The US Navy shouldn't be surprised in the least, given that they had a Swedish submarine (HMS Gotland) doing exactly that in various exercises for two years straight.
Yes, but Swedes are amusing little people who eat strange fish from an amusing little country where they make wonderfully intricate clocks and great chocolate[1], so they're supposed to be able to do that. And they're harmless
The Chinese, on the other hand, are The Great Commie Evil who are supposed to be utterly technically and procedurally incompetent due to their inferior moral fiber and their lack of Jeezus. *Them* doing this is, alongside the trumpets and the horsemen and the end of days, a sign that maybe, just maybe, the US's continued assumption that they dominate despite coming 50th or so worldwide is most measures is not Divine Jeezus-inspired Truth.
And THAT gives them nightmares.
[1]: Do you *really* expect the current crop of Americans in government to know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland? I don't.
Not so much your military competence, but, rather, the unjustified sense of smug superiority so many Americans, particularly military sorts, exhibit in regards to everything.
The US military has pretty much the best hardware on the planet, and mostly has reasonably competent personnel running it. However, the concept of not being *the best* at anything at all is incredibly shocking to many Americans - and the idea of the heathen commies doing something right? That's damn near blasphemy.
Its already been said, but diesels are damned near impossible to track. I could go into a lot of detail on successful prosecutions of subs by the US... but I'd lose my clearance and that would be bad.
At least in the Navy, its more a case of several things we do well, but not necessarily anything in which we excel... definitely a case of Jack of many trades, master of none.
Again, I'm not saying the Navy are bad at any of this, or that this was due to incompetence rather than the natural difficulty in tracking a very quiet thing in an ocean.
My statement about puncturing the myth of natural supremacy has to do far more with other things, of which this is an example. The myth is much *less* far from the truth in the realm of military competence than it is in terms of, say, electoral honesty, medical care, or quality of available education.
That's nothing new, really; I saw a news article shot in the mid-80s aboard the HMCS Onondaga (a Canadian diesel sub) during a NATO exercise in the North Atlantic, which showed footage of the sub's Captain executing a successful simulated torpedo attack on the USS America (an American aircraft carrier).
-- Steve distinctly remembers the Captain's joking order to, "Stand by to surface and machinegun survivors."
PS: diesel subs are deadly quiet for submarines; the US does really well detecting the louder nuclear subs, but everybody has trouble with diesels running on batteries.
I'm wondering why the American battle group wasn't running active sonar - even a diesel sub running on batteries ought to show up if you're pinging the hell out of the area. (My only guess is that would *also* show up their own subs, and they didn't want to give them away.)
The lack of any independent corroborating articles by other major news agencies (AP, CP, CNN, BBC, US networks) suggests that this may not be quite as true as all that.
That said, it's believable: the Chinese are reported elsewhere to be investing in diesel-electric subs, and as has been noted, those can be very quiet indeed.
The Daily Mail isn't known for its journalistic integrity. There was one point where it was nicknamed the Princess Diana Memorial, because it wouldn't stop devoting the front page to her even many years after her death.
It also led to tense diplomatic exchanges, with shaken American diplomats demanding to know why the submarine was "shadowing" the U.S. fleet while Beijing pleaded ignorance and dismissed the affair as coincidence.
Er, maybe it was just parked there (being that the carrier group was "in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan") and they moseyed over its position, then the sub captain thought "hey, wouldn't it be funny if..."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 12:43 am (UTC)DAYYYAAMMN.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 01:43 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 09:59 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 02:31 pm (UTC)The Chinese, on the other hand, are The Great Commie Evil who are supposed to be utterly technically and procedurally incompetent due to their inferior moral fiber and their lack of Jeezus. *Them* doing this is, alongside the trumpets and the horsemen and the end of days, a sign that maybe, just maybe, the US's continued assumption that they dominate despite coming 50th or so worldwide is most measures is not Divine Jeezus-inspired Truth.
And THAT gives them nightmares.
[1]: Do you *really* expect the current crop of Americans in government to know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland? I don't.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 03:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 04:30 pm (UTC)The US military has pretty much the best hardware on the planet, and mostly has reasonably competent personnel running it. However, the concept of not being *the best* at anything at all is incredibly shocking to many Americans - and the idea of the heathen commies doing something right? That's damn near blasphemy.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 08:19 pm (UTC)At least in the Navy, its more a case of several things we do well, but not necessarily anything in which we excel... definitely a case of Jack of many trades, master of none.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 09:15 pm (UTC)My statement about puncturing the myth of natural supremacy has to do far more with other things, of which this is an example. The myth is much *less* far from the truth in the realm of military competence than it is in terms of, say, electoral honesty, medical care, or quality of available education.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 11:28 am (UTC)I figured it was a diesel running on its electric motor before I even read the article.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 02:55 pm (UTC)-- Steve distinctly remembers the Captain's joking order to, "Stand by to surface and machinegun survivors."
PS: diesel subs are deadly quiet for submarines; the US does really well detecting the louder nuclear subs, but everybody has trouble with diesels running on batteries.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 03:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 03:51 pm (UTC)Because hippies bitch at us when whales show up dead with ruptured ear drums.....
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-13 01:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 05:23 pm (UTC)That said, it's believable: the Chinese are reported elsewhere to be investing in diesel-electric subs, and as has been noted, those can be very quiet indeed.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 07:33 pm (UTC)The Daily Mail isn't known for its journalistic integrity. There was one point where it was nicknamed the Princess Diana Memorial, because it wouldn't stop devoting the front page to her even many years after her death.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-12 09:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-13 04:12 am (UTC)Er, maybe it was just parked there (being that the carrier group was "in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan") and they moseyed over its position, then the sub captain thought "hey, wouldn't it be funny if..."
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-13 01:52 pm (UTC)"You think their eyes are round now! Watch this!"