SinoDefence Forum

Finn McCool · 11-13-2006

This incident does not prove anything. It does not prove that the Chinese SSK force can penetrate USN ASW defences. There is not enough evidence on this to prove that, and I find that hard to believe based what I know right now.

That said, it does show that the PLAN has proven that it can find a carrier battle group in the open ocean, and can get a sub/s into its path. Of course, that was aided by the fact that the Kitty Hawk's itinerary was posted on the Internet (

) but still, getting that Song in the correct position was probably quite difficult. I personally believe that more than one sub was involved in this operation and that the PLAN put a SSK picket line across the relatively narrow area between Taiwan and the Phillipines.

Quote:

Few subs can "keep up" with a transitting CBG. Those few are probably Seawolf and Virgina, and maybe Russia's latest nuke attack boat. All others will make noise. If the CBG is really moving, they'll all make noise. A diesel Song simply cannot keep up. on diesel or (for long) on batteries. It is unlikely that the Song "shadowed" the carrier.

What is more likely is that a Song somehow, using an external intellignece source, managed to manovoure itself in the path of the CBG and let screen ships waltz right in

None of this sounds like a blue water operation but cases where we have always assumed PRC might a achieve best case advantage when compared to US Navy (assuming article is true)

Basically I agree with Seacraft. We here at SDF have always maintained that in a realistic situation the best chance that the PLAN would have at getting at a US carrier would be to put an SSK waiting in its path. Of course, in a realistic situation that would take excellent intelligence and luck.

crobato · 11-13-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by duskylim

Dear Sirs:

This incident and the tactics the submarine commander utilized remind me of World War II submarine operations against enemy warships, essentially it consisted of and elaborate ambush, that is, predict the future course of the enemy, place yourself there, wait and hope you were right!

To quote a famous submariner "yee gods! A flat top!"

It must be recalled that half the carriers lost in that war were lost to enemy submarine action, so history suggest that with enough subs available one can do considerable damage to major elements of the opponent's fleet.

Both the Soviet Union before and the PLAN now are aware of this and probably rate subs as their best naval weapon. I would look to see a greater expansion of China's submarine fleet.

By the way someone mentioned that the Song had a seven-blade propeller, however I do believe that only the lead sub - which was rated unsatisfactory and had to undergo extensive modification before being accepted - had this.

All the new build subs in fact have a much smaller (and hence faster-turning) brass propeller - its quite prominent in many pictures of the new Song's. I have always wondered as to why the PLAN decided on this apparently retrogressive step, as the smaller, faster propeller should be noisier and less efficient.

Anyone care to comment?

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim

Except for the first, they all should have the same 7 bladed skewed propeller, at least according to the pictures I've seen. I'm not really sure where you see the so called smaller propeller. I hope you are not confusing pics with that of older Kilos.

crobato · 11-13-2006

Quote:

That said, it does show that the PLAN has proven that it can find a carrier battle group in the open ocean, and can get a sub/s into its path. Of course, that was aided by the fact that the Kitty Hawk's itinerary was posted on the Internet ( ) but still, getting that Song in the correct position was probably quite difficult. I personally believe that more than one sub was involved in this operation and that the PLAN put a SSK picket line across the relatively narrow area between Taiwan and the Phillipines.

I don't really think it's far out into the open. Anyway, we know the PLA can "find" ships at least close to their backyard. Back in 1994, the same carrier was harassing a Han sub. J-6s were sent to intercept and they were well out of their loiter range,which means the planes had to be scrambled from the ground and directed. That implies a command network that is able to detect and respond, probably with the aid of satellites.

Pointblank · 11-13-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by duskylim

By the way someone mentioned that the Song had a seven-blade propeller, however I do believe that only the lead sub - which was rated unsatisfactory and had to undergo extensive modification before being accepted - had this.

All the new build subs in fact have a much smaller (and hence faster-turning) brass propeller - its quite prominent in many pictures of the new Song's. I have always wondered as to why the PLAN decided on this apparently retrogressive step, as the smaller, faster propeller should be noisier and less efficient.

Anyone care to comment?

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim

I think it is because they were just more experienced with the older prop, and the newer one was first generation, and hence, they were not experienced with them and they subsequently had some trouble with the design.

crobato · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pointblank

Then again, the PRC would want to send a statement to the USN: Your not invincible. We got one of our subs into firing position on your carrier. Watch your back next time, if you decide to cross us.

The usual policy is to pretend nonexistance of capability. It's always better for the enemy to underestimate you, than to overestimate.

