Chinese sub surfaces undetected behind USS Kitty Hawk

kunmingren said:

i know this sound kinda of stupid, but could it be possible that the sub just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, may be it was just a coincident. And when the sub discovered the suface fleet, it surfaced to show that it has no hostile intent.

i mean this is possible, right?

Click to expand...

That's a possiblity. It was like, excuse me PLAN fans, well surrending if what you described is true.

However I think it happend like this. The PLAN having observed the USN CV's operating in the same area year after year dispachted a sub there to "observe" the CSG. Nothing more nothing less. It just happened.

bd popeye said:

However I think it happend like this. The PLAN having observed the USN CV's operating in the same area year after year dispachted a sub there to "observe" the CSG. Nothing more nothing less. It just happened.

Click to expand...

I agree popeye...this is the most likely scenario as far as I am concerned. I will add that I think the Song got there first and waited, but that is just my own surmize.

BLUEJACKET said:

Please read ALL my posts here carefully.
I agree, but I wouldn't rely only on submarines- please see ALL my posts here.

Click to expand...

I have read your thread and would comment that SSBN's, as well as SSG/SSGN's are only one part of the force. I don't believe the PLA should invest ALL thier nuclear deterrance in SLBMs, but it shouldn't be neglected eitehr.

According to the (US) Annual Report to Congress, Military power of the People's Republic of China 2006:


The DF-31A ICBM has estimated range of ~11,270 km, which means it can only cover all of continenal US, if the ICBM was positioned at closest firing points from the PRC.

I think SSBN's offer a more flexible option, as well as deterrance value even if your spotted. If your purpose is to show off your big stick with couple dozen gift-wrapped nuclear missiles, you prolly want to cruise within firing range, then surface to parade around a bit.

kunmingren said:

i know this sound kinda of stupid, but could it be possible that the sub just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, may be it was just a coincident. And when the sub discovered the suface fleet, it surfaced to show that it has no hostile intent.

i mean this is possible, right?

Click to expand...

IMHO, China is probably testing its military satellite system more than anything else. The JianBing-5(SAR satelllite) is used to fixed the location of the carrier. The info is probably sent back to command base. Then from command base positioning info is sent by FenHuo-1(communication satellite) to relayed the information to the Song sub to set an intercept course.
Because of the relatively short range of D-E subs, it has to be sent to a precise location, otherwise it would be just wasting a lot of diesel fuel. Okinawa is well outside the normal patrol lanes of D-E subs.

may be china is testing its wolf pack doctrine, since Chinese survey ship had mapped the water around Japan extensively, and with all the new space and aerial surveillance gadgets, china may be testing the effective of the doctrine and the data-links between various platform.

This really reminds me of some incidents I heard about where Chinese subs stalked and were stalked by JMSDF subs and surface ships around some disputed areas of open ocean where both nations were conducting searches for oil deposits. Anyone have anymore info on that? I think it was a year or two ago, maybe more.

bd popeye said:

Could someone please, pretty please translate this article in to English? I want to read the PRC version of the event.

Thanks!!!!

Click to expand...

Hi, it seems no one's will to response your request, so, here goes your translation:

The Renmin Website's news, according to the Foreign Dept's website news, the Chinese Foreign Dept's spokeman, JiangYu states on a Reporters' Interview that that Washington Time's report about Chinese sub tails the KH is not true.

Q Please confirm the situation of the Chinese sub tails American's carrier, KH. Can the Chinese side introduce the latest situation. Why PLA has such an action?

A According to what we know, The Washington Time's report about the incident is not true.

I can introduce to you about Sino-American's latest cooperation. In response to China's invitation, American Navy Pacific Fleet's commander, Adm 拉夫黑德 (his name) is visiting China. His visiting time is from the 12 to the 18. Aside from Beijing he also visit Shanghai and Zhanjiang and also attend the welcome ceremony of the American "朱諾" (the ship's name) visiting to Zhanjiang. During his visit he met the Foreign Minister's Assistant, Mr. He Yafei, PLAN Commander Wu Shengli and other Chinese officers.

Chinese and American army's relation is growing well. We believe that Adm 拉夫黑德 and other American high range officers' visit will increase trust to the both sides, and push both armies' relation to a higher level.

During this visit, both navies will carry out the second stage "on-sea search and rescue" exercise on Nov 19. This exercise is an important action to carry out the both countries leaders' common understanding on strengtening both countries' military intercourse.


I found myself a hard time to translate this article, sorry for any bad translation.

Thanks Steelbird!

Bottom line is they are simpling denying it took places as described. Too bad they did not give their own version.

They seem to be happy about the US Navy visiting China again.

I'm not much into Navy stuff..

Thru the thread.. I've read that the CBG has one or two SSN protecting it, and that most of you post that the Song class couldn't trail a carrier in transit.

If this is such a case, then what made you think the SSN can patrol and protect the transiting CBG's outer quadran ?? Yes, the SSN do have more endurance and max dived speed of 32 knots (Los Angeles class).. but it would be very noisy above 5 to 10 knots and I wonder whether it could detect anything on sonar travelling 20 knots and above ?

Another question is what is the normal cruising speed of a carrier ?

And what is the dived speed of a song ?

What, technically, I mean is that the CBG could only be as fast as the SSN can trail, while providing adequate protection.

mobydog said:

I'm not much into Navy stuff..

Thru the thread.. I've read that the CBG has one or two SSN protecting it, and that most of you post that the Song class couldn't trail a carrier in transit.

If this is such a case, then what made you think the SSN can patrol and protect the transiting CBG's outer quadran ?? Yes, the SSN do have more endurance and max dived speed of 32 knots (Los Angeles class).. but it would be very noisy above 5 to 10 knots and I wonder whether it could detect anything on sonar travelling 20 knots and above ?

Another question is what is the normal cruising speed of a carrier ?

And what is the dived speed of a song ?

What, technically, I mean is that the CBG could only be as fast as the SSN can trail, while providing adequate protection.

Click to expand...

I believe the manuever is called sprint a drift. It works as two ASW ships work in conjuction with each other. One slows to 5 knots (drift) and listen while the other "sprints" to a new location.

The most effective means of finding and destroying submarines is with another submarine. This subs utilize the stealth advantage of submarines to track enemy submarines. The difficulty is that they have to be out of communication with the units they are protecting for most of the time to use this stealth. Therefore most submarines operate independently, having been given general rules of engagement (ROE) for reconnaissance, ESM and early offensive operations.

What this means is that, assuming a wartime posture, the SSN operates at the outer edge of the battlegroup. They listen for hostile submarines that within their assigned sector and depending on their ROE, they either take it out or shadow it.

The Virginia and Seawolf class are quiter at 20 knots than most subs at 5 knots.