[TomasCTT]

From another board, apparently a PLAN sub collided with USS John S McCain's towed array sonar at Subic last Thursday. http://forums.milita...m/3230008522001 Anyone else got news other than that snippet in the board?

[Paul in Qatar]

If this occurred, it is violation of the Convention for the Prevention of Incidents at Sea. Why the hell would someone want to do such a fool thing? If someone ordered it, it is scary. If some hotshot did it on his own, that is even more scary.

[Paul in Qatar]

AP has picked this up. Here.

[TSJ]

Sir, this is no big deal. Obama is in charge. Chillaxx, sir.

LCpl Mord.

[Paul in Qatar]

It is a big deal in some ways, and a minor incident in other ways. Cutting the sonar array was a one-in-a-million shot.. But it would seem the sub was maneuvering aggressively near another warship. That is a Bad Thing.

It is a big deal as this sort of nonsense increases the chances of a misunderstanding. Right now, when things are calm, foolish behavior like this just a single event, but were it happen during a period of tension it could cause events to spin out of control. Warships are not toys.

Next if the level of seamanship in the PLAN is this low, if the event was an accident, then that is its own problem.

Then if this was some hotdog playing around, then it would imply the PLAN is rather much in a state of indiscipline.

But of course if the guy was under orders to harass the US Navy, then the entire PLAN leadership (at least) is simply mad.

[Luke Y]

Reminds me of the incident in the 80's with a soviet sub catching the towed-array, then the FFG actually improvising some sort of hook to 'snatch it back'

In blind man's bluff IIRC...

[Nobu]

Luke_Yaxley, on Sun 14 Jun 2009 1522, said:

Reminds me of the incident in the 80's with a soviet sub catching the towed-array, then the FFG actually improvising some sort of hook to 'snatch it back'

In blind man's bluff IIRC...

Reminds me of the incident in the 80s with Emilio Estevez and Sheriff Brady. "Reap the whirlwind, sheriff. Reap it!"

[shep854]

Well, the CHICOMs are hot for US sonar tech... :blink:

[Jeffro]

How long is a Towed Array Sonar? Yards , Hundreds of Yards or Miles??

Can a PLAN sub get this close to a USN DD and not get spotted??

[Praet]

Jeffro, on Sun 14 Jun 2009 2246, said:

How long is a Towed Array Sonar? Yards , Hundreds of Yards or Miles??

TACTAS fully deployed about 2000 m (~1700 m cable length + ~250 m array length)

[Special-K]

I'm really curious to know if the destroyer knew the sub was there or not.




-K

[pikachu]

Wasn't there another incident recently when PLAN ships harassed an unarmed USN ship where it was suspected they were also trying to snag the towed array?

[Josh]

pikachu, on Mon 15 Jun 2009 0408, said:

Wasn't there another incident recently when PLAN ships harassed an unarmed USN ship where it was suspected they were also trying to snag the towed array?

One of the SURTASS ships (T-AGOS-23?) was harassed by a combination of 'fishing' boats and patrol boats and a crewmen seemed to be trying to hook something out of the water. I rather wonder if the sub could hear the array's sled; I would have thought the flow noise would be so low it would have no idea where it is. Rather, it was probably just trying to shadow the ship streaming the array and pushed the envelope.

The real surprise is that the USN still has any ships towing arrays...I thing later maks of Burke delete the wince for this and I'd thought earlier Flights had beached their tails. IMO not an incident worth worrying about, though along with the routine harassment of the SURTASS ships it seems to indicate a change in PLAN behavior. That said, the USN steams up and down the coast of China routinely, probably having more sub sorties off their coast than they do. Naturally as they start fielding a modern fleet that can come out and play they'll get a little uppity about that situation...imagine how annoyed the USN and US populace would be if Chinese boats and naval intelligence ships routinely opperated just off New York or Boston harbor.

[Jeff]

jua, on Mon 15 Jun 2009 0829, said:

The real surprise is that the USN still has any ships towing arrays...I thing later maks of Burke delete the wince for this and I'd thought earlier Flights had beached their tails.

Perhaps it was a semi replacement for the SURTASS ship in case the Chinese got aggressive again? The DDG is a lot tougher opponent than a T-AGOS is.

[Josh]

Jeff, on Mon 15 Jun 2009 1527, said:

Perhaps it was a semi replacement for the SURTASS ship in case the Chinese got aggressive again? The DDG is a lot tougher opponent than a T-AGOS is.

I don't think the arrays are interchangable in capability however. Especial since two of AGOS have low freq active sources. I guess the navy is just getting back in the habit of putting tails on ships that were so equiped in the Pacific. Be interesting if you could get a number of towed arrays in inventory and deployment. I wonder if they cross deck them like VLASROC and such.

[Ol Paint]

pikachu, on Sun 14 Jun 2009 2308, said:

Wasn't there another incident recently when PLAN ships harassed an unarmed USN ship where it was suspected they were also trying to snag the towed array?

At least two in the last 3 months: T-AGOS-23 in March, which is the incident I think you are referring to, and T-AGOS-19 in May of this year.

Douglas

[TomasCTT]

I am laughing myself to bits.

Over here, at a local board, some of the people are "indignant, indignant I say!" over the incident because it supposedly happened within territorial waters.

Then the government recently put out a statement saying the incident occurred beyond the 12nm limit, and that there was nothing really to be worried about. That only made some people even "more indignant, indignant blasphemous I say!" :rolleyes:

Really, fact is it happened in international waters. Plus, we have no credible navy to begin with to chase it off.* And now these same people are fantasizing that we had harpoons and nukes so we can blast that chicom sub out of the water...? OMG, I sometimes question why I even bother to give them a dose of reality on the "issue." <_<

Oh I'm sure I'll be labeled as being not nationalistic enough, having to patriotism, etc etc again. :rolleyes: They can play their "sink the chicom sub" phantasies for all I care.


* - what is that quote someone has here as his sig? About defense and countries that are not willing to spend on it are destined not to be taken seriously or something like that?

[Mike Steele]

TomasCTT, on Mon 15 Jun 2009 1855, said:

I am laughing myself to bits.

Over here, at a local board, some of the people are "indignant, indignant I say!" over the incident because it supposedly happened within territorial waters.

Then the government recently put out a statement saying the incident occurred beyond the 12nm limit, and that there was nothing really to be worried about. That only made some people even "more indignant, indignant blasphemous I say!" :rolleyes:

Really, fact is it happened in international waters. Plus, we have no credible navy to begin with to chase it off.* And now these same people are fantasizing that we had harpoons and nukes so we can blast that chicom sub out of the water...? OMG, I sometimes question why I even bother to give them a dose of reality on the "issue." <_<

Oh I'm sure I'll be labeled as being not nationalistic enough, having to patriotism, etc etc again. :rolleyes: They can play their "sink the chicom sub" phantasies for all I care.


* - what is that quote someone has here as his sig? About defense and countries that are not willing to spend on it are destined not to be taken seriously or something like that?

You're just a troublemaker Thomas.http://smilies.vidahost.com/otn/other/jpshakehead.gif

[TomasCTT]

http://208.84.116.223/forums/public/style_images/Tanknet_OD4/snapback.png' alt='View Post' />Mike Steele, on Tue 16 Jun 2009 1101, said:

You're just a troublemaker Thomas.

That is why you do not want me within 12 nautical miles of the Red Button.™ Imagine the trouble I'd make had I pressed it. (Oh look! Pretty rockets!) :D

EDIT:

Oh, and for the record, I did not lure that sub into Subic. :D

This post has been edited by TomasCTT: 15 June 2009 - 2324 PM

[Doug Kibbey]

TomasCTT, on Tue 16 Jun 2009 0422, said:

Oh, and for the record, I did not lure that sub into Subic. :D

Would you be willing to testify to that under oath, Counselor?

:lol: