China’s New Nuclear Submarine Sank During Mysterious Incident In Wuhan: Report

[LX1111]

Because all those cranes did not converge on the pier where a sub was docked till recently for no reason. Something happened

This is exactly the third doubt. You can see that the four crane ships around the place where the so-called submarine sank are all hundreds of tons. They are not capable of lifting a submarine with a displacement of more than 4,000 tons. The correct approach is to tie air bags around the submarine, which is very famous in the salvage of the South Korean Sewol. We did not see any use of air bags in the pictures. The only possibility is that these crane ships are just dredging the waterway.

 

[Ashwin]

In this case, assuming that China has some magical technology that can cram a nuclear reactor into a small submarine with a displacement of only 4,000 tons, and don't forget that all of China's conventional submarines are double-hulled. Under the condition of the same displacement, the internal space is smaller than other single-hulled submarines, and the space available to accommodate a nuclear reactor is also very small.

French operated SSN, Rubis class is just 2,600 ton and 74 meters. Its not a magical technology at all.

Do some reading outside of weibo.

 

[Parthu]

In this case, assuming that China has some magical technology that can cram a nuclear reactor into a small submarine with a displacement of only 4,000 tons, and don't forget that all of China's conventional submarines are double-hulled. Under the condition of the same displacement, the internal space is smaller than other single-hulled submarines, and the space available to accommodate a nuclear reactor is also very small.

That depends on the purpose of the submarine and what modifications were performed. The size by itself is not a hindrance at all. Early Soviet sub classes like November were also double-hulled and they coould contain not one but TWO reactors while displacing only around 4,000 tons submerged.

View attachment 36634
Let's take the example of the Indian Kilo-class submarine that sank in the Mumbai Harbor. The water depth of the Mumbai Harbor is seven meters. We can see that the submarine Command Station is above the water. In the WSJ report, in the Yangtze River, which is only five meters deep, no part of the submarine was seen above the water, and this is still on the shallower shore. If a submarine larger than the Indian Kilo ， you should see something more obvious on the satellite photos.

Again there are so many variables.

What was the bouyancy level of the vessel when it sank? How many compartments were flooded and how many remained filled with air? Did the flooding happen unevenly, resulting in the boat tipping over on its side, making the conning tower go underwater unlike in the case of the Indian submarine?

We only know the figure of the average natural depth of a harbour that is in public domain. Nobody here knows if any dredging activity was performed at the shipyard's premises prior to this. The actual depth at the shipyard is unknown.

The point is, people who are experts at this, who have access to far more detailed satellite imagery with regular revisit rates than what is available to share in public have reported that a nuclear sub sank. What purpose could it serve the US DoD to portray the events falsely?

 

[Parthu]

This is exactly the third doubt. You can see that the four crane ships around the place where the so-called submarine sank are all hundreds of tons. They are not capable of lifting a submarine with a displacement of more than 4,000 tons. The correct approach is to tie air bags around the submarine, which is very famous in the salvage of the South Korean Sewol. We did not see any use of air bags in the pictures. The only possibility is that these crane ships are just dredging the waterway.View attachment 36635

First, there are four cranes, not one.

Again, we don't know what exactly the cranes are trying to do.

They might as well be trying to simply upright the vessel so it can be floated later. There could be divers underneath trying to weld shut some compartments so water can be pumped out and the cranes might be trying to reposition the hull to help them.

There's no need to attribute imaginary explanations. People who know far more about submarines than anyone on this forum have confirmed that a nuclear-powered submarine sank in those waters.

 

[BMD]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/sep/30/sunken-chinese-submarine-was-new-hybrid-nuclear-co/?utm_campaign=twtnl_x&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow

Sunken Chinese submarine was a new hybrid nuclear-conventional attack boat, U.S. says​

 

[South block]

CCP bots have been unleashed in full force to deny everything as fake news. Chinese are the most shameful & pathetic of the lots.....only filthy pork-e surpass them when comes to spreading BS.

 

[LX1111]

First, there are four cranes, not one.

Again, we don't know what exactly the cranes are trying to do.

They might as well be trying to simply upright the vessel so it can be floated later. There could be divers underneath trying to weld shut some compartments so water can be pumped out and the cranes might be trying to reposition the hull to help them.

There's no need to attribute imaginary explanations. People who know far more about submarines than anyone on this forum have confirmed that a nuclear-powered submarine sank in those waters.

First of all, WSJ does not have any official information source to prove its statement, only the so-called anonymous official of the Department of Defense. The only thing that can be confirmed is that a person named Tom Shugart found on Twitter that there were several cranes parked at the dock of the Wuhan Shipyard, and then he made up such a report. What is the difference between this and Reuters' statement a few months ago that Chinese missiles are filled with water?

There are more and more false reports about China

 

[Amarante]

Whatever happened on that pier, I'm still very sceptical about this "half LEU-mini-nuke & half diesel propulsed" submarine [Frankenstein’s sub ] story.

I think the whole affair is too much like a communication campaign, an operation.

It's well known that the submarine component (and not only the submarine component) of the US navy is suffering from serious backlogs in maintenance as well as manufacturing and recruitment (which is why the Australians are in trouble).

In the US, the military-industrial complex has every interest in making maximum profits from this affair. And not just in the US, either.

Anyway...
Here's a counter-narrative that I find quite relevant, defenceone_02.10:

What reports got wrong about China’s ‘sunken nuclear submarine’

Western news organizations often miss crucial context—and even the real news—about Chinese military modernization.

www.defenseone.com

The purported sinking of a Chinese nuclear submarine at a Wuhan shipyard pier is the latest example of Western reporting on military developments in China that overlooks important details and context, or even takes the wrong lessons from the fragments of stories they tell.

The incident, which took place in June, drew some mention the following month on social media and even in the defense press, but it went viral after a Sept. 26 report in the Wall Street Journal touched off coverage from Fox News to CBS. What apparently lit up the U.S. media landscape were the assertions, attributed to unnamed U.S. defense officials, that the submarine was nuclear-powered. Many of the subsequent reports suggested that the incident revealed safety concerns about a new class of PLA Navy nuclear submarine and a serious setback for China’s military modernization.

These are mischaracterizations. (…)

@Parthu and youall.

 

[Amarante]

French operated SSN, Rubis class is just 2,600 ton and 74 meters. Its not a magical technology at all.

Do some reading outside of weibo.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

French operated SSN, Rubis class is just 2,600 ton and 74 meters. Its not a magical technology at all.

Do some reading outside of weibo.

Tiny country, tiny nuclear submarine