How good are Japanese submarines?

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by Dr Phobus

I understand that in a war over Tawian, Japan wil be a logistical hub for the americans. Thus, indirectly the Japanese will be involed, and of course the sub force is a great way to be covertly invovled, even if it blocking/patrolling the american's back door. Interesting concept, the jap subs hunting chinese SSK's/SSN's.

The Japanese would surely be involved in any Chinese/Taiwan Conflict. From a Logistical Hub in a Blockade to a full partner in a all out War. Really, I would be shocked. If, the USN and JMSDF didn't train regularly on Anti-Submarine Missions with there combined SSK/SSN fleets.

[Dr Phobus]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

The Japanese would surely be involved in any Chinese/Taiwan Conflict. From a Logistical Hub in a Blockade to a full partner in a all out War. Really, I would be shocked. If, the USN and JMSDF didn't train regularly on Anti-Submarine Missions with there combined SSK/SSN fleets.

I can not imagine the chinese sub force lasting long against a combined USN/Japan navel forces. It will be on hell of a navel and air battle, one with far reaching implacations i am sure. Still, it would be folly to think the chinese navy could win any protracted conflict between them and USA/Japan.

thoughts please

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by Dr Phobus

However, no one in this forum as questioned the qualtity of the japanese submarine fleet. Its proabably 4-5th most capable in the world i would imagine

top submarine forces, by capability.

1- USN
2- Russian navy, sheer number and modern designs
3- RN, getting smaller, 8-9 SSN's in future
4- Japan large modern fleet of SSK, soon with wide spread AIP tecnology
5 (6?)- French, getting smaller, 6 SSN's in future, maybe SSK also ?
6- (5?) China, growing, SSN (very limited for now), SSK in numbers

possion 5 and 6 are very debatable.

any thoughts ?

Which, would you consider superior SSN's or SSK's? Also, why did the Royal Navy go from a mix fleet of Nuclear and Diesel to SSN's and SSBN's only?

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by Dr Phobus

I can not imagine the chinese sub force lasting long against a combined USN/Japan navel forces. It will be on hell of a navel and air battle, one with far reaching implacations i am sure. Still, it would be folly to think the chinese navy could win any protracted conflict between them and USA/Japan.

thoughts please

I think you hit the nail on the head! Any Taiwanese/Chinese conflict would surely involve several countries (i.e. Taiwan, Japan, US, UK, Australia, etc.) and there combined forces would be just to much for China to counter.......

[Dr Phobus]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

Which, would you consider superior SSN's or SSK's? Also, why did the Royal Navy go from a mix fleet of Nuclear and Diesel to SSN's and SSBN's only?

The mixed dub fleet concept was so that one could place the SSK;s in a defensive position (GIUK gap) with SSN behind them to react to attacks/break-throws, also, the SSN force had more an offensive ability with escort and counter-sub operations. The upholder class was originally going to be a class of 12 boats, for such patrolling/defensive operations, and the SSN force was for battle group escort and attack.

When the cold war went away, there was no foreseen need for a patrol force, indeed, NATO/EU operations are mainly offensive or peace-keeping in nature. Hence the RN kept SSN's only.

RN's had a way to save a load of money on platforms, operations and personnel, but without losing real strike power.

I hope this helps

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by Dr Phobus

The mixed dub fleet concept was so that one could place the SSK;s in a defensive position (GIUK gap) with SSN behind them to react to attacks/break-throws, also, the SSN force had more an offensive ability with escort and counter-sub operations. The upholder class was originally going to be a class of 12 boats, for such patrolling/defensive operations, and the SSN force was for battle group escort and attack.

When the cold war went away, there was no foreseen need for a patrol force, indeed, NATO/EU operations are mainly offensive or peace-keeping in nature. Hence the RN kept SSN's only.

RN's had a way to save a load of money on platforms, operations and personnel, but without losing real strike power.

I hope this helps

Do you know how deep the waters are around Taiwan? Also, in any conflict with Taiwan. Wouldn't US Carriers be positioned hundreds of miles East? Surely, China wouldn't want to send SSK's out in deep waters against American SSN's?

[Dr Phobus]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

Do you know how deep the waters are around Taiwan? Also, in any conflict with Taiwan. Wouldn't US Carriers be positioned hundreds of miles East? Surely, China wouldn't want to send SSK's out in deep waters against American SSN's?

