PLAN Type 035/039/091/092 Submarine Thread

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

That is fair and true, but that in itself is meaningless.

Whether the USN can adequately address the issues exposed by Gotland depends on a great many factors, many of which could easily be beyond the ability of anyone to address without new equipment.

Also, iirc, historically the USN have always been very well equiped and trained and boasted of superb tactics and competancy.

While the detailed results from Gotland are classified, obviously at least one element of the USN's ASW capacity is not what it was cracked up to be.

Don't get me wrong, im sure the USN's ASW capacity is formitable and is no doubt being improved thanks to the findings from Gotland. But then neither is it infalible or impregnable, as the Gotland and a certain Song skipper have amply demonstrated.

 

[Ambivalent]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

That is fair and true, but that in itself is meaningless.

Whether the USN can adequately address the issues exposed by Gotland depends on a great many factors, many of which could easily be beyond the ability of anyone to address without new equipment.

Also, iirc, historically the USN have always been very well equiped and trained and boasted of superb tactics and competancy.

While the detailed results from Gotland are classified, obviously at least one element of the USN's ASW capacity is not what it was cracked up to be.

Don't get me wrong, im sure the USN's ASW capacity is formitable and is no doubt being improved thanks to the findings from Gotland. But then neither is it infalible or impregnable, as the Gotland and a certain Song skipper have amply demonstrated.

I wouldn't be too sure anyone with only open source knowledge knows the truth about the lessons learned from Gotland's time in San Diego. I see things every month in the so called professional defense press about programs I am involved with that are inaccurate. Some of the reportage is exaggerated, and some are complete fabrications put in print to support one faction or another in the defense budget wars. The true lessons learned, and any new tactics, remain buried under layers of classification. I will go out on a limb however to state the USN didn't rent that sub for two years and not make changes from the lessons learned. Better to find out now than during a war, eh?
Regarding the Song class boat, absent a war, the USN cannot sink another nation's sub. It can sail where it wants, nothing we can do to prevent it, but that does not mean it was not being tracked. It was common enough for Soviet subs to show up in US task forces back in the Cold War ( didn't a Victor class boat once surface right underneath the Kitty Hawk, doing damage to itself and the Kitty in the process ? ), doesn't mean we didn't know it was there beforehand. Again, we don't have access to any classified data to know the truth of that encounter, but the play up in the press sure works for certain political factions, does it not?

 

[plawolf]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Yes, keep going, this is doing your credibility wonders.

Its rather amusing how you are so desperately unable to accept a pretty obvious and benign fact that the USN's ASW capabilities are far from perfect.

So far all you got to counter indisputable facts are generalist presumptions and wild guesses.

You can believe that the USN has learnt lessons from Gotland, no one will deny that. However that alone is meaningless. All sub operators are also constantly improving their tactics and learning new lessons as well. What does that tell us? Nothing.

As for the Song, well please. If the USN did not want the Song popping up in its innermost defense perimeter, there are plenty of things they could have done to avoid it. Simply speeding up would have been one of the easiest options. They could have also pinged it with helos or have a destroyer sit on it. You know, the kind of things you yourself pointed out the USN has done to keep soviet subs out of the way.

If the USN simple decided to let the Song get through, then you really need to ask yourself why. What kind of message does that send to China? In a time when the US is complaining about the increasing assertiveness of the PLAN. You really think the USN would want to do anything to help build the PLAN's confidence and encourage them to be bolder? Good luck rationalizing that.

 

[pla101prc]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

ambivalent even if USN couldnt sink the sub, it would have done something to acknowledge its presence. its like the Chinese cant shoot down the EP-3, but they still have to send fighters after it. the fact that USN did nothing before the sub had surfaced, its really hard to convince anyone that they knew the Song was there.

 

[Finn McCool]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

ambivalent even if USN couldnt sink the sub, it would have done something to acknowledge its presence. its like the Chinese cant shoot down the EP-3, but they still have to send fighters after it. the fact that USN did nothing before the sub had surfaced, its really hard to convince anyone that they knew the Song was there.

Well the fact of the matter is that we don't know that they didn't do anything. I say this every time this incident comes up: We simply don't know the whole truth of the matter. We don't know if the USN knew the Song was there or not, we don't know if the carrier's escorts and airwing took steps to harass the sub, we don't know if the sub was lying in wait or if it "ran into" the battle group. We don't know.

Some people simply assume that it was the "best case" scenario for the PLAN (i.e. the Song deftly infiltrated and the USN had no idea it was there) and some people assume it was the best case scenario for the USN (i.e. they knew it was there the whole time and were tracking it for quite a while etc.)

On the subject of fixed wing vs. helo ASW, I think that fixed wing is more important in a real war situation because helo dipping sonar is really only useful when you have the subs location narrowed down to a relatively small area. Within those parameters dipping sonar is, as Ambivalent stated, an absolutely devastating weapon. But it's pretty difficult to narrow a subs location down that much in the first place. To track them down in the open ocean, you need fixed wing aviation to drop sonobouys over a wide area.

 

[vesicles]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

ambivalent even if USN couldnt sink the sub, it would have done something to acknowledge its presence. its like the Chinese cant shoot down the EP-3, but they still have to send fighters after it. the fact that USN did nothing before the sub had surfaced, its really hard to convince anyone that they knew the Song was there.

Yep. Also, once the sub surfaced, the USN immediately turned around and began chasing the sub (if I remember the incident correctly). That means USN did not want the Chinese sub to be there. Then why didn't they start doing something before the sub surfaced and take the initiative IF they knew it was there? If they wanted to simply monitor it and didn't mind it to be there, why did they chase it once it surfaced? I'm sure the USN commanders knew well that chasing the sub would make them look bad...

 

[bladerunner]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Yep. Also, once the sub surfaced, the USN immediately turned around and began chasing the sub (if I remember the incident correctly). That means USN did not want the Chinese sub to be there. Then why didn't they start doing something before the sub surfaced and take the initiative IF they knew it was there? If they wanted to simply monitor it and didn't mind it to be there, why did they chase it once it surfaced? I'm sure the USN commanders knew well that chasing the sub would make them look bad...

Because its a game of Chess played with warships. In the First instance the route was well publicised in advance, so all the Chinese sub had to do was lie and wait.

Having infiltrated the US Fleet why would you want to let them know what you have achieved? Why not just slip away and let the Amercians continue to think they have the edge when it comes to sub warfare.

 

[vesicles]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Because its a game of Chess played with warships. In the First instance the route was well publicised in advance, so all the Chinese sub had to do was lie and wait.

Having infiltrated the US Fleet why would you want to let them know what you have achieved? Why not just slip away and let the Amercians continue to think they have the edge when it comes to sub warfare.

It's a psychological thing. The Chinese sub was telling the USN "this is our playground and we can do whatever we want. You claim to be the best and see what we can do!" It's a show-off

 

[pla101prc]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Well the fact of the matter is that we don't know that they didn't do anything. I say this every time this incident comes up: We simply don't know the whole truth of the matter. We don't know if the USN knew the Song was there or not, we don't know if the carrier's escorts and airwing took steps to harass the sub, we don't know if the sub was lying in wait or if it "ran into" the battle group. We don't know.

Some people simply assume that it was the "best case" scenario for the PLAN (i.e. the Song deftly infiltrated and the USN had no idea it was there) and some people assume it was the best case scenario for the USN (i.e. they knew it was there the whole time and were tracking it for quite a while etc.)

its not about best case scenario or whatever. the best case scenario would be the USN was doing some exercise and Song manage to penetrate its highly alerted defence. in this case it wasnt even on battle alert, its perfectly OKAY if a relatively advanced sub got really close to the AC, doesnt mean it can do it in wartime also. but to say that USN knew that the Song was there the whole time and just ignored it...man i dont know its really testing my imaginations.
and also, if i were the US military, if the USN had known in advance of the Song's presence, i'd prolly articulate that point to save the embarrassment, though its nort really an embarrassment.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Re: PLAN submarines Thread II

Here we go again with this rehash.

Let's not forget how one Gotland sunk the Royal Navy in an exercise.

Chinese subs aren't going to be chasing surface fleets. They're going to be laying in wait. And just as the Chinese navy has to travel through ocean bottlenecks, so does any adversary. Guess where Chinese subs will be laying in wait?