Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise

[gambit]

God you are slow. He was refering to why demonstrate actual capability. Until that time, China never shot down a satellite, only USA and Russia did. This was to demonstrate this capability. For example if Iran can do it, then our preconceptions of Iranian missile capability changes. Get it? Got it? Good.

No...It is YOU who are slow. The question is...

...why stupid China reveals its secret capability of destroying satellite?

And was in response to why would China do something stupid like revealing supposedly top secret submarine capability. Because you have never served in the military, which looks more likely as time goes by, you do not understand the notion of -- IF it is possible to hide a capability from an enemy, especially if that capability can undermine a strategic position, such as dominance over air or sea, THEN by all means do whatever you can to keep that capability as secret as possible. That is what the US did with the F-117 and before that the SR-71, for a couple of examples.

For this silly idea that a Song-class sub can sneak undetected around a US aircraft carrier battle group, and they all have sub escorts, there is no 'if' on hiding that capability. Like Nike said it -- Just Do It -- but keep quiet about it. That capability would undermine US naval strategic positions WORLDWIDE. So why do something so stupid like revealing it? For what gain? And the 'gain' question is vital because now the enemy will change his tactics and improve his technical capability to counter yours. You DO NOT want a potential adversary to improve his military capabilities. You want him to be static while you improve.

Thanks for the beer toast for your 'static' thinking. You reveal much.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

No...It is YOU who are slow. The question is...And was in response to why would China do something stupid like revealing supposedly top secret submarine capability. Because you have never served in the military, which looks more likely as time goes by, you do not understand the notion of -- IF it is possible to hide a capability from an enemy, especially if that capability can undermine a strategic position, such as dominance over air or sea, THEN by all means do whatever you can to keep that capability as secret as possible. That is what the US did with the F-117 and before that the SR-71, for a couple of examples.

For this silly idea that a Song-class sub can sneak undetected around a US aircraft carrier battle group, and they all have sub escorts, there is no 'if' on hiding that capability. Like Nike said it -- Just Do It -- but keep quiet about it. That capability would undermine US naval strategic positions WORLDWIDE. So why do something so stupid like revealing it? For what gain? And the 'gain' question is vital because now the enemy will change his tactics and improve his technical capability to counter yours. You DO NOT want a potential adversary to improve his military capabilities. You want him to be static while you improve.

Thanks for the beer toast for your 'static' thinking. You reveal much.

It was a calculated move. Nothing wrong about that. Just as when India exploded their first nuke, they wanted to enter the "exclusive club". I'm sure they knew there would be years of protest and sanctions, so why did they do it then and there? To send a message, because eventually you reveal your hand.

 

[gpit]

You have got to be joking with that question...



You cannot hide a missile launch because there are satellites designed to detect such launches. The response time to such detection is not the point but the detection capability itself is. Not just US but also many countries have satellite tracking capability, from governments to civilians. Do a word search for 'satellite tracking' and see for yourself. For an organization like NORAD, no satellite is hidden. Now all of a sudden, there is a missing (predicted) track from the previous rotation and its place a debris cloud. It does not require a PhD to deduce what happened and when.
...

You are telling us that the only way to prove having the capability of killing satellites is to actually shot one down.

Frankly, I now really hope USAF has smarter pilots. Desperately!

If you are aware of the concept of Proximity fuze, as you should if you are indeed a pilot, you should know that it doesn’t require a physical destruction of an object to prove that the object can indeed be shot down, and with extremely high confidence.

If you still feel intellectually challenged in understanding what I said above, I’m glad to present a scenario.

 

[gambit]

It was a calculated move. Nothing wrong about that.

Premise -- That a Song-class submarine shadowed undetected a US aircraft carrier battlegroup, presumably also undetected by the group's sub escorts. Then just for show-and-tell, the Chinese sub surfaced in plain view of all.

Argument -- From a strict military perspective, what could be gained by China with this? Just about %99 of a submarine is 'classified', especially its screws in construction and design. So why would China expose this seemingly improved capability to a potential adversary, especially one that dominated the oceans, even to China's backyard, for so many decades? Again -- WHAT IS THE TACTICAL AND/OR STRATEGIC GAIN FOR CHINA? It make no logical sense. The collapse of the Soviet Union, once China's sponsor, and the decline and currently plateauing of the Russian military, is a great opportunity for China to surpass Russia in terms of military prominence. China does not need to achieve parity of forces with the US, only eclipse the Russians and that still has some ways to go. But China cannot do that if the US, by hook or by crook, is aware of China's military progress.

We have no credible TECHNICAL information on how this Song-class sub eluded US sensors. For all we know, it may not even be technical but merely from the stationing of the group's ships that created a 'blind' area where US sonar is not as effective. Anyone who ever served in a military would know that the military is an inherently conservative organization, not necessarily resistant to change but rather cautious to change, and that this would be the standard layout of the entire US carrier force and it would take a lot of convincing for the US Navy to change. So if this tale is true, what would be more compelling for a change by having a potential adversary's submarine showing off his cards? The US Navy would immediately reassess how the fleet operate, everything from array to speed, to find this 'blind spot'. China, by foolishly surfacing this sub, now lost a great tactical advantage. For what? Just so a few Chinese kids could have bragging rights on anonymous Internet forums? Do you really think what you spew here matter to China's admiralty, who has the weight of an entire nation on their shoulders?

Counter-argument --

...why stupid China reveals its secret capability of destroying satellite?

The question implied two things:

1 - That China ELECT to reveal an anti-satellite capability.

2 - That in having option, China could also NOT reveal said anti-satellite capability.

Unfortunately, currently it is not possible to conceal a missile launch due a constellation of satellites, imagers or non-visible spectrum sensors, that covers the Earth. So if implication two is invalid, the entire counter-argument is invalid. This leads back to the original question -- What is the tactical and/or strategic gain for China in revealing the ability to elude US sonars? Saying that 'It was a calculated move' without saying what are the consequences of such a move means nothing. The readers of your argument learned nothing other than the fact that it is a vacuous statement intended to give a facade of knowledge. Nothing more. Calculated to give the US a status report of China's military progress? Gee whiz...Thanks a bunch. Our sub skippers will certainly toast the PLAN with their morning coffees.

Just as when India exploded their first nuke, they wanted to enter the "exclusive club". I'm sure they knew there would be years of protest and sanctions, so why did they do it then and there?

For an indigenous aviation program, the best way to prove that such a program is a success is to actually fly a model. Same for an indigenous nuclear weapons program. To date, the only way to verify that such a program is a success is to actually detonate a functional nuclear warhead. To date, it is not possible to conceal such an event. IF it is possible to simulate in a computer a nuclear warhead with better than %95 certainty that such a program is accurate, do you really think that any country would reveal it is finally a nuclear weapons state, especially when there is a hostile neighbor? For the military, it is desirable to keep enemies and potential enemies ignorant of one's own capabilities in everything.

So is it possible to conceal the fact that a sub could sneak around undetected? Of course it is. Just sneak up to the enemy, take your readings, go home and keep your mouth shut. Concealability is why subs were invented in the first place -- to conceal a weapon platform from view. So why on Earth would you want to reveal to enemies and potential enemies that you can go underwater when none of them can? If they are numerically superior to you in terms of surface ships, it would be more crucial that you keep such a program secret. This continues to lead back to the original question -- What is China's gain in revealing TO THE WORLD that Chinese subs can sneak around undetected, especially when a potential adversary already enjoys a considerable technological advantage in every area?

And YOU call me 'slow'?

To send a message, because eventually you reveal your hand.

The best time to 'reveal your hand' is when you are in a conflict, or when you enjoy a gross advantage in whatever area in question. If I successfully deploy one submarine while my potential enemies cannot, it would be foolish to reveal what I can do. I have only one boat and it cannot be everywhere at once. But if I am patient and build up a fleet that can cover my territorial waters, then as deterrent it is now logical to let my potential enemies know what they will face should there be a war between us.

And YOU call me 'slow'?

The more this story is examined with a critical eye the more absurd it become. In the remote possibility that China is truly incredibly that stupid to reveal such a capability, the US is more than willing to take this black eye to learn how to counter the new threat. And in this possibility, with this kind of military leadership, China already lost a war without a single shot fired by either side. Once again, the US thanks China a bunch.

 

[gambit]

You are telling us that the only way to prove having the capability of killing satellites is to actually shot one down.

Frankly, I now really hope USAF has smarter pilots. Desperately!

If you are aware of the concept of Proximity fuze, as you should if you are indeed a pilot, you should know that it doesn’t require a physical destruction of an object to prove that the object can indeed be shot down, and with extremely high confidence.

If you still feel intellectually challenged in understanding what I said above, I’m glad to present a scenario.

This is unbelievable...!!! Incredible...!!! Astounding that some can be so limited in their thinking.

Anti-aircraft gunnery does not rely solely on direct hits by inert rounds but ALSO by rounds that have altitude fused explosives, which is a type of proximity fuse. So when an aircraft is disabled by a proximity fused round and felled from the sky, what else could it be but 'shot down'? Delivering that proximity fused explosive package is called a shot, is it not?

To prove that an anti-satellite program is actually a functional one, a satellite must be shot down, does not matter which method, kinetic or proximity fused. But if the thing is successfully destroyed or even disabled, it is 'shot down'.

I must admit I am at a loss for words for someone who believe the words 'shot down' equal a direct impact.

