China's submarine fleet is largely limited to a coastal defensive role, but still could not prevent infiltration by US undersea boats, according to a recent analysis by Owen Cote Jr. of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Security Studies Programme.
Only big shifts in doctrine and technology could alter the current equation, Cote explained.
Cote's assessment is a fresh reminder of the obstacles China faces in securing its own waters – to say nothing of extending its influence farther into the Pacific. The report is also a reminder that, despite the high visibility of aircraft carriers, jet fighters and ballistic missiles, submarines are still the most decisive weapon in the evolving rivalry between Washington and Beijing.
With their stealthiness and tremendous firepower, submarines pose a serious threat to surface vessels. For that reason, they are ideally suited to so-called sea denial – that is, keeping enemy fleets out of a given patch of ocean.
That's precisely what Beijing intends for its force of roughly 50 small diesel-electric submarines and 10 or so larger nuclear boats. ‘China plans on using its diesel attack submarines…for coastal defence,’ Cote wrote.
Likewise, the nuke boats could be used in an attempt ‘to deny or limit the access of Western navies to the larger sea space between what (Chinese officials) call the 'first and second island chains' – or, roughly speaking, the Philippine Sea.’
But the US Navy’s own submarines plus its patrol planes, helicopters, surface ships and underwater ‘listening’ arrays, concentrated in geographic choke points, could probably detect most Chinese subs attempting to reach the US fleet beyond the first island chain, Cote asserted.
At the same time, ‘China has very limited (Anti-Submarine Warfare) capabilities and appears not to be making major investments to improve them.’
So while the submarines of the People's Liberation Army Navy might be able to deny US and allied surface vessels access to the South China Sea, they can’t reliably extend that denial into the Philippine Sea. Nor could they even detect American undersea vessels anywhere. ‘US submarines can currently operate freely in Chinese coastal waters.’
This imbalance is a result of the United States’ huge investment in submarine technology during the decades of the Cold War. The US has demonstrated ‘the ability to establish and consistently maintain significant acoustic advantages for its nuclear submarines in a competition with a peer competitor.’
The United States’ 55 nuclear attack subs are so quiet ‘that their passage at close range can actually cause a dip in noise levels because background noise is being blocked by the submarine's hull.’
The superiority of US subs could severely limit the potential of China's own undersea fleet in a prolonged conflict, even degrading its coastal defence capability. Cote described US boats taking up positions outside Chinese ports, tracking and destroying PLAN subs as they left or entered.
There’s a catch. The US Navy maintains only 10 submarines on routine forward deployment all over the world during peacetime. Many more boats could ‘surge’ in the event of hostilities, but would require days or weeks to reach Chinese waters. For that reason, ‘the US can do little to stop an initial sortie by a large portion of the Chinese submarine fleet.’
The American sub fleet's advantage would increase over time as more vessels arrived.
Whether Chinese subs could exploit their moment of relative freedom is debatable. Even US submarines with their highly sophisticated sensors and combat systems rely on ‘cueing’ by land-based over-the-horizon radars, satellites or high-altitude surveillance aircraft that can steer them towards their targets.
China possesses a rudimentary cueing capability in the form of several OTH radars and a small constellation of surveillance satellites. Beijing is also developing drone spy planes. The United States could find a new role for its submarines in destroying some of these cueing assets, further handicapping an already inferior Chinese undersea fleet.
US subs are already armed with land-attack cruise missiles. For their own cueing against OTH radars on land, US boats could deploy small aerial drones – a capability already in development.
Thus equipped, US submarines would also be capable of destroying a wider range of land targets, including China's hundreds of mobile missile launchers.
‘Just as I argue that the US could seek new areas of military competition with China by giving its submarines new missions, the Chinese might seek to do the same,’ Cote explained. ‘But the situation for the Chinese is different because they would not be building on a situation of current or inherent advantage like the US would be.’

FILAM
CHINA IS AN OPPORTUNISTIC COWARD! IM SICK AND TIRED OF THEM BULLYING THEIR ASIAN NEIGHBORS!
CALLING ON OUR MIGHTY US ARMY! LETS TEACH THIS PEOPLE A LESSON! LETS CRUSH CHINA!!!!
Meerza
& Gentlemen, we would discount Chinese ASBM DF 21-D for playing Havoc with the flirting Billion Dollars worth US Warships & Trillion Dollars worth of Aircraft carriers, regardless strategic upsets.
Seph
China – Bully, opportunistic, liar, manipulator, idiotic, counterfeiter, faker and most of all A NATION OF THIEF! Chinese navy is the Modern Pirates of the Asia.
mtybroker
The US has NEVER fought a war alone with a skilled, capable, advanced, motivated opponent with modern warfare capabilities. The US has never won a war where they fought without a coalition support. They have fought perceived inferior opponents and lost, or at best, a draw. N, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. They only beat Grenada!! The US is not lead with a unified voice. China is unified. This gave them economic power that is endeniable. There are billions of Chinese, the majority of whom are loyal to the homeland. When China wants to get something done, it gets done. The Chinese army of the 1950's stepped into the Korean War, and the US could not advance further. Talk to any veteran of that war that fought aginst the Chinese, and ask if they want to face them again. The US people and culture in general cannot stomach the death and dying that comes from war. They can only do so to a certain point. China as a nation is battle hardened. They have been invaded. They have lived thru occupation. They have lived thru colonization. They have lived thru famine. They have lived thru civil war. Thousands of Chinese soldiers threw themselves at grenades, and machine guns on command during the Korean War. This was when China was not even invaded. What to you think they are willing to do if anyone threatens the homeland itself? The US themselves proved that technological superiority in war means jack. Its the savage will, tenacity, and the ability to put an ideal before human lives that wins wars time after time. Ask the Vietcong. Ask the Taliban. The US in most wars, will not be the defender. They are far from home, being the aggressor in another's backyard. 10 years against the talibans, and where did that get the US? For god sake, the US cannot find a counter for the primitive IEDs. The Chinese will not by relying on IEDs. They are capable, cunning, willing, they are smart. They have tricks up their sleeves. They are capabilities the world is not aware of. That is they way they are. They want to be underestimated. The Pentagon knows this and is giving China its due respect. Its the ignorant people that believes in their own hype. The US does not want to test China's because it does not want to be embarassed. It does not want to be smack down on the world stage. So, a show of force, rhetoric, and saber rattling is all they want to do. Just to keep face. If both nations get devastated in a war, who do you bet on to rebuild faster? With a greater work force, factories, and $$$$? The Chinsese can lose 10 subs, but its the 1 Us carrier that gets sunk that will be the talk of the world.
Spectre
mtybroker,
Well to blow your argument of the United States never winning a war by themselves out of the water, I guess you conveniently forgot to mention basically the entire Pacific theatre of WWII, or the fact that the US military brought the North Vietnamese to their knees twice. North Korea, same thing, yeah the Chinese pushed the US back, but guess what, the Americans eventually pushed the Chinese back, and if you want to go even further in depth, the UN (aka THE US) saved South Korea from the North and US was even debating on invading China. In These coalitions, let's be honest, the US did almost all the heavy fighting save for the British in some Iraqi cities, I guess utterly dismantling the 4th ranked army at the time in 91 wasn't respectable enough for you. Keep in mind many Iraqi soldiers were battle hardened veterans of the Iran- Iraq war. And for Afghanistan and recent Iraq, try taking a look at the results for yourself rather then the propaganda you are spoon-fed, you'll find a much different story. Not to mention the fact that the American military was acting as a police force rather than a military force when the IEDs started. And for the American public not having the stomach for war, why don't you ask the Japanese about how well that approach and train of thought worked. Never mind, I'll answer it for you, NOT WELL. You speak of Chinese soldiers throwing themselves at machine gun nests and grenades, good for them, the Americans will have plenty of 50 cal rounds,5.56 rounds, and M67s waiting for them AGAIN. The United States has virtually been at war every year in its existence in some place or another. One thing you should know by now, is that the Americans have perfected the art of destroying and killing anything and everything efficiently. If you think that the United States isn't fully aware of Chinese capabilities, that's fine, because I can guarantee the Chinese have no idea what the United States is hiding and developing. Take the blinders off and look at reality. If it ever came down to war with China, and the United States military was allowed to do what it was actually designed for (all-out war without political constraints), the Chinese military wouldn't last long. Now, if the US had aspirations for occupying China, that would be a very different story since they would face the same situation in Iraq and Afghanistan X 1000. Simply put, take off the restraints (which I think would happen in the event of a war with China) of the American Armed Forces, and China will burn. Fortunately, this will never have to happen as both countries' economies are entwined together. I for one would love to see the two countries work together and strengthen ties, it would better for both countries and for the world.