PLAN Anti-Piracy Deployments

Finally we can put to rest the issue of on board desalination plants abroad Chinese warships mainly the Type 054A, something which was always assumed but never reported

The following paragraph clearly establishes that in the early days of the anti-piracy missions PLAN warships did not have the ability to purify salt water to fresh drinking water, it wasn't until May 2010 when the situation was solved almost two years after the start of the missions

See page 123 first paragraph, I recommended anyone who is interested in PLAN read this article it's full of rich information I have a photographic memory and when I read something I can usually repeat things word for word if you can't be bothered reading just ask and I can answer questions since I have read the whole article probably one of the best I have read all details are referenced


Another interesting part is that PLAN developed the ability to keep vegetables fresh from 25 days to 40 days, the Replenisment tankers have been used as command and control platforms, PLAN is training how to negotiate with pirates and how to rescue hostages from on shore Somalia using special forces

Another event recalls a COSCO cargo ships which was boarded by pirates and 21 crew taken hostage Chinese special forces were dispatched from helicopters and speed boats within 20 minutes the vessel was secured and hostages rescued where they had been held for over 10 hours , Type 054A Xuzhou was the FFG which picked up the distress signal on 20th November 2010

Part about purification systems

Note this "In February 2012 People’s Navy ran a special report on securing fresh drinking water for sailors in the Gulf of Aden.6 During the first deployment, in 2008, crewmen faced a major dilemma in that regard:
Most maritime areas near the Gulf of Aden are desert-like zones lacking water [resources], freshwater can even be sold for between fifty and sixty U.S. dollars per ton, over a hundred times the price of water in Chinese cities. If warships want to replenish freshwater on the coast, not only is the degree of difficulty great, [but, in addition, money] spent on foreign exchange is extremely high. However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high."

So they did have desalination plants even on the 2008 voyage. They just weren't fully effective for long term deployments by the sounds of it. Part of it was probably machinery, part of it was policy. But the units were there.

Like page 123 says, the problem seems to have been effectively solved by early 2010.

Bltizo said:

Note this "In February 2012 People’s Navy ran a special report on securing fresh drinking water for sailors in the Gulf of Aden.6 During the first deployment, in 2008, crewmen faced a major dilemma in that regard:
Most maritime areas near the Gulf of Aden are desert-like zones lacking water [resources], freshwater can even be sold for between fifty and sixty U.S. dollars per ton, over a hundred times the price of water in Chinese cities. If warships want to replenish freshwater on the coast, not only is the degree of difficulty great, [but, in addition, money] spent on foreign exchange is extremely high. However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high."

So they did have desalination plants even on the 2008 voyage. They just weren't fully effective for long term deployments by the sounds of it. Part of it was probably machinery, part of it was policy. But the units were there.

Like page 123 says, the problem seems to have been effectively solved by early 2010.

Click to expand...

Thats one interpretation but it's clearly says and quote

"People’s Navy suggests that the main cause was that the vessels deployed to the Gulf of Aden had been designed for Near Seas opera- tions and thus did not have the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages."

Important part being "did not have" it doesn't say insufficient or already installed Page 123 paragraph one lines 5 and 6

asif iqbal said:

Wow what a great link just had a quick look at the tables of analysis of the ships that have been out on deployments and they match the table I posted in the thread I started in PLAN deployments!

Very nice and accurate peice of work which tells even which ports have been visited and how many times, even has the dates and the nature of the visit for example port call friendly visit replenishment etc etc

This PDF and a good peice of work this is very very informative best analysis I have seen by far!

Click to expand...

I agree. That is a very thorough and well researched article from the US Naval War College.


I liked it A LOT!

The one table listing all of the vessels that the PLAN has sent on the anti-piracy missions makes one thing very clear. The PLAN is very seriously taking the opportunity to train and exercise virtually all of its major surface combatants. Thirty-one vessels to date and the list is a virtual who's who regarding modern PLAN frigates and destroyers.

Also, I found it interesting that in the entire article/paper of 194 pages (actually it is a book), there is only one picture. The picture of the Z-9 helicopter in the section discussing the aviation assets. Interesting.

But, it is a US Naval War College document, and is put forward for research and scholastic purposes. Still, pictures paint a thousand words and I would have included more pictures of the operations they were discussing to further punctuate and stress those points.

The US Naval War College has an entire library of China Maritime Studies, with numerous similar papers covering a large nubmer of topics from mine warfare, to the PLAN modernization, to PRC naval shipbuilding, to PLAN scouting and surveillance operations as regards Japan, etc., etc.:



Feast.

asif iqbal said:

Thats one interpretation but it's clearly says and quote

"People’s Navy suggests that the main cause was that the vessels deployed to the Gulf of Aden had been designed for Near Seas opera- tions and thus did not have the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages."

Important part being "did not have" it doesn't say insufficient or already installed Page 123 paragraph one lines 5 and 6

Click to expand...

I think it can be interpreted as not having the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages perhaps implying inadequate capacity rather than non-existence. It may be interpreted similar to 'not having the firepower needed to deal with armoured warfare', which is not the same is not having firepower. I say this because I know for a fact that the newer Jianghus have desalination plants and indeed some sort of desalination machinery is almost always present even as a by product in major modern combatants.

However, if they do not have dedicated units the desalination capacity may indeed be vastly inadequate.

Preux said:

I think it can be interpreted as not having the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages perhaps implying inadequate capacity rather than non-existence. It may be interpreted similar to 'not having the firepower needed to deal with armoured warfare', which is not the same is not having firepower. I say this because I know for a fact that the newer Jianghus have desalination plants and indeed some sort of desalination machinery is almost always present even as a by product in major modern combatants.

However, if they do not have dedicated units the desalination capacity may indeed be vastly inadequate.

Click to expand...

I don't know wether you guys use different English but if something says "did not have" I assume it didn't exist

Also if someone says and I quote

"Relying solely on on-ship stores of freshwater cannot even come close to meeting these demands, and as such, medium- and large-scale ships have all installed high-production saltwater purifica- tion equipment "

Important part being "installed" not re-installed, I have checked a few references and they are spot on this document is second to none and I trust it 100%

Clear quotations like "installed" and "did not have" mean nothing was there before hand, if it didn't exisit it would say something totally different

Any well learned naval person know desalination is very very expensive, that was a general comment not in relation to any Chinese warships, the quotes I have posted are in reference to Chinese warships more importantly anti-piracy warships

Medium and large would be referring to FFG and DDG so it can only mean Type 054A and other PLAN DDGs

"People’s Navy suggests that the main cause was that the vessels deployed to the Gulf of Aden had been designed for Near Seas opera- tions and thus did not have the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages."


This is a game of semantics.

For example:
"I do not have a car" is not he same as "I do not have a car that can take me to Jupiter".

The first statement makes it stark that I simply do not have a car of any kind. The second says I do not have a car that can reach my requirements of reaching Jupiter. Now one may argue this was just awkward phrasing by the author. However I will then refer to this part:
"During the first deployment, in 2008, crewmen faced a major dilemma in that regard:
Most maritime areas near the Gulf of Aden are desert-like zones lacking water [resources], freshwater can even be sold for between fifty and sixty U.S. dollars per ton, over a hundred times the price of water in Chinese cities. If warships want to replenish freshwater on the coast, not only is the degree of difficulty great, [but, in addition, money] spent on foreign exchange is extremely high. However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high."

This makes it fairly clear that it cost the existing desalination plants too much to produce water. By association it means those plants must at least have existed.


----

Also, the quote here: ""Relying solely on on-ship stores of freshwater cannot even come close to meeting these demands, and as such, medium- and large-scale ships have all installed high-production saltwater purifica- tion equipment "
That quote is from an email which Erickson procured from a mister Bernard Cole vis Internet correspondence, if you check his reference list. So what does the quote mean in context? Well I am pretty confident in saying Cole is merely making a general statement regarding the need for desalination plants on ships. Nowhere is it said that Cole believes Chinese ships lack desalination plants.

Rather, that quote, once integrated into a big picture, only serves to tell us how important desalination plants are for the uninitiated, and helps give context for how the PLANs initial plants didn't meet the standards of long voyages.

Well the part that says "However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high." this is part of a paragraph which is talking about water usage in general and not in reference to PLAN warships so i think this is a general statement, actually if you read that paragraph is talking only about water usage in that part of the world

If anywhere they actually mentioned a PLAN warship then I could understand that the existing plants were not sufficient but it clearly says they did not have them and they were installed in summer of 2010

The the paragraphs which state "does not have" and "installed" is however statments which refer to PLAN warships in particular and not a general statement

This would mean that PLAN warships did not have desalination plants, and now they do

...did not have the water-purification equipment needed for longer voyages.

Click to expand...

Imo, the above statement does have a indefinite meaning.

Compare this to the following statement:

...did not have any water-purification equipment and therefore are unsuited for longer voyages.

Click to expand...

Just my 2 cents.

asif iqbal said:

Well the part that says "However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high." this is part of a paragraph which is talking about water usage in general and not in reference to PLAN warships so i think this is a general statement, actually if you read that paragraph is talking only about water usage in that part of the world

Click to expand...

That, paragraph, started with this...
"During the first deployment, in 2008, crewmen faced a major dilemma in that regard: Most maritime areas near the Gulf of Aden are desert-like zones lacking water [resources], freshwater can even be sold for between fifty and sixty U.S. dollars per ton, over a hundred times the price of water in Chinese cities. If warships want to replenish freshwater on the coast, not only is the degree of difficulty great, [but, in addition, money] spent on foreign exchange is extremely high. However, the warships’ costs for purifying salt water were [also] extremely high"

This statement is in context of the 2008 deployment. Why mention costs of desalination at all if there simply weren't any desalination plants on the 2008 voyage?

If anywhere they actually mentioned a PLAN warship then I could understand that the existing plants were not sufficient but it clearly says they did not have them and they were installed in summer of 2010

Click to expand...

If PLAN ships didn't have desalination plants why wouldn't erickson just write that instead of going out of his way to point out that it cost a lot to purify.
If it cost a lot to desalinate the water it must follow they had something to desalinate the water with.

The the paragraphs which state "does not have" and "installed" is however statments which refer to PLAN warships in particular and not a general statement

Click to expand...

I disagree, the quote from Bernard cole is got made in context of being specific to the PLAN, but rather all medium and large warships.
Erickson wrote that Bernard is said to see the logistical challenges as inadequate PLAN distilling plants and water management practices. So nowhere is it said that Bernard believes the PLAN ever packed distilling plants, only that they were inadequate for their missions for a time.

This would mean that PLAN warships did not have desalination plants, and now they do

Click to expand...

No, it means that the PLAN warships didn't have desalination plants rigorous enough to meet their needs at first, but they did by 2010



Look at it this way, if the above explanations don't convince you, let's ponder this question: why didn't Erickson simply explicitly write that the PLAN lacked desalination plants in simple words if they lacked them?