Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia - 2005 UPDATE
JEFFHEAD.COM ^ | March 7, 2005 | Jeff Head

Posted on 03/07/2005 9:49:24 AM PST by Jeff Head

THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN ASIA
2005 Update

By Jeff Head, February 2005


As an update to the original "Rising Sea Dragon in Asia", that I publiushed in January of 2004 (and have been writing and warning about since 2000), I offer this update, dated in February of 2005. This report is fairly short and broad, and I believe does not contain the detail necessary to reflect the true scope of the emerging threat. But it does clearly indicate the nature and size of the current Red Chinese buildup, and their is only one principle power that such a buildup can be directed at, the United States military.

Regarding the continuing naval buildup, the Chinese have already built and launched two of the brand new, very modern, Aegis type Lanzhou Class destroyers, two of the new Guangzhou Class guided missile destroyers, two new Ma'anshan Class guided missile frigates, four of the new large Type 73 Amphibious Assault ships (that's right, four in a very short time frame and more building...can you guess what these are inded for?), and a class of very modern diesle-electric attack subs. In addition, the west has now seen another new class, dubbed the Type 51C that was just launched in December of 2005 in the Dalian, Liaoning Province. Another area air defense destroyer similar to the Type 52C, Lanzho class, this new class is similar in appearance to the Arleigh Burke class original batch destroyers, and is based on the late 1990's Luhai class hull.. It has an Aegis type air defense capability, but no helo facilities, while the two new Type 52C's are similar to the Arliegh Burke Batch IIA ships, with onboard helicopter landing and housing facilities.

All of this is in addition to acquiring four very modern and capable Hangzhou Class destroyers from Russia and a total of twelve very modern Russian diesel-electric subs, as well as currently building their own new and modern classes of nuclear attack subs and ballistic missile submarines, along with continuing heavy research into aircraft carrier design and/or refitting.

The efforts continue unabated as the Red Chinese continue to build or aquire these EIGHT new classes of ships simultaneously at a rapid pace. Eight new classes of ships at once represents a HUGE outlay in technology and capital across the board. It is almost unheard of and is representative of the massive arms build-up the Red Chinese are embarked upon with their new found wealth. If continued, it can have but one goal in mind, a direct challenge for naval dominance in the Pacific Rim and beyond. As stated, that challenege is a direct one to the United States Navy.

In the mean time, the Chinese are also modernizing their naval air forces at a rapid pace, acquiring or license building hundreds of modern SU-27, SU-27SK, and SU-30 aircraft from Russia, many with very credible strike at sea, air to surface missile capabiulities. They are also building their own new J-10 aircraft. Within the past two to three years these efforts represent a quantum leap in terms of the quality of the Red Chinese equipment and the rate at which they are being built or otherwise put into service.

Here are some recent pics.


The brand new construction and launch of the area air defense, Aegis-like, Type 51C Class destroyer.


The new Lanzhou Class (Type 52C) Aegis-like destroyer. 1st commissioned in July 2004, second in service in early 2005.


The new Guangzhou Class (Type 52B) Guided Missile Destroyer. 1st commissioned in July 2004, second in service in early 2005.


The new Hangzhou Class (Type 951/EM) guided missile destroyers. Four acquired from Russia in the last five years, two already in service, two more in 2005. They carry the Russian Sunburn or Moskit cruise missiles, designed to attack US Aircraft Carriers.


The new Ma'anshan Class (Type 054) Guided Missile frigates. Two launched in late 2003, will be in service in early 2005.


Two of the new Type 73 Amphibious Assault Ship class, of which three have already been built.


The new Yuan Class SSK diesel/electric attack submanrine.


The new Russian acquired Kilo Class SSK diesle/electric attack submarines, of which four have been acquired and EIGHT MORE are on order.


Coninued outfitting of the former Russian Vayrag at the Dalian shipyards.


Red Chinese SU-30 and SU-27SK (J11) and SU-27 aircraft.


The chinese Produced J-10 attack fighter.

As these ships are produced in numbers and as the Chinese continue with their across the board naval buildup and their carrier development plans towards ultimately lauching their own, the balance of power in the China Sea and western Pacific is going to hang in the balance. Do not forget, the Chinese have purchased and are studying and apparently refitting western style and Russian aircraft carriers. Their intentions in this regard, with the production of all the support and defense ships necessary to form carrier battle groups of their own is clear. Even without those groups, they are poducing a formidable force to challenge our groups in the inner island chain in the western Pacific.

While the Chinese experience level with this equipment is lacking and will be very much inferior to the decades of practical experience the United States Navy has, there is no doubt that the Chinese are embarked on a path to challenge that experience and heretofore dominance of the U.S. Navy in the region at some point. If within range of large numbers of land-based aircraft and missiles, and if coupled with modern, capable weapons systems like the Sunburn or Moskit missiles and perhaps supercavitiating torpedo technology, a credible threat to American naval supremecy in the western Pacific could be posed in the next few years...and this does not even address their continued rapid buildup of ballistic missiles and modernization program across the board of their land based armed forces, which are proceeding at a similar pace as that described here regarding their navy and naval air forces.

Although the hefty12-14% increase in direct military expenditures of the Red Chinese (and this does not include dual use and so-called private sector input to the defense apparatus-just remeber, in the Red Chinese system, there is no real private sector) represents a small proportion of US Military outlays, remember as well that a significant portion of western outlays goes towards relatively high salaries, benefits, and health care costs that the Chinese system is not burdened with. In terms of outlays towards pure military weapons systems directly, the Chinese are rapidly catching up with western numbers. All of this bears very serious consideration and planning.

While we do so, consider this: As stated, the Chinese are currently building and launching eight modern, entire classes of major combatant vessels (not including the two new nuclear attack and strategic missile submarines)...simultaneously. This is a monumental achievement and compares to the United States Navy which is currently building and launching three new classes of major combatants (the Virginia class subs, the San Antonio class LPDs, and the continuing Burk class destroyers) with plans for two to three more U.S. classes in the future Clearly the Chinese and the PLAN are serious about their future naval capabilities in the China Sea and western Pacific and are rapidly building up across the board to implement them. This should be be reminiscent to our senior citizens who experienced it, or anyone who has studied history, of the rapid buildup of adversary military in the 1930s. We all know where that led.

Again, there can only be one power that the Red Chinese intend to, and must, confront if conflict over geo-political policy comes into play...and that is the U.S. Navy. Such tremendous development, building and launching of vessels indicate that they intend to do just that and their intentions, capabilities and funding in this regard cannot be underestimated.

Copyright © 2005, by Jeff Head


Jeff Head (jeffhead.com) is an engineering consultant who has many years of experience in the power, defense, and computer industries. He currently wotrks for the federal government helping maintain and protect regional infrastructure. He is a member of the U.S. Naval Institute, and he is also the author of a self-published and best-selling fictional series of military techno-thrillers about future military confrontation with the Red Chinese called the Dragon's Fury Series of novels (dragonsfuryseries.com) that projects a fictional third world war arising out of current events.

You can read about that series by clicking on the pictures of the novel covers below:


THE DRAGON'S FURY SERIES OF NOVELS



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Free Republic; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: armsrace; chinesenavy; chinesethreat; dragonsfuryseries; freeperjeffhead; jeffhead; militarybuildup; plan; redchinanavy; redchinathreat; worldwariii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 241-260 next last
To: Rebelbase

You may wish to check out Patrick Robinson's series of books. I would recommend two: Kilo Class and Nimitz class.


81 posted on 03/07/2005 11:41:02 AM PST by Bald Eagle777 (No more high-tech Exports to China. None. The Clinton years were a DISASTER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

I've heard rumours that the phased array radar(PAR) used on China's 052C is actually a more advanced version of PAR than the ones on Burkes, though nobody can confirm this.


82 posted on 03/07/2005 11:42:29 AM PST by Pussy_Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: tom paine 2
Actually, a diesel electric operating on electricity can be quieter than our mukes. I believe studies have shown this to be so.

I know how fast our subs go and I know of their capabilites. They are dominant in blue water without equal. Litoral waters are a different matter, particularly when there is signifant land based air cover. Not that we would lose at all...just that the threat and danger go way up.

So, please don't get me wrong, I have a son in law in the submarine sevices and believe we will persevere in any case...I just cannot and will not too cavalierly underestimate and write off dedicated enemies.

83 posted on 03/07/2005 11:42:59 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: tom paine 2; Jeff Head; Rebelbase

Let's put it this way-a N-sub will slaughter any number of D/Es in deep ocean by virtue of it's ability to stay submerged for great periods,at great depts & much greater speed & with increased efficiency of it's sonars.Nearer to the shore(in littorals),the situation becomes a lot more hazy,with speed & dept not as useful.

Tom_Paine,the Kilos that China are acquiring from Russia carry a new cruise missile system(in anti-ship & land attack variants) with ranges from 220kms to 300kms.So It doesn't even need to go out of port to hit Taiwanese vessels.

From what I have read, submerged endurance of a normal D/E doesn't go much beyond 24-30 hours due to the need to recharge it's batteries.The current D/Es that China is acquiring from Russia reportedly feature an air-independent propulsion module which can theoritically allow the sub to stay submerged for upto 8-10 days(which is a huge advantage for a D/E).If & when the Germans start selling to China,the PLAN would have it's eyes on Germany's Fuel cell based AIP,which according to reports can sustain a sub underwater for as long as 15 to 20 days & is more efficient than competing Russian & French systems.


84 posted on 03/07/2005 11:44:23 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Pussy_Cat
Well, it is newer...but I doubt seriously that it is more capable. We have too many years experience and have invested far too much.

But the Chinese are using our own dollars to rapidly close the gap, and any new, capable system must be judged as an increased threat and cannot be discounted or underestimated, particularly in the China Sea/South China Sea region where they have significant land based air support and very short logistic lines.

85 posted on 03/07/2005 11:46:05 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

Thanks for the update. Our current technology for making screws still makes our boats pretty damn quiet. I was on a fast attack sub during Viet Nam and the screw noise from Russian nucs was unbelievable.


86 posted on 03/07/2005 11:47:06 AM PST by tom paine 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Agreed 100%. In the littorals, the Chinese will be a significant threat and are just adding more thickness to the tough nut they are trying to create before going after the ROC.
87 posted on 03/07/2005 11:48:20 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Bear in mind that the Europeans-Germany,France,Italy & Britain are only inducting or going to induct ships with advanced radars-some of which are rated as better than the Aegis/Spy-1 combo.Don't rule out the PLAN getting those.You don't necessarily need to sell missiles with such systems.


88 posted on 03/07/2005 11:48:55 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: elmer fudd
Actually, I think Taiwan needs nukes of it's own. It's fine for us to say that we'll help defend them, but everyone knows that we hold elections every four years and all the Chicoms have to do is wait until the time is right.

I agree. A shame that the CIA stopped them in the 1980s. Taiwan needs the ability to turn China into a gigantic sheet of glass.

89 posted on 03/07/2005 11:50:29 AM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN! http://asiasec.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

I did some more research on the web and found this site that had some good info on Chinese ships and planes:
http://www.sinodefence.com/

Hmmm. Hey jeff, you didn't rip all your photos from this web site did you?


90 posted on 03/07/2005 11:52:09 AM PST by s_asher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Well, as to whether the Euro stuff is better than the AEGIS system, that is yet to be seen and very doubtful from an operational standpoint in my own estimation.

Having said that, it is very advanced and would only increase the risk and danger in the hands of an overt belligerent. I pray the Chinese don't get it, but know they are proceeding with their own development and whatever aqvenues they can acquire in the mean time. There is but one end and reason for it...us.

91 posted on 03/07/2005 11:52:20 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: s_asher

Not all of them...there are several places on the web where great photos of the growing Chinese threat are located...but that site has some great pics for sure.


92 posted on 03/07/2005 11:53:36 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Sorry, in litoral, confined waters like the Straits of Formosa, they would pose a credible threat. They are very quite, they are armed with modern sensor suites and weapons, including cruise missiles, and they would have significant land based air support. We cannot underestimate them. A bunch of them are the very latest Russian Kilo designs and they are building their own as well.

The Virginia-class is also built with littoral combat in mind while still retaining deep-water capabilility.

93 posted on 03/07/2005 11:54:06 AM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN! http://asiasec.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Some key paragraphs from http://navlog.org/aswcom.html

"the US Navy in the forefront -- find themselves ill-equipped to counter the explosive growth in the Third World fleet of stealthy, fourth generation diesel-electric subs like the U-212/214-class (Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH of Kiel and Thyssen Nordseewerke GmbH of Endenand, Germany) and the Scorpene-class (DCN of France and Izar (formerly Bazan) of Spain). Such current technology subs can stay submerged for days without need for snorkeling. Equipped with closed-oxygen diesel drives such as the French "MESMA" (Module d'Energie Sous-Marine Autonome) AIP steam-turbine system that burns ethanol and liquid oxygen to make steam to drive a turbo-electric generator, the design permits retrofitting into existing submarines by adding an extra hull section. Typical cost for a new submarine powered by MESMA is $250 million. These warships are openly for sale to almost anyone with a big enough checking account (except Taiwan, but that’s another story). For the budget-conscious – or someone simply in a hurry to raise hell with an allied navy -- a Russian P-130 or Piranha-T Small-class submarine may be purchased for a fraction of the cost of a Scorpene. While limited in crew size and range, a Piranha-T’s torpedoes and mines are quite suitable for denying coastal waters to most navies ill prepared for ASW."

"Today’s conventional subs – SSKs -- with their “airless” diesel technology, super-quiet electric motors, greatly improved noise reduction, and great submerged dash speed in shallow water, make active ranging in most cases almost useless. The halving since 1991 of the US Navy’s submarine fleet -- a primary ASW asset itself – further aggravates the situation. The US and allied navies have become keenly aware of this danger. ASW, like anti-mine warfare, has traditionally been unglamorous, complicated, and absolutely essential to the Navy. There was no movie “Top Bunk” starring Tom Cruise as P-3 pilot Hank “Sleepy” Levey on a typical 12-hour flight looking for submarines in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the dramatic highlight of which was two off-duty crewmen flipping a coin over one bunk."

94 posted on 03/07/2005 11:54:11 AM PST by Rebelbase (Who is General Chat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

There is no Ukrain connection here.

The aerial defence systems on 051C and 052B are either imported directly from Russia, or manufactured under license from Russia.

The PAR on 052C is developed indigenously by China's Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology.


95 posted on 03/07/2005 11:54:53 AM PST by Pussy_Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton

Understood...but its size and the reactor itself (no matter how you cut it, a reactor is still inherantently louder than batteries) will restrict its overall effectiveness in the littoral regions IMHO. Too expensive, too big, and too capable to risk sending in there IMHO, we need our own diesel electrics in my view.


96 posted on 03/07/2005 11:58:25 AM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
It's amazing that some people still refuse to see what's in front of their eyes.

No sh!t. Too many people have a warped veiw of China or think we should appease the dragon instead of slay it.

97 posted on 03/07/2005 11:58:50 AM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN! http://asiasec.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Pussy_Cat

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/052c.asp

Kindly tell these folks to correct their data,then.


98 posted on 03/07/2005 12:00:13 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Jeff, while I believe this falls under acceptable "fair use", shouldn't we at least try to credit the source?


99 posted on 03/07/2005 12:01:02 PM PST by s_asher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Sicne the EU refused to build D/Es for Taiwan as part of Bush's 2001 arms deal, the D/Es were and still might be (pending Taiwan's own politics) built here. There is a chance that we might adopt that.


100 posted on 03/07/2005 12:05:02 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN! http://asiasec.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 241-260 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson