Miscellaneous News

S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Why is everyone so stirred up by this Australian-UK-US defence pact?
Seems like a simple rebranding and reorganizing of numerous existing agreements with some nuclear subs thrown on top.
To me it really seems like a net zero change in the strategic calculus.
1. Australia, US, UK all already made their intentions clear before.
2. All 3 are already aligned, Five Eyes, ANZAC, Quad, etc.
3. Why is the UK even relevant here? Almost seems like tacked on to make UK feel more important (The QE2 made it to the Pacific! -*GREAT*- Britain 4 Lyfe!!!!1111)
4. Nuclear subs would be based on US/UK tech, which PLA has been planning for already. So this would be basically the equivalent of planning for 6 or so more USN SSNs.
If anything, this seems like:
- Showing that the Five Eyes don't trust NZ much at the moment
- As people love to mention here, India is the junior-junior in their precious QUAD since they are announcing Indo-Pacific defense pact without Indo-people
 
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
ZeEa5KPul said:
I see the UUV and other ASW not as a substitute for a massive PLAN SSN fleet as an asymmetric strategy would suggest, but as a supplement. Just like the AShBMs are not a substitute for a navy, they are a supplement.
Click to expand...

And that's exactly why those three tiers are concurrent but developed on timescales and during periods befitting of their requirement and technical difficulty.

I didn't suggest they are substitutes at all.

However the USN sub force is a structure to destabilise. They are hugely expensive and take years to replace. They however do not have any limits on range at all unlike surface fleets. The first step in countering USN submarines would have been detection. There must be reliable, effective, and accurate detection of those submarines for PLAN to fight. What I mean by a force to destablise is that you cannot counter it by producing similar level SSNs and numbers of them. That isn't an option for immediate counter since it takes decades to build a similarly numbered force even if Type 095 is being constructed.

This has been a requirement and China has had the technical ability to begin working on this for the last 30 odd years. It is done.

There is no doubt. This is something that should take around a decade. Given the necessity and the consequences of not having done this and done it years ago, it is wilful ignorance to believe PLAN has no way to effectively counter the PLAN's main threat.

This stuff is clearly top secret but it is something PLA has done ages ago because it is the first step in this puzzle. The rest is about redundancy and details on cost and effectiveness and how many layers of defenses and networked hardware is involved. Pish Posh compared to the main point.

There is literally no point building dozens of multibillion dollar surface warships with the latest tech if you are leaving the submarines free to roam. China's rapid build up of non ASW involved warships would logically indicate that the subsurface threat is at the very least being countered if not convincingly addressed with developments and improvement ongoing at a comfortable enough rate.

If there weren't, China wouldn't be spending only under 2% GDP on military. It would have needed to get this done regardless of cost.

If USN SSNs are still are high threat to the entire PLAN as it would be if there were no way of always detecting and destroying them with ease, then we'd see China spend upwards of 5% of GDP just to achieve this. I mean those PLAN warships do cost a pretty penny and several decades of work. Nothing compared to measly 5% GDP. Time is something money can't buy.
 
Last edited:
ZeEa5KPul

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
supersnoop said:
Why is everyone so stirred up by this Australian-UK-US defence pact?
Seems like a simple rebranding and reorganizing of numerous existing agreements with some nuclear subs thrown on top.
To me it really seems like a net zero change in the strategic calculus.
1. Australia, US, UK all already made their intentions clear before.
2. All 3 are already aligned, Five Eyes, ANZAC, Quad, etc.
3. Why is the UK even relevant here? Almost seems like tacked on to make UK feel more important (The QE2 made it to the Pacific! -*GREAT*- Britain 4 Lyfe!!!!1111)
4. Nuclear subs would be based on US/UK tech, which PLA has been planning for already. So this would be basically the equivalent of planning for 6 or so more USN SSNs.
If anything, this seems like:
- Showing that the Five Eyes don't trust NZ much at the moment
- As people love to mention here, India is the junior-junior in their precious QUAD since they are announcing Indo-Pacific defense pact without Indo-people
Click to expand...
This! So much this! Frankly, the reactions to this news shocked me. Maybe China should name various combinations of alliances with Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan - that's 16 possibilities right there! :D
 
A

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
supersnoop said:
Why is everyone so stirred up by this Australian-UK-US defence pact?
Seems like a simple rebranding and reorganizing of numerous existing agreements with some nuclear subs thrown on top.
To me it really seems like a net zero change in the strategic calculus.
1. Australia, US, UK all already made their intentions clear before.
2. All 3 are already aligned, Five Eyes, ANZAC, Quad, etc.
3. Why is the UK even relevant here? Almost seems like tacked on to make UK feel more important (The QE2 made it to the Pacific! -*GREAT*- Britain 4 Lyfe!!!!1111)
4. Nuclear subs would be based on US/UK tech, which PLA has been planning for already. So this would be basically the equivalent of planning for 6 or so more USN SSNs.
If anything, this seems like:
- Showing that the Five Eyes don't trust NZ much at the moment
- As people love to mention here, India is the junior-junior in their precious QUAD since they are announcing Indo-Pacific defense pact without Indo-people
Click to expand...
@supersnoop hahaha sorry for the outburst bro but you're right the 5eyes is an anglo saxon alliance but this latest iteration instead of a Quad it had become a trio with grievances against the Chinese cause 1) Xi don't want a summit 2) want to be notice but is been ignored 3) lusting to bring its glory days back....LOL the three stooges want to give a show for us.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Overbom said:
Tell you what. This new development is a 100x times more consequential for the region + China than the UK US AU theatrics.

Genuinely shocked if China manages to join CPTPP. Would be China's biggest strategic masterstroke in the last 20 years
Click to expand...

We already had discussions on China joining TPP before.

Because of China's sheer size, many Chinese companies are already world-class because of domestic competition.
So Chinese companies will likely expand heavily into overseas markets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top