DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Eye on China » A Little Chinese Sub Buffet?

A Little Chinese Sub Buffet?

song-sub.jpg

Is this for real?

From the UK Daily Mail

When the U.S. Navy deploys a bat­tle fleet on exer­cises, it takes the secu­rity of its air­craft car­ri­ers very seri­ously indeed.

At least a dozen war­ships pro­vide a phys­i­cal guard while the tech­ni­cal wiz­ardry of the world’s only mil­i­tary super­power offers an invis­i­ble shield to detect and deter any intruders.

That is the the­ory. Or, rather, was the theory.

American mil­i­tary chiefs have been left dumb­struck by an unde­tected Chinese sub­ma­rine pop­ping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exer­cise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk — a 1,000ft super­car­rier with 4,500 per­son­nel on board.

By the time it sur­faced the 160ft Song Class diesel-​​electric attack sub­ma­rine is under­stood to have sailed within viable range for launch­ing tor­pe­does or mis­siles at the carrier.

According to senior Nato offi­cials the inci­dent caused con­ster­na­tion in the U.S. Navy.

The Americans had no idea China’s fast-​​growing sub­ma­rine fleet had reached such a level of sophis­ti­ca­tion, or that it posed such a threat.

One Nato fig­ure said the effect was “as big a shock as the Russians launch­ing Sputnik” — a ref­er­ence to the Soviet Union’s first orbit­ing satel­lite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.

The inci­dent, which took place in the ocean between south­ern Japan and Taiwan, is a major embar­rass­ment for the Pentagon.

The lone Chinese ves­sel slipped past at least a dozen other American war­ships which were sup­posed to pro­tect the car­rier from hos­tile air­craft or submarines.

And the rest of the costly defen­sive screen, which usu­ally includes at least two U.S. sub­marines, was also appar­ently unable to detect it.

According to the Nato source, the encounter has forced a seri­ous re-​​think of American and Nato naval strat­egy as com­man­ders recon­sider the level of threat from poten­tially hos­tile Chinese submarines.

It also led to tense diplo­matic exchanges, with shaken American diplo­mats demand­ing to know why the sub­ma­rine was “shad­ow­ing” the U.S. fleet while Beijing pleaded igno­rance and dis­missed the affair as coincidence.

Analysts believe Beijing was send­ing a mes­sage to America and the West demon­strat­ing its rapidly-​​growing mil­i­tary capa­bil­ity to threaten for­eign pow­ers which try to inter­fere in its “backyard.“ 

This sounds like a a sim­i­lar inci­dent that occured last year, where another Chinese popped up a lit­tle too close for com­fort next to the Kitty Hawk.

What gives? I mean, Pentagon chief Gates was just over in China mak­ing nicey nice with is Sino coun­ter­parts. Why the shadow pup­petry which is cer­tainly going to give the US Navy a seri­ous case of the jit­ters? I can’t find much more on this story, and the Daily Mail is surely not the most cred­i­ble source…What do you dear read­ers make of this?
(Gouge: CM)

– Christian

Share |

November 12th, 2007 | Eye on China | 265590 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/11/12/a-little-chinese-sub-buffet/A+Little+Chinese+Sub+Buffet%3F2007-11-12+12%3A20%3A43Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « The Freaky F-​​35 Lid | Power to the People on Grounded Eagles » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Byron Skinner says:
    November 14, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    Good Afternoon Folks,
    All the com­ments here seem good and I can add only a sin­gle point. The two Admirals in the Pacific at the time Fallon (PACOM) and McConell(INTPAC) and CNO Mullen (CNO) seem not to have skated any dam­age to their careers, since all have been pro­moted after this event. Don’t we long for the days when a CNO would comitt sucide over the ques­tion of an attach­ment to a decroa­t­ion?
    Any account­abil­ity among Naval Officers seems to be a lost tra­did­ion or unless of course it’s an 06 or below, the it’s a dif­fer­ent story.
    One would think that have­ing a Carrier at sea, even just for train­ing, that there would have been at least one SSN down stairs and at least one DD would have it’s ears on not to men­tion the car­ri­ers own air­borne ASW platform(s) This clearly wasn’t the case and by the time a ASW pres­ence was made the intruder have left the area.
    In short the Chinese arn’t that good but it seems that we are that bad.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  2. EM2(SS) says:
    November 14, 2007 at 5:53 pm

    LOL, Surf1. My hat’s off to DC2 and Crusty Old Chief for their orig­i­nal responses –they are what inspired me to hop into this lit­tle can of worms.…
    So today I ran into an inter­est­ing arti­cle at the Navy Times and it fits into this dis­cus­sion:
    http://​www​.navy​times​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​0​7​/​1​1​/​a​p​_​s​u​b​m​a​r​i​n​e​s​_​0​7​1​1​13/
    They are approv­ing money for new Virginia class subs to be built. Now I am totally for new nuke boats, but at a whop­ping $2.5 Billion for each boat, well, that’s a lot of cash for one lit­tle boat.
    Having spent time at both No Ka Oi (Pearl Harbor) and Portsmouth ship­yards, I can totally under­stand the need to keep this infra­struc­ture in place, and keep it main­tained. EB and NN ship­yards are incred­i­bly impor­tant to our abil­ity to pro­duce qual­ity boats in the future.
    The skills that the ship­yard work­ers (the good ones, not the slack­ers) have is incred­i­ble. A national asset, and should def­i­nitely be kept run­ning. That is “tribal knowl­edge” that we can NOT afford to lose. To allow those places to floun­der is just asi­nine at best.
    But what bugs me (even as a nuke) is that they are strug­gling to keep the ship­yards open with 1–2 new nuke boats a year. Yes, we need to keep the pro­duc­tion lines open and keep on pro­duc­ing new nuke boats. But what about Air Independent Propulsion diesel boats? (SSIs) Or even just nor­mal diesel-​​electric boats? (SSKs) For each SINGLE Virginia class boat, they could pro­duce 5–7 SSK or SSIs (esti­mat­ing $300M and $500M each –my num­bers could be off, please for­give me if they are).
    Let’s look at some of the advanatages:
    – More American jobs, if these are pro­duced in-​​country.
    – Keeping and expand­ing crit­i­cal infra­struc­ture.
    – The O-​​gangers should love it, because more hulls = more depart­ment head, XO and CO bil­lets. ==> More chances for them to actu­ally com­mand a boat of their own.
    – It would give us more cov­er­age in the lit­toral areas where nuke boats aren’t totally needed or the best for the con­di­tions: near Taiwan, the Persian Gulf and (God for­bid) even doing homeland/​coastal secu­rity work. Maybe even drug inter­dic­tion.…
    –By hav­ing SSKs and SSIs in our inven­tory, we could prep our ASW and SSN forces to bet­ter thwart the threat.
    The only down­side about a SSK/​SSI from my POV is that the bat­tery is prob­a­bly a cast iron bey­atch to main­tain. It might mean a lot more EM bil­lets… and pos­si­bly pro­mo­tion poten­tial.… maybe not so bad… were I still active or drilling.…
    But if the rest of the world is mak­ing a whole LOT of SSks and SSIs, it would make a lot of sense to pre­pare to counter that par­tic­u­lar threat. But that’s just me. I’m sure that the Powers That Be are a whole lot smarter than I am.… [face_​rolling_​eyes]

    Reply
  3. DC2 Jennings says:
    November 14, 2007 at 10:25 pm

    Surf1,
    I would like to thank the United States Navy for help­ing me grow a pair and be able to receive this Testicular Award. Like any good red blooded American, I will proudly dis­play this award from the trailer hitch on my truck.
    Byron, I served under the man you men­tioned com­mit­ted suiced (Adm. Jeremy Boorda) and he was truly an hon­or­able man. I per­son­ally believe that the Navy has a higher stan­dard of account­abil­ity than for their offi­cers than any other ser­vice. The CO of the USS Cole, even though he was not offi­cially rep­ri­manded, was toast after that inci­dent.
    The fact of the mat­ter is every branch of the ser­vice has had to make do with less and these wars are tak­ing an even greater toll. It was bad enough when Clinton was pres­i­dent and he decided to overex­tend the mil­i­tary, what Bush is doing now is just as bad. The Air Force is fly­ing planes too old, the Navy has had to decom good ships and vir­tu­ally do away with the major­ity of their ASW capa­bil­ity, the Marines have always been red­headed stepchil­dren, and the Army is hav­ing it’s own issues to deal with.
    The F-​​15, LUH, and this blog are prime exam­ples of where our mil­i­tary finds itself today.
    I agree with EM2, KISS.

    Reply
  4. Roy Smith says:
    November 14, 2007 at 10:50 pm

    Not to make a big deal over nothing,but two exam­ples of “swal­low­ing a camel & strain­ing on a gnat” is the for­mer CNO in the mid­dle of the 80’s(who was also caught at Tailhook in 91 or 92 I think) who was more con­cerned about sailors being clean shaven instead of being allowed to have beards & good ole’ Jim Webb when he became Secretary of the Navy & he felt that the first most impor­tant deci­sion he had to make was that Napoleon McCallum couldn’t play for the Raiders while he was in the navy.I’m sure peo­ple have opin­ions about both subjects,but this for­mer sol­dier won­ders if there were not any more press­ing mat­ters than if a sailor plays pro ball on his off duty time & whether a sailor looks bet­ter with or with­out a beard.I know there are peo­ple here who feel like the F/​A-​​18 Super Hornet is the best jet right now for the navy,but I was upset that the F-​​14 was the only jet that could fire the AIM-​​54 air-​​to-​​air mis­sile & both were retired,but there was the AIM-​​155 Advanced Air-​​to-​​Air Missile that was lighter than the Phoenix & could be fired by the Super Hornet & other fighters,but it was can­celed.
    Its like some devi­ous mind is out to neuter our navy’s abil­ity to defend itself.Now I read that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the navy has to make its sonar safer for whales & dolphins.I think that our coun­try has gone nuts.

    Reply
  5. Crusty Old Chief says:
    November 15, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    Some last thoughts before this arti­cle rolls off:
    – Beards were sixed on Adm Watkins’ watch not on Adm Boorda’s. But you’re only off by a decade; not bad for the sis­ter ser­vice that never learned to use a sim­ple blous­ing cord. :) Moreover, even the most hoary tra­di­tions must bow to oper­a­tional neces­sity. Beards, goa­tees, and Elvisite side­burns inter­fere with gas masks and OBAs/​SCBAs. Some of us stood in the head with the CMAA until mid­night of the last day we were per­mit­ted beards, refus­ing to shave until the last moment.
    – Nuclear power has the great poten­tial to solve ALL of our power require­ments essen­tially for­ever. Our TLD-​​wearing geeka­zoids in the reac­tor com­part­ments of ships and subs have a half-​​century long record to prove its safety, reli­a­bil­ity, and sus­tain­abil­ity.
    Nuclear power also has the great poten­tial to spawn some rather nasty stuff like plu­to­nium that can essen­tially solve all the apoc­a­lyp­tic require­ments of ter­ror­ists, al-​​Mahdi jerk­wads, and schizoid geeks who made it just far enough through nuclear power school to be dan­ger­ous to every­one.
    Nuclear power is the ulti­mate hob­gob­lin of Luddites, wheat-​​germers, and all the rest who read Mother Earth News or who believe in the divin­ity of Al Gore. Personally, I blame Uncle Sugar for 60 years of per­mit­ting the Left to con­trol what passes for infor­ma­tion about any­thing nuclear.
    Nuclear power, to my mind, falls under the broad cat­e­gory of Things Forbidden to Stupid People. Is there any won­der why the Soviets lost so many subs to reac­tor inci­dents or that Chernobly went boom? Bad designs built by incom­pe­tents and run by politi­cians and farm­ers. Its the same rea­son why the Lada, Trabant, and Zil never cap­tured a size­able share of the export mar­ket.
    Lastly, because a nuclear reac­tor or even a radioiso­tope gen­er­a­tor (RTG) falls near the top of the Things Forbidden to Stupid People, we need to make a pretty solid swipe at keep­ing them out of the hands of chil­dren and ter­ror­ists. Now I’m a pretty igno­rant fel­low who grew up think­ing that red lead primer, asbestos, and MEK were all pretty much benign but I still stand pretty firm on the idea that fis­sion­able, radioac­tive, or oth­er­wise Fairly Damned Dangerous mate­ri­als should not be put into any­thing unmanned. (Unless, of course, the unmanned device is a space probe or a warshot.)
    Just my opin­ion. If you think I’m wrong please let me know. Because if I am, then I’m going to start col­lect­ing smoke alarms to build my own RTG. I’m think­ing that it might make a good pre­heater for my hot water heater or at least a way to keep the bird­bath from freez­ing this win­ter.
    Cheers,
    Chief B.
    BTW, any­one have a spare dosime­ter and radiac?

