Small Fish Boats vs 3 Billion USD Destroyer

[Lostfleet]

US Navy hopes $3 billion stealth ship answers a rising China | Inquirer Global Nation

Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong's strategy of sending many small fish boats with explosives reminds me of Japanese preparations for Allied invasion in 1945.

Apart from the much debated Zumwalts, what kind of force does the US Navy needs to station of China with its current fleet?

 

[STURM]

Admiral Zhaozhong's statement was purely rhetoric and does not suggest that the PLAN has such 'plans' in place. Though the PLAN do doubt has well rehearsed plans to use assymetric tactics, in conjunction with air and land based assets, to off set the USN 's tecnological superiority, I doubt very much if this includes fishing trawlers ramming USN ships. I'm just speculating but between the lines, what he was probably saying is that despite the USN pouring in a ton of cash on a new technologically advanced vessel, the PLAN was not worried and had plans to counter it.

 

[Lostfleet]

I am just trying to imagine a flottila of a thousand fishing boats swarming upon an Arleigh Burke class : probably it will make a good movie scene,

I read a book published by Osprey called "Defense of Japan 1945" a very light reading about invasion preparations of Japan. Plans included a lot of assymetrical tactics as well ( submersible gun platforms, kamikaze airplanes and boats hidden in caves, a lot of midget submarines, frogman with mines) Since invasion never took places I don't know how these tactics would work compared to conventional tactics.

In case of China, I always thought numerical superiority would be their tactic, like missile boat flottilas in the size of 30-40 ships against a fleet ( not a carrier fleet though), employing 3 or 4 sqaudrons of J-7 ( Mig-21 ) against a squadron of a F-18, F-15 or F-16, but I guess it would be very difficult at a battle scene to co-ordinate these big numbers to come at one point at a favorable moment.

So I wonder what would be their assymetrical tactics apart from the fishing boats ? a new invention at an electronic warfare or anti-ship ICBMs ? any ideas?

 

[cconway]

Admiral Zhaozhong's statement was purely rhetoric and does not suggest that the PLAN has such 'plans' in place. Though the PLAN do doubt has well rehearsed plans to use assymetric tactics, in conjunction with air and land based assets, to off set the USN 's tecnological superiority, I doubt very much if this includes fishing trawlers ramming USN ships. I'm just speculating but between the lines, what he was probably saying is that despite the USN pouring in a ton of cash on a new technologically advanced vessel, the PLAN was not worried and had plans to counter it.

As in most of these situations, it is not the capability of the equipment, as much as the Rules Of Engagement. One can own and operate the perfect system, but when the powers that be preclude the use of the safeguards built into the system to protect itself, and do its job, you end up with our people getting killed.

 

[STURM]

In case of China, I always thought numerical superiority would be their tactic

That may have been the case in the 1960's right up to the 1980's, when Chinese doctrine placed emphasis on mass superiority at the point of contact to compensate for technological defiencies against an opponent they thought they were most likely to face which was technologically advanced - which during this period was the Soviet Union. Many still have a purely Western entric viewpoint of the Chinese military and the Chinese use of mass infantry attacks in Korea [though more than 60 years ago[ and the PLAs performance against Vietnam in 1979 continues to influence the way many think as to how the Chinese might conduct themselves in a future war. But things have changed, the technological gap seperating the Chinese and U.S. military has narrowed and the Chinese have made changes to their doctrine, in line with new capabilities made possible by new assets. They are certainly not going to play to the strengths of their enemy and launch mindless mass attacks on the principle that some might get through the enemy's defences.

