PDA

View Full Version : China's navy is not a threat



Peter1469
12-30-2011, 07:35 PM
[/URL]
[URL]http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/relax-chinas-first-aircraft-carrier-is-a-piece-of-junk/all/1 (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/relax-chinas-first-aircraft-carrier-is-a-piece-of-junk/all/1)

Wired magazine takes a look.



The answer depends on who you ask. To China’s closest neighbors, the prospect of a carrier speeding heavily-armed Chinese jet fighters across the world’s oceans is an alarming one. But the U.S. Navy, the world’s leading carrier power and arguably the Chinese navy’s biggest rival, seems oddly unaffected.


There are good reasons for the Pentagon’s calm. For starters, Shi Lang, pictured above, could be strictly a training carrier, meant to pave the way for bigger, more capable carriers years or decades in the future.


But even if she is meant for combat, there’s probably little reason to fear Shi Lang. A close study of the 990-foot-long vessel — plus the warships and airplanes she’ll sail with — reveals a modestly-sized carrier lacking many of the elements that make U.S. flattops so powerful.


****


Shi Lang will not possess anything close to that mix of aircraft and capabilities. China’s J-15 naval fighter, pictured above, is a rough analogue of the F-18, but with a shorter range, less sophisticated sensors and fewer weapons options. The Ka-28 helicopter hunts submarines like the H-60 does.


But that’s it. The PLAN doesn’t have radar-jamming jets, carrier-based airlifters or fixed-wing radar planes. Rumors of a Chinese copy of the E-2 seem unfounded, for an E-2 would require a steam-powered catapult to boost it into the air, and Shi Lang lacks even that basic equipment. To fill that huge gap in Shi Lang‘s air wing, China is testing a Z-8 helicopter fitted with a radar. But such a set-up offers only a fraction of the E-2′s range and endurance.


***


The Chinese navy has just two destroyers that come close to matching America’s Aegis warships, although more are under construction. The Type 052C destroyer, pictured above, carries half as many missiles as a U.S. destroyer, and its radar is unlikely to match the Aegis’ ability to closely track scores of targets simultaneously. On the surface, Shi Lang will be all but defenseless, by U.S. standards.



***


The PLAN has two Type 093 submarines capable of long-range patrols. Again, that’s too few for carrier-escort duty in addition to the other missions likely assigned to the Chinese attack-submarine force. But the bigger problem is communications. To coordinate surface ships and submarines, the Americans and other advanced navies rely on a mix of Very Low Frequency radios installed aboard special aircraft, plus higher-frequency radios for talking from ship to sub.


China hasn’t perfected that system. “Due to the limitations of submarine communications technology, the PLAN currently can only exercise relatively limited tactical control over its submarines,” Garth Heckler, Ed Francis and James Mulvenon wrote in the 2007 book China’s Future Nuclear Submarine Force.

MMC
12-30-2011, 08:11 PM
Yet they are hacking into everything.....huh? De Mesquina says China will implode trying to keep up with us.

Conley
12-30-2011, 08:47 PM
Their aircraft carrier doesn't seem like much but their submarine technology and ability to avoid detection remains a concern of mine.

Mister D
12-30-2011, 08:59 PM
I'm going to ay that China's military is way overrated but that's probably a good thing since they are somewhat bellicose and it's better to be over prepared.

Peter1469
12-30-2011, 10:04 PM
Their aircraft carrier doesn't seem like much but their submarine technology and ability to avoid detection remains a concern of mine.

Their subs are very noisy.

Also from Wired:


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/china-submarines/

On the other hand, the flurry of undersea activity gives American forces more opportunities to tail and examine Chinese subs. And U.S. analysts discovered (http://the-diplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2011/08/03/us-vs-china-undersea/) a silver lining in the gathering strategic storm clouds. Chinese submarines are a hell of a lot noisier than anyone expected. The sound you hear is the Pacific balance of power tipping in Washington’s favor.
As recently as 2007, China’s diesel-powered subs and a handful of nuclear-propelled models managed just a few patrols per year (http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php), combined. Two years before that, none of Beijing’s undersea boats went on patrol. For years, the majority of PLAN submarines remained tied up at naval bases, sidelined by mechanical problems and a shortage of adequately trained crews.
As long as the PLAN’s submarines were idle, the U.S. Navy’s spy planes, surveillance ships and snooping subs had few opportunities to assess China’s undersea capabilities — and, most importantly, how much noise the Chinese generate while submerged and moving. Navies can use passive sonars to track submarines by the sounds they make. The louder a vessel, the easier it is to detect. And destroy.
With little information to go on, American intelligence officials had to guess. In cases like that, “you guess conservatively,” a respected U.S.-based naval analyst tells Danger Room on the condition of anonymity. The conservative estimates (http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/subnoise.php) placed the latest PLAN subs roughly a decade behind the state-of-art for Russian submarines — and potentially 20 years behind U.S. undersea technology.
Now Chinese subs are patrolling more frequently. “Within the last year or two the Chinese have begun to deploy diesel boats more frequently into places like the Philippine Sea,” the analyst reveals. More and better data is flowing in from U.S. forces. With that data, the Navy conducted a fresh assessment of PLAN submarines. The unnamed analyst attended a classified briefing based on the assessment.
The assessment’s biggest surprise: Leaving aside the PLAN’s dozen imported Russian subs, new Chinese submarines can be detected at what’s known as the “first convergence zone,” (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/cold-war-asw.html) a ring approximately 25 miles from an undersea vessel where outward-traveling sound waves pack close together

Peter1469
12-30-2011, 10:05 PM
I'm going to ay that China's military is way overrated but that's probably a good thing since they are somewhat bellicose and it's better to be over prepared.


Don't fall for NEOCON propaganda. China is a land power; they have zero ability to project non-nuclear force. They aren't invading anything further from their shores than Taiwan.

Conley
12-30-2011, 10:12 PM
Their subs are very noisy.

Also from Wired:


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/china-submarines/

On the other hand, the flurry of undersea activity gives American forces more opportunities to tail and examine Chinese subs. And U.S. analysts discovered (http://the-diplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2011/08/03/us-vs-china-undersea/) a silver lining in the gathering strategic storm clouds. Chinese submarines are a hell of a lot noisier than anyone expected. The sound you hear is the Pacific balance of power tipping in Washington’s favor.
As recently as 2007, China’s diesel-powered subs and a handful of nuclear-propelled models managed just a few patrols per year (http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/01/chinese_submarine_patrols_rebo.php), combined. Two years before that, none of Beijing’s undersea boats went on patrol. For years, the majority of PLAN submarines remained tied up at naval bases, sidelined by mechanical problems and a shortage of adequately trained crews.
As long as the PLAN’s submarines were idle, the U.S. Navy’s spy planes, surveillance ships and snooping subs had few opportunities to assess China’s undersea capabilities — and, most importantly, how much noise the Chinese generate while submerged and moving. Navies can use passive sonars to track submarines by the sounds they make. The louder a vessel, the easier it is to detect. And destroy.
With little information to go on, American intelligence officials had to guess. In cases like that, “you guess conservatively,” a respected U.S.-based naval analyst tells Danger Room on the condition of anonymity. The conservative estimates (http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/subnoise.php) placed the latest PLAN subs roughly a decade behind the state-of-art for Russian submarines — and potentially 20 years behind U.S. undersea technology.
Now Chinese subs are patrolling more frequently. “Within the last year or two the Chinese have begun to deploy diesel boats more frequently into places like the Philippine Sea,” the analyst reveals. More and better data is flowing in from U.S. forces. With that data, the Navy conducted a fresh assessment of PLAN submarines. The unnamed analyst attended a classified briefing based on the assessment.
The assessment’s biggest surprise: Leaving aside the PLAN’s dozen imported Russian subs, new Chinese submarines can be detected at what’s known as the “first convergence zone,” (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/history/cold-war-asw.html) a ring approximately 25 miles from an undersea vessel where outward-traveling sound waves pack close together

What about that one that surfaced in the middle of naval exercises in the early 2000s though? I think it came up right by the Kitty Hawk...I can track down the article if you don't remember. I posted it recently...

Mister D
12-30-2011, 10:13 PM
I'm not one for neocon propaganda, Peter. I'm just saying it's better to overestimate your enemies and I say enemies because that's the way China wants it.

Conley
12-30-2011, 10:15 PM
A brief summary

In the month of October 2006, Kitty Hawk and her escort warships were undergoing exercises near Okinawa, and a Chinese Song class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_class) submarine shadowed the group then surfaced within 5 mi (8.0 km) of the group on 26 October 2006.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)#cite_note-8) It was considered to be quite rare for Chinese subs to operate that far from their homeports on the mainland, though with this incident that may be changing. Reports claim that the submarine had been undetected until it surfaced.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)#cite_note-9)[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)#cite_note-10)[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)#cite_note-11) In 2009, Timothy J. Keating (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_J._Keating), commander of the United States Pacific Command (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Pacific_Command), commented on the issue, stating that the carrier was "in a very relaxed posture. If there were some heightened state of tension, we would, believe me, we would not let them get that close."[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)#cite_note-12)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)

Peter1469
12-30-2011, 11:24 PM
Did any officers get relieved over that?

Conley
12-30-2011, 11:28 PM
Did any officers get relieved over that?

I don't know and am not sure how I could find that out...honestly you would know better than I. I remember when it was first reported in the media and it was certainly cause for concern. Having the event formally addressed three years later didn't exactly make me feel better but I suspect that overstating China's military capabilities benefits all involved on both sides.

Peter1469
12-31-2011, 08:13 AM
I knew a guy who would certainly know- he was the XO on the Enterprise not long ago. But he divorced his wife and I lost contact with him.

If a Chinese sub got that close to a US Carrier Group, I imagine that several people were not doing their jobs- things like that end careers in the Navy.

Conley
12-31-2011, 09:13 AM
Thanks Peter, that is definitely comforting to read.

Mister D
12-31-2011, 10:12 AM
Yes, actually. That is VERY comforting.

Peter1469
12-31-2011, 01:20 PM
That avatar suits you.

Conley
12-31-2011, 01:45 PM
That avatar suits you.

:rofl: It does indeed!

Mister D
12-31-2011, 01:48 PM
That is a great avatar. I have to thank Conley, actually.

Peter1469
12-31-2011, 06:34 PM
It is hilarious.

RollingWave
02-06-2012, 04:14 AM
How quite or nosiy a sub is and how easy or hard it is to detect them is a very complex issue, suffice to say that sonar doesn't simply blink and will see a clear dot on their screen for sure. there's a lot of complex problem involved, espeically if they're not out in he middle of the deep open sea.

I've served on a (albeit mostly a vietnam era one) US warship here in Taiwan and participated in a few sub hunting drills, suffice to say that even catching really old outdated subs are not far from a sure thing if they're intent is simply to hide . of course in war times and if the subs were attempting to attack you that would make it more difficult for the Subs to remain undetected. in short, the subs may be able to make one hit, but that's why ships usually move in huge groups (espeically carriers), and if they show up and make that hit they'll have a really really hard time getting away. and unlike ships you really can't move subs in large groups.


As for the Chinese navy, yeah, their not going to challenge the US in the open sea anytime soon (like at least half a century), but they have enough capacity to at least give the US navy some threat in the close sea at least (mostly through missiles and to lesser extend subs.). or at least seriously threaten maritime trade.

China would actually have a pretty difficult time taking Taiwan under the current circumstances, and their base setup in the SE coast reflect that, it's more defensive than anything else. their ability to project power onto Taiwan on a moment's notice is very very limited (aka do it before the USA can react) . and obviously if they want to really put enough pieces on the table to seriously attack, then the US would have long have made the decision to either showdown or backdown (and it's rather unlikely to be the later). If there's a country that it really CAN invade and said country probably would have a hard time standing much of a chance right now it's Mongolia, but that's a different can of worms.

As long as the USA doesn't officially (or secretly agree to) politically give up on Taiwan, the odds of China invading it is about the same as it's willingness to us nukes to do it.

Peter1469
02-06-2012, 08:30 AM
Welcome RollingWave. Good comments.

Conley
02-06-2012, 09:07 AM
China would actually have a pretty difficult time taking Taiwan under the current circumstances, and their base setup in the SE coast reflect that, it's more defensive than anything else. their ability to project power onto Taiwan on a moment's notice is very very limited (aka do it before the USA can react) . and obviously if they want to really put enough pieces on the table to seriously attack, then the US would have long have made the decision to either showdown or backdown (and it's rather unlikely to be the later). If there's a country that it really CAN invade and said country probably would have a hard time standing much of a chance right now it's Mongolia, but that's a different can of worms.