I really do not know, its will not be too deep due to its proxmity with the mainland. Remeber, historcally SSK's have fought in the open ocean, look at submarine campaigns of both world wars. So, I argue the answer to your question is yes, the PLA-Navy will operate SSK's agianst carrier groups. THe RAN's collins class boats rountenly penertrate the escort screens of the US carrier groups.

I hope this helps

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by Dr Phobus

I really do not know, its will not be too deep due to its proxmity with the mainland. Remeber, historcally SSK's have fought in the open ocean, look at submarine campaigns of both world wars. So, I argue the answer to your question is yes, the PLA-Navy will operate SSK's agianst carrier groups. THe RAN's collins class boats rountenly penertrate the escort screens of the US carrier groups.

I hope this helps

I don't know about routinely? I have heard that it has happen on a couple of exercises. That said, I don't know if USN SSN's where close by or not.....Surely, the USN would equip its Carrier Battle Groups with much better ASW screens if it was that easy...........Much like Air Exercises. (India for example) It depends alot on the Forces employed and the Rules of Engagment? Its like I always say "Its not what they tell you? Its what they don't!"

[gf0012-aust]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

I don't know about routinely?

They've breached and killed in every RIMPAC they've entered - they have done it "routinely".

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

I have heard that it has happen on a couple of exercises.

See above. This does not include the ex's run from the sub warfare training grid. in other words, there are more incidents of successful prosecution in other exercises.

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

That said, I don't know if USN SSN's where close by or not.....

In RIMPAC 2004 the Rankin slotted the SSN as well as the CVN. SSN's are there to run as the CVN's terrier. They are tasked in RIMPAC to kill the "red" sub before it can get to the carrier or designated target.

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

Surely, the USN would equip its Carrier Battle Groups with much better ASW screens if it was that easy...........Much like Air Exercises. (India for example) It depends alot on the Forces employed and the Rules of Engagment? Its like I always say "Its not what they tell you? Its what they don't!"

RIMPAC 2004 included the following blue assets against Rankin.

DF-31 - which is the ASW Squadron - it also trains other fleet ASW assets. It was comprised of 4 x Arleigh Burkes
3 other DDG and FFG's
2 ASW air elements. Both Air ASW groups are highly proficient and also act as trainers for other ASW air assets.

Couple of additional points.

The USN helo pack "cheated" by tracking and locking Rankin before she entered the training box. They should have had the advantage - especially as there were 3 of them who'd "locked and boxed"

Rankin came in and attacked from the coast side of the training box - a difficult thing to do as it makes a sub vulnerable for escape and evasion routines

The USN went to active pings in the closing stages - Rankin managed to avoid all the pinging assets

She avoided DF-31, 4 other skimmers, an SSN, 2 x dedicated asw air groups and air assets from the CVN. She also avoided detection by P3 Orions from Hawai'i.

When she scored the CVN kill, she played the aussie band "Men At Work's" signature song, "We Come from a Land Down Under" on the hydrophones.

I should also point out that the Kiwis "cheated" for the Fincastle ASW exercise one year by also tagging before the start of the Ex. Waller evaded and escaped as well.

finally, IMO the Japanese subs are the best deep diving conventionals in the world - and they are the only other large conventional sub capable of taking the larger combat suites available to the Collins. - In short, the Oyashio Class are very very good assets. IMV they're in the top 3 DE subs in use.

The ROE's are basically weapons free on sims - the blue force have absolute free reign to kill the enemy. the sub tasked as "red" has to hit specific targets within specific time frames and in a nominated exercise area. they are boxed to fight in controlled space.

in a few exercises (not RIMPAC 2002-2004), the subs have had to make noise so as to provide assistance to the hunters

[gf0012-aust]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

Really, I would be shocked. If, the USN and JMSDF didn't train regularly on Anti-Submarine Missions with there combined SSK/SSN fleets.

The US and Japan train regularly together, either with the assets rotated out of Yoka, or with the 7th Fleet rottating assets.

Japan also participates in mixed country events like RIMPAC. They operate on a discrete channel so as to not compromsie their constitution . ie there are two comms channels in play, the Japanese relay any activity via the US so as to not be in direct contact with other nations.

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by gf0012-aust

They've breached and killed in every RIMPAC they've entered - they have done it "routinely".



See above. This does not include the ex's run from the sub warfare training grid. in other words, there are more incidents of successful prosecution in other exercises.



In RIMPAC 2004 the Rankin slotted the SSN as well as the CVN. SSN's are there to run as the CVN's terrier. They are tasked in RIMPAC to kill the "red" sub before it can get to the carrier or designated target.



RIMPAC 2004 included the following blue assets against Rankin.

DF-31 - which is the ASW Squadron - it also trains other fleet ASW assets. It was comprised of 4 x Arleigh Burkes
3 other DDG and FFG's
2 ASW air elements. Both Air ASW groups are highly proficient and also act as trainers for other ASW air assets.

Couple of additional points.

The USN helo pack "cheated" by tracking and locking Rankin before she entered the training box. They should have had the advantage - especially as there were 3 of them who'd "locked and boxed"

Rankin came in and attacked from the coast side of the training box - a difficult thing to do as it makes a sub vulnerable for escape and evasion routines

The USN went to active pings in the closing stages - Rankin managed to avoid all the pinging assets

She avoided DF-31, 4 other skimmers, an SSN, 2 x dedicated asw air groups and air assets from the CVN. She also avoided detection by P3 Orions from Hawai'i.

When she scored the CVN kill, she played the aussie band "Men At Work's" signature song, "We Come from a Land Down Under" on the hydrophones.

I should also point out that the Kiwis "cheated" for the Fincastle ASW exercise one year by also tagging before the start of the Ex. Waller evaded and escaped as well.

finally, IMO the Japanese subs are the best deep diving conventionals in the world - and they are the only other large conventional sub capable of taking the larger combat suites available to the Collins. - In short, the Oyashio Class are very very good assets. IMV they're in the top 3 DE subs in use.

The ROE's are basically weapons free on sims - the blue force have absolute free reign to kill the enemy. the sub tasked as "red" has to hit specific targets within specific time frames and in a nominated exercise area. they are boxed to fight in controlled space.

in a few exercises (not RIMPAC 2002-2004), the subs have had to make noise so as to provide assistance to the hunters

Well, according to you USN Carrier Battle Groups are easy targets for SSK's. Funny, that you have such classified material? Further, if true its hard to believe that the USN and the US Goverment wouldn't be so alarmed. As to purchase more ASW equippment including your invincible SSK's! Sorry, but I don't think its that simple! While, its not that I believe a CBG couldn't be successfully attacked. Just that is surely is far from routine. Last I heard the USN was ranked number 1 in ASW in the World! So, according to you that is very far from the truth?

[JAF]

Crusader 2000, do you think the USN or the US government would publicly state their forces are vulnerable to modern SSK's?

I am not denying your argument that the USN is #1 in ASW, nor am I supporting gf0012-aust post.

What I am saying is any navy that intends to operate in areas patrolled by hostile, modern, ultra quiet SSK, is in harms way big time. Including the USN.

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by JAF

Crusader 2000, do you think the USN or the US government would publicly state their forces are vulnerable to modern SSK's?

I am not denying your argument that the USN is #1 in ASW, nor am I supporting gf0012-aust post.

What I am saying is any navy that intends to operate in areas patrolled by hostile, modern, ultra quiet SSK, is in harms way big time. Including the USN.

Would the US Goverment publicly state their forces are vulnerable to modern SSK's? Well, no I don't think so. Do you think that the leaders of the USN would ididily stand by if that was indeed the case!!!

[JAF]

Originally Posted by Crusader2000

Would the US Goverment publicly state their forces are vulnerable to modern SSK's? Well, no I don't think so. Do you think that the leaders of the USN would ididily stand by if that was indeed the case!!!

No of course they would not stand by. That does not mean the USN or any other navy is invulnerable to them. SSK's operating on batteries or AIP are very quiet, to put it mildly. Your posts, and correct me if I am reading tone where i should not, seem to indicate a complete lack of respect for SSK's and additionally that the USN could deal with them without much worry. I am simply trying to point out that they need to be respected and worried about.

[Crusader2000]

Originally Posted by JAF

No of course they would not stand by. That does not mean the USN or any other navy is invulnerable to them. SSK's operating on batteries or AIP are very quiet, to put it mildly. Your posts, and correct me if I am reading tone where i should not, seem to indicate a complete lack of respect for SSK's and additionally that the USN could deal with them without much worry. I am simply trying to point out that they need to be respected and worried about.

Go back and read my posting! Its not that I don't respect SSK's. I believe they are a threat to all surface ships. That said, I don't think they could routinely and sucessfully attack and sink USN CBG's either. Also, the USN is starting to field Seawolf and Virgina SSN's...............