 

[sob]

Gambit,

Sir there can be two scenarios for this incident

1. The Chinese sub was actively pinged by the US Naval Warship and was forced to surface.
OR
2. This was a message from the Chinese Navy, that this is our backyard and we have the capability to sneak in close, so keep your distance from our areas of influence.

The 1st scenario would be more logical as the Chinese would not gain from tipping off their tactical advantage, just to harass the US Ships.

 

[gambit]

Gambit,

Sir there can be two scenarios for this incident

1. The Chinese sub was actively pinged by the US Naval Warship and was forced to surface.
OR
2. This was a message from the Chinese Navy, that this is our backyard and we have the capability to sneak in close, so keep your distance from our areas of influence.

The 1st scenario would be more logical as the Chinese would not gain from tipping off their tactical advantage, just to harass the US Ships.

There are two possible explanations for this tale:

1 - It is not true.
2 - Situation one as above.

I favor the first explanation.

As for the possibility that we detected the Chinese sub and shadowed it before we pinged it to the surface, it is slightly less plausible than the first explanation.

People should learn to take what they read with a more critical eye. They should learn to be suspicious at any article that have a lot of 'senior Pentagon big cheeses' or 'top NATO grand poobah' or anything with no attributable names.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

I wonder why some of the genrels in penatagon gave orders to sink their own battle ships during the cuban missile crises just to impress JFK to give orders to attack Cuba.

I think the more logical reasoning is that Pentagone wants to have a distinction in terms of milletery tech. They are aware of how the Chinese are slowly catching up to the Mark. Its the Fear which is forcing the Pentagone in plunging in an arms race despite tough Economic Conditions .Moreever most probably these funds would go to those companies in US which are dying to have a bailout.
If the Chinese are smart they wont indulge in such an Arms Race an act for which the Soviet Union paid alot.

Looks like a sleeping hare has awaked and has seen the slow turtle just yards away from it trying to win the game.

The Dawn of Cold War II and the hight of Virtual third world war

 

[ajpirzada]

Exactly man... its hilarious to imagine such a scene.... just like a cartoon. Just imagine some US battle ships getting prepared for exercise being scattered here and there, and then all of a sudden a submarine pops up in the middle splashing water on the faces of the US Naval officials leaving them red faced.

hahahaha... u came up with a whole scene of 'splashing water on the faces'.
let me add characters. wat do u think about Homer Simpson being an incharge of US battle fleet? and do u want Dexter or Stewie(from family guy) as an incharge of chinease sub?
now its even more funny when i imagine these characters speakin to each other

 

[gpit]

This is unbelievable...!!! Incredible...!!! Astounding that some can be so limited in their thinking.

Anti-aircraft gunnery does not rely solely on direct hits by inert rounds but ALSO by rounds that have altitude fused explosives, which is a type of proximity fuse. So when an aircraft is disabled by a proximity fused round and felled from the sky, what else could it be but 'shot down'? Delivering that proximity fused explosive package is called a shot, is it not?

To prove that an anti-satellite program is actually a functional one, a satellite must be shot down, does not matter which method, kinetic or proximity fused. But if the thing is successfully destroyed or even disabled, it is 'shot down'.

I must admit I am at a loss for words for someone who believe the words 'shot down' equal a direct impact.

I know it’s a metal challenge to you. No surprise!

Here is the simple experiment: the warhead of the anti-satellite missile contains a proximity fuze that, instead of igniting explosive when it closing a target within a sufficient distance, trigs a signal back to the testing base on the ground.

This is what I said: you don’t actually shot down an object to prove to yourself (not anyone else) that you have the capability.

BTW, your altitude stuff of 1940’s doesn’t work in this scenario. Instead, optical, or other means, has to be employed that will not perturb the moving of the object for anyone to detect.

Do you have a further need for me to elaborate how an optical sensor should be designed in this case?

 

[Captain03]

awesome article

 

[gambit]

I know it’s a metal challenge to you. No surprise!

Here is the simple experiment: the warhead of the anti-satellite missile contains a proximity fuze that, instead of igniting explosive when it closing a target within a sufficient distance, trigs a signal back to the testing base on the ground.

This is what I said: you don’t actually shot down an object to prove to yourself (not anyone else) that you have the capability.

BTW, your altitude stuff of 1940’s doesn’t work in this scenario. Instead, optical, or other means, has to be employed that will not perturb the moving of the object for anyone to detect.

Do you have a further need for me to elaborate how an optical sensor should be designed in this case?

You are so wrong on what is a 'proximity fuze' or 'fusing' that it invalidate your entire argument. It is amazing your lack of basic research...

Proximity fuze - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A proximity fuze (also called a VT fuze) is a fuze that is designed to detonate an explosive device automatically when the distance to target becomes smaller than a predetermined value or when the target passes through a given plane.

Read it slowly and learn something.

An air-air missile has proximity fuzing and a 'shoot down' is what happened if there is a successful kill.

 

[gpit]

You are so wrong on what is a 'proximity fuze' or 'fusing' that it invalidate your entire argument. It is amazing your lack of basic research...

Proximity fuze - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Read it slowly and learn something.

An air-air missile has proximity fuzing and a 'shoot down' is what happened if there is a successful kill.

Buddy, it's no longer in 40s. Use your brain which is more important nowadays than muscle in many occasions:

1) you don't have to shot down something to prove to yourself that you have the capability.

2) Fuze or fuze like mechanism doesn't have to be used to ignite explosive.

3) I can't force anybody else to learn but myself.

Why the Chinese do this? Hopefully you can read something by Robert Aumann and Thomas Schelling about win-win compromise under conflict, strategy of conflict…

 

[gambit]

Buddy, it's no longer in 40s. Use your brain which is more important nowadays than muscle in many occasions:

Speak for yourself.

1) you don't have to shot down something to prove to yourself that you have the capability.

That is like saying you can read about driving but does not have to actually drive a car to declare yourself a 'driver'. That is like saying you can build all the parts to a pistol but do not have assemble it to declare the pistol a functional device.

2) Fuze or fuze like mechanism doesn't have to be used to ignite explosive.

Really? In weaponry, what is a 'fuse'?

1. A cord of readily combustible material that is lighted at one end to carry a flame along its length to detonate an explosive at the other end.

2. often fuze A mechanical or electrical mechanism used to detonate an explosive charge or device such as a bomb or grenade:

We are NOT talking about the definition of 'fuse' in non-weapon context.

A 'proximity fuse' is a triggering mechanism that include a sensor that will detonate an explosive charge if the weapon, bomb or missile, comes NEAR the target. It does not have to impact the target. If it does, that is a bonus, but a missile or bomb that is equipped with proximity fuse is designed to explode when the weapon is NEAR the target.

What was it you say about the 40s? You are wrong about the definition of a proximity fuse when you said this...

...a proximity fuze that, instead of igniting explosive when it closing a target within a sufficient distance, trigs a signal back to the testing base on the ground.

So when you said 'instead of igniting explosive' you are putting this device into a category NOT recognized by anyone who is familiar with weapons more sophisticated than sidearms.

BAe Active Skyflash and AIM-120 AMRAAM

The active seeker is complemented by a pulse Doppler active proximity fuse, powered by an independent thermal battery. The fuse employs a pair of receive and a pair of transmit antennas, using a slotted waveguide design, this would create a radiation pattern resembling a flattened dumbbell, the plane of which is normal to the missile's longitudinal axis. The antennas are flush with the missile skin, aligned lengthwise. The fuse electronics are largely built with thick film hybrids on ceramic. The proximity fuse is complemented by a contact fuse, the latter using a piezoelectric accelerometer to sense missile impact. BAe claim the the proximity fuse has good resistance to countermeasures and can operate successfully in low altitude clutter.

A proximity fuse today, in function, is no different than a proximity fuse of the 1940s in anti-aircraft gunnery.

Today's designs, as shown, is much more sophisticated involving radar in the sky.

Or sonar for torpedoes...

SSK Tupi Class Attack Submarine - Naval Technology

As the torpedo reaches to the target, a magnetic proximity fuse and an impact fuse detonates the warhead. The speed of the torpedo is 25kt in passive mode and 35kt to 50kt in active seeker mode. The range of Tigerfish is within 14km to 40km.

Or optics for missiles...

Optical proximity fuse - US Patent 5601024 Claims

1. Optical proximity fuse of a missile with laser transmitters and optical receivers, whose beam paths bundled by optical means are oriented in such a way at a small angle to the direction of flight that they intersect in predetermined measuring segments, wherein radiation reflected from objects in these measuring segments is evaluated for derivation of a firing pulse,...blah...blah...blah...

But in function, the proximity fuse has not changed, which is to detonate an explosive charge.

You are proven wrong about this subject. Man-up and admit it.

3) I can't force anybody else to learn but myself.

Good...You may begin anytime.

Why the Chinese do this? Hopefully you can read something by Robert Aumann and Thomas Schelling about win-win compromise under conflict, strategy of conflict…

Why did the Chinese sub surfaced? Because US sub pinged him up to the surface.

 

[Communist]

hahahaha... u came up with a whole scene of 'splashing water on the faces'.
let me add characters. wat do u think about Homer Simpson being an incharge of US battle fleet? and do u want Dexter or Stewie(from family guy) as an incharge of chinease sub?
now its even more funny when i imagine these characters speakin to each other