PRC Peoples Liberation Army Navy

[Feanor]

Most of that post isn't about freedom of navigation though.

24 Chinese subs ... I'm not sure how the logistics would work there but yes that would be unpleasant

Is the US or Europe planning on drilling for oil in the SCS? No of course not.

Europeans as far as Cornwall, but mostly in the Mediterranean, have indeed suffered from dangers from the sea, most notable the Barbary Pirates.

The acts that you describe are far from freedom of navigation, and some, such as blockading the English channel are acts of war.

Is it an act of war if not legal blockade occurs, and no attempt to stop vessels occurs, but the simple quantity of Chinese warships is such that physically no other ship can pass? This questions sounds a bit silly when discussing submarines, but I'm more thinking of the Chinese fishing or "fishing" (phishing?) fleet. Hang a naval ensign, put the crew in some sort of uniform, and ta-da "warships". Not blockading, but there's a lot of them, to the point where you literally can't navigate past them.

 

[swerve]

Well, first of all, there's the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGS). The English Channel, & especially the Strait of Dover, is a regulated waterway with legally enforceable traffic regulations. It (& the waters either side) are also all EEZ waters where fishing is regulated. A huge fleet of Chinese fishing vessels seeking to block the strait would be breaching COLREGS, & if they put nets down, breaking fishing laws. Also, British & French territorial waters meet in the middle.

There are laws about innocent passage, as well. Warships en masse, deliberately breaking them (& massing would, in itself, be a breach), could be acted against, & if they resisted, sunk. I think it wouldn't get that far, though. Pretending to be fishing boats then revealing themselves as warships would be another breach. Warships must identify as such throughout.

The whole thing's illegal, in multiple ways. I doubt that the weird scenario was thought about when the laws were written, but lesser actions certainly were, & this scenario is really just some of those lesser actions which were legislated against on a very large scale.

 

[Feanor]

Well, first of all, there's the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGS). The English Channel, & especially the Strait of Dover, is a regulated waterway with legally enforceable traffic regulations. It (& the waters either side) are also all EEZ waters where fishing is regulated. A huge fleet of Chinese fishing vessels seeking to block the strait would be breaching COLREGS, & if they put nets down, breaking fishing laws. Also, British & French territorial waters meet in the middle.

There are laws about innocent passage, as well. Warships en masse, deliberately breaking them (& massing would, in itself, be a breach), could be acted against, & if they resisted, sunk. I think it wouldn't get that far, though. Pretending to be fishing boats then revealing themselves as warships would be another breach. Warships must identify as such throughout.

The whole thing's illegal, in multiple ways. I doubt that the weird scenario was thought about when the laws were written, but lesser actions certainly were, & this scenario is really just some of those lesser actions which were legislated against on a very large scale.

In my hypothetical they wouldn't reveal themselves suddenly, rather China simply does this in advance and then sails them into a space in large numbers. No fishing nets, no fishing taking place, the obstruction is the point, a sort of soft blockade, but a major impediment to sea traffic below the threshold of war. Your point about the territorial waters is taken, and the English Channel specifically is a pretty unlikely place for this to happen but what about in international waters around an island or some major port? Maybe a disputed island somewhere around China...

 

[Redlands18]

If anyone put 24 Submarines in the English channel on an operational mission, their opponent would probably be rubbing their hands together with glee.

The average depth is just over 60 metres, where are they going to hide?

During the Ice Age you could walk from where Paris is to where London is.

 

[Redshift]

Is it an act of war if not legal blockade occurs, and no attempt to stop vessels occurs, but the simple quantity of Chinese warships is such that physically no other ship can pass? This questions sounds a bit silly when discussing submarines, but I'm more thinking of the Chinese fishing or "fishing" (phishing?) fleet. Hang a naval ensign, put the crew in some sort of uniform, and ta-da "warships". Not blockading, but there's a lot of them, to the point where you literally can't navigate past them.

Hmmm I'm not sure that they could realistically block the English channel by just their presence, how would they stay on station? How would they resupply?

Does the size of the current Chinese Navy even come close to the Royal Navy or the USN of the first half of the 20th century?

I might just look that up!

 

[Redshift]

Hmmm I'm not sure that they could realistically block the English channel by just their presence, how would they stay on station? How would they resupply?

Does the size of the current Chinese Navy even come close to the Royal Navy or the USN of the first half of the 20th century?

I might just look that up!

From Wikipedia

At the start of the war in 1939, the Royal Navy was the largest in the world, with over 1,400 vessels.[109][110]

7 aircraft carriers – with 5 more under construction
15 battleships and battlecruisers – with 5 more under construction
66 cruisers – with 23 more under construction
184 destroyers – with 52 under construction
45 escort and patrol vessels – with 9 under construction and one on order
60 submarines – with 9 under construction

I think that you anchored that lot in the English channel ships could still get past myself.

 

[Redshift]

From Wikipedia

At the start of the war in 1939, the Royal Navy was the largest in the world, with over 1,400 vessels.[109][110]

7 aircraft carriers – with 5 more under construction
15 battleships and battlecruisers – with 5 more under construction
66 cruisers – with 23 more under construction
184 destroyers – with 52 under construction
45 escort and patrol vessels – with 9 under construction and one on order
60 submarines – with 9 under construction

I think that you anchored that lot in the English channel ships could still get past myself.

The strait of Gibraltar might be a better place to go and just be a nuisance! Only 13km wide, better still the entrance to the Suex or Panama canas??

 

[Ananda]

what about in international waters around an island or some major port? Maybe a disputed island somewhere around China...

This is similar to what I'm implying on my previous post. Officialy China aggressively shadowing US and Allies ships in SCS because they are encroaching on their SCS bases. While US said otherwise, as they are not recognized China SCS base as Chinese teritory and consider that as part of International Water.

Thus the question in SCS will move from freedom of navigation (from US and Allies POV) to encroachment toward sovereign Chinese Military Base (from China POV). English Channel comparison as examples is not similar case. However if Chinese vessels then just moving around outside 12 miles of Portsmouth, will RN not shadowing closely like PLAN done in SCS ? Or USN if PLAN ships now circling around Diego Garcia in the name of Freedom of Navigation. What RN and USN going to do if PLAN put their spy ships in front of Portsmouth and Diego Garcia just in border what consider as teritorial water.

There's difference between Freedom of Navigation and security action toward safety of your own ports or Naval Base. PLAN and Russian are known to do more aggressive close shadowing in their practices (especially when they consider USN and Allies doing encroachment toward their bases). However if situation reverse, I doubt USN and Allies will not do similar practices.

 

[koxinga]

While I would say never say never, the chances of the Chinese turning up in Europe on semi-permanent basis is remote.

Their priorities have been to secure what they deem as their sphere of influence (e.g Pacific), lines of trade (e.g Indo-pac/ME). If Chinese activities do increase in non-traditional areas like the Alantic and Med, it's the geopolitical equvialent of trolling and not a lasting or significant policy shift.

I don't recommend to continue this largely remote, hypothetical discussion, as it is going down a rabbit hole...

 

[Redshift]

This is similar to what I'm implying on my previous post. Officialy China aggressively shadowing US and Allies ships in SCS because they are encroaching on their SCS bases. While US said otherwise, as they are not recognized China SCS base as Chinese teritory and consider that as part of International Water.

Thus the question in SCS will move from freedom of navigation (from US and Allies POV) to encroachment toward sovereign Chinese Military Base (from China POV). English Channel comparison as examples is not similar case. However if Chinese vessels then just moving around outside 12 miles of Portsmouth, will RN not shadowing closely like PLAN done in SCS ? Or USN if PLAN ships now circling around Diego Garcia in the name of Freedom of Navigation. What RN and USN going to do if PLAN put their spy ships in front of Portsmouth and Diego Garcia just in border what consider as teritorial water.

There's difference between Freedom of Navigation and security action toward safety of your own ports or Naval Base. PLAN and Russian are known to do more aggressive close shadowing in their practices (especially when they consider USN and Allies doing encroachment toward their bases). However if situation reverse, I doubt USN and Allies will not do similar practices.

Yes the royal navy and the RAF will indeed shadow them, what they won't do is

Shine lasers at them, risking blinding Chinese sailors.

Aim water cannon at them.

Maneuver dangerously threatening to cause a collision at sea.

Give them illegal orders and threaten to attack them.

They are highly unlikely to start firing weapons or dropping bombs either (aka Russia).

I don't think that you understand European or British behaviour as much as you think you do.

We will almost certainly remain within internationally agreed laws, boundaries and guidelines. I am not aware that we have constructed military bases inside the EEZ of other countries , China is now the nearest thing to a colonial power that the world has, emulating the British Empire strategies of old by using their economy, leasing land, building bases and simply using force to appropriate their hotly disputed claims. It is noteworthy that to date they have done this against east and south east Asian rather than Europe or the USA.

 

[Ananda]

China Launches Its Most Sophisticated Submarine to Date - Naval News

A Chinese shipyard in Wuhan has launched a submarine which is likely to be the country's most advanced non-nuclear type. The new boat is larger than existing ones and is the first in the country to feature X-form rudders. There are indications that it may have a vertical launch system (VLS).

www.navalnews.com

Sutton wrote in Naval News on more description of new Chinese SSK. I believe before he already shown some pictures on this new type of SSK in his own X account. However now he seems manage gatherings more information. Seems SSK with VLS also catching trend with Chinese designer.

Current SSK the type 039 already also being export by China. Pakistan already become user, while Thailand still in limbo, as to get final decision.

 

[John Fedup]

China Launches Its Most Sophisticated Submarine to Date - Naval News

A Chinese shipyard in Wuhan has launched a submarine which is likely to be the country's most advanced non-nuclear type. The new boat is larger than existing ones and is the first in the country to feature X-form rudders. There are indications that it may have a vertical launch system (VLS).

www.navalnews.com

Sutton wrote in Naval News on more description of new Chinese SSK. I believe before he already shown some pictures on this new type of SSK in his own X account. However now he seems manage gatherings more information. Seems SSK with VLS also catching trend with Chinese designer.

Current SSK the type 039 already also being export by China. Pakistan already become user, while Thailand still in limbo, as to get final decision.

Interesting speculation wrt the longer length. As per the article, a VLS is the likely reason. However, given the huge R&D investments in battery technology by China in the commercial sector, a longer endurance propulsion system is also a possible reason.

 

[Ananda]

China’s submarine fleet may soon be powered by lithium batteries

Technical solutions have been found through extensive development and testing in booming electric car market, according to navy study.

www.scmp.com

PLANA and Chinese Yards seems already invest more and more with Lithium Ion battery. Thus they are going follow Japan and French in that matter. Even ROK seems also begin to tilt more to Li-Ion then AIP. Type 039 use AIP. Thus not clear yet for this new SSK, if they're going to combine AIP with Li-Ion, or just Li-Ion.

 

[Redshift]

Is it an act of war if not legal blockade occurs, and no attempt to stop vessels occurs, but the simple quantity of Chinese warships is such that physically no other ship can pass? This questions sounds a bit silly when discussing submarines, but I'm more thinking of the Chinese fishing or "fishing" (phishing?) fleet. Hang a naval ensign, put the crew in some sort of uniform, and ta-da "warships". Not blockading, but there's a lot of them, to the point where you literally can't navigate past them.

Then they would surely be impeding freedom of navigation? They would be obliged by the laws of the sea to avoid collision so it's not going to work

I'm not sure what the point is though in postulating absurd situations such as the fishing boats one though after all what would they eat and drink, where would they refuel amongst other minor problems?

 

[Feanor]

Then they would surely be impeding freedom of navigation? They would be obliged by the laws of the sea to avoid collision so it's not going to work

I'm not sure what the point is though in postulating absurd situations such as the fishing boats one though after all what would they eat and drink, where would they refuel amongst other minor problems?

I'm not well versed in international law regarding freedom of navigation, hence that question. Though I wonder between a static and a moving ship, who is required to take action to avoid collision? Take a look at the second post I made though. Presumably they would eat and drink and resupply at nearby Chinese ports. I don't literally think they're going to do this in the English channel. It was more of a mental exercise to test the concept.

 

[Redshift]

I'm not well versed in international law regarding freedom of navigation, hence that question. Though I wonder between a static and a moving ship, who is required to take action to avoid collision? Take a look at the second post I made though. Presumably they would eat and drink and resupply at nearby Chinese ports. I don't literally think they're going to do this in the English channel. It was more of a mental exercise to test the concept.

Sorry I misunderstood, I thought that you were positing the Chinese fishing fleet filling the English channel!!

 

[Redshift]

Sorry I misunderstood, I thought that you were positing the Chinese fishing fleet filling the English channel!!

I think that to be considered stationary you must be at anchor and displaying the appropriate lights and signals . If you are moving then there are specific rules as to who gives way.

 

[Ananda]

Chinese Navy Testing Laser Turret On Type 071 LPD

The Chinese Navy is testing what appears to be a laser turret on a Type 071 amphibious dock. The step is a notable first for PLAN.

www.navalnews.com

PLAN shown their prototype of Direct Energy Weapons on one their Type 71 Prototype. Shown they are catching up on the weapons program with US. Their Electromagnetic Rail Gun also being use one of their amphibious assets as testing platform.

 

[John Fedup]

Chinese Navy Testing Laser Turret On Type 071 LPD

The Chinese Navy is testing what appears to be a laser turret on a Type 071 amphibious dock. The step is a notable first for PLAN.

www.navalnews.com

PLAN shown their prototype of Direct Energy Weapons on one their Type 71 Prototype. Shown they are catching up on the weapons program with US. Their Electromagnetic Rail Gun also being use one of their amphibious assets as testing platform.

Will be interesting to watch the progress on lasers. As for the railgun, probably will disappoint the PLAN as it seems to have done to the USN. Besides durability problems, the energy requirements are significant, even more than lasers. Other than nuclear carriers, only the Zumwalt class with its 78 MW of GT IEP is the USN’s only conventional candidate and they are going with hypersonic missiles in lieu of the AGS.

 

[Ananda]

Yes, not see more development on that rail gun development from Chinese Weibo or from Deino's X. However few months back found some talk in Chinese forums that the rail guns development still on going.

Still personally it's still bit early to discount rail gun. Japan already test their own version last year.

Japan Performs First Ever Railgun Test From Ship at Sea - Naval News

Japan's ATLA announced it has conducted the first ever railgun test firing from a ship, with the cooperation of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF).

www.navalnews.com

DEW seems so far being focus as part of anti missiles and anti drones defense. With advancement of hypersonic missile, more likely DEW can be the choices being taken as defense weapons for that. While rail gun more as missiles alternative (at least that's what I read from the prototypes program). So I guess the nature of target environment bit different between rail gun and DEW. So far PLAN seems going toward both of them, while on other side US on DEW but Japan seems keen on Rail Gun path. Perhaps both of them complement each other.