Pentagon accuses Chinese vessels of harassing U.S. ship

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Surveying the oceans make it sound like a normal and legitimate, but for what purpose? Identifying sonar signatures of opposition subs, makes it sound like fun n games of old. It would be interesting to find out on how long the US has been surveying around Hainan island. Just recently because of the sub base? or for yrs

Long time. very long. I know that oceanographic surveys are needed for proper navigation and to find seaborne hazards such as underwater mountains, carvesses(Holes in the ocean) sunken vessels, etc. These things are hazards to navigation.

The Title should have been "U.S. ship is harrassing Chinese vessels near Chinese military base on Hainan island". .

The USNS ship was 125 miles from land. How were they doing what you alleged from that distance?

Did China send her ships to U.S. military base near U.S. waters to gather intelligence? NO

If they did an LA class SSN would be watching them.

Mods note. As a moderator I shall step out of this conversation. Please keep the level of discussion civil.

bd popeye super moderator

I went to navy.mil and could not pass these photos up..

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


SOUTH CHINA SEA (March 8, 2009) A crewmember on a Chinese trawler uses a grapple hook in an apparent attempt to snag the towed acoustic array of the military Sealift Command ocean surveillance ship USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23). Impeccable was conducting routine survey operations in international waters 75 miles south of Hainan Island when it was harassed by five Chinese vessels. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


SOUTH CHINA SEA (March 8, 2009) Two Chinese trawlers stop directly in front of the military Sealift Command ocean surveillance ship USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS-23), forcing the ship to conduct an emergency "all stop" in order to avoid collision. The incident took place in international waters in the South China Sea about 75 miles south of Hainan Island. The trawlers came within 25 feet of Impeccable, as part of an apparent coordinated effort to harass the unarmed ocean surveillance ship. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)
 
Last edited:

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Long time. very long. I know that oceanographic surveys are needed for proper navigation and to find seaborne hazards such as underwater mountains, carvesses(Holes in the ocean) sunken vessels, etc. These things are hazards to navigation.

Not only that, but up to date knowledge of them is immensely important in submarine warfare. It's necessary to know the underwater topography to know likely paths and hiding places of subs. For example the US and Soviets both know the underwater map of the North Seas, and knew the routes each other's subs took through them.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Do you have any idea how long the US has been surveying the ocean with these ships? For decades. I was assigned to HSL-31 out of NAS North Island in the late 70s and we sent detachments to older version of these ships. Those ships were unarmed then and now. The only arms aboard small arms.

The accounts of the incident are interesting.
The Impeccable is not a combatant. she is operated by the Military Sealift Command and is crewed by civilains with Navy Officers.

She is an Ocean Surveillance vessel with the specific mission of tracking submarines, and is the quietest ship the US Government operates, outside of our nuclear submarines themselves. She has a very unique, and very quiet hull. <p> Such ships serve as a stable platform to gather underwater acoustical data. Impeccable was specifically designed to deploy two underwater listening devices called surveillance towed-array sensor system (SURTASS) used to augment the Navy's antisubmarine warfare capability.

The SURTASS mission is to gather ocean acoustical data and, through electronic equipment onboard, process and provide rapid transmission of antisubmarine warfare information via satellite to shore stations for evaluation and analysis.

The Chinese know this and this is why they are so touchy about it. Their new subs are likely being tagged by this vessel.

IMHO, this vessel should be armed for self defense purposes at the very least. A 20mm CIWS or a RAM launcher, and at least a couple of .50 cal machine guns, or better yet the newer 25mm cannons.

Here she is:

Impeccable.jpg


t20_ches.jpg
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Whatever she is, she is still a spy ship (as indeed were probably the Chinese vessals).

I am interested to know why now? to either start doing these missions, or of they have been ongoing to complain now? The more benign interpretation is that the Pentagon is trying to coerce the Obama administration into not cutting military budgets.

The malign interpretation is that this relates to the tensions on the Korean peninsular, where the US and ROK are conducting major joint exercies, the DPRK is about to test a T2 and Japan is threatening to shoot it down, which the DPRK says would constitute an act of war.

In which case both Immacualate off Hainan and Victorous in the Yellow Sea could be listening for sounds of large numbers of Chinese Subs being suddenly sent to sea.....
 

Engineer

Major
IMHO, this vessel should be armed for self defense purposes at the very least. A 20mm CIWS or a RAM launcher, and at least a couple of .50 cal machine guns, or better yet the newer 25mm cannons.
It would not be qualified to be a "civilian" vessel then, and it would be welcomed by frigates rather than "fishing boats". Furthermore, if the crew play around with machine guns and cannons like what they did with the fire hoses, it would be considered as an aggression and warrant the ship to be sunk.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
It would not be qualified to be a "civilian" vessel then, and it would be welcomed by frigates rather than "fishing boats". Furthermore, if the crew play around with machine guns and cannons like what they did with the fire hoses, it would be considered as an aggression and warrant the ship to be sunk.
Actually, in an earlier incident, a PLAN frigate did cut arcoss her path, without warning, at a distance of 100 yards and the vessel was buzzed during that earlier incident by PRC surveillance/patrol aircraft This incident comes after that one.

Muy point is simply that if the US is going to design a vessel to do a basic military intelligence job, particularly of tracking submarines, then in this day, whether to try and dissuade harrassment in international waters by the Navy they are monitoring, or from terrorists (because there is some pretty expensive gear and very qualified people on the vessel) that some armament is warrented.

That's all...I am full aware that doing so would remove her from the MSC roles and make her official Navy, but in this case I believe it is warrented.
 

le thi kieuoanh

Just Hatched
Registered Member
what would US reaction be if a similiar vessel of the PLAN is to snooping around the international waters of san diego, norfolk etc
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
what would US reaction be if a similiar vessel of the PLAN is to snooping around the international waters of san diego, norfolk etc
I believe the US would abide by international law if the vessel was careful to maintain itself outside of territorial waters.

As a result of the cold war and of our experiences with Russian spy trawlers off our coasts and shadowing our naval formations, we know that this is the case because the US, in those days did not attempt to provoke or harass those vessels as long as the maintained their distance according to international and maritime law.

Now, admitteldy, during the cold war, particularly dealing with submarines, there were times when both sides did not maintain their distance and there were some pretty tense incidents...but that almost invariably resulted from one side or the other pushing beyond international and maritime law.

In that regard, I would suggest the book,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, for some excellent reading.

In this case, the US vessel was clearly adhering to international law and maintaining its distance well outside of territorial waters. It is unarmed, and slow, and clearly not a vessel that in and of itself poses any risk to navigation or other shipping. It is a ship designed to gather intelligence in those waters...and that's the rub. The US has technology that allows it to gather good intelligence from well outside of territorial waters and other a nation like the PRC resents this.

My guess is, that the PRC will use exactly the same typ of technology, or that of their own, to eavesdrop on US capabilities whenever they can, or whenever they develop it.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Whatever she is, she is still a spy ship (as indeed were probably the Chinese vessals).

I am interested to know why now? to either start doing these missions, or of they have been ongoing to complain now? The more benign interpretation is that the Pentagon is trying to coerce the Obama administration into not cutting military budgets.

The malign interpretation is that this relates to the tensions on the Korean peninsular, where the US and ROK are conducting major joint exercies, the DPRK is about to test a T2 and Japan is threatening to shoot it down, which the DPRK says would constitute an act of war.

In which case both Immacualate off Hainan and Victorous in the Yellow Sea could be listening for sounds of large numbers of Chinese Subs being suddenly sent to sea.....

very well said, I think this release could very well have political implications behind it.

Of course, we would never know how US would react to a foreign country being so close snooping at its ships, but I don't think it'd be too happy. And I'm sure some members of PLAN are pissed that they can't do the same to US, but that's the difference in their military strength.
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
very well said, I think this release could very well have political implications behind it.

Of course, we would never know how US would react to a foreign country being so close snooping at its ships, but I don't think it'd be too happy. And I'm sure some members of PLAN are pissed that they can't do the same to US, but that's the difference in their military strength.

Maybe we shouldn't rush to see political timing in everything. But it seems likely that this was a collision of the fact that this ships activites were really pissing the Chinese off, and they wanted to give a bit of a nudge to the Obama administration to say that the PLAN doesn't like America's intelligence gathering "business as usual".

I think we do know how the US would react. There's precedents. All throughout the Cold War Russian "fishing trawlers" sat off of US bases. We would occasionally harass them but there were never any war-threatening incidents. With respect to China we know that this sort of thing happens fairly frequently. Look at the supposed sub-surfacing next to the Kitty Hawk incident, just to name one. In addition we know that there are occasional airborne confrontations between P-3s and other maritime patrol craft and PLAAF interceptors. So, basically, yes the Chinese were technically in the wrong here, because it was international waters, but really we all know that the USN should expect a little hazing now and then if they want to go into these areas, and China would get the same if it was in US waters. Maybe not the exact same thing, but you could bet there would be flybys, stalking by subs, ships etc.
 
Top