A new slant on RIMPAC Naval politics/The Fight To Control The South China Sea

[Aktungbby]

A new twist (ominous) on current Pacific Naval politics? http://live.wsj.com/video/wary-moves-as-china-joins-us-led-naval-drills/D310446D-029B-48F4-B8EC-24021995AAC8.html#!D310446D-029B-48F4-B8EC-24021995AAC8 If yer gonna fight 'em; first ya gotta practice & additionally: http://www.marsecreview.com/2014/07/in-pacific-drills-navies-adjust-to-new-arrival/ of course it would be interesting to see Chinese vessels under nominal Japanese command in the drill. Sun-Tsu asea is getting veeeerrrry diplomatic No shootin' my 'Killer tomato' IMHO

[Aktungbby]

http://online.wsj.com/articles/china-pushes-limits-to-closer-ties-with-u-s-military-1405964884?cb=logged0.010558662141789965 "China's navy chief, Adm. Wu Shengli, suggested the U.S. should bring the USS George Washington, an aircraft carrier based in Japan, to a mainland Chinese port and allow the crew of the Liaoning to take a tour, according to Adm. Greenert." U.S. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, right, speaks with China's Navy Commander-in-Chief Adm. Wu Shengli during a welcoming ceremony in Beijing July 15. If they wish to copy us so badly, perhaps they should rename the ship the Shengli-La!

[vanjast]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

If they wish to copy us so badly, perhaps they should rename the ship the Shengli-La!

Looking at the Millenia of history .. I'd say USA is copying China

[Oberon]

Oh snap!

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by vanjast

Looking at the Millenia of history .. I'd say USA is copying China

NOT! "The naming of the ship was a radical departure from the general practice of the time, which was to name aircraft carriers after battles or previous US Navy ships. After the war altering Doolittle Raid, launched from the USS Hornet, President FDR answered a reporter's question by saying that the raid had been launched from "Shangri-La", the fictional faraway land of the novel Lost Horizon. CV/CVA/CVS 38 USS Shangri-La; on last deployment 1970. Two battle stars in WWII as flagship Carrier Task Force Two-Vice ADM John S. McCain Sr. commanding, and three Battle stars for Viet Nam. Some literary fantasy meets some badass reality I'd say! AND, The 'proof may be in the pudding' as the Brits have it: the Chinese are coming to U.S. for advice!?... ie now that we got one of these...How & what do we do with it?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by vanjast

Looking at the Millenia of history .. I'd say USA is copying China

Originally Posted by Oberon

Oh snap!

LOL...may well do when they have enough muscle to throw some of it about

[Aktungbby]

