With regards to naval activity in northeast Asia check out this little piece of self-satisfaction that happened on exercise between Japan and Taiwan:
Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced
... American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk … The lone Chinese vessel slipped past at least a dozen other American warships which were supposed to protect the carrier from hostile aircraft or submarines. And the rest of the costly defensive screen, which usually includes at least two U.S. submarines, was also apparently unable to detect it. ... Commodore Stephen Saunders, editor of Jane’s Fighting Ships, and a former Royal Navy anti-submarine specialist, said the U.S. had paid relatively little attention to this form of warfare since the end of the Cold War. He said: “It was certainly a wake-up call for the Americans.
h/t to Grendel.
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « Moslem Anti-Kemalist Turks capture Sinkiang!
- » China’s green energy gap
COMMENTS / 15 COMMENTS
Ken added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 6:47 amSecond time in a year? Hum…where were the Destroyers and/or the helo’s?
Could be someone is getting complacent; or letting someone else THINK they are?Destroyers and/or the Helo’s?
Mihnea Dumitru added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 11:01 amthey just need a couple of slaps in their face like this one and they’ll be all over it so it doesn’t happen again. but.. yeah, LOL!
ramjet added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 11:36 amIt’s better that US Navy gives a lot more attention to anti sub warfare in general and in littoral waters in particular; by now and in the near future. More helos on destroyers and a returning of antisubmarine aircraft on carriers. Don’t now if it’s possible to have back Vikings as stopgap waiting for a new aircraf, but this is the most likely asymmetric challenge the chinese can give wirh their diesel-electric (quieter than nuclear) near their shores.
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 12:15 pmThere was a similar discussion over at Democratic Underground. The most informative comment suggested what had happened is that the Chinese sub had turned on its diesel upstream, then drifted with minimal maneuvering on battery until near the sub.
We could have seen it if we had turned on active sonar, but that confuses whales which we apparently value more than our sailors, so our passive sonar did not detect the nearly-silent vehicle. It’s like trying to see someone in the dark, when no one has turned on a light.
Adrian added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 1:07 pmCarriers are just big floating targets anyway. I’m glad I’m not on them.
Beijing_Barbarian added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 1:29 pmFor the record, I have seen some Chinese parents playing a game simular to peekaboo with their kids, they say “门门！”
:-P
Grendel added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 1:43 pmYou can count on it that during war time nobody’s going to take chances and play pong on their computers instead watching out for enemy subs… ;-)
ramjet added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 2:00 pmCarriers does not have to stay in littoral waters like Japan sea, Yellow see, West China see. They have to stay away in blue waters where his antisub defense are made to work better. It is a nonsense to close in waters where there is a menace than can’t be properly countered (times of siling in the Adriatic sea as in the Kosovo war are gone). Since you have to show the flag and take part of exercises with allied navies ok, but when “things goes bad” stay out and hammer hard with bombers and cruise missiles from distance; let the new littoral fast ships operate near the coasts and protect them from subs by air. Again, they need more AS(antisubmarine)aircraft in the air; and I think also they must have to retreat many expertise in AS war thev have lost in these years. It’s not a riturn to cold war tactics but a rielaboration of them. If not, for me, this is a confirmation of the Kaplan’s article…
ElamBend added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 9:36 pmWhat I can’t figure out is why did the Chinese purposely give away their position, if that’s what they did. Better to be underestimated than put your ‘rivals’ on guard.
ramjet added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 10:45 pmYes, Chinese always take their times and have subtle beahaviors; maybe they made a mistake, maybe they need to divert attention from something else, bigger. It seems they want to insist sending a message that has not beeen understood before (this is the second, the first wasn’t so explicit): To stay away from their business; to let them lose.
P. Aeneas added these pithy words on 12 Nov 07 at 11:25 pm“What I can’t figure out is why did the Chinese purposely give away their position, if that’s what they did. Better to be underestimated than put your ‘rivals’ on guard.”
Perhaps the goal is not so much actual military advantage, but rather good military PR? The Chinese may see embarrassing the American military as more strategically valuable than keeping a tactic in reserve which may never have the opportunity to be used.
If this is the case, we are truly in trouble. Even against semi-guerrilla tactics like these, I think our military would still prevail in the end. But an image war? We just don’t seem to have the wherewithal any more.
molon labe added these pithy words on 13 Nov 07 at 1:11 pmYou guys were taken in by PR. The reason the Chinese sub surfaced is that it was pinged badly by the US ships. Has it occurred to you that maybe we don’t choose to let our anti-sub detection capabilities be made public in exercises like this?
Chinese sub lost. Our commander was promoted. You do the math.
ramjet added these pithy words on 13 Nov 07 at 6:22 pmThe reason the Chinese sub surfaced is that it was pinged badly by the US ships. Has it occurred to you that maybe we don’t choose to let our anti-sub detection capabilities be made public in exercises like this?
Chinese sub lost. Our commander was promoted. You do the math.You’r probably right. I hope so. Then why so much embarassment? Anyway, I keep thinking they need more AS capabiltiy. Maybe the message was from the Navy just for this. If is this, they are very good PR. Surely better than us..
Eddie added these pithy words on 14 Nov 07 at 10:26 am“Big floating targets”?
No we’re more like big floating taxi ship targets… but yes, various commenters are right that the Navy is paying even now for bad decisions made regarding anti-submarine warfare capabilities in the past. They’re working hard to correct it. The most interesting part of all this is “why did the Chinese sub surface?”. Given that this has happened (officially twice) before, what does it mean and what are the Chinese saying?
Having served on the Kitty Hawk for 3 years, I know we’ve been caught with our pants down more than enough times (Chinese subs, Indonesian/Thai fishing boats, Russian carrier bombers).
Though the fault (if this is not what Ramjet and molon labe are assuming) of this was with our battle group in general, we all make mistakes, especially at the higher op tempo 7th Fleet ships have compared to the rest of the Navy. This could have happened from sheer exhaustion of our existing anti-sub assets, which are stretched to the limit at this point until the redirection of resources and attention to ASW again pays off.
The battlegroup combatants are constantly out to sea with the Kitty Hawk, out on missile defense duties up North, or in the yards, undergoing a maintenance availability to keep the ships afloat after constant sea service. Its not like the Stateside Navy where they pull in for the sake of saving operations money or “for the holidays”.
SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.