I have a theory that it's not just a message to the USN, but to the PLAN, the PLA and the CMC leadership itself. Recently the PLAN once again had a change in leadership, and these ones are more oriented on surface ships. Hence serious talk and effort on the possible carrier project. Militaries have factions that usually back one doctrine against another, your "mafias" for example. Sensing a change in policy, one that may deemphasize subs for surface ships and carriers, here is a sub guy trying to send the message "hey look, we can do it. We can do it better than anything else you have now or planned. Subs is the best weapon you have."

coolieno99 · 11-14-2006

IMHO the carrier group position was probably fixed by the Jian Bing-5 SAR satellite. The outline of carrier flight deck can be made out by SAR satellite in high resolution mode. The sub was then sent to position itself for ambush like in World War 2. German U-boat "wolf packs" always staged an attack by ambush, they never tried to "outrun" their prey, even slow running freighters.
Besides modern subs do not need to get near their targets. They can launched Club-S missiles at 200 miles away. Even the subs are lucky enough to get near their targets, they can launched wave-homing torpedoes at about 20 miles away.

Jeff Head · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolieno99

IMHO the carrier group position was probably fixed by the Jian Bing-5 SAR satellite. The outline of carrier flight deck can be made out by SAR satellite in high resolution mode. The sub was then sent to position itself for ambush like in World War 2. German U-boat "wolf packs" always staged an attack by ambush, they never tried to "outrun" their prey, even slow running freighters.
Besides modern subs do not need to get near their targets. They can launched Club-S missiles at 200 miles away. Even the subs are lucky enough to get near their targets, they can launched wave-homing torpedoes at about 20 miles away.

Both of those scenarios (Club2 at 200 miles, or wave homing at 20 miles) would be ineffective against a US nuclear powered carrier. AEGIS will knock down the Clubs, unless there are very many of them (like 20-30). And a wave homer from 20 miles? Far too much time for the target to react and either turn away or otherwise avoid the torpedo...becaue they will hear the launch and hear it coming.

Getting inside the ring, like where this Song was at less than five miles is where a sub will need to be to inflict maximum damage on a carrier....even then, a US nuclear carrier is VERY fast, and may be able to outrun most torpedoes unless they are launched within a mile or two and moving at well over 50 knots.

Scratch · 11-14-2006

Could it be possible that the ASW vessels of the Group detected the sub but didn't react to see how the sub would act.
Or would they "ping" every unknown contact in the path of a carrier ?

RedMercury · 11-14-2006

Kudos to crobato for the most insightful post so far. Everyone else failed to consider the internal politics of the PLAN.

Jeff Head · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by crobato

The usual policy is to pretend nonexistance of capability. It's always better for the enemy to underestimate you, than to overestimate.

I have a theory that it's not just a message to the USN, but to the PLAN, the PLA and the CMC leadership itself. Recently the PLAN once again had a change in leadership, and these ones are more oriented on surface ships. Hence serious talk and effort on the possible carrier project. Militaries have factions that usually back one doctrine against another, your "mafias" for example. Sensing a change in policy, one that may deemphasize subs for surface ships and carriers, here is a sub guy trying to send the message "hey look, we can do it. We can do it better than anything else you have now or planned. Subs is the best weapon you have."

If that message was meant to be sent, it was on orders from much higher up, IMHO, than the individual sub commander. I doubt that an individual boat commander would act in such a fashion to take upon himself the decision to send such a message...but I do not discount that higher level brass within the PLAN would set in a motion such a plan to do so, for the reasons you cite

I still believe that the Song did not "shadow" the CSG...it would be too slow to do so...and that if they did penetrate the ring, it was done so by knowing in advance where the carrier would be operating and then waiting there quietly until they were in a position to surface close in to the carrier.

I'd love to see pictures of the surfacing so a more accurate explanation could be formulated...but if they exist, on either side...it is not likely that the general public will ever see them.

Kilo636 · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by tphuang

not exactly the same issue, but I guess this incident might have coincided with this latest statement

On the issue itself, the incident is reported by Bill Gertz. I honestly take stuff that he reports with little credence. I remember the media reported several incidences where a Chinese sub supposedly went undetected and surfaced outside its usual operating circle. But then gf0021-aust from DT said that it was pretty much tracked the entire way. So, for me, it's a little hard to believe something by a China threat guy like Bill Gertz. Besides, what the heck is this sub doing trying to show up a carrier?

gf0021-aust ?? He everytime says that.

He is someone who cannot believe PRC is capable of doing anything impressive. Just treat his words like Bill Gertz..

If anybody can remember during 1996 of North Korean sub intruding into the south? Those subs went undetected and was only discovered after a sub ram ashore. One sub even went directly under a net of ASW during an exercise between of USN and South Korean Navy. Don't tell me those north korean sub r the latest most advance version available that time that can evade any western subs?

Yes,the scenario r much different. But my point is even a very inferior NK sub can do that. Why can't a far more advance Song have the chance to get near a CVN within its firing range without detected? Those so call expert just can't believe the advancement of Chinese.

tphuang · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kilo636

gf0021-aust ?? He everytime says that.

He is someone who cannot believe PRC is capable of doing anything impressive. Just treat his words like Bill Gertz..

If anybody can remember during 1996 of North Korean sub intruding into the south? Those subs went undetected and was only discovered after a sub ram ashore. One sub even went directly under a net of ASW during an exercise between of USN and South Korean Navy. Don't tell me those north korean sub r the latest most advance version available that time that can evade any western subs?

Yes,the scenario r much different. But my point is even a very inferior NK sub can do that. Why can't a far more advance Song have the chance to get near a CVN within its firing range without detected? Those so call expert just can't believe the advancement of Chinese.

I've learnt not to argue with gf0021-aust a long time ago. In terms of credibility, Bill Gertz has none as far as I'm concerned, except as a certified China threat amplifier. I'm not sure about the North Korean sub incident. But this story has all the writings of an intentional leak.

Also, I totally agree with Jeff. For sure, you can fire your AShM from far out, but if you can actually get to within 5 mile of the target, and fire multiple torpedoes and Anti-ship missiles at the carrier, that would be far more dangerous.

duskylim · 11-14-2006

Dear Crob:

I took the chance to check out all the Song pics I had downloaded and I must admit you're right - the seven-bladed large-diameter skewed propeller is definitely the one mounted. It appears that I mistook some sort of emblem (a wreath of some sort) that was pasted over the prop for the prop itself.

Deepest apologies for the wild goose chase, gotta have my eyes checked again.

Regards,

Dusky Lim

bd popeye · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Getting inside the ring, like where this Song was at less than five miles is where a sub will need to be to inflict maximum damage on a carrier....even then, a US nuclear carrier is VERY fast, and may be able to outrun most torpedoes unless they are launched within a mile or two and moving at well over 50 knots

The top speed of a Nimitz class is classified.It is in excess of 30 knots. But I sure thye can go at a much greater speed than that.

Quote:

Of course, that was aided by the fact that the Kitty Hawk's itinerary was posted on the Internet

True to a point. Those locations are posted after the fact on an no-offical USN web site.... BUT everytime the Kitty Hawk departs or arrives in any port it is posted on navy.mil. Any excersises that the USN conducts with the JMSDF are posted in advance on navy.mil. and http://www.c7f.navy.mil/ Ahemmmm now why does the USN do this?...Anyone want to guess?

BLUEJACKET · 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kilo636

gf0021-aust ?? He everytime says that.

He is someone who cannot believe PRC is capable of doing anything impressive. Just treat his words like Bill Gertz..
If anybody can remember during 1996 of North Korean sub intruding into the south? Those subs went undetected and was only discovered after a sub ram ashore. One sub even went directly under a net of ASW during an exercise between of USN and South Korean Navy. Don't tell me those north korean sub r the latest most advance version available that time that can evade any western subs?
Yes,the scenario r much different. But my point is even a very inferior NK sub can do that. Why can't a far more advance Song have the chance to get near a CVN within its firing range without detected? Those so call expert just can't believe the advancement of Chinese.

Thanks for pointing it out!
As a former CV-63 crewmember, I got to say something about the internet allegation.
1. "EMAIL MATURITY"-every once in a while, we were reminded NOT TO DISCLOSE ANYTHING ABOUT THE SHIP'S MOVEMENT when emailing messages out. If the onboard censors found those, not only those messages were not sent out, but the sailor involved would find him(her)self in very hot water, and email priveleges could be turned off for the entire ship!
2. Even if the info. about CV-63 is dislosed on the Navy websites, it doesn't include precise coordinates, course & speed at any given time! So, to use the internet dislosures to berate PLAN capabilities is as shallow and flimsy as saying that Sitting Bull and other chiefs won at the Littlle Big Horn because they must have studied at the military academy!

SinoDefence Forum

Chinese sub surfaces undetected behind USS Kitty Hawk

Chinese sub surfaces undetected behind USS Kitty Hawk

DefenceTalk Military Pictures

vBulletin Tweet Poster