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33153.pdf Of particular interest is the Chinese development and testing in the Gobi desert ot the (Dong-Feng/ East Wind) DF21 D ASBM missile designed to takeout ships at sea within a considerable range of 2000 miles. Clearly, as with the Kaiser's Imperial fleet development prior to WWI, a specific 'potential' enemy, the U.S. and its allies is the intended target.
"An apparent test of the missile was made against a carrier target in the Gobi desert in January" 2013.http://www.military.com/video/forces/military-foreign-forces/china-sinks-us-carrier-df-21d-missile-test/3161588772001/
"A Russian Military Analysis report of the DF-21D has concluded that the only way to successfully counter it would be through electronic counter measures. Conventional interceptions of high-speed objectives have worked in the past, with the Russian report citing the 2008 interception of a malfunctioning satellite by a U.S. cruiser, but in that situation the warship had extensive knowledge of its location and trajectory. Against an attack from the Mach 10 DF-21D without knowing the missile's launch point, the U.S. Navy's only way to evade it would be through electronic countermeasures.
The emergence of the DF-21D has some analysts claiming that the "carrier killer" missiles have rendered the American use of aircraft carriers obsolete, as they are too vulnerable in the face of the new weapon and not worth the expense. Military leaders in the U.S. Navy and Air Force, however, do not see it as a "game changer" to completely count carriers out. Firstly, there are questions on whether it has even entered operational service. Chinese publications said it was deployed in 2010 and U.S. officials reported it reached IOC that same year. Even so, being deployed does not mean it is combat-ready, and the Xinhua News Agency reported that the DF-21D was “still in the research stage” and not yet operational as of July 2011. Secondly, the missile may not be able to single-handedly destroy its target. The warhead is believed to be enough to inflict a "mission kill" to make a carrier unable to conduct flight operations, while other missiles would follow to actually destroy the ship. Thirdly, there is the problem of finding its target. The DF-21D has a range estimated between 1,035 to 1,726 miles-Since upgraded-so a carrier battle group would need to be located through other means before launching. Over the horizon radars could detect ships, but their exact locations could be off by miles. Chinese recon satellites would be able to look for and locate a battle group. Recon aircraft and submarines could also look for them, but they are vulnerable to the carrier's defenses. Finally, the missile may have a hard time hitting its target. To hit ships moving at 34 mph (30 kn), the DF-21D has radar and optical sensors for tracking. These are supposed to make it accurate, but the missile has not yet been tested against a moving target, let alone ones at sea against clutter and countermeasures. The "kill chain" of the missile requires processing and constantly updating data of a carrier's location, preparing the launch, programming information, and then firing it. How often this is trained is not known, and the U.S. military's Air-Sea Battle concept involves disrupting an enemy's kill chain. Some U.S. analysts believe that the DF-21D doesn't fly any faster than Mach 5." In an offset war such as the two submarine based world wars waged against superior naval forces (England), the cheap solution to an expensive problem is always paramount-as with the Stinger against the Hind helicopter etc. The Chinese, lacking the number of marine 'platforms' of their 'potential' RIMPAC opponent(s), are embracing the cheap $olution...time to quit kidding ourselves(and helping!); the clock is ticking. from satellite image"a common line from China's national defense doctrine before the country acquired an aircraft carrier of its own — namely that carriers are an offensive weapon while anti-ship missiles are defensive. "It can be used like a stick to hit the dog intruding on our backyard, but it can never be used to attack the house where the dog comes from," You're supposed to "walk softly with a big stick"...and that ain't happenin'

[Oberon]

Well, it makes sense really, the Chinese want to be able to exert the same sort of military power in the western pacific that the US exerts in the entire pacific.
Namely the Chinese want a sword to be able to hang over Taiwan, not that they'll actually want to invade Taiwan, because that would wreck the place and ruin the whole point of taking it, but they want to be able to put themselves in a position where they can credibly threaten Taiwan with invasion to the point that Taiwan would have little choice but to back down (not that Taiwan actually would) and also to have the power to push back against other nations territorial claims, nations such as South Korea, Japan and the Philippines.

Now, Chinas current weaponry is primarily defensive, since although it can (in theory) target US carriers, it has nothing to replace the US dominance on the water with, aside from one, old, second hand aircraft carrier.
By 2022 they should have about three carriers in the style of the Liaoning (I prefer the Admiral Shi Lang, which was what they were originally going to call the Liaoning), with plans to build other home-grown designs by the mid-2020s. The US has 19 carriers, 19 vs 3 is a number that even the most die-hard Communist Admiral is going to flinch at, and with Japan slowly remilitarising, I wouldn't worry too much about the US in the Pacific until the mid 2030s. Then the hegemony will be challenged, and by that time it will have been almost a century of unchallenged US dominance in the Pacific.

[Aktungbby]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/artyom-lukin/world-war-iii_b_5646641.html Precisely my thinking; and relevent to this thread as well...

OBERON:The US has 19 carriers, 19 vs 3 is a number that even the most die-hard Communist Admiral is going to flinch at, and with Japan slowly remilitarising, I wouldn't worry too much about the US in the Pacific until the mid 2030s. Then the hegemony will be challenged, and by that time it will have been almost a century of unchallenged US dominance in the Pacific.