In a scenario where they might find themselves in conflict with the U.S. over Taiwan or in the South China Sea, the Chinese military will no doubt still use a mix of low end assets [in quantity] in conjunction with more capable assets but these will be carefully planned to maximise any advantage they have to take into account the USNs strengths and weaknesses as well as their own, and will be in parallel with air, surface, sub surface and land base assets. We also have to take in account that the Chinese may have a few surprises up their sleeves, ones that foreign intel agencies might not have found out about. The use of fishing boats in mass is very unlikely to succeed or even be attempted as USN ships, in times of war or in times or heightened tensions, will be on full alert against any kinds of assymetric attacks involving non-miliary small craft and even aircraft, not to mention the fact that USN ships will be quite a distance way from the mainland.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I am just trying to imagine a flottila of a thousand fishing boats swarming upon an Arleigh Burke class : probably it will make a good movie scene,

And like most movie scenes of military action it would be total nonsense. The good Chinese Admiral has displayed either an amazing ignorance of naval warfare or was just throwing a line out there for the defence ignorant media to swallow. A thousand suicide boats against a modern destroyer would end with all suicide boats being destroyed. Because the destroyer would simply sail away from them faster than they are able to sail making it physically impossible for their suicide attack to work. The destroyer would then pick these boats off one at a time if they were foolish enough to try and chase it. This kind of attack only works when the destroyer is immobile in port and you don’t need a thousand, one or two will be fine, as was the case with the attack on USS Cole.

I read a book published by Osprey called "Defense of Japan 1945" a very light reading about invasion preparations of Japan. Plans included a lot of assymetrical tactics as well ( submersible gun platforms, kamikaze airplanes and boats hidden in caves, a lot of midget submarines, frogman with mines) Since invasion never took places I don't know how these tactics would work compared to conventional tactics.

The USN was implementing a massive scheme to counter these Japanese defences for the planned invasion. They were converting literally hundreds, maybe even over a thousand (memory is hazy), large landing craft (LSMs, LCIs) into gunboats covered with 40mm and 20mm. These boats would screen the landing force and destroy the incoming boats, semi-submersibles and the like. Also similar German attempts to use small boats and semi-submersibles against the D-Day fleets were hugely unsuccessful.

Also one needs to factor into account the static nature of these asymmetric units. The Japanese had to cover all their landing areas and they lacked the mobility to redeploy once the Allied landing had gone ahead. So far from facing the hundreds of boats, semi-submersibles, frogmen, etc the Allies would only face a small fraction that were pre-located in the landing area.

The real threat the Allied landings would have faced were the same weapons that caused most of the casualties in the Okinawa invasion: mortars, artillery and Kamikaze aircraft. The later would be comparatively less capable because the Allies would have far more tactical aircraft over Japanese airbases to supress them. Also the USN was fielding faster fighters and the world’s first AEW to provide interception of Kamikazes further from the ships than before. In the end the invasion of Japan would come down to a conventional slug fest.

 

[aussienscale]

If you had a thousand fishing boats coming at you packed full of explosives, it would be like a room full of mouse traps ! Just blow up one of them and set off the chain reaction

 

[StobieWan]

If you had a thousand fishing boats coming at you packed full of explosives, it would be like a room full of mouse traps ! Just blow up one of them and set off the chain reaction

Can't see it being a lot of fun for the fishing boat guys - DDG-1000 carries a pair of 57mm each side plus AGS, two helicopters and numerous smaller calibre weapons. That's a lot of spent brass to kick over the side afterwards.

I suspect other methods like air dropped mines laid at short notice into choke points and whatever the Chinese equivalent of Stonefish or Captor would be for starters, plus any Silkworm armed FAC's. Maybe if they containerised an ASM like the recent Klub conversion but if the USN forces stay away from shipping lanes, getting near them will be interesting (fatal...)

 

[fretburner]

Can't see it being a lot of fun for the fishing boat guys - DDG-1000 carries a pair of 57mm each side plus AGS, two helicopters and numerous smaller calibre weapons. That's a lot of spent brass to kick over the side afterwards.

And if there's an Amphibious Assault Ship nearby -- it's an AH-1Z Turkey Shoot

The only way a suicide boat swarm would win is if the USN did NOT know it was even a suicide boat swarm in the first place. But then again, if there's a thousand of such boats coming their way, they will probably know what it is exactly. The helos are going to get the first shot

 

[Belesari]

US Navy hopes $3 billion stealth ship answers a rising China | Inquirer Global Nation

Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong's strategy of sending many small fish boats with explosives reminds me of Japanese preparations for Allied invasion in 1945.

Apart from the much debated Zumwalts, what kind of force does the US Navy needs to station of China with its current fleet?

While i dont agree with the idea of fishing boats with explosives i think a better question is what if they just say "hey here it is" through satelite phones or radio's.

I believe its supposed to be visible from 13 or so mile away and if its operating in the litorials someone Will see it who will then tell someone else which will end in a squadron of cheap fast chinese missile boats zeroing in on the DDG with others following on.

 

[dazzerler1]

While i dont agree with the idea of fishing boats with explosives i think a better question is what if they just say "hey here it is" through satelite phones or radio's.

I believe its supposed to be visible from 13 or so mile away and if its operating in the litorials someone Will see it who will then tell someone else which will end in a squadron of cheap fast chinese missile boats zeroing in on the DDG with others following on.

I can't believed these discussions and scenarios, they are like coming from high school kids and movie plots. The USN officers and sailors are not a bunch of idiots to think that they will not know what they are up against? A bunch of fishing boats attacking an sophisticated $3B warship is preposterous and at best laughable. What ever happened to all those aircrafts/fighters from the 6 aircraft carriers stationed in the pacific, or just say 1 aircraft carrier closeby? Did anybody think that the USN will not use those aircrafts/fighters to demolish all those fishing boats? LOL.

 

[salthorse]

One might take a leaf out of the UNCLASS Naval War College series, China Maritime Studies Number 3 on Chinese mine warfare here..."PRC historical analyses point to numerous examples, ranging from WWII to the Persian Gulf, of civilian vessels executing MIW and MCM missions." Food for thought....the threat does not have to be a direct engagement.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

One might take a leaf out of the UNCLASS Naval War College series, China Maritime Studies Number 3 on Chinese mine warfare here..."PRC historical analyses point to numerous examples, ranging from WWII to the Persian Gulf, of civilian vessels executing MIW and MCM missions." Food for thought....the threat does not have to be a direct engagement.

There is a big difference between laying mines with a fishing fleet and sending them out as a suicide battle fleet. Trawler mine layers or not the USN won’t be sending ships into Chinese waters without MCM protection.

The idea that a fleet of suicide equipped trawlers is somehow going to deny access to the USN as was the thrust of this original statement is ridiculous. I also wouldn’t be too confident that the Chinese have countermeasures for the kinds of capabilities the Zumwalt class brings to the table. It’s a true stealth ship – as opposed to all those ships with angled sides that just reduce their radar signature to that of a boat but can still easily be detected – and has very powerful land attack weapons.

 

[Belesari]

There is a big difference between laying mines with a fishing fleet and sending them out as a suicide battle fleet. Trawler mine layers or not the USN won’t be sending ships into Chinese waters without MCM protection.

The idea that a fleet of suicide equipped trawlers is somehow going to deny access to the USN as was the thrust of this original statement is ridiculous. I also wouldn’t be too confident that the Chinese have countermeasures for the kinds of capabilities the Zumwalt class brings to the table. It’s a true stealth ship – as opposed to all those ships with angled sides that just reduce their radar signature to that of a boat but can still easily be detected – and has very powerful land attack weapons.

Its really not that powerful.

The AGS has long range yes. However, the shells (or better term missiles sense thats really what they are-7ft ones at that) have a small warhead 24lbs. Also while the DDG is stealthy any missiles or rounds sent down range are not. Imagine those 10rpm arching through the air....showing where the ship is to any good radar.

That assumes that the ships location hasnt already been broadcast by a chinese friendly ship nearby sense many of the places it will be operating are major shipping lanes.

And before anyone brings it up i understand its missile load out. Thats a good thing. But is it something any ship near that size couldnt have had anyways? And if the missiles are what makes it so dangerous what is the benefit vs cost of a more traditional ship?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Its really not that powerful.

Depends who’s doing the measuring… US Navy thinks it is.

The AGS has long range yes. However, the shells (or better term missiles sense thats really what they are-7ft ones at that) have a small warhead 24lbs.

No they are shells, fired through a gun and all that. Used like a shell fired in barrages against area targets as opposed to a single or small number of missiles against a point target. As to the size of their warhead six inch shells have been destroying targets well enough for a long time. Obviously it’s smaller than say a Tomahawk missile but the whole point is you fire a large number of shells to cover an area over time. A similar cost/weight in Tomahawk missiles is not going to do the same level of sustained damage to something like an amphibious beachhead as the AGS will do.

Also while the DDG is stealthy any missiles or rounds sent down range are not. Imagine those 10rpm arching through the air....showing where the ship is to any good radar.

Obviously any stealthy asset from a submarine to a B-2 telegraph’s its position when it blows something up but their stealth enables them to get undetected into a firing position and then escape. Using a firing point calculator to track back on a ballistic arc may tell you were the stealth ship was when it fired its gun and the general area it is in but that doesn’t mean you can target it with anything less than nuclear weapons. And you plot is going to expire its use very rapidly as soon as it stops shooting. Of course since the AGS on a Zumwalt does not fire shells that follow ballistic arcs its no good even for localisation in this case.

So that’s not how stealth works plus that’s not how guns and missile works equals incorrect conclusion.

 

[ADMk2]

Its really not that powerful.

The AGS has long range yes. However, the shells (or better term missiles sense thats really what they are-7ft ones at that) have a small warhead 24lbs. Also while the DDG is stealthy any missiles or rounds sent down range are not. Imagine those 10rpm arching through the air....showing where the ship is to any good radar.

This is a single guided 155mm round impacting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaJBmyDxtYE

Is that powerful enough for you?

 

[STURM]

The good Admiral's statement was purely rhetorical and was intended to send a message that despite billions poured in for a new USN ship, the PLAN was not worried. The Chinese are not so naive or foolish as to believe that large numbers of fishing vessels packed with explosives will work against USN ships in open waters that are on full alert.

I The USN officers and sailors are not a bunch of idiots to think that they will not know what they are up against?

The same can be said about the PLAN....

 

[aussienscale]

I can't believed these discussions and scenarios, they are like coming from high school kids and movie plots. The USN officers and sailors are not a bunch of idiots to think that they will not know what they are up against? A bunch of fishing boats attacking an sophisticated $3B warship is preposterous and at best laughable. What ever happened to all those aircrafts/fighters from the 6 aircraft carriers stationed in the pacific, or just say 1 aircraft carrier closeby? Did anybody think that the USN will not use those aircrafts/fighters to demolish all those fishing boats? LOL.

Dazzerler, welcome to the site, if you hang around you will get to know us a bit better, especially the regular posters, but just so you know, most of the post's on this subject have been taking the p*^#

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The same can be said about the PLAN....

Except in this case where an Admiral in the PLAN has made claims that can’t be supported.

The good Admiral's statement was purely rhetorical and was intended to send a message that despite billions poured in for a new USN ship, the PLAN was not worried. The Chinese are not so naive or foolish as to believe that large numbers of fishing vessels packed with explosives will work against USN ships in open waters that are on full alert.

It wasn’t a rhetorical statement because it relies on ignorance on the beholder to have any meaning. It was plain and simple propaganda. A Maoist attempt to talk down the importance of quality in the face of quantity.

Unfortunately for the PLAN they completely lack the numbers needed to overmatch the USN’s superior capability. If the PLAN isn’t worried about the Zumwalt class then they are unprofessional.

 

[Volkodav]

Except in this case where an Admiral in the PLAN has made claims that can’t be supported.



It wasn’t a rhetorical statement because it relies on ignorance on the beholder to have any meaning. It was plain and simple propaganda. A Maoist attempt to talk down the importance of quality in the face of quantity.

Unfortunately for the PLAN they completely lack the numbers needed to overmatch the USN’s superior capability. If the PLAN isn’t worried about the Zumwalt class then they are unprofessional.

It almost sounds like the maritime equivalent of human wave attacks, you just keep sacrificing your people until the enemy runs out of personnel, ammunition or both. The problem is technology has moved on and and the only thing such a strategy would result in this day and age is a great many unnecessary deaths.