This report is interesting, it looks like the chinese submarine force is testing the capability of the USN again. Wonder what sub class is the chinese using.
Chinese sub smashes US sonar
Chinese sub smashes US sonar
Chinese sub smashes US sonar
- Thread starter trex101
- Start date
Testing indeed
Interesting Chinese viewpoint in the China Daily published also on June 15, 2009.
Sub, sonar collision 'inadvertent'
It seems the sub did not expect the USN destroyer to tow a sonar array. Maybe it could have moved away or dived lower? In any case it was most likely not discovered before it was hit.
The sub took a position in the South China Sea from where it could observe the joint naval exercise involving 6 ASEAN nations and the USN. Interestingly the AFP report and CNN did not report the participation of the USN destroyer in a multi-national navy exercise. For China such exercises are obviously very important to observe.
Interesting Chinese viewpoint in the China Daily published also on June 15, 2009.
Sub, sonar collision 'inadvertent'
It seems the sub did not expect the USN destroyer to tow a sonar array. Maybe it could have moved away or dived lower? In any case it was most likely not discovered before it was hit.
The sub took a position in the South China Sea from where it could observe the joint naval exercise involving 6 ASEAN nations and the USN. Interestingly the AFP report and CNN did not report the participation of the USN destroyer in a multi-national navy exercise. For China such exercises are obviously very important to observe.
Testing indeed
Interesting Chinese viewpoint in the China Daily published also on June 15, 2009.
Sub, sonar collision 'inadvertent'
It seems the sub did not expect the USN destroyer to tow a sonar array. Maybe it could have moved away or dived lower? In any case it was most likely not discovered before it was hit. The sub took a position in the South China Sea from where it could observe the joint naval exercise involving 6 ASEAN nations and the USN, according to the China Daily article. Interestingly the AFP report and CNN did not report the participation of the USN destroyer in a multi-national navy exercise. For China such an exercise is obviously very important to observe.
Interesting Chinese viewpoint in the China Daily published also on June 15, 2009.
Sub, sonar collision 'inadvertent'
It seems the sub did not expect the USN destroyer to tow a sonar array. Maybe it could have moved away or dived lower? In any case it was most likely not discovered before it was hit. The sub took a position in the South China Sea from where it could observe the joint naval exercise involving 6 ASEAN nations and the USN, according to the China Daily article. Interestingly the AFP report and CNN did not report the participation of the USN destroyer in a multi-national navy exercise. For China such an exercise is obviously very important to observe.
I pretty much expected such a statement from the Chinese side.
Anyway the towed array was most likely deployed because it was certainly not the first time a USS was shadowed by a Chinese submarine in this part of the Pacific. We don't now the course of the two vessels so we can not come to an definite conclusion.
Anyway the towed array was most likely deployed because it was certainly not the first time a USS was shadowed by a Chinese submarine in this part of the Pacific. We don't now the course of the two vessels so we can not come to an definite conclusion.
I highly doubt that the hydrophones in the towed array failed to detect a shadowing submarine from such a close distance. But of course we can not know for sure what happened.
localhost127
Member
how much mass do towed sonar arrays have? what is their relative size?
since the sub was likely trailing the ship, relative speed should have been pretty close ... so how much damage could possibly have been done from such an impact?
since the sub was likely trailing the ship, relative speed should have been pretty close ... so how much damage could possibly have been done from such an impact?
Why does the USN still use an "array"? Now that they have other technology to detect submarines. Such as Satellites (that's how they discovered the underground sub base)?
Ah, interesting. So what technology can replace the SURTASS which got it's latest updates in the last years?
Look up the link. Given the great lenght of the cable and all the technology on the rear and the communication lines it must be rather strong and thus it is rather heavy.
The relative speed could have been considerable, given that the speed of the USS was due to the towed array slow, probably around 5 knots. So the submarine could have had a relative high relative speed to it. But if you consider the relative strict limits placed on the speed and the turning of the ship by a towed array even a not much faster submarine coming at it at an angle can wreak havoc. The Submarine however can also suffer, especially when the cable gets into the propellor...
Ah, interesting. So what technology can replace the SURTASS which got it's latest updates in the last years?
My personal feeling is, the new USAF constellation of satellites Obama gave the green light to , that they are going to put up in the next couple of years, will better detect subs then the current "array" they use to detect subs today. Just a thought, I could be wrong.
The question here is: How? Perhaps you should go first to the thread about ASW where there is a great amount of links and information about the specific topic.
I don't think you know what the McCain was towing.
The system is question is called a TACtical Towed Array Sonar (TACTAS), it is a series of hydrophones towed behind ship, it is a very good system but it limits the maneuverability of the ship, and it is expensive.
TACTAS is probably the best tool a ship like a Flight I Burke has to track submarines since it can be lowered below the temperature layers.
AN/SQR-19 Tactical Towed Array SONAR (TACTAS)
How exactly will satellites hunt for submerged submarines?
