PLAN Anti-Piracy Deployments

hyalitemarine

Banned Idiot
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

I'm not questioning the actual accuracy of the missile (I should've used my words more carefully). What I'm questioning is the ability of the missile to hit a moving target. A ship won't stay still and on the high sea, there is no pre-set course for it to travel. It would be almost impossible to hit a small ship moving at >30 knots in the ocean.

Anyways, unless you want to kill all the hostages, you leave your whatever missile at home.

Well, in the article that I linked to, some Russian and US ballistic warheads are maneuverable all the way to the target in real time.

:rofl: LOL, Actually, I liked that last sentence of yours, it did make me laugh with your humor. :D
 

vesicles

Colonel
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

I agree that we do live in a era of instant communication. But the decision to pick up the phone in the first place lies with the commander. Using this phone analogy, if the commander is put on hold for an indefinite amount of time should he just sit there and wait or take action that he sees fit? I argue that USN commanders are selected for their ability to lead men and accomplish the mission.

It is also important to note that the line back to command headquarters might not always be there, especially in wartime conditions.

OK, I'm done with this nonsense. But I beg you, USE SOME LOGIC, please...
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine, You shall not make threats against this forum.

Oh, and by the way, my reference to Invision Tech Solutions in Phoenix, AZ was reference to fact that if this web site continues to only be a pro-China forum and to single out and bash Americans and other nationalities, then I am sure that the ownership of the InvisionTech Solutions, who are American, will take special note of it and action to correct the situation.

You need to read this thread..

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/announcements/ban-list-8-54.html#post108975

bd popeye super moderator

5unwxw.jpg
 

Engineer

Major
As I have stated in previous posts, the US Navy TOOK COMMAND of the situation and set up the pirates. I will not go through the whole rigmarole yet again. If anyone here is actually serious about discussing this situation, lets cover it is a part at a time, not some ridiculous, long winded manifesto.
In case I have not made it clear in my previous post, what the US did in the hijacking of Maersk Alabama is irrelevant as that situation is completely different to the recent hijacking of the Chinese vessel.

Now, I believe I have asked you to provide evidences that support your statements regarding 1) the abilities of Chinese naval commanders and 2) the distance of the hijacked ship to the Chinese task force. If you are serious in participating in discussion, then let see some supporting arguments from your side. Otherwise, your silence only means you acknowledge that your statements are pure conjectures. :rolleyes:

As I said previously, lets debate subjects point by point.
Then let see some evidences supporting your assertions.

The links are supporting arguments for location of ships; authority to chase down pirates on Somali waters and land, and the China Daily website that has not mentioned the De Xin Hai hijacking since October 22.
The links you have provided do not support your argument regarding the distance between the ship and the task force in any manner. Again, I shall refer to this site:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The site contains a map showing the location where the ship was first hijacked. As one can see, the distance between the ship and the mouth of the gulf is actually longer than the distance between the ship and the coast. This contradicts your claim that the distance between the ship and the coast is equal to that between the ship and the task force.

My critique of Chinese naval tactics is that they lost a valuable opportunity in not taking control of the situation. If the Chinese ships immediately raced down the Somali coast, they stood a good chance, albeit a slim one, but a chance non-the-less, to deny the hijacked ship access to the pirates liar.
What kind of double talk is this? A good chance, but slim? :roll:

The task force, being in escort duty at the time of the attack, made the correct decision in staying with the ships being escorted. An attempt to reach the ship 1000 nm away would not only be fruitless, but expose the ships under escort to other possible pirates attack.

If you cannot see this simple fact, then quite frankly you are in no position to judge the actions of Chinese naval commanders.

By allowing the hijacked ship to rule events by going to shore, it will now be a extremely long and difficult situation to free not only the ship, but also the hostages, which will be dispersed deep into the hinterlands of a lawless state. The Somali pirates now have little to fear from a Chinese Navy as long as they keep changing tactics and move quicker than the Chinese naval bureaucracy.
I failed to see how Chinese naval bureaucracy is in anyway relevant to the discussion at hands.

The escorting of convoys is a multinational one, that means there are SEVERAL multi-national ships in the area that can easily plug the gap. The reason all those warships are there is to protect shipping from pirates. Their mission does not say, "Oh, if a pirate is on the other side of this line then ignore it.".
First of all, the prevention of commercial vessels from being attacked by pirates is the multinational effort. Escorting convoys is an unilateral act from the Chinese government. There is no naval vessels in the escort other than those from the Chinese.

Secondly, you are correct in pointing out that there are all those warships (from different nations) in the area. So why has the US Navy not race to the rescue of the hijacked Chinese vessel? Following your logic, this would definitely constitute as incompetence on the part of US naval commanders, illustrating their failures at quick-thinking, showing initiatives, and taking control of the situation.

What is not professional is not adapting to unforeseen circumstances. So if a Chinese ship was ordered to guard a harbor on point A, while an enemy attack at point B only a few miles away, by your logic, it would "abandoning your post" if that ship went to aid in the "B" battle.
This argument is totally flawed in that the ship that was hijacked was not just "miles away" from the Chinese task force, rather it was some 1000 nm away.

Therein lies the difference between US policy and Chinese policy. Americans would most likely adapt to the situation and take initiative and not wait for orders and join the B battle. The Chinese, it seems, would sit still, since that was their orders.

If you think robotic control is a good thing in a tactical environment, you are entitled to that belief.
On really? This is very interesting indeed!

If you are correct, than given the fact that B is some 1000 nm away, the Somali pirates would have little to fear from the US Navy as long as they move quicker than your bureaucracy -- attack point B when the US ships are at point A, and attack point A when US ships are at point B. If US Naval commanders really do that, then they must be the most incompetent naval commanders ever.

That being said, the abilities of US naval commanders are unquestionable, thus I believe that they will make the same correct decision as their Chinese counterpart -- by not abandoning the escort mission and put more ships at risk of pirate attacks.

As I have stated earlier, this is a point where we agree to disagree. I stated my belief that the commander on site is the individual best suited to make decisions on the spot, be it 1 foot away or 26,000 miles away. I know US commanders can make those decisions on the spot because I was there when they did, and yes, deviations of thousands of miles. Of course the commander can inform his command, and the command can likewise tell him to abort and head back, but it is the commander that decides what is best at that moment. If he makes the wrong choice, he can be punished for it.

I understand where you are coming from, but this is a difference between US command and Chinese command.
Of course you can disagree all you like. Nobody is preventing you from doing that. However, different of opinions does not in anyway prove your assertions are correct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Ok gents, in case you guys have not noticed hyalitemarine is banned forever. So ignore is trolling post.


bd popeye super moderator
 
Last edited:

UCSDAE

New Member
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

I don't know if anyone has heard of the World Journal, but basically it's the most reputable Chinese newspaper in North America(I think). In their 11/12/09, Greater DC edition, under the Mainland(II) section, there's news/rumor that said the hijacked ship will be release in about 6 weeks.
The story in WJ said that according Southern Metropolitan Post(a Mainland newspaper), a video of the ship, docked in port, surfaced about a week ago. No sight of the crew though. Phoenix News Network, a Hong Kong based Chinese news outlet, also reported that negotiations are well underway and the release of the ship and crew can be achieved in the next 6 weeks. So,I guess they paid the ransom, or in the process of.

For an after thought, What changes do you expect in the PLAN task force's policy and procedures after this incident, as far as I know, the ship was on its way to the rendezvous point with the task force, but the pirates got to it first.

I might be opening a pandora's box with this one..but, what kind of action/contingency plan should the PLAN spec ops have in case that the pirate capture, or attempt to capture a vessel before rendezvous? I don't think the PLAN spec ops come out all this way to look pretty for photo ops.
 

pla101prc

Senior Member
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

the ship was on a route that is not included in the PLAN's designated excort routes so no it was not on its way to rendezvous.
usually you think it'd make sense that ships do rendezvous with PLAN BEFORE they enter high risk areas lol. but in case the pirates do get them, the best course of action is obviously get to the ship before it sails to shore. round them up and negotiate. its better to negotiate with the surrounded because they have less to bargain with. very rarely do you jump onto the ship and actually attempt to rescue the hostages. i think only the French have done it.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

I don't know if anyone has heard of the World Journal, but basically it's the most reputable Chinese newspaper in North America(I think). In their 11/12/09, Greater DC edition, under the Mainland(II) section, there's news/rumor that said the hijacked ship will be release in about 6 weeks.
The story in WJ said that according Southern Metropolitan Post(a Mainland newspaper), a video of the ship, docked in port, surfaced about a week ago. No sight of the crew though. Phoenix News Network, a Hong Kong based Chinese news outlet, also reported that negotiations are well underway and the release of the ship and crew can be achieved in the next 6 weeks. So,I guess they paid the ransom, or in the process of.

For an after thought, What changes do you expect in the PLAN task force's policy and procedures after this incident, as far as I know, the ship was on its way to the rendezvous point with the task force, but the pirates got to it first.

I might be opening a pandora's box with this one..but, what kind of action/contingency plan should the PLAN spec ops have in case that the pirate capture, or attempt to capture a vessel before rendezvous? I don't think the PLAN spec ops come out all this way to look pretty for photo ops.

How about blockading the harbours and searching all the somali boats as they come and go, especially the ones that could be the pirates motherships
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Somalia has a significant economic relation with China. Even though I wouldn't doubt a ransom maybe a part of a deal, it's probably more likely China is using its diplomacy with the government. A government in a chaotic country wouldn't be in power if there weren't people in the government that knew people...
 
Top