First, some great detailed shots of some of the gun towers built on each corner of all of the "Big 3™️" island bases. Here's one from Fiery Cross Reef. You can see clearly what looks like a transplanted naval gun turret, and an anti-missile CIWS.
Here's a shot of another gun+CIWS combo on Fiery Cross...
...based on those side and rear views of the CIWS, I'd say it's likely a Type 730 or 1130 CIWS, just like on the PLA Navy's combatants.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4…
You may notice the island's CIWS mount doesn't have radars on top of it like on ships. I think they've moved the fire control radar higher up on the gun tower, where it wouldn't be subject to blast from the gun turret right behind it. Here's a set from Cuarteron Reef.
As for the gun turrets, my best guess is that they're something like the dual-purpose 76mm PJ26 mount, as carried on Type 054A frigates. Here's a comparison:
Back on Fiery Cross, we have this garage with super-tall doors. There are similar garages on each of the Big 3 (one has 2). In each case the tall doors face out to sea, and there are shorter openings on the land-facing side.
Over on Mischief Reef, you can see another one these sea-facing tall-door buildings, as well as the retractable-roof buildings that are also on each island.
My guess is that the sea-facing garages are for angled cruise missile launchers (for anti-ship YJ-12 or CJ-10 land-attack missiles)(left), while the retractable roof buildings are for vertical-launch SAMs (like HQ-9, right):
Some more good detail from the great photos: while it often looks on imagery like these islands are empty, as you can't really see people doing things, here we can see a car driving around Fiery Cross and someone walking down a street. It's not crowds, but it's also not nothing.
Here we have a great shot of a KJ-500 AEW aircraft on the ramp at Fiery Cross. Given the gray color scheme with subdued markings, I'm guessing it's PLAAF instead of PLANAF? (IIRC they're blue-gray)
As mentioned elsewhere, we also have this likely Y-8/Y-9 inside a hangar at Mischief Reef. Thought not 100% proof, this might be an indicator that patrol aircraft are now at least semi-permanently stationed there, instead of just on temporary mission-oriented detachments.
On the topic of aircraft, you can see in several photos that the Chinese have blocked the runway on Subi reef by placing what looks like luggage wagons in multiple spots. As a pilot, I can tell you this is an unsafe act, hostile to anyone else flying in the area.
You see, when you close a runway, if possible you're supposed to mark it as closed so that pilot know that it's not safe to land there. This is an international standard per ICAO, who recommends that runways be marked for temporary closure.
The reason this is important is that if you're a pilot in command of an aircraft in true distress, you're likely to look for the nearest available runway and take it. If you're busy dealing with an emergency, you might notice a big X on the runway...
...but you may not notice a luggage cart *deliberately* left on the runway 1/3 of the way down until it's too late & everyone dies. Now, ICAO says the X may be omitted if the reason is short duration & ATC can notify folks. But IMO that's for exigencies, not something like this.
I mean, what if the aircraft taking these pictures had an inflight emergency & really needed to use the runway, which was fouled *on purpose*? IMO this once again puts the lie to the idea these islands were built for the navigational safety of all. They're military bases, period.
One thing I forgot (I don't want to go all the way back & move every tweet down 1), assuming the Type 730/1130 CIWS on the corner of each island has its advertised 2500m effective range vs missiles, here's what the interlocking coverage looks like for Subi Reef, for example. 🖖
1. Everyone involved in reporting this clearly understands that nuclear submarines had not—yet—been built in Wuhan, and that this was a new development: a significant expansion of nuclear submarine production outside of Huludao.
1. cont'd: rumors of a new "auxiliary nuclear powerplant for electricity generation for fitting into conventional submarine designs" (like the subs they've been building at Wuhan) have been circulating for years, so not that surprising of a development.cimsec.org/pla-navys-plan…
2. Everyone also understands the Yangtze is shallow, which is why for years the subs being built there have been taken downriver on barges. The new boat is only ~10% longer than previous classes, nothing like the size of PRC SSNs, so no reason to think it couldn't be so also.
What if I told you that as I type this there was a vessel, associated with the Chinese PLA, that *could* be equipped with many dozens of anti-ship cruise missiles—and was parked less than 4 miles from the bulk of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet.
Well guess what: it's happening—for real.
The vessel in question is a container ship named COSCO Shipping Sakura. It's a massive ship, more than 360m long (~1200 ft), and weighing far more than a U.S. aircraft carrier. Built in 2018, It can carry more than 14000 shipping containers.
The shipyard that built it, Jiangnan Shipyard, in addition to building ships for COSCO (and western, even TAIWANESE companies!) also builds warships for the PLA Navy, including its first full-size aircraft carrier. features.csis.org/china-shadow-w…
This USNI Proceedings article advocates a "trade denial" strategy - though not a blockade - as a "low-cost option" for deterring PRC military aggression against Taiwan.
While I like the idea of finding new ways to deter China, I have some issues with this article, as follows:
My overarching concern is this: for years there's been a strain of thinking that China will never attack because the U.S. & allies could "just cut off their oil" or the like. That kind of thinking undercuts support for the necessary resources to actually deter the PRC militarily.
THIS article doesn't advocate an actual blockade, considering it infeasible in part because of the internationalized nature of modern shipping. Here I agree with the author, retired RADM Khanna, Indian Navy: this factor undercuts the idea of a "blockade" that others advocate.
Imagery update: looking back at some commercial imagery at Wuchang Shipyard (one of China's conventional submarine builders), if I'm not mistaken I believe there may be a new class of Chinese submarine out there.
I recently acquired this interesting image of the shipyard from 26 April 2024.
On the left, you can see what appears to be a freshly-launched Hangor II-class submarine, the 1st of 8 being built for Pakistan.
You can also see the other, possibly new class of boat.
The ID of the Hangor-II is based on separate reporting of its launch in late Apr, matching nicely with what we see.
Comparing the Hangor with images of earlier 039A class boats—and the new boat—the difference is plain to see.
Got some fresh @planet imagery of China's new base at Ream, Cambodia. Looks like they continue to be busy bees, constructing what looks to be a sizable naval base.
First, here's an overall comparo of where things are now-ish (6/2020) to before construction started (3/2020).
They've now completed enough of the drydock & wharf that we can now see their final dimensions: right at 140m from the back of the drydock to where the caisson would go, & a 270m wharf.
Also, there's what looks like a ramp to pull smaller vessels out for maintenance.
You can see pretty clearly that the ramp extends into the water. A facility like this would be useful for working on smaller vessels like Cambodia's patrol boats and other harbor craft, and faster than using a drydock.
So, I recently acquired some updated imagery from Wuchang Shipyard in Wuhan - China's primary shipyard for non-nuclear submarine construction.
It appears there may have been something...odd going on there in June. 🤔
First, an older image from 29 May shows nothing unusual - a presumably new-construction Yuan-class submarine (Type 039 variant) in the usual spot where newly-launched boats are fitted out.
[BTW the patchwork nature of the images is because I buy my own and pay by the area, so..]
More recently I acquired an image from June 13th. In the image, there appears to be what look like crane barges clustered around...something...near where the submarine was earlier.
Also, the floating pier where the submarine was moored appears to have been offset a bit.