PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I am not sure why you said it is weakness There is nothing unusual for submarine to surface and show the flag that is required under the protocol to show peaceful intention when you sail in contagious water
If a P-3 tracked it, the only definitive conclusion is that the 093 is made of metal, which is not particularly helpful. I'm sure the KQ-200 can do the same to a Virginia or Yasen. There's a reason fixed-wing ASW aircraft is such a defining hallmark of ASW competency.
If the JMSDF ship tracked the 093, a bunch of other factors have to be known. How far away was the ship, how deep was the 093, whether it was active or passive detection, how much emphasis was placed on staying quiet by the 093 captain, etc.
Worst case scenario; the ship was outside weapons range of the 093, tracked it via passive sonar, and the captain tried very hard to be quiet. Best case scenario; the ship was basically adjacent to the 093, had to resort to active sonar, and the captain gave no shits and ordered the crew to make a ruckus. Who knows what the actual conditions were...
No, I was mainly referring to the sub being tracked prior to the surfacing
It shows that JMSDF are great at doing their job. They're doing this stuff as their primary role for over 50 years and are probably the best in the world in that aspect of naval warfare.
A better question would be why Japanese made it public. I think there two main reasons of this act:
1) it entered contiguous zone around Miyako Island
2) the current political climat in Japan. PM Abe pushes hard to increase defensive budget and arm the SDF for a real fight. The question to the public: would you like to have a Chinese submarine near your town? If you don't want that then we should put more money into SDF as they're capable of doing their job!
For sure Chinese side didn't want that to happen as it obviously doesn't put it's submarine force in a good light whatever the circumstances were. I think they were there to for intel like checking out the seabed within the Miyako Strait area. And we don't know how many of such 'live drills' are conducted every year because that's classified information.
It was underwater all the time underwater and surfaced in the East China Sea after being trsacked all the way by JS Onami. They didn't obey the protocol.
If a P3C tracked it it shows that's a great aircraft satisfying in 100% purposes for what it was built and it's crews are great professionals who can exploit it's capabilities to the maximum. You don't detect submarines just because they are made of metal parts... Aircraft is indeed the most potent weapon against submarines all over the world since WWII days when the allied obliterated the u-boot armada.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I am not sure they are honest maybe they track the submarine while it is sailing on the water
Actually, that's exactly how MAD ASW aircraft work; by detecting large metal objects. Like I said, the PLANAF's KQ-200 can do the exact same to a Virginia, Yasen, or Soryu since they're all metal and warp the Earth's magnetic field wherever they go. Their limiting factor is range as MADs are only sensitive within a few hundred metres so they have to fly low and fly a tight search pattern to ensure no scan gaps. A deep-diving submarine can avoid detection just by diving and a lucky captain can slip through an area before the ASW aircraft circles around for another search.
The ASW aircraft used in WW2 primarily relied on eyesight and surface radar to locate U-Boats as submarines in those days only submerged when attacking or fleeing. There is no comparison with today's usage of aircraft in ASW roles.
I think that it's more how hardware and software for ASW is used is more meaningful nowadays. How effective it could be under given circumstances and how to get the best out of the tools that you use as it's more or less uniform around the world now. If it would be so easy to put it in use then submarines would be rendered useless, just like big guns. But from time to time we hear about submarines being in the winning team during routine drills or surfacing near aircraft carriers (like Song did back in 2007). How come one team get their job done and detect a submarine and how the other group can't accomplish the same task using the same tools? That's what modern ASW is about. Years of practice piling up and I assume intuition of skilled professionals are most important.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
To assume that Japan has better train ASW program is presumptuous. Ok they found one this time but how many times that they missed the Chinese is not going to tell them
Both side constantly probing and testing the response to incursion and see how well their ASW program is
And adjust their SOP or equipment or strategy. The game of cat and mouse will continue !
This just one of the many skirmishes in long struggle of underwater supremacy . Japan has a lead since it their specialty during the cold war tracking Soviet Sub. They are well equipped with 100 of PC3 But China too is now producing KQ200 by the dozens And better sensor and training will come onboard
In real war technology does play significant role Zero vs theri american contemporary like P40 But the later Mustang P 51 make mince meat out of zero
So I can foresee the introduction of A1 and SQUID in Sub hunting and China has a lead on this technology
Last edited:
The carrier group wasn't expecting anything as it was a low-threat area. During wartime, with active radars pinging everywhere, the Song would not have gotten that close and would've either hid somewhere or engaged much further out. The USN CBG also did not have the same tools as the JMSDF in this incident. For one, they didn't have a P-3. And two, they didn't have a territorial dispute to motivate them to search harder. Do you actually believe a USN P-3 or P-8 crew would under-perform compared to a JMSDF crew under identical circumstances?
The issue at hand isn't whether the P-3 detected the submarine. If it did, it's nothing special. The issue is whether the ship detected the 093 and with what type of sonar. If it's active sonar, it depends on a bunch of other variables but the general theme is it isn't anything special either. Active sonar is very effective but rarely used in peacetime. If it's passive sonar, there is again a host of variables to consider but the general theme is the submarine needs to be quieter. Out of three possible detection methods, only one is concerning to the PLAN and even then it's not exactly news the 093 under-performs compared to a Virginia or Yasen.