Usn Asw

Sea Dog

the un states that a special economeic zone can be traveled freely by warships of other nations

if your talking about the apperance of soves over the oil drilling platform

here is some news its about 250km from china but over 100km from the nearest japo island

also the drilling platform is owned by china

darth sidious said:

Sea Dog

the un states that a special economeic zone can be traveled freely by warships of other nations

if your talking about the apperance of soves over the oil drilling platform

here is some news its about 250km from china but over 100km from the nearest japo island

also the drilling platform is owned by china

Click to expand...

According to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, prior approval is required from countries of concern when one country wants to conduct oceanographic research or other peaceful operations in the exclusive economic zone of another. The countries concerned can refuse to allow this. Since warships are allowed to sail in international waters, they do not need this kind of approval. This is all true.

But you're missing the point, a forum member said that this is seen as aggression coming close to any nations shores or territorial waters and stated that there is a "Weapons range" that they should take into consideration. I raise this as an issue to challenge the logic of said forum member. BTW, this is not the first time China has sailed into Japanese waters. They just got caught sailing a submarine into Japanese waters not too long ago also. By this members logic, expect the Japanese to sink this vessel as a proper response against this type of "agression". Another forum member said, that they would only "have themselves to blame". Hope that clears it up for ya'.

Steering this back on topic, does anybody know how much longer the Gotland will be used by the USN for anti-diesel tactics and training? If they are having a considerrable amount of success like it looks they're having, they might actually extend the lease, IMO.

Sea Dog said:

According to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, prior approval is required from countries of concern when one country wants to conduct oceanographic research or other peaceful operations in the exclusive economic zone of another. The countries concerned can refuse to allow this. Since warships are allowed to sail in international waters, they do not need this kind of approval. This is all true.

But you're missing the point, a forum member said that this is seen as aggression coming close to any nations shores or territorial waters and stated that there is a "Weapons range" that they should take into consideration. I raise this as an issue to challenge the logic of said forum member. BTW, this is not the first time China has sailed into Japanese waters. They just got caught sailing a submarine into Japanese waters not too long ago also. By this members logic, expect the Japanese to sink this vessel as a proper response against this type of "agression". Another forum member said, that they would only "have themselves to blame". Hope that clears it up for ya'.

Click to expand...

such an act willl antigonize a nation but no one will go to war over this it can however cause military build up and such

example after the us send some carriers to taiwan waters in 96 the chinese greatly increase their efforts to improve the PLAn

darth sidious said:

such an act willl antigonize a nation but no one will go to war over this it can however cause military build up and such

example after the us send some carriers to taiwan waters in 96 the chinese greatly increase their efforts to improve the PLAn

Click to expand...

Don't have to tell me that. My point exactly. Why don't you try conveying that to others in this post that have alluded that sailing in international waters can be construed as hostile. Some don't seem to get it. The PLAN is certainly not going to stop the USN from sailing in international waters. At any rate, I'm still wondering if anyone knows about the Gotland lease. Popeye?

I'm still wondering if anyone knows about the Gotland lease. Popeye?

Click to expand...

It's for one year. That will be up in 1 July 2006. So just imangine how much more capable the USN ASW against SSK's will be by the end of August.

Sea Dog said:

Nope, the Chinese ships were in internationally recognized Japanese sovereign waters. The Japanese economic exclusion zone, not in international waters at all. The Japanese could have easily blown these ships out of the water. I still can't find any incidents of U.S. ships doing this. By your logic, the USA/Japan should have obliterated these PLAN ships. Oh, yeah, and the South China Sea or the East China Sea is not China's property.



Your logic, not mine. The Chinese ships were well within "Weapons Range"......

Click to expand...

These waters were not internationally recognized, they were disputed oil fields(claimed by both sides). otherwise, the u.s would have kicked up a huge fuss about the incident. The japanese had all the means to blow up the PLAN ships, but why didnt they???
They were smart not to escalate conflict, a sign of backign off.

bd popeye said:

It's for one year. That will be up in 1 July 2006. So just imangine how much more capable the USN ASW against SSK's will be by the end of August.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that the lease may be extended. How much do you want to bet that new hydrophones and processors are being built and tested as we speak. Gotland, as one of the quietest conventionals out there is perfect in this role.

MIGleader said:

They were smart not to escalate conflict, a sign of backign off.

Click to expand...

Nope. This is a sign of restraint. The Japanese seem to have alot of this despite their own strong military capabilities. But by your own admitted logic, with "Weapons range" being the litmus test, the Japanese could have blown these PLAN ships out of the water. I mean after all, they were in Japanese economic exclusion zone. International waters, yes. Disputed oil areas, yes. Japanese waters, yes. Within Japanese weapons range, yes.

Of course the PLAN ships were in japanese weapons range. Thats why I like weapon's range logic. A ship may stray close to a foreign shore if it wishes, but it does so running the full risk of receiving hostile fire(not to mention triggering international hostilities). Deisle submarines form one of the key parts of such detterent. Now, the USN does not even go that close to foreign shores without permission, so perhaps its better we forget this and go back to the USN asw talk.

Now, im pretty sure if the usn does not have its desired results by july, it will ask to extend the lease. The Usn then may perhaps lease diesels from other countries to practice tracking more kinds of diesels, and multiple diesels at once.

MIGleader said:

Of course the PLAN ships were in japanese weapons range. Thats why I like weapon's range logic. A ship may stray close to a foreign shore if it wishes, but it does so running the full risk of receiving hostile fire(not to mention triggering international hostilities). Deisle submarines form one of the key parts of such detterent. Now, the USN does not even go that close to foreign shores without permission, so perhaps its better we forget this and go back to the USN asw talk.

Now, im pretty sure if the usn does not have its desired results by july, it will ask to extend the lease. The Usn then may perhaps lease diesels from other countries to practice tracking more kinds of diesels, and multiple diesels at once.

Click to expand...

Travelling in international waters is not operating in a hostile manner. I hope you're starting to understand that. Looks like you're finally coming around at any rate. BTW, the USN doesn't go around violating anybody's international waters. But that's due to international relations matters. And also due to the fact, the USA has respect for the integrity of other countries teritories.....unless they are at war with them. The USN pretty much can go where they want. Nobody has the power to prevent them from going anywhere in this day and age.

Getting back on topic, The USN is gaining tremendous proficiency in quiet diesel submarine tracking. Also nuclear ASW:



ASW as a mission has again become the priority focus for the USN again.

travelling to close to somones shore triggers questions, like WHAT ARE YOU DOING? spying?

I wouldnt call the usn navy tremendously proficcient at trackign diesles just because they are training with a single diesel. still a long way to go. Nothings that easy...