Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: China's failure

  1. #16
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    He does not have any military service afaik. I've looked for his Phd dissertation but it isn't available to browse. I have no idea how one gets a copy of it.
    Still does not change the fact that his sources are nothing more than internet and magazines. The Brigadier Ray, RIP, was extremely surprised when I forwarded him a PDF copy of FM 3.0 OPERATIONS. Such a document would be considered SECRET by the Indian Army.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    In the talk he was introduced by a Japanese admiral who Satoru considers a guru. So that's the military connection here. I found the admiral's talk interesting. Challenging the perception of China as this big monster.
    More than likely but still doesn't change the fact that Satoru has zero clue about combat operations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    If US navy wants to big up China for the sake of budget, such a view also works for Abe to enable the SDF to operate further from shore with augmented budget. As there is this 'threat'
    Same old game but it's really laughable to us Cold Warriors to take the Chinese threat seriously,

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    To what end ? domestic consumption ?

    If you can see all this, what is the PLA thinking. I don't even know if this is the PLA or Beijing that came up with this whole charade as the military value appears to be zero. So its a show of sorts. Political in purpose.
    I seriously think the Chinese thought this would work only to be discover later that it doesn't when they conduct actual exercises. This is not the first time the Chinese (and us) committed vast sums on a "cheap" system only to abandon it later. An aircraft carrier requires an extremely hard R&D investment and judging by the VARYAG, it ain't all there BUT islands are easy and long runways eliminate the need for catapult technology.

    However, you get the worst of both worlds. The limited storage of a ship and the known location of an unmovable site.

    I could list a whole sleuth of things the Chinese had tried and then abandon because it doesn't work. They even tried put field artillery and tanks on a freighter to create a shore bombardment vessel, only to discover that sea waves wreck misery onto land based targeting systems. They tried to load an entire division onto ferries to discover that 80% of the troops were vomiting over the sides due to sea sickness.

    How about the anti-ship ballastic missile? Not one single live test? Why? It doesn't work. It's a fantastic missile against fixed land targets though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    That is George's claim. The intent to dominate the SCS has failed eight years after China set out to make the China seas their seas.

    See, this is not the perception though. Hence why i posted it. He is challenging this conventional wisdom and being blunt about it.

    The perception is China has already got two, maybe working on the third when the opportunity arises as they could care less about some court in the Europe. Once they complete the triangle is when they let their subs loose. Deterrence has failed currently maybe because it isn't set up to deter yet. They know nobody is going to war over a bunch of rocks so China gets to keep what they have. For whatever its worth.

    Kinda begs the question why is China waiting for the triangle to complete to let those subs loose. Why not do it now. How confident will others be when there are subs prowling around. Enter the area and you will either be chased out or shot.

    If they cannot do it it now then they will never be able to do it ?
    There are ZERO sub pens on any of those islands and are you talking about the subs that we can hear all the way from Hawaii? The Chinese are even further behind than Soviet boomers of the 80s.

    The original intent was to keep ASEAN at bay, thinking the Western allies would not get involved. ASEAN could not and would not challenge Chinese claims. It is the Western allies who punched holes in the Chinese claims. Again, when Canadian and Australian destroyers sail through those waters without worry, it showed just how militarily weak those islands actually are.

    The claims also goes both ways. Yeah, we're not going to war over a bunch of rocks but would the Chinese dare to fire on Canadian or Australian destroyers when they sail too close?

  2. #17
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,487
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Still does not change the fact that his sources are nothing more than internet and magazines. The Brigadier Ray, RIP, was extremely surprised when I forwarded him a PDF copy of FM 3.0 OPERATIONS. Such a document would be considered SECRET by the Indian Army.

    More than likely but still doesn't change the fact that Satoru has zero clue about combat operations.

    Same old game but it's really laughable to us Cold Warriors to take the Chinese threat seriously,
    I guess then he is trying to keep the Chinese threat up for budget & political reasons in Japan. Everything is assumed to work about this grandiose chinese great wall in the sea and you're pointing out even the basics won't be feasible : )

    The voices who call out this China hype are few and far between and speak softly.

    Repeating what you said invites scorn. The Chinese are building their strength. Is it wise to let them do so without a commensurate effort ?

    One cannot assume their intent will remain benign they say. Today their interests may be purely commercial, tomorrow when they are stronger their intent will change.

    Building a navy takes time. Leaning to make that navy effective still more time. They need to put some fire extinguishers on their boats if they want to do that : )

    The Chinese will learn through trial & error what does and does not work.

    Laugh now but who will have the last laugh

    Build up the China threat is good for military budget. Arms lobbies like that.

    The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. -- The Usual Suspects

    I seriously think the Chinese thought this would work only to be discover later that it doesn't when they conduct actual exercises. This is not the first time the Chinese (and us) committed vast sums on a "cheap" system only to abandon it later. An aircraft carrier requires an extremely hard R&D investment and judging by the VARYAG, it ain't all there BUT islands are easy and long runways eliminate the need for catapult technology.

    However, you get the worst of both worlds. The limited storage of a ship and the known location of an unmovable site.

    I could list a whole sleuth of things the Chinese had tried and then abandon because it doesn't work. They even tried put field artillery and tanks on a freighter to create a shore bombardment vessel, only to discover that sea waves wreck misery onto land based targeting systems. They tried to load an entire division onto ferries to discover that 80% of the troops were vomiting over the sides due to sea sickness.

    How about the anti-ship ballastic missile? Not one single live test? Why? It doesn't work. It's a fantastic missile against fixed land targets though.
    ok, so its a learning exercise. The only way to learn is to fail and keep coming up with more ideas.

    Again, if i were to characterise China's actions in the SCS over the last eight years as a learning exercise i expect to get laughed it. You will get away with it : )

    Oh what a saga Varyag is for China. Bought in jun 2000, arrives in China Feb 2002. Almost two years to get delivery because the bloody thing got caught in a gale half way and broke. What sort of death trap is this pos (!)

    Much patience required. I remember an analyst on GPF, podcast linked at beginning of thread saying he will begin to assess Chinese sea power once they complete graduating a couple squadrons of fighter pilots. They bought this thing back in 2000. It will be 2020 soon. Liaoning is still a training boat !!!

    Liaoning did a circuit around Taiwan and there was so much noise about it from Taiwan. No harm done. You know what i bet the captain did it to keep his sailors morale up : )

    Quote Originally Posted by wiki
    Liaoning would need extensive land-based support to oppose a USN carrier strike group; however, it would be potent against the Vietnam People's Navy and the Philippine Navy. Deficiencies will likely be corrected with future aircraft carriers, which are expected to be larger with conventional takeoff decks and catapult launching for heavier fighters, plus fixed-wing radar and anti-submarine patrol aircraft.
    They need a bigger boat. Will that take yet another twenty years to get up and going ?

    I don't get it. Why is China taking so damn long. It feels like the Imperial Japanese were more potent a navy at the dawn of WW2 than China is today.

    There are ZERO sub pens on any of those islands and are you talking about the subs that we can hear all the way from Hawaii? The Chinese are even further behind than Soviet boomers of the 80s.

    The original intent was to keep ASEAN at bay, thinking the Western allies would not get involved. ASEAN could not and would not challenge Chinese claims. It is the Western allies who punched holes in the Chinese claims. Again, when Canadian and Australian destroyers sail through those waters without worry, it showed just how militarily weak those islands actually are.

    The claims also goes both ways. Yeah, we're not going to war over a bunch of rocks but would the Chinese dare to fire on Canadian or Australian destroyers when they sail too close?
    If the idea is to create an exclusion zone then subs are for area denial. Have a fleet of subs patrolling up and down the Chinese eastern sea board in circuit. As for being quiet is there no way for the Chinese to improve. So what if they get spotted. It means people have to be on their guard and subs can be aggressive too. Instead what we see are the Chinese navy militia sending out fishing boats to harass people. That works up to a point, makes headlines. If the idea is to make headlines then subs are not a good idea.

    I heard other countries in ASEAN are buying subs. So they expect to keep ships at bay.

    Such a loud noise was made because that Chinese SSN docked in Sri Lanka. Maybe the Indians missed it and only found out at the last minute. Or they are signalling disapproval at allowing Chinese navy docking anywhere in the vicinity.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 18 Mar 19, at 00:21.

  3. #18
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    This is jumping all all over the place. I'm going to try to concise this down to answer some of your questions. As I pointed out earlier, the Chinese have been trying to use asymetric techniques to balance the overwhelming advantages in technology and technic enjoyed by the Western allies. In the case of these islands, they're meant to suplement/replace aircraft carriers which again takes a hell of a R&D investment is both time and resources. The Chinese are impatient and are now flexing their small muscles. However, we've already got the answer to these islands. We had it since WWII when both Nimitz and MacArthur bypassed the smaller Japanese garrisons and choked them by killing their LOCs. These islands are more meant for ASEAN than Western Navies but the Western Navies have already answered that challenge for over 70 years.

    Now, can these islands and Chinese subs get better? You would be an idiot not to expect them to but that does not mean we're standing still and let them catch up. But you can see where they're going to spend their monies and you can react accordingly, rather than trying to outguess them. Are they working on their subs? Well, we are waiting outside their ports listening in on them and collecting accoustic signatures. We can look down on the docks and see construction. The same for the islands. We can identify new builds and then ask, do we have that cover or do we need to develop something new to counter them?

    In the mean time, we're asking ourselves, how do we want to fight future wars? What do we need to dominate the future battlefield? And we're developing systems to answer those questions. Do we want PREDATOR drones or F22s or a mixture? What's the balance? Questions the Chinese have not yet begun to ask and them seeing us asking those questions and trying different answers (wrong or otherwise) are giving them headaches and heartaches when they're still trying to figure out aircraft carriers.

  4. #19
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,487
    I read reports how the Chinese are sending subs into the Indian ocean. I am lead to believe they want to "carve out controlled spaces in the Indian Ocean". They will do this by deterring Indian presence there.

    I then look to see how well they have been able to carve out space in their own backyard and wonder why their subs can't do anything to prevent FONOPS. What controlled space do the Chinese have in their backyard ? none. Where is the zone of exclusion ? not there

    If they can't do this in their own backyard then what chance do they have of pulling it off in the Indian Ocean ?

    They are putting quieter engines in their subs. Report from 2013

    Forget the aircraft carriers, the Chinese will get there in a couple of decades.

    What about the subs for denial ? why aren't they using them in the SCS to deny access
    Last edited by Double Edge; 18 Mar 19, at 04:14.

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I read reports how the Chinese are sending subs into the Indian ocean. I am lead to believe they want to "carve out controlled spaces in the Indian Ocean". They will do this by deterring Indian presence there.
    And India is free to do her stuff in the China Seas. The sad truth is that outside of NATO, no one has any clue to ASW. Crews need to be trained and co-ordinated and in a lot of ways, ASW requires time and resources more intensive than the sub itself. It's 3 (EP3, helo, destroyer) against 1 (sub) and preferably, 4 (EP3, helo, destroyer, friendly sub) against 1. And a lot of times, we have subs waiting outside Russian and Chinese ports waiting for Russian/Chinese subs to follow without the Russians and the Chinese knowing it.

    That kind of expertise and capability is expensive. Most often, non-NATO countries go for the subs alone.

    Sub designs are more than just engines. It is also hull shape and sound absorbing materials. Any sub going through water would cause turbulance in the water. Big enough turbulance and it creates sound. And because of NATO's investments in ASW, our listening devices are also decades ahead of what the Chinese can only dream of. What they think of is quiet is a Queen's Concert to us.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 18 Mar 19, at 05:19.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,370
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    What they think of is quiet is a Queen's Concert to us.
    Hahahahahahaha, sorry, but that was funny. Please carry on.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  7. #22
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,487
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    And India is free to do her stuff in the China Seas. The sad truth is that outside of NATO, no one has any clue to ASW. Crews need to be trained and co-ordinated and in a lot of ways, ASW requires time and resources more intensive than the sub itself. It's 3 (EP3, helo, destroyer) against 1 (sub) and preferably, 4 (EP3, helo, destroyer, friendly sub) against 1. And a lot of times, we have subs waiting outside Russian and Chinese ports waiting for Russian/Chinese subs to follow without the Russians and the Chinese knowing it.

    That kind of expertise and capability is expensive. Most often, non-NATO countries go for the subs alone.

    Sub designs are more than just engines. It is also hull shape and sound absorbing materials. Any sub going through water would cause turbulance in the water. Big enough turbulance and it creates sound. And because of NATO's investments in ASW, our listening devices are also decades ahead of what the Chinese can only dream of. What they think of is quiet is a Queen's Concert to us.
    Am still not understanding why China isn't using subs in the SCS to deter FONOPS. If it needs all you say to detect them then just avoiding areas with Chinese subs is easier isn't it. Ergo China gets their exclusion zone.

    China seas become China's sea : )

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Am still not understanding why China isn't using subs in the SCS to deter FONOPS. If it needs all you say to detect them then just avoiding areas with Chinese subs is easier isn't it. Ergo China gets their exclusion zone.

    China seas become China's sea : )
    Chinese sub captains don't like it when we use them for training drills. Unless the sub surfaces, we can legitimately say we have an unknown contact and was in the process of identifying (and targetting but they don't need to know that) the unknown contact.

    And they don't want to surface because that means that they're not good enough for the job and would get replaced soon. So, it's a lot easier to avoid giving Western navies the excuse to train against them.

  9. #24
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,487
    ok, so what i asserted earlier isn't completely true.

    Just because the Chinese cannot create an exclusion zone in their seas does not necessarily mean they cannot create protected spaces in the Indian Ocean.

    The deciding factor is capabilities. Chinese subs can't threaten western navies. But could do that to navies of other countries including India. I still don't think they can dominate the Indian Navy and never will.

    We're getting ASW capabilities slowly. Towed sonars etc. The trouble is the hydrography of Indian Ocean favours subs more than hunters.

    Chinese have been busy mapping out the Ocean with survey ships. They definitely plan to hang out here for extended periods.

    We'll know when they enter after that the challenge will be tracking them.

    So we're going to build our capabilities till the day we will also be able to use Chinese subs for training drills : )
    Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Mar 19, at 00:51.

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Just because the Chinese cannot create an exclusion zone in their seas does not necessarily mean they cannot create protected spaces in the Indian Ocean.
    I really do not see how. What are they going to do? Make islands? The InN will do FNOP up the ying yang. Send subs in? Nothing is stopping the InN from doing drills right now and point in fact, it is a challenge to Indian dominance. The InN should be doing everything she could to challenge Chinese subs in the Indian Ocean. Again, short of sinking it, one single ping would let the sub Captain know he's been found and has just lost his job.

  11. #26
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,487
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    I really do not see how.
    In peace time i don't know how you create an exclusion zone as there is no threat.

    But in a conflict, not knowing where a sub is means it can take out ships ?

    Harder for China to do against western navies but for others that do not have all the detection in place..

    So this way you have area denial with some navies. Challenge dominance.

    What are they going to do? Make islands?
    Not islands. They can't be adequately defended.

    Again, short of sinking it, one single ping would let the sub Captain know he's been found and has just lost his job.
    Provided you can find it

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    But in a conflict, not knowing where a sub is means it can take out ships ?
    If your Captains are not up to par, at most you would lose one ship and then the rest of the task force should be wolves on a wounded cow. Once a sub let lose a torpedo, you should know where it is. If your Captains are up to par, then zero. Have the target ships travel at a high enough speed that the Chinese captain would have no choice but to increase speed for interception and thus create big enough of a wake for detection.

    If the Chinese sub is lying in wait, then you should have ping the hell out of the bottom to scare the Chinese captain up. It takes nerves of steel to trust Chinese sub designers to create a sub that would not sound different from the sea bottom and that the Indians are not versed enough to notice the difference, especially when the pings get louder and louder. And again, only one shot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Provided you can find it
    That is why I pointed out the investment for ASW is at times far more intensive than for the subs themselves. Currently, it would be a war of attrition. Regardless, Indian Captains should be looking for subs no matter what, even if they don't find one. That's the job.

  13. #28
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,158
    ''No AI has ever took or held ground.''

    OOE,Sir,I kept thinking at this.The issue here is that no commander or even a General Staff ever took ground.Their troops did.
    We know the Russians at least try to penetrate our OODA loop by making faster decisions at Bde and Btn level.That's the reason for their drills and staff SOP's.AI may not take ground,but if it fights a simulated battle 10000 times in 5 minutes,it will offer a good enough solution way before we get past Step 1 in MDMP.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  14. #29
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    ''No AI has ever took or held ground.''

    OOE,Sir,I kept thinking at this.The issue here is that no commander or even a General Staff ever took ground.Their troops did.
    We know the Russians at least try to penetrate our OODA loop by making faster decisions at Bde and Btn level.That's the reason for their drills and staff SOP's.AI may not take ground,but if it fights a simulated battle 10000 times in 5 minutes,it will offer a good enough solution way before we get past Step 1 in MDMP.
    Which is reliant on intel, ie the reccee battle.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Europe’s Philosophy of Failure
    By Shek in forum International Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 31 Jan 08,, 16:56
  2. A failure in generalship
    By Shek in forum The Staff College
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 01 Jun 07,, 01:04
  3. Our failure in Afghanistan
    By Ray in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06 Mar 07,, 11:32
  4. Failure is not an Option
    By Shek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31 Oct 05,, 15:30
  5. Failure Isn't An Option
    By Shek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 07 Jul 05,, 06:04

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •