China sub stalked U.S. fleet

"Ricardo" wrote in message
.uk...

SNIP!
SNIP!
SNIP!

I was merely quoting a press release at the time! It's not my fault if US
Government agencies get their arses in a twist with facts - I was just
passing it on.

The press in US is not controlled by the government nor is it a government
agency.

If you mean the US Navy, as the origin of the press release, I would wager
that it contained the correct information.

The US press in its efforts to "sell the news", is not noted for its
accuracy in reporting. If a few facts are left out, distorted, or
sensationalized, it doesn't really matter to them as long as it SELLS!

----------
In article , Ricardo
wrote:

"China, which has a rampant economy, has raised military spending by
more than 10 per cent a year for 15 years. That has given the People's
Liberation Army a bristling array of high-tech weaponry, including
carrier-killing weapons. They threaten the vessels that have kept the
Pacific a United States lake for more than half a century and that could
block China's long-cherished dream of snuffing out the small democratic
breakaway state of Taiwan.

Er... maybe not.

There's a lot of hyperbole about the "Chinese defense buildup." If you read
the aviation press, there have been some pretty good articles in recent
issues of Combat Airpower about the Chinese air force. In short, the
aviation geeks are not impressed. The Chinese have bought a fair amount of
new equipment, but they are also wedded to a lot of old and inferior
equipment as well. And their flight hours are awful, averaging something
like 40-60 per year. In other words, their pilots are getting in an average
of about one hour of flight time a week.

As far as the Chinese navy is concerned, people make a big deal out of their
purchase of some modern Russian destroyers. But how many did they actually
buy? Four? It's not a lot. One would think from the hyperbole that they
now have a massive navy. They don't. It's not much bigger than it was ten
years ago.




D

DDAY wrote:
----------
In article , Ricardo
wrote:


"China, which has a rampant economy, has raised military spending by
more than 10 per cent a year for 15 years. That has given the People's
Liberation Army a bristling array of high-tech weaponry, including
carrier-killing weapons. They threaten the vessels that have kept the
Pacific a United States lake for more than half a century and that could
block China's long-cherished dream of snuffing out the small democratic
breakaway state of Taiwan.


Er... maybe not.

There's a lot of hyperbole about the "Chinese defense buildup." If you read
the aviation press, there have been some pretty good articles in recent
issues of Combat Airpower about the Chinese air force. In short, the
aviation geeks are not impressed. The Chinese have bought a fair amount of
new equipment, but they are also wedded to a lot of old and inferior
equipment as well. And their flight hours are awful, averaging something
like 40-60 per year. In other words, their pilots are getting in an average
of about one hour of flight time a week.

As far as the Chinese navy is concerned, people make a big deal out of their
purchase of some modern Russian destroyers. But how many did they actually
buy? Four? It's not a lot. One would think from the hyperbole that they
now have a massive navy. They don't. It's not much bigger than it was ten
years ago.




D
Check on their recent submarine acquisitions, diesel and nuclear.

Ricardo

--
"Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..."

----------
In article , Ricardo
wrote:


Check on their recent submarine acquisitions, diesel and nuclear.

Uh huh. How many? Two? Three?




D

DDAY wrote:
----------
In article , Ricardo
wrote:



Check on their recent submarine acquisitions, diesel and nuclear.


Uh huh. How many? Two? Three?




D
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Asi...fic/wm1001.cfm

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...3134-8152r.htm

Have a look - and think about it!

Ricardo
--
"Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..."

----------
In article , Ricardo
wrote:

Check on their recent submarine acquisitions, diesel and nuclear.

Uh huh. How many? Two? Three?

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Asi...fic/wm1001.cfm

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...3134-8152r.htm

Have a look - and think about it!

Well, The Heritage Foundation says the answer is--four. And also accuses
the US Navy of ignoring the threat. That's kinda funny, actually, because
the submarine service would be jumping all over this if it's true. I have a
glossy brochure that they produced over a decade ago warning about all the
submarines that the Russians were launching, and that didn't happen.

Something that frequently gets lost in the hype about Chinese "force
modernization" is that in many cases they are not really increasing their
numbers. They're simply replacing badly outdated equipment. Their sub
fleet is ancient, so they're modernizing it.

Don't believe all the hype. Yeah, they're building weapons, but it's not at
a great rate.



D