[@RectalRooter]

hahahahaha Big leagues hahahahaha

[@muzammilahmad6768]

@@Americaisgreat12 about Vietnam and Afghanistan defeats yeah !!

[@deanyt3697]

I know this sounds weird, but I miss your previous microphone setup. It became a signature of your videos 😂

[@avus-kw2f213]

16:41 so are explosive rounds smaller than 3.7cm

[@theasianchannel2000]

Nice. you used footage from CCTV and didn't copyrighted? That's Good. was it because you only cut and used a small portion? back then i used a long portion of a CCTV footage for my C919 video, it got a copyright claim from them. it was not a strike tho, just a claim. so they got the earnings of the video.

[@republicspaceagency9141]

Hello sir, what is the difference between sailors who are specialists and also generalists

[@jawedmanowar657]

50 Warship for Anti submarine Warfare its an Huge capability and enough to cover whole Pacific region and western media doesnt speaks about such volume and chinas construction

[@Blake_87]

More videossssssss

[@douginorlando6260]

Omitted in this presentation is any means of damaging/destroying incoming torpedos. I would think this would be a highly desired defense against submarines for itself and any other nearby ship in a task force. Perhaps it is not something China talks about. Perhaps it does not exist. My first thought was can the 30 mm auto cannon point down low enough to fire at incoming torpedos?

[@IrishCarney]

"The larger ships -- the destroyers, the frigates, and the aircraft carriers -- are intended for blue-water deployment.." Strange order to list them in. Going from smaller to larger it would be frigate, destroyer, and aircraft carrier. But that also omits cruisers, like the Type 055 _Renhai_ class. Bigger than destroyers but smaller than carriers.

[@moss550]

055 are destroyers, only US propaganda calls them cruisers which they are not. Renhai is also a US made up name only used by US propaganda. The lead ship of the 055 is the Nanchang, so by traditional western naming convention the 055 should be a Nanchang class. Chinese themselves use 055. 21st century destroyers are in the 10000+ tons range. 055 is comparable in size to the Korean Sejong the Great class and Japanese Atago class and Maya class. It's much smaller than a Zumwalt. Like cars, every generation of warship gets progressively bigger. Next gen frigates will be in the 8000 tons range, with German F126 exceeding 10000. Next gen destroyers like the DDG(X) will exceed 13000 tonnes. If you looked at the 1980s' CSGN, the 'next' gen US cruiser for the 2000s were supposed to be 17,000+ tonnes. By extension cruiser in the 2030s should exceed 20000 tonnes. Ticonderoga were Spruance DDG with Aegis and was always intended to be destroyers. It was only redesignated CG at the last moment to save face after they cancelled cruiser program.

[@johnsmith1953x]

@@moss550 Yeah but the 055 is larger than any US CRUISER every built !!

[@canismajoris3910]

Wait, what?!?! Can I give it, "What is the Zumwalt?"

[@IrishCarney]

@@canismajoris3910 _Zumwalt_ isn't primarily meant for blue-water sea control battles and doesn't have flag facilities, but yes its huge size makes being called a "destroyer" questionable. Also the Soviet/Russian carriers being called "cruisers" - especially the _Kuznetsov_ . Easily the all-time most ridiculous, though, is the Japanese _Izumo_ class carriers being called "destroyers".

[@IrishCarney]

@@moss550 Good points on ship sizes increasing over time, and on the _Renhai_ name .. I guess it was assigned by NATO/OSD when the _Nanchang_ name was still not announced. But it's not "propaganda" to call the 055 a cruiser, because it's not just very large but is a true multi-mission ship that's especially capable of blue-water sea-control battles, and especially because separately from the ship's bridge manned by the captain and his staff to run the ship itself, there is also a separate "bridge" or facility available for an admiral or commodore and his staff, who would be charge of an entire task force. If you can be a flagship and are designed to be one, you're not a destroyer. THAT is objective fact that no attempt to dismiss as "propaganda" can make go away.

[@vevenaneathna]

small ships like this are the future of naval warefare. with drones and so many widespread antiship missiles, ukraine conflict has taught us a lot. if you look back into the falklins war, small converted cargoships were used as primative aircraft carriers using vtol harriers, which were much more difficult for the argentenians to counter despite having a couple dozen exoset missiles. look back further to the japanease attempts on wake island, a handful of contractors and marines and just a couple short range fighters held off a large detachment of the japanease navy for several months and inflicted thousands of casualties.

[@賴志偉-d7h]

Wake island held out for 2 weeks, and total Japanese casualties were a bit short of a thousand. But I get your point. Small islands do not warrant large resources to take or hold. Smaller ships can be useful.

[@spudz7405]

Why r they using a wasd keyboard

[@mahmoodhassan7879]

Love you China ❤

[@bradgolding6847]

China builds beautiful and very efficient warships. One thing that is often overlooked by those who compare the PLA Navy with its western counterparts is, the PLA Navy personnel are there defending their Motherland, a concept quite alien to most in the West. The Anglo/US empire and NATO, on the other hand, is simply a tool of aggression that is, in reality what Chairman Mao always said it was, a "Paper Tiger!"

[@哈哈哈-d8b]

毛主席坚持的就是论持久战，今天的中国一旦全面动员在军事上是无可匹敌的，但是这并不能帮助中国占领北美大陆侧底解放美国，所以论持久战才是中美博弈的最佳战法，今天的西方总是幻想能够在任何领域快速击败中国，这会导致西方在与中国的长期博弈中失败，中国明白世界发展中国家都不愿继续被西方压迫剥削，所以中国只需要稳定发展军事科技随着越来越多的发展中国家崛起，西方霸权体系自然崩溃，还有假设美国不愿意服输试图赌博在军事在击败中国，那么最终的结果就是第二岛链被解放军接管

[@vincentpli4315]

Hanzhong(汉中) is not a city from Sichuan province , it's belong to Shannxi province

[@tomwolf26]

what ? no comments on the host girl yet ? 那我先说： 妹子好看

[@PravdaSeed.96]

🌍ThankS🌎 🤍☸ ☯ ☸🤍 & MarXisM & Merit☯cracY 💚🐉🇨🇳🐉💚

[@Frank-bh3cm]

Too much ads

[@nicb.1213]

​ @RectalRooter Irrespective fairy tales or not, why don't you ask the US Fleet to fire at China or her navy and see what happened, whether the US Fleet sank to the bottom of the sea. For you info, The US Blue Fleet Navy dare not antagonize Chinese Navy Directly for fear going to the bottom of the sea. China gave serious warning to two US AC and they fled to Guam and Okinawa for shelter.

[@IrishCarney]

@@nicb.1213 Literally nobody with any brains would bet on the PLAN over the USN. I'm not saying the PLAN is a pushover, but in a serious, gloves-off fight, the PLAN would probably dish out some punishment, but in the end it would be overwhelmed and cease to exist

[@哈哈哈-d8b]

​@@IrishCarney哦，美军是一个毫无纪律性的军队，只能对付拖鞋军，跟解放军打那么还是洗洗睡吧

[@哈哈哈-d8b]

​@@IrishCarney为什么你会认为美国有能力惩罚中国？美国至今为止对中国所做的一切包括科技战贸易战只是让中国越来越无所不能，美军对中国开战的下场会比朝鲜战争更惨，那就是关岛被解放军接管

[@哈哈哈-d8b]

​@@IrishCarney一个百分之40军工原材料元器件零件依赖中国的国家，居然认为自己很强大，你是活在上个世纪吗？

[@IrishCarney]

​@@哈哈哈-d8b Whatever comment I made that you are responding to seems to have vanished. Anyway, if US trade and technological policy was so wonderful for Communist China, then Beijing would be thrilled and ask for more of it, faster. Instead, Beijing complains bitterly. As for war, let's hope that never happens, but despite the Communist regime's military buildup, its military is still far weaker than America's. The USA has 11 carriers, all of them nuclear, while the PLAN only has three, all of them inferior, even the new Fujian. The same holds true in every other category. If you had the chance to magically snap your fingers and have the US military and the PLA trade places, of course you would.

[@chandrachurniyogi8394]

the Israeli Sa'ar 6 class 1,683 ton (2,245 ton loaded) guided missile advanced ASW corvette powered by iFuelCell® e-HYBRId™ M-HEP system . . . it's one of the best ASW corvette by far & can be deployed alongwith naval task groups far across the expanse of the world's oceans & seas . . . a true blue-water navy corvette . . .

[@dontworry6672]

Yeh that lady’s ears are gone lol

[@RectalRooter]

The little barking dog comments are more entertaining than the videos.

[@jamesmclamb1498]

Stop being a hype man and give us facts real hard evidence

[@RectalRooter]

You do understand the channel has no insights too any navy and only makes the videos to entertain gullible people.. Remember the saying -- The gullible leading the blind

[@ferdinandpo4272]

Propaganda ! Big Doubt the capabilities in real war !😂😅