From the article:

VLADIVOSTOK -- If the next world war is to happen, it will most likely be in Asia and feature a clash between the incumbent hegemon, the United States, and the principal challenger, China. The good news is China does not want war now and in the foreseeable future, primarily because Beijing knows too well that the odds are not on its side. But if we look ahead 20 years from now, in 2034, the circumstances will have shifted significantly.
NOT NOW
There are three reasons war is unlikely anytime soon.
First, despite the double-digit annual growth in its defense budgets, China's military still significantly lags behind the U.S.' It will take China 15 to 20 years to attain parity or near-parity with the U.S.-Japan allied forces in the East Asian littoral.

One things for certain: it's a' comin' They're not 'rattlin' the sabre' yet! but they're sure forging it!

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/artyom-lukin/world-war-iii_b_5646641.html Precisely my thinking; and relevent to this thread as well... From the article: One things for certain: it's a' comin' They're not 'rattlin' the sabre' yet! but they're sure forging it!

Well, because the US and Western Europe have been very quiet in their arms manufacturing sector over the last three decades...

[Aktungbby]

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/chinas-nuclear-subs-alter-global.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed& utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AmericanPower+(American+Power) "The question is when do we really start worrying about China's challenge to American strategic preeminence? Back in the late-1990s, lots of policy and scholarly work pumped up the China challenge, but it's only now that Beijing's truly giving the U.S. a run for its money. Recall, just a week or so ago folks were getting all fired up about China's GDP numbers surpassing America's, although some might have been over-stating the case (by using purchasing power parity).
Still, China is growing and competing against America for global military and economic leadership. The day of reckoning won't be anytime soon, and fortunes can change, but it pays to look at more micro-economic foundations of power, particularly in the military realm."
One Sunday morning last December, China’s defense ministry summoned military attachés from several embassies to its monolithic Beijing headquarters.
To the foreigners’ surprise, the Chinese said that one of their nuclear-powered submarines would soon pass through the Strait of Malacca, a passage between Malaysia and Indonesia that carries much of world trade, say people briefed on the meeting. "“This is a trump card that makes our motherland proud and our adversaries terrified,” China’s navy chief, Adm. Wu Shengli, wrote of the country’s missile-sub fleet in a Communist Party magazine in December. “It is a strategic force symbolizing great-power status and supporting national security.”
Two days later, a Chinese attack sub—a so-called hunter-killer, designed to seek out and destroy enemy vessels—slipped through the strait above water and disappeared. It resurfaced near Sri Lanka and then in the Persian Gulf, say people familiar with its movements, before returning through the strait in February—the first known voyage of a Chinese sub to the Indian Ocean.
The message was clear: China had fulfilled its four-decade quest to join the elite club of countries with nuclear subs that can ply the high seas. The defense ministry summoned attachés again to disclose another Chinese deployment to the Indian Ocean in September—this time a diesel-powered sub, which stopped off in Sri Lanka.
China’s increasingly potent and active sub force represents the rising power’s most significant military challenge yet for the region. Its expanding undersea fleet not only bolsters China’s nuclear arsenal but also enhances the country’s capacity to enforce its territorial claims and thwart U.S. intervention.
China is expected to pass another milestone this year when it sets a different type of sub to sea—a “boomer,” carrying fully armed nuclear missiles for the first time—says the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence, or ONI.

China is hardly hiding its new boomers. Tourists could clearly see three of them at a base opposite a resort recently in China’s Hainan province. On the beach, rented Jet Skis were accompanied by guides to make sure riders didn’t stray too close.
These boomers’ missiles have the range to hit Hawaii and Alaska from East Asia and the continental U.S. from the mid-Pacific, the ONI says.
“This is a trump card that makes our motherland proud and our adversaries terrified,” China’s navy chief, Adm. Wu Shengli, wrote of the country’s missile-sub fleet in a Communist Party magazine in December. “It is a strategic force symbolizing great-power status and supporting national security.”
To naval commanders from other countries, the Chinese nuclear sub’s nonstop Indian Ocean voyage was especially striking, proving that it has the endurance to reach the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s headquarters in Hawaii.
“They were very clear with respect to messaging,” says Vice Adm. Robert Thomas, a former submariner who commands the U.S. Seventh Fleet, “to say that, ‘We’re a professional navy, we’re a professional submarine force, and we’re global. We’re no longer just a coastal-water submarine force.’ ”
In recent years, public attention has focused on China’s expanding military arsenal, including its first aircraft carrier and stealth fighter. But subs are more strategically potent weapons: A single one can project power far from China and deter other countries simply by its presence.
China’s nuclear attack subs, in particular, are integral to what Washington sees as an emerging strategy to prevent the U.S. from intervening in a conflict over Taiwan, or with Japan and the Philippines—both U.S. allies locked in territorial disputes with Beijing.
And even a few functional Chinese boomers compel the U.S. to plan for a theoretical Chinese nuclear-missile strike from the sea. China’s boomer patrols will make it one of only three countries—alongside the U.S. and Russia—that can launch atomic weapons from sea, air and land.
“I think they’ve watched the U.S. submarine force and its ability to operate globally for many, many years—and the potential influence that can have in various places around the globe,” says Adm. Thomas, “and they’ve decided to go after that model.”
China's nuclear-sub deployments, some naval experts say, may become the opening gambits of an undersea contest in Asia that echoes the cat-and-mouse game between U.S. and Soviet subs during the Cold War—a history popularized by Tom Clancy's 1984 novel "The Hunt for Red October."

"Back then, each side sent boomers to lurk at sea, ready to fire missiles at the other’s territory. Each dispatched nuclear hunter-killers to track the other’s boomers and be ready to destroy them.
The collapse of the Soviet Union ended that tournament. But today, as China increases its undersea firepower, the U.S. and its allies are boosting their submarine and anti-sub forces in Asia to counter it.
Neither China nor the U.S. wants a Cold War rerun. Their economies are too interdependent, and today’s market-minded China doesn’t seek global revolution or military parity with the U.S.
Chinese officials say their subs don’t threaten other countries and are part of a program to protect China’s territory and expanding global interests. Chinese defense officials told foreign attachés that the subs entering the Indian Ocean would assist antipiracy patrols off Somalia, say people briefed on the meetings".... ... ...UH HUH! http://online.wsj.com/articles/chinas-submarine-fleet-adds-nuclear-strike-capability-altering-strategic-balance-undersea-1414164738?

THE CHOKE POINTS OF CHINA"S SUBMARINE FORCE

[ikalugin]

No project 955?

Also it isn't like Russian Navy is going to compete with the US any time soon in the NA (UK and France should be capable of projecting sufficient naval presence there), so the pivot to the Pacific is quite logical. With said pivot I doupt that China would be capable of providing a force competetive to that of the US due to the fact that US has 3 allies fleets there (with a submarine component) - ROK, Japan, Australia.

[Von Tonner]

According to the below analysis the USA is still way way ahead of the current capabilities of the Chinese sub fleet even with them continuing to increase their year on year defence budget by double digits

Long may this last as it is comfort to all in the free world. I am extremely mindful of the fact that the % going towards the US Defence budget from the hardworking US citizenry is also ensuring my relative safety on the other side of the world.

In his statement, (to the to the U.S. House Seapower and Projections Forces subcommittee on the status of the Chinese navy) "Admiral Mulloy acknowledged that U.S. submarines remain superior to Chinese ones. But, his remark about China producing some "fairly amazing" submarines mischaracterizes and overplays the Chinese underwater force, particularly its nuclear submarines. Relatively speaking, and given the qualitative difference between the U.S. and Chinese nuclear submarine force in particular, if the latest Chinese submarines are "fairly amazing" then the latest U.S. Virginia class submarines could only be described as "phenomenal."

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/ch...-still-us-wake

[Aktungbby]

AHEM: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=214616 post 11

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

AHEM: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=214616 post 11

Dont know how I missed that Aktungbby Thanks for the heads up