Beatmaster
New Member
This may sound weard but why would a chinees sub position itself so close to a destroyer in the first place?
This could have a provocation effect.
IMHO both china and the us are fully aware of what systems they use so its very likely that the chinese sub did know exactly what it was doing otherwise the would shadow the exercise from a safe distance without the risk of being detected... and so on and so on......
I do not know or a us destroyer could detect a diesel running on electrics but iam pretty sure that if the chinese sub was running in silent mode that it would have known that the destroyer was directly near them.
So they also would have known that the destroyer was checking the waters for subs and other non us contacts.
At least thats what i think....
This could have a provocation effect.
IMHO both china and the us are fully aware of what systems they use so its very likely that the chinese sub did know exactly what it was doing otherwise the would shadow the exercise from a safe distance without the risk of being detected... and so on and so on......
I do not know or a us destroyer could detect a diesel running on electrics but iam pretty sure that if the chinese sub was running in silent mode that it would have known that the destroyer was directly near them.
So they also would have known that the destroyer was checking the waters for subs and other non us contacts.
At least thats what i think....
Beatmaster
New Member
There are a large number of technologies used in modern anti/detection-submarine warfare:
Sensors
Acoustics particularly in active and passive sonar, sonobuoys and fixed hydrophones and in the reduction of radiated noise.
Pyrotechnics in the use of markers, flares and explosive devices
Searchlights
Radar
Low frequency spread-spectrum electromagnetic surface wave devices
Active spread-spectrum magnetic techniques
Hydrodynamic pressure wave detection
Blue-green laser airborne and satellite LIDAR Is this the system you mean?
Electronic countermeasures and Acoustic Countermeasures such as noisemakers
Passive acoustic countermeasures such as concealment and design of sound-absorbing materials to coat reflecting underwater surfaces
Magnetic anomaly detection
Active and (more commonly) passive infra-red detection
I think you should first read up how LIDAR works. It helps to understand the intrinsic issues and the specific ones if used by a satellite are also rather plain.
But this should be discussed in the ASW thread, and not in here.
P.S: It could have been a simple accident caused by an decision error by the commander of that boat. It is not the first time something like that happened.
But this should be discussed in the ASW thread, and not in here.
P.S: It could have been a simple accident caused by an decision error by the commander of that boat. It is not the first time something like that happened.
i think a tow sonar can have cable length of dozen miles so i won't say its really close. also i read somewhere that it was the US destroyer shadowing the sub, not sure which way is true. but this is simply a accident, no sub commander in right mind will intentional hit the sonar and risk tangle in it.
Beatmaster
New Member
Agreed LIDAR is not the topic here....i just asked or that LIDAR is the system that AegisFC
refered to.
And yes it could be a accident we probably never know...but you have to agree that in the middle of a huge ocean this is very weard situation because its not the first time that USN and China navy have a little crash standoff.
Offtopic @AegisFC:
Its a old piece of tekst but it shows that LIDAR is capable of detecting a submerged submarine, check this link
Just for the record iam not saying that LIDAR is a satallite but the system itself ( The thermal changes detection part) and some other LIDAR based systems are already used in satallites and they are used for other tasks...but ill bet that if the US goverment is in need of finding a specific sub then they could use the system.
As far as i can remeber there should be a satallite used by NATO and US forces that detects heatsignature and mass displacement in a specific grid on the globe this way a submarine is very easy to detect because each type has its own specific signature....iam not sure or this is the same as the LIDAR concept....
Last edited:
It is an interesting piece.
Note however that physics sets firm limits to the use and applications of LIDAR. It will be an amazing asset in specific circumstances and could greatly support the other ASW sensors. It is indicative that Sweden used it first. It should be excellent to lessen the workloads of seaborne MCM assets and to detect submarines in shallow waters, both very important traditional tasks of the Swedish Navy.
It will never replace the towed array - the capabilities and spectrums are too different .
Note however that physics sets firm limits to the use and applications of LIDAR. It will be an amazing asset in specific circumstances and could greatly support the other ASW sensors. It is indicative that Sweden used it first. It should be excellent to lessen the workloads of seaborne MCM assets and to detect submarines in shallow waters, both very important traditional tasks of the Swedish Navy.
It will never replace the towed array - the capabilities and spectrums are too different .
Not true. there are already solutions being mapped to replace towed arrays in some areas,
these are complimentary artifacts - not "either or"
Bad wording of mine:
It will never replace sensors which operate in the signal spectrums covered by towed arrays - the capabilities and spectrums are too different. This phrase was in reference to LIDAR.
Still I think that the right spirit was there, but it is no the first time I and gf seem to differ on it's interpretation.
It will never replace sensors which operate in the signal spectrums covered by towed arrays - the capabilities and spectrums are too different. This phrase was in reference to LIDAR.
Still I think that the right spirit was there, but it is no the first time I and gf seem to differ on it's interpretation.
On interpretation and distinction.
Agree with the principle per se