As long as the USA doesn't officially (or secretly agree to) politically give up on Taiwan, the odds of China invading it is about the same as it's willingness to us nukes to do it.

Does China have reason to invade Mongolia? Are there metals or oil there?

RollingWave
02-06-2012, 10:50 PM
Does China have reason to invade Mongolia? Are there metals or oil there?

There's plenty of natural resource there yes, (search Mongolia Resource Boom and you'll see) but the political reason is also quite obvious, China claims Taiwan mostly based on the "it's part of China" claim, aka historical rights, but Taiwan was only part of the Chinese dynasty during the Qing era and very brifely in the Republic era, by the same standard, Mongolia is equally and probably more qualified as "Part of China" since it was a integral part of the Qing dynasty (Mongolian nobles were of high status in the period) and at least nominally part of the Republic era for a brief period as well.

Of course, that's a different can of worm , the reason why the PRC have never seriously talked about retaking Mongolia is also a obvious political one, because Mongolia broke away during the Republic era mainly thx to the "help" (aka conspriacy) of the USSR, so after Mao won the civil war (which again the USSR had a hand in) it was obviously keen on not angering their biggest backer at that point. and even today there is still the general feeling that if they retake Mongolia not only would they scare the living shite out of everyone else in the region (and the US) but even really angering Russia, which is still obviously their biggest partner geo-strategically speaking.

It is ironic of course, since there are more Mongolian Speakers and Mongolians living in China than in Mongolia, and also the old Mongolian writing system is only preserved in China, and mostly dead in Mongolia.

Conley
02-06-2012, 11:40 PM
Thanks for the explanation RollingWave. What you say makes sense. To me Mongolia fits more with China than with the USSR (back in the day) but I can see how any Chinese action in the area would trigger a dramatic change in relations with Russia. I think Russia and China are uneasy bedfellows, united in their dislike of the U.S. but beyond that not a lot in common. Once those resources become more scare Mongolia could well be in play between the two powers.

Conley
02-07-2012, 12:31 AM
Interesting stuff:

"After a 16-hour drive under the piercing blue skies of Mongolia's southern Gobi, the first view of the world's newest mega-mine looks eerily like a desert aflame.

Black clouds of dust billow up above the horizon from the pit at Tavan Tolgoi, where a swarm of bulldozers and mechanical diggers have clawed a 70-metre deep gash into the yellow hills.

This resource – thought to be the biggest deposit of coking coal on the planet – is chewed out and transported away to China by a seemingly endless line of trucks that rumble across the plains in a convoy of dust.

Until recently, this area of southern Mongolia was one of the world's last great wildernesses – a cold desert that is home to gazelle, wild ass and herders living a traditional nomadic existence.

Today, however, it is the centre of the planet's greatest resource boom. Some are calling it "the last frontier", others "Minegolia". Whatever the name, this impoverished but remarkable nation in east Asia is on the brink of one of the most dramatic transformations in human history."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/07/gobi-mega-mine-mongolia

Another article I read called Mongolia China's Canada. It definitely sounds like there is huge potential there. Oh, and "wild ass" apparently as well. :grin:

RollingWave
02-07-2012, 12:35 AM
Thanks for the explanation RollingWave. What you say makes sense. To me Mongolia fits more with China than with the USSR (back in the day) but I can see how any Chinese action in the area would trigger a dramatic change in relations with Russia. I think Russia and China are uneasy bedfellows, united in their dislike of the U.S. but beyond that not a lot in common. Once those resources become more scare Mongolia could well be in play between the two powers.

Yeah, but that's basically the same thing with most country's international relationships, Japan doesn't exactly love the US bases in itself for example, but obviously would rather have that than having to face China themself in the future, likewise while obvouisly China and the US's geo-political interest have significant collisions, neither side would really want to end up in a total war for that . etc.. Hell even Israel and the US have conflict of interest in reality.

Conley
02-07-2012, 12:41 AM
Yes. We were having a discussion a few days ago and one of our members was emphasizing how closely Russia and China work together but others were making the point it's almost always when they're coordinating against the United States. The topic of discussion was the U.N. Security Council resolution to condemn Assad in Syria which those two blocked.

RollingWave
02-07-2012, 12:59 AM
Yeah, but from China's POV they essentially say they stand for non-interference of other country's domestic affairs and on that level they've been fairly consistent. though Syria's out of this topic's frame really, but suffice to say international diplomacy is almost never black and white, but almost always a really dark greyish realpolitk . This is true for everyone.

Though on the brighter side, since WW2 the world have mostly managed to keep this balance act within reasonable degree, there have been considerablly less challenges to shatter it , and even today China and Russia is still playing well within the game rules. while those that are not (most noteably North Korea, and to some lesser extend Iran / Syria etc) are not nearly as serious as the events that preluded the World Wars for example

Mister D
02-07-2012, 08:51 AM
Yeah, but that's basically the same thing with most country's international relationships, Japan doesn't exactly love the US bases in itself for example, but obviously would rather have that than having to face China themself in the future, likewise while obvouisly China and the US's geo-political interest have significant collisions, neither side would really want to end up in a total war for that . etc.. Hell even Israel and the US have conflict of interest in reality.

true. All nations have interests that conflict and it's naive to think in terms of "friendship" between states.

MMC
02-07-2012, 12:19 PM
Yes. We were having a discussion a few days ago and one of our members was emphasizing how closely Russia and China work together but others were making the point it's almost always when they're coordinating against the United States. The topic of discussion was the U.N. Security Council resolution to condemn Assad in Syria which those two blocked.

Well thats what they are going to do and are doing now. Co-ordinating against the US. As they see whats taking place with Syria and Iran. which is why they will work even more closely together than ever before. Making the move to accept each others currency also knocks some barriers down.

waltky
11-08-2012, 02:56 PM
China Will Have Nuclear Subs in 2 Years...
:shocked:
China submarines to soon carry nukes, draft U.S. report says
WASHINGTON | Thu Nov 8, 2012 - New subs could be deployed within 2 years



China (http://www.reuters.com/places/china) appears to be within two years of deploying submarine-launched nuclear weapons, adding a new leg to its nuclear arsenal that should lead to arms-reduction talks, a draft report by a congressionally mandated U.S. commission says. China in the meantime remains "the most threatening" power in cyberspace and presents the largest challenge to U.S. supply chain integrity, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission said in a draft of its 2012 report to the U.S. Congress.

The deployment of a hard-to-track, submarine-launched leg of China's nuclear arsenal could have significant consequences in East Asia and beyond. It also could add to tensions between the United States and China, the world's two biggest economies. Any Chinese effort to ensure a retaliatory capability against a U.S. nuclear strike "would necessarily affect Indian and Russian perceptions about the potency of their own deterrent capabilities vis-à-vis China," the report said, for instance. That means China must "complete military mechanization and make major progress in full military IT (information technology) application by 2020," he said.

To address a wide variety of security threats, "we must make major progress in modernizing national defense and the armed forces," Hu said.China is alone among the original nuclear weapons states to be expanding its nuclear forces, the report said. The others are the United States, Russia, Britain and France (http://www.reuters.com/places/france). Beijing is "on the cusp of attaining a credible nuclear triad of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and air-dropped nuclear bombs," the report says. China has had a largely symbolic ballistic missile submarine capability for decades but is only now set to establish a "near-continuous at-sea strategic deterrent," the draft said.

Chinese President Hu Jintao has made it a priority to modernize the country's navy. China launched its first aircraft carrier, purchased from Ukraine and then refurbished, in September. "Building strong national defense and powerful armed forces that are commensurate with China's international standing and meet the needs of its security and development interests is a strategic task of China's modernization drive," Hu said in a speech on Thursday at the opening of the Chinese Communist Party's once-every-five-years congress.

ARMS CONTROL TALKS URGED (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/08/us-china-usa-military-idUSBRE8A705720121108)

RollingWave
11-09-2012, 04:11 AM
errr, Waltky, Nuclear Submarine usually means that the Sub is running on a Nuclear reactor, not that it's carrying nuke, and the former the Chinese already have for a long time, although they aren't very good once (reputed to be quite noisy , though usually their point isn't to get close to fleets anyway so it's not a huge problem) .

The Chinese have been developing Underwater ICBM for a long time, they actually have older types that theoretically might work, just that its too unreliable.