PLA Navy news, pics and videos

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
True, but it doesn't matter, as long as it can grasp the readers uneducated point of view across about China that's all that counts to them.

I'm not sure what you're saying -- are you acknowledging the fact that the chart is not displaying naval ships, but that to unaware readers it may be seen as naval ships? Or are you saying that the chart is not displaying naval ships, but unknowledgeable readers would incorrectly equate them to being naval ships and that the website or ONI who produced the diagram is fear mongering?

The difference is that I'm not sure if you knew in post 286 that the chart was displaying coast guard ships rather than naval ships. If you knew they were displaying coast guard then naval ships, then I assume you were criticizing the website or ONI for "fearing mongering" -- which we cannot assume, because it's possible that the website may have simply been unaware of the picture and was under the impression the picture was for naval ships; and for ONI, well they are displaying a quantitative fact which exists and we cannot perceive that as fear mongering as there are no suggestions that their facts are wrong or that they are using excessive means to generate fear.
If you did not know that post 286 was displaying coast guard ships rather than naval ships, and you believed that the website or ONI were fear mongering, I would also call that incorrect, because in that case they again are simply listing the number of ships for each respective country.

In other words, the only way in which I would consider fear mongering to be occurring, is if the website put up the image of the coast guard ships and called it naval ships, knowing they were not naval ships, with the intention to generate fear through deception and deliberately misportraying the facts.
 

JayBird

Junior Member
Equation probably meant the website make a mistake with the chart and uploaded it with their little story because it fits their agenda of China threat theme with the huge advantage in ship numbers and tonnage compared to her neighboring countries on the chart.

It was a mistake by the website because they didn't realized the chart is for coast guard ships, but it doesn't matter because the website's original intended message with the chart is the same. At least that's what I thought Equation was saying. :D

I believe I've seen another chart that list actual naval ships before from somewhere a while back. Maybe that's how the website got it mixed up. Maybe they got this chart from another site and didn't even check carefully and use it to post their story.
 
found at DefenseNews (dated October 8):
Chinese Newspaper: Spy Satellites Will Target US Carriers
China’s military is getting its ducks in a row for what many experts see as a realistic competence at destroying US aircraft carriers during a confrontation scenario over Taiwan.

In a recent issue of the Chinese-language state-run China Youth Daily newspaper, a report claims that the Gaofen-4 geostationary earth observation satellite will be launched by the end of this year with the express purpose of hunting US aircraft carriers. The satellite is equipped with a visible light imager at 50 meters and infrared staring optical imager at 400 meters.

During the 1996 Taiwan Strait missile crisis, the Chinese military was flustered by the presence of two US aircraft carriers sent to protect Taiwan during missile exercises designed to intimidate the island.

Since then, the military has created the means of holding at risk US aircraft carriers with two new anti-ship ballistic missiles, the DF-21D and the new DF-26. However, locating US aircraft carriers is not easy, and China has developed a variety of airborne and space-based sensors to ease the search.

“The Gaofen series of satellites, as the first series of satellites developed under the Medium and Long-term Development Plan for Science and Technology, plays an important role in building this system,” Kevin Pollpeter, senior research analyst on China at Defense Group Inc., said. “As China develops and deploys long-range, precision strike assets, it recognizes the need for an effective C4ISR [Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance] platforms, to take imagery of large swaths of the ocean to attempt to locate targets such as aircraft carriers.”

Pollpeter said that during the time that it would take to process the imagery, the aircraft carrier would have moved, but its general location would have been fixed.

Hans Kristensen, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Nuclear Information Project, agrees that the Gaofen-4 will have limitations, but “China does not need to track every single US aircraft carrier around the globe — only those within striking range of China.” For knowledge of a carrier’s location to be useful for operators of the DF-21D, the satellite would have to be able to relay that information, more or less, continuously to the guidance system for a DF-21D to be able to strike the carrier.

The Gaofen appears to be another important piece in China’s evolving space-based monitoring capabilities — a network that will work together to locate, target and destroy aircraft carriers and destroyers.

The tragedy, according to Ian Easton, a China military specialist at Project 2049 Institute, is that China has made clear its intention to target US carrier groups with ballistic missiles.

“Yet the Obama administration chose not to issue a diplomatic demarche or raise the issue with [Chinese President Xi Jinping] at the White House,” Easton said. “By default, the White House is legitimizing China’s military buildup, which is aimed at [the US] and [its] friends. Any other sovereign country in the world would protest full throatedly. America’s silence on this issue is self-defeating.”

In early September, Beijing commemorated the 70th anniversary of its victory over imperialist Japan with a parade that unveiled both the DF-21D and the new DF-26. The DF-21D is operational and deployed; the status of the DF-26 is unclear.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

vesicles

Colonel
found at DefenseNews (dated October 8):
Chinese Newspaper: Spy Satellites Will Target US Carriers

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“Yet the Obama administration chose not to issue a diplomatic demarche or raise the issue with [Chinese President Xi Jinping] at the White House,” Easton said. “By default, the White House is legitimizing China’s military buildup, which is aimed at [the US] and [its] friends. Any other sovereign country in the world would protest full throatedly. America’s silence on this issue is self-defeating.”

This statement made me laugh. Seriously, what does he expect that China would do when/IF Obama "issue a diplomatic demarche or raise the issue with [Chinese President Xi Jinping] at the White House"? Would China actually stop what they have been doing? I don't think Obama has wasted any "golden opportunity".

Every nation with such capability does this. The US and the former Soviet Union monitored each other's major assets constantly. I am sure the US monitors every moving asset that belongs to China as much as possible. I can be almost 100% sure that the CV-16 has not left American sight ever since the first time it was launched.

Additionally, China's military build-up does not need to be legitimized. It is totally legit to begin with. China has every right to build a military as powerful as anyone else's. And Chinese people deserve to be protected as well as the citizens of any other nations. There is nothing to be legitimized. If the US can build a military stronger than all the rest of the world combined, China should have the right to build a "second best" military...
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Think it's very difficult to track and follow a carrier strike group by satellite

A satellite alone won't cut it, you will need air borne survailence, UAV, AWACS, electronic emissions and under water monitoring

A whole array of senors and equipment would be needed to track a carrier at sea including code breaking and jamming

It's not impossible but you will be tieong down a lot of resources more than just a satellite
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Think it's very difficult to track and follow a carrier strike group by satellite

A satellite alone won't cut it, you will need air borne survailence, UAV, AWACS, electronic emissions and under water monitoring

A whole array of senors and equipment would be needed to track a carrier at sea including code breaking and jamming

It's not impossible but you will be tieong down a lot of resources more than just a satellite

The satellite they speak of in the article is GF-4, a geostationary satellite that will remain over the western pacific. Geostationary satellites could theoretically do the job of maintaining constant tracking of a ship or a formation of ships... but I'm not sure if GF-4 has high enough resolution.
Also, GF-4 is part of the CHEOS civilian satellite constellation, and we know quite a bit about its capabilities, so I'm a little doubtful as to whether it would have any primary military applications.
The YaoGan lower earth orbit military satellites will probably also be used for carrier tracking. They are lower in orbit but there are also more of them, meaning they could conceivably have high enough refresh rates over the western pacific, as more satellites are added, to be viable as a maritime surveillance system.
 
Top