    Reply
  6. Roy Smith says:
    November 15, 2007 at 11:02 pm

    I had to look his name up to be sure,but I thought that it was Frank B. Kelso II who ordered the beards banned.Anyway,I thought that it was strange that the navy retired(& as I’ve other say,turned into razor blades) all of the nuclear-​​powered cruis­ers that they had,especially with the oil crisis(as far as prices go) hav­ing an impact on the navy being able to deploy & exercise.The retir­ing of the bat­tle­ships was also a big disappointment.Being a sol­dier,& I’m sure I can also speak for the marines,those big guns were a great com­fort to us on land.I don’t think that amphibi­ous assaults are com­pletely dead & those guns would have helped a lot in any amphibi­ous land­ing oper­a­tion or just the fact that they are there would divert the enemy’s troops to cover the beaches like the Iraqis had to do dur­ing Desert Storm​.It seems like we have done every­thing we could to crip­ple our abil­i­ties to defend our ships against sub­marines & air­craft car­ry­ing anti-​​ship mis­siles,& we crip­pled our abil­ity to pro­tect the marines land­ing on beaches.

    Reply
  7. Jonathan says:
    November 16, 2007 at 2:26 am

    So, looks like the Chinese are still our enemy.
    Wait till after the olympics. The Olympics are a
    huge source of pride for the Chinese, but once they come and go, China isnt going to prob­a­bly wait too much longer on Taiwan. China, while a huge trad­ing part­ner, is also tak­ing advan­tage of that posi­tion to build up its mil­i­tary and get in a posi­tion to take over tai­wan with­out any inter­fer­ance from us.
    China is mil­i­tar­ily our enemy, and needs to be treated as such. Robert Gates is igno­rant if he really thinks they arent.

    Reply
  8. Requiem gold says:
    August 5, 2008 at 8:01 pm

    My friends in order to help me, send me much Requiem gold, I was very thank him.

    Reply
  9. buy cronous gold says:
    August 5, 2008 at 8:05 pm

    Actually I prac­tice the level by myself to be much quicker than together, and I need not buy cro­nous gold for , but it was very amus­ing that two peo­ple played in together.

    Reply
  10. Habbo gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 2:15 am

    I know that you are not a sloppy per­son, you have your aspi­ra­tion, have your ideal. You will not care the game Habbo gold. Therefore you are doomed to leave Habbo, leave friends who these share some hard­ships, and leave me who am lonely apprentice.

    Reply
  11. LOTRO Gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 2:18 am

    Finally, I gained have suf­ficed the LOTRO Gold, had the fam­ily. We were in together finally.

    Reply
  12. buy last chaos gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 2:19 am

    If we do not have the good for­tune this life, we will see with each other and that time I will buy last chaos gold enough for you in next life.

    Reply
  13. Metin2 yang says:
    August 19, 2008 at 2:39 am

    Of course the Metin2 yang can bring funs. I believed that you will love this Metin2 gold new game.

    Reply
  14. Cheap metin2 gold says:
    August 19, 2008 at 2:45 am

    If you want to Buy metin2 gold you can go to the com­pany. I hope that we will become good friends in the Cheap metin2 gold game.

    Reply
  15. R D HAMILTON says:
    April 21, 2009 at 8:57 pm

    The Navy is con­cerned at the cost of build­ing more than one Atomic Sub a year. Since the Japanese Sub build­ing is now out of busi­ness why not have them build the hull sim­i­lar to what the air lines are now doing.If the work designed with the future of the Sub to take on the com­ple­tion by the U S Engineers, this could be a grate saving.

    Reply
  16. Betty says:
    August 19, 2009 at 3:14 am

    I recently came across your blog and have been read­ing along. I thought I would leave my first com­ment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed read­ing. Nice blog. I will keep vis­it­ing this blog very often.
    Betty
    http://​elec​tric​gui​tarhow​to​play​.net

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I wonder if anyone noticed: This attack happened right after...
      freefallingbomb
    • Keep it Simple
      To the poster "Zandor" : You wrote: "Your last post...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      Part III : You wrote: "These airbags are made similarly, so the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      To the educated guesser: Part I : …………...
      freefallingbomb
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      Only two companies in the world are...
      Frank Hols
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Dear Designer; It is somewhat strange that the German Armed forces...
      Zandor
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      The first priority is to get a reliable...
      Brian
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I've seen them to. Believe me, I hate those 19 just as much as...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      You are funny.
      Zandor
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Wow after reading these varied comments, I am surprised and educated. I...
      John
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage