"Beijing's aircraft carrier heads for South China Sea" Topic

Beijing's aircraft carrier heads for South China Sea
by Staff Writers
Beijing (AFP) Nov 26, 2013

"China's first aircraft carrier left Tuesday on a training mission to the South China Sea, escorted by missile destroyers and frigates, state media said.

The newly-commissioned Liaoning left its home port of Qingdao accompanied by two missile destroyers, the Shenyang and Shijiazhuang, and two missile frigates, the Yantai and Weifang, the official Xinhua news agency said.

The deployment comes amid heightened tensions between China and its neighbours over disputed waters, with Beijing declaring air defence rights over islands controlled by Japan at the weekend, provoking a furious international reaction.

Beijing took effective control of Scarborough shoal, claimed by Manila and just 200 kilometres (120 miles) from the Philippines, last year.

It keeps up nearly daily pressure in the South China Sea, which it claims almost in its entirety and where Vietnam and others have competing claims to some of the islets.

China's vessels also frequently patrol near the disputed East China Sea islands known as Senkaku in Tokyo, which controls them, and in China as Diaoyu."
link

Thanks for sharing.

Saw that last night, as a part of the Senkaku Islands story.

Apparently, it is its first real deployment, though its not clear if the carrier is operational yet.

Last I recall, they were still doing touch-and-go landings with their one Sukhoi jet (pilot), though a few others are apparently waiting in the wings.

Not sure how many pilots, if more than one, are rated for carrier landings yet, and I suspect there'll be a lot to learn about operations at night, and in heavy seas.

I guess, regardless, they want to assert their claims in the region.

Seems like a good time for their opponents to do a little submarine testing as well, to test their ASW skills.

Most welcome. Doesn't seem as daunting right now as B-52s huh? Robert

Well, for those who felt nostalgic about the Cold War, this should be comforting.

Gotta love those Buffs, and their crews, which fly, where others fear to tread, usually over enemy territory.

Unless of course, you are the enemy.

Yeah…every USN ship commander in the Pacific right now is getting their "How we are gonna sink that tub" briefing right now…

Are they going to paint it white and call it a Coast Guard ship?

A single carrier is symbolic. They don't even have a working air wing to embark on said CV. They don't have a solution for long-endurance, fixed-wing AEW. They don't have a solution for Air-to-Air Refueling, either for the Air Force or Navy. The recent fleet exercise titled "Maneuver 5" aside, they haven't figured out yet how to operate as a CVBG, integrating those nice new shiny Air Defense DDGs and ASW frigates into the big gray spot you're using to seeing only under US colors. But they will. It will take time, and effort, and some bloodshed in terms of exercise and operational accidents. It's par for the course for any upcoming maritime power.

On the other hand, sailing a flattop past everyone else who doesn't have such a big carrier (India and Thailand notwithstanding) is more about trailing your coattails. It's to intimidate and remind people who the big kid is on the block when the USN policeman is on the far side of his beat. But that's about it.

If you want to be worried, be worried about their ability to "salami" the first chain of the so-called Nine-Dash line by using their combination of hard and soft power, the latter in terms of their enormous China Marine Surveillance (nee China CG), whose numbers alone dwarf most navies of the surrounding nations. Little by little, they will eat away at the SCS. Some of it may result in a bit of a playground shove. Some of it may even be a legitimate tiff like the match between them and Vietnam after the fall of Saigon. But they'll find a way to get there. After all, their short-term planning window exceeds most Western long-term planning. Having waited almost 50 years to get to this state from a naval perspective, what's another 50? Another 100?

I never knew the Chinese could move Russian scrap iron, impressive.

It's like when my two year old thinks his teddy bear is Ironman, you don't have the heart to tell him otherwise.

Just remember the submariner's motto:

"There are two types of ships at sea, submarines and targets."

and the Japanese send one of their new "large" destroyers to match. I think I'll take the Japanese in this one.

Considering that for nearly 300 years they got bullied by the west, I doubt that now that they are building a big navy of their own that they care about our POV. They will, unless they fall apart internally, be a major player, if not the major player in the next few decades. Embarrass them or cause lose of face to them and there will be repercussions at some point.

I'd suggest a certain amount of respect, work things out and move on. No bending over, but dissing them now will result at some point in a hell of a pay back.

Ex-colonial powers should be care about throwing stones about China's claims. May not like their claims, may have to push back, but let's not pretend that they're not doing what most of the west got away with for centuries when the big stick was in their hands.

Dan

^^^ While 99.9999% of Americans don't have any idea about the Opium Wars or any other Western intervention in China, I am pretty sure the Chinese have not forgotten.

and the Japanese send one of their new "large" destroyers to match. I think I'll take the Japanese in this one

Except the Japanese one does not have fixed wing capability. It's purely ASW with helicopters.

Maybe one day in the future the Japanese will equip it with F-35Bs but this will be a long time in the making.

The Chinese carrier is not scary. It's the umpteen conventional cruise and ballistic missiles that's the issue. And there are some in USN that are worried by Chinese anti-carrier capability.

They also have a large-ish force of Su-27/J-11 Flankers (several hundred) which are long range and extremely capable and which are backed up by a reasonable AWACS force based on Russian and Israeli technology.

According to at least one US analyst, China also has some advantages in Anti-submarine Warfare over USN, an area that the USN has not invested heavily in the last couple of decades.

The Chinese are extremely deficient in maritime patrol aircraft.

So in a naval conflict, it's not so clear cut.

The PLAN does have some long range air support in the form of the PLAN/PLAAF Flanker fleet. And these Flankers come in both air superiority and air to ground flavours. Indeed the PLAN operates Su-30MKKs which are a multirole version.

And coupled with the cruise/ballistic missile threat, it could force the USN carrier fleet out of range

Indeed former Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates, stated that carriers will be outmoded in future conventional conflict due to considerable missile threats.

But in any case never underestimate your enemies.

^^^ While 99.9999% of Americans don't have any idea about the Opium Wars or any other Western intervention in China, I am pretty sure the Chinese have not forgotten.

Sure. And the Russians haven't forgotten about the Mongols holding them down for a few centuries. And the Americans haven't forgotten about the British/Canadians burning the White House.

Ok, most Americans have forgotten. Many of the remainder are merely jealous they haven't done the same. :)

The Brits/Canadians burned down the White House?!

Holy moly, we're not going to let them get away with that, are we?

But seriously, of course this Chinese aircraft carrier is by itself, not very significant. But what it shows for what their goals are 20 or 50 years from now, is very significant.

As long as the Chinese don't have carrier-qualified pilots, the carrier is a very large target with no weapons.

I'd put money on a Burke (or the enlarged Burkes that the Japanese have) being the equal of that ship.

But at some point, the rest of the world is going to have to teach China to play by the same rules as everyone else.

Heard on the news tonight that their "carrier" sortied without any aircraft on board.

I'm surprised they didn't at least create and put some inflatable plastic ones on board, tied down sufficiently to keep them from blowing off the deck.

Someone in the PLA-N is slipping.

Then again, maybe this IS the maiden voyage of their "waterborne casino" afterall, and the carrier landing trials were just an elaborate ruse to keep people like Donald Trump, or others from coming out with one first.

Crafty Chinese planners!

The Brits/Canadians burned down the White House?!

Holy moly, we're not going to let them get away with that, are we?

Vengeance is a dish best served ccold.

I love your racism Mako11. Nice to know those idiot Chinese types can't do anything and it's all just propaganda for morons.

Then why is the USA freaking out over Chinese inflatable balloons and floating casinos by redeploying forces to Asia Pacific?

I'm not saying the Chinese are even close to US levels.

But they are not a force to be underestimated.

And unlike the US, they're not grounding a large chunk of their forces and cancelling deployments due to budget issues.

And unlike the US, their aircraft aren't older than the people who fly them due to an overcomplicated procurement system that fails to deliver equipment on time at a reasonable cost.

They're not to be overestimated either. They count for certain, and they are heading towards a frighteningly advanced force readiness for the region, but were still the best part of this century away before they really are able to challenge the US seriously, and even then they will need to bring the Koreans, Japanese and the Vietnamese on side before they could do that.

Philippines says China carrier's mission 'raises tension'
by Staff Writers
Manila (AFP) Nov 27, 2013

" The Philippines Wednesday criticised China's dispatch of its first aircraft carrier to the South China Sea, saying it "raises tension" in waters where the two Asian neighbours are locked in a territorial dispute.

"Its deployment does not contribute to collective efforts to strengthen regional stability and instead serves to strengthen the status quo," foreign department spokesman Raul Hernandez said in a statement.

"Its deployment raises tension," he said, adding it was contrary to efforts by governments in the region to craft a "Code of Conduct" in the South China Sea."
link

There is nothing in my post that is racist, Thomas, despite your assertion to the contrary.

I do dislike people that unilaterally declare control of zones to which they have no real basis in ownership for.

I also dislike it when their leaders have their pilot crash his fighter jet into one of our recon birds flying over international waters.

I agree, they should not be dismissed, eventually, since they have a large population, and an oppressive government which seems bent on subjugating a lot of people in their country, and in bullying others in the region, with their nonsensical assertions.

I do dislike people that unilaterally declare control of zones to which they have no real basis in ownership for.

The Americans and Russians all play similar games. Funny how the Americans interpreted No Fly Zone over Libya as toppling regime and providing CAS for Islamist rebels.

Oh and then the Americans wanted to bomb Syria because they used chemical weapons (but funnily enough ignored conventional weapons including Fuel Air Explosive which if undetonated are worse than most nerve gases).

in bullying others in the region, with their nonsensical assertions.

Kinda like American policy since Vietnam?

I totally agree with you on the Libya thing.

You'll get no argument from me over that. Sadly, I have no control over those in charge.

Apparently, we're now negotiating with Hezbollah too.

I'd say you are way off base on your post-Vietnam assertions, but will leave it at that.

'While 99.9999% of Americans don't have any idea about the Opium Wars or any other Western intervention in China, I am pretty sure the Chinese have not forgotten.'

IMO what they have not forgotten is that an obsolete army makes you easy meat for any foreign intervention and interference. It doesn't really matter whether said intervention comes from the West, or some islands just to the East. They are not keen to repeat the experience.

Given that, I am not suggesting China are not throwing their weight around, and being damn cheeky with the supposed exclusion zone. But IMO they blame many of China's misfortunes of the past 2 centuries on a weak, outdated military. And it is hard to argue with that.

To cover the hobby aspects of this subject, I found this reference that might be of use to some folks here:

Methinks that considering the "carrier" to be sortieing for some reason in response to the US B-52s and creating some kind of incident that might get blown out of proportion would be one kind of scenario. Robert

I just want to remind everyone, before this gets out of control, that we only burned Washington because of what you did to York! And remember Port Dover! (the least well-known rallying cry in Canada)

We only got revenge for the Fenian raids recently with "Operation Justin Bieber".

You sent us Bieber On PURPOSE? Okay, that's a declaration of war. I'll begin fortifying now since Wisconsin will be the front lines.

There wasn't enough room in Canada for his hat. Or his monkey.

Justin Bieber was done on purpose?!?! Ok, that's it… We're dragging Canada into the Hague for crimes against humanity. Or sending 'Duck Dynasty' and 'Honey Boo-Boo' north of the border…

"American TV Anchor: But, Mr. Minister, it isn't like this film is the first troublesome thing to come out of Canada. Let us not forget Bryan Adams.
Canadian Film Minister: Now, now, the Canadian Government has apologized for Bryan Adams on several occasions!"

For a Breakdown cruise it seems that not having it's aviation assets on board does tend to be a little suspect huh? Robert

Love the axe!

I think it's sensible to see whether one's new carrier can actually float and navigate before filling it with expensive planes.

Leigh

For a Breakdown cruise it seems that not having it's aviation assets on board does tend to be a little suspect huh?

Not really. The US does the same thing with brand-new carriers. Sends them out to sea without aircraft to make sure everything holds together before complicating things with air operations.

True Lion. I guess what I meant to say that sending it into an area where tensions is great with out an aircraft contingent does tend to be a little suspect.If more as a type of threat more then a "breakdown cruise". Robert