Chinese sub surfaces undetected behind USS Kitty Hawk

Status
Not open for further replies.

zraver

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Not with Chinese subs poppin gup in the "middle" of our carrier battle groups. Combined with the recent crash of a PRC plane that was working on advanced directed energy weapons that disable US missiles, production of the worlds most manuverable dogfighters and new tanks etc etc.

When uisng the Red Scare tactic to ge tfunding inflate the enemies capabilites and down grade your own so that congress wets itself and cuts a check. The Reds got the Bomb (1948 Truman president begins massive re-armament), the Reds are gonna invade Europe ( JFK moving nukes to Turkey), if Vietnam falls so does the rest of Asia (JFK/LBJ), Russian fighters are better than ours (COPE India), Chinese Subs can sink our carriers etc etc etc


Welcome to the Cold War, round two
 

mobydog

Junior Member
Intresting indeed. Well all we can do is speculate because none of us where there...:(

It's somewhat difficut to believe a Song clas was that far out to sea. But I do not doubt the incident did happen. I also doubt that the USN will give a full accounting of the incident to the public.
Not really.. diesel subs can transit and operate thousands of miles away from base... look at the germans subs during WWII.

Base on this, I have always wondered.. who started the myth or perception that diesel subs cannot/don't operate in distant blue seas... promoting fundings for more nuclear subs no doubt.

Just a thought...
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Not really.. diesel subs can transit and operate thousands of miles away from base... look at the germans subs during WWII.

I'm well aware of that. I do know history. Being 53 years old I've lived quite a bit of history.:) .. However an SSK is designed to operate in littoral waters. That's why I posted the statement I did.

When the Swedish sub was sent to San Diego it was sent on a transport ship.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


San Diego, Ca. (June 27, 2005) – The Swedish diesel-powered attack submarine HMS Gotland arrives in San Diego on a transport ship from Sweden. Gotland will begin a one-year bilateral training effort with the U.S. Navy’s anti-submarine warfare forces in July. (see picture below)

Base on this, I have always wondered.. who started the myth or perception that diesel subs cannot/don't operate in distant blue seas... promoting fundings for more nuclear subs no doubt.

I think it has to do with there limited speed and indurance when operating submerged on batteries. But honestly that is a great question.
 

Attachments

  • web_050627-N-0685S-003.jpg
    web_050627-N-0685S-003.jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 32
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
Isn't there the issue that the USN wouldn't be on "full ASW alert" and moving more slowly, given that it's peace-time at the moment? What happened in this case wouldn't be the same sort of challenge if the US was at war/on a war footing. I think Mercury touched upon the second point.
 

Seacraft

New Member
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.

If you look at the timelines placed by Popeye's link and assuming those "dates" and the date in the article then the battle group may have been transiting between Taiwan and the P.I.

Lots of skinny water, reefs, humps, underwater mountains to hide around. PLant a line of 10 PRC SSKs in there when the PRC probably knows where the CBG will be, one or two of these subs will get lucky...

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)
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
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)
I agree 100% with this analysis. A Song is a capable diesel/electric...newer ones supposely with AIP capability.

But they are not fast enough to keep up with a carrier in transit and shadow it as it moves at cruising speed If they tried, they would make far too much noise and not be able to do it anyway.

I expect in these conditions, with the US announceing where the KH and others are, that some of these diesel electrics will be able to station themselves in advance of USN carriers and come close to them...in war time situations where the carrier is in a buttoned up state, is aggresively looking for enemies, and is taking highly evasive actions...I believe it would be extremely rare for this type of thing to happen. Now, a good nuc is a different matter...but USN defenses are better suited for discovering them too.

Given time, those defenses are going to get very good at finding the DEs too.

Just my oppinion.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
I expect in these conditions, with the US announceing where the KH and others are, that some of these diesel electrics will be able to station themselves in advance of USN carriers and come close to them...in war time situations where the carrier is in a buttoned up state, is aggresively looking for enemies,

Amen..One of the things that the USN does is announce where the Kitty Hawk is on navy.mil..all the time. I think they need to cut back on that sort of thing.

When any USN ship in in certian EMCOM conditions or not operating certain electronic systems those ships will be very difficult to find. Very hard.
 

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
I always love these oxymoron headlines. If the SONG was undetected, why is it known that it trailed the US CSG. If such thing occured, it should be a top military secret and not be published. Why give the USN time to reassessed their defence and fixed this "vulnerability".

A SSK, even the top of the line ones, got nothing against SSNs.

(1) A state of the art SSK has a maximum endurance of about 400km at about 4 knots on its batteries. You don't get anywhere at 4 knots and you certainly are not going to be very successful chasing your quarry at that speed. You also do not typically run your batteries 95% flat before a recharge. Rather you tend to do it at conventient times when you don't think there is anyone around to find and kill you. When you surface to run your diesels you have very little stealthy on your side. You are noisy and at periscope depth. In fact, every other thing aside, running fast and near the surface is doubly bad acoustically because your screw cavitate like hell near the surface whereas at depth the water pressures migates the formation of vaccum pockets on the trailing edged of your screw reducing or eliminating cavitation. Radars can find your snorkel, SSNs and ASW ships can hear your from a long way off and aircrafts can literally see you at that depth. You are basically exposing yourself!

(2) There is always the option of AIPs. The problem is that firstly AIPs, probably with exception of the Fuel Cell, is not as silent as motors on batteries. The sterling is a reciprocating piston engine running of separately heated working gas. The Close cycle diesel is exactly that a diesel engine running on diesel fuel, oxygen and part of its recycled exhaust. The MESMA is a steam turbine running on the products of alcohol-oxygen combustion. They all make more noise than a battery does and they all have exhausts to get rid of. The worst thing howeveris that power density is in usually horrible enough that cruise speed on AIP is no better than 5-6 knots and there is every little power left over to recharge the batteries in a timely manner. The Fuel Cell which is the quietest AIP setup also happens to have the worst energy density by a long shot... large PEM stacks, large LOX tanks and huge LH2 tanks, all for less energy yield than the combustion type AIPs. In the end what it means is that AIP boats usually transit or maneuver tactically by running their diesels and running on the surface or at snorkel depth to get close to their quary. In a real war with a massive navy like the USN, a lot of them will be picked off while doing this by ASW aircraft and a forward screen of SSNs.

(3) The other fallacy is that batteries and electric motor equals total silence. This is nonsense. In fact, it is frequently not flow noise and propeller noise which shows up most prominently on a sonar system when an SSK is picked up. It is frequently the inverter buzz from the switching inverters which the SSK uses to convert its DC battery power to AC current to run its motors with. Just about all high power motors are AC induction motors.

(4) The last thing when cosidering using diesels against a major surface action group is that all the silencing advantage is useless against active sonar which is routinely employed on ASW helos and once they catch a glimpse of you, an SSK has neither the speed on the endurance to slip away. Once found you are usually dead meat.
 

zraver

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Isn't there the issue that the USN wouldn't be on "full ASW alert" and moving more slowly, given that it's peace-time at the moment? What happened in this case wouldn't be the same sort of challenge if the US was at war/on a war footing. I think Mercury touched upon the second point.

if the carrier is conducting air operations it is moving at least 20knots with it's escorts alternating sprinting and drifting for close in ASW while aircraft drop dipping sonars and sonar bouys. They would also have some sort of surface search radar on and the sub would be spotted as soon as anypart of it raise dabove the waves.

Eiter the USN let the sub in for a red scare or the CBG was not conducting ops for some reason. in which case the Song didn't really prove itself vs the American A game.
 

Sea Dog

Junior Member
VIP Professional
The key is this.

The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed in ocean waters near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program.

This is the USN's ANNUALEX that occur in this region every year at the same time. So it's quite likely that the PLAN simply tasked a Song SSK there before the exercise began. Try doing this stuff in wartime. Plus I highly doubt they were "shadowing" anything for any number of days. Songs and other diesels are only acoustically quiet at low speeds only. I'm talking 4 knots or less. Above that they emit a highewr radiated noise and drain their batteries much quicker.

And this is also telling.

The surfaced submarine was spotted by a routine surveillance flight by one of the carrier group's planes.

It's telling because they knew when and where to look for it on the surface. It's my guess, that they may have conducted acoustic searches and knew where it was before this occured. Sounds too coincidental to me. But of course the Pentagon will never release details of this as they don't want the Chinese or anyone else being able to assess our abilities in tracking these subs. And also the USN certainly wouldn't respond in a hostile manner as we are not at war with China at the moment. This was in international waters. So it's not really a big issue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top