Aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth and her Carrier Strike Group have entered the South China Sea for the second time, despite Chinese warnings.

This is the second time the British carrier strike group has entered the disputed region.

China previously issued a warning to the UK’s Carrier Strike Group not to carry out any “improper acts” as it entered the South China Sea for the first time earlier this year. The pro-government Global Times, which is seen as a mouthpiece for the ruling Chinese Communist Party, said:

“The People’s Liberation Army Navy is at a high state of combat readiness China has been closely monitoring the progress of the Carrier Strike Group, which is currently sailing through the South China Sea en route to Japan. It has also accused Britain of “still living in its colonial days.”

China claims almost all of the 1.3 million-square-mile South China Sea as its sovereign territory, and it has denounced the presence of foreign warships there as the root of tensions in the region.

HMS Queen Elizabeth and her Carrier Strike Group.

China say that its claim to the sea is based both on the Law of the Sea Convention and its so-called ‘nine-dash’ line. This line extends for 2,000 kilometers from the Chinese mainland, encompassing over half of the sea. However in an historic decision in 2016, the international tribunal in The Hague ruled against part of China’s claims to the sea.

The US, UK and Australia routinely conduct freedom of navigation operations (or FONOPs) to challenge what Washington calls “attempts by coastal states to unlawfully restrict access to the seas”.

Territorial claims in the South China Sea

Both the US and UK have angered China previously by carrying out ‘Freedom of Navigation Patrols’ in the South China Sea to assert rights to freedom of navigation. For more on why the Carrier Group is in the disputed region, follow the link below.

Why was a British carrier group in the South China Sea?

Chinese defence spokesman Tan Kefei was quoted in the South China Morning Post as saying:

“The Chinese side believes that the South China Sea should not become a sea of great power rivalry dominated by weapons and warships. The real source of militarisation in the South China Sea comes from countries outside this region sending their warships thousands of kilometres from home to flex muscles. The Chinese military will take necessary measures to safeguard its sovereignty, security and development interest as well as peace and stability in the South China Sea.”

HMS Queen Elizabeth sailing with her Carrier Strike Group.

Back at the start of the month, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told MPs that “It’s absolutely right we exercise and defend the rights, and we do so from the Ukrainian territorial sea to the South China Sea” after discussions on a British warship sailing through Ukrainian territory claimed by Russia.

What happened last time a British vessel sailed through the South China Sea?

HMS Albion has previously sailed through the South China Sea.

In 2018, assault ship HMS Albion was challenged by a Chinese frigate and two helicopters during freedom of navigation exercise in the South China Sea. Local media report that both sides remained calm during the encounter and the Royal Navy assault ship continued on course despite protests from China.

What is the UK Carrier Strike Group doing?

HMS Queen Elizabeth is the deployed flag ship for Carrier Strike Group 21 (CSG21), a deployment that will see the ship and her escorts sail to the Asia-Pacific and back. The Carrier Strike Group includes ships from the United States Navy, the Dutch Navy, and Marines from the US Marine Corps as well as air assets from 617 Sqn, 820 NAS, 815 NAS and 845 NAS.

The Royal Navy say that the UK’s Carrier Strike Group will visit more than one fifth of the world’s nations. Led by HMS Queen Elizabeth, the task group will visit 40 nations including India, Japan, Republic of Korea and Singapore in a deployment covering 26,000 nautical miles.

“While in the Pacific, ships from the Carrier Strike Group will mark the 50th anniversary of the Five Powers Defence Agreement between Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and the UK by taking part in Exercise Bersama Lima. Joining HMS Queen Elizabeth on her maiden deployment are destroyers HMS Diamond and Defender; frigates HMS Richmond and Kent; an Astute-class submarine in support below the waves; and Royal Fleet Auxiliary support ships RFA Fort Victoria and RFA Tidespring.

More than 30 aircraft will also embark across the task group including F-35 jets from 617 Squadron, the Dambusters, and the US Marine Corps’ VMFA-211; Wildcat helicopters from 815 Naval Air Squadron and Merlin helicopters from 820 and 845 Naval Air Squadrons. Royal Marines from 42 Commando will also deploy with the carrier. Dutch frigate HNLMS Evertsen and American Arleigh Burke destroyer USS The Sullivans are also part of the strike group.”

HMS Queen Elizabeth at sea with a mix of British and American jets.

For analysis on the rationale behind entering the South China Sea, followthe link below.

Right versus might in the South China Sea

 

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

138 COMMENTS

  1. Can China afford to maintain their massive navy? I know they have loads of money at the moment, but they seem to be hurting their economy by making decisions such as banning gaming etc.

    I have no idea how much it costs to maintain a Frigate or Destroyer over the course of it’s life, but I imagine it’s not cheap, and if China’s economy starts to slow down too much, they might decide to use their ships while they can still afford to.

      • This will give you a better picture of what we can expect with between six and ten carriers planned for the future.

        The one currently under construction will be their biggest yet measuring about 320 meters.

        “China’s naval modernization effort encompasses a wide array of ship, aircraft, and weapon acquisition programs, as well as improvements in maintenance and logistics, doctrine, personnel quality, education and training, and exercises. China’s navy has currently had certain limitations and weaknesses, and is working to overcome them.”

        https://news.usni.org/2021/09/14/report-to-congress-on-chinese-naval-modernization-11

          • Thanks for all the info.

            I had no idea their defence budget is expected to rise by so much. I thought it was high enough as it is.

            I bet a lot of countries in the South China sea are getting a bit worried.

          • I think their rate of expansion and technological improvements across the board should worry everyone!

            What also concerns me are the wargames involving Russia.
            No doubt they are taking note of the west’s approach with the possibility of joining forces at some point in the future?

            Hopefully, nothing more will come of it.

            https://www.skynews.com.au/world-news/china/more-than-10000-russian-and-chinese-troops-to-partake-in-attack-and-elimination-wargames/news-story/3c6b8f3954b9220b2954d55d98f73c47

          • Well certainly become very good at stealing tech and intellectual property rights violations aplenty

          • Clearly!

            “CASIC’s WJ-700 Lieying medium-altitude long-endurance UAV seen at Airshow China 2018 with a range of air-to-ground and air-to-surface missiles. The company is proposing that the WJ-700 be used as a stand-off missile launch platform using targeting cues from the stealthy Tianying reconnaissance UAV.” 

            https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/airshow-china-2021-casic-showcases-production-ready-wj-700-falcon-uav-and-unmanned-combat-system-concept

          • Every time, I put up a post like yours Jason , I get a question mark against it why because it’s the Truth

          • I think you are forgetting that China has a domograhic timebomb Nigel. China had a very high birth rate in the mid 1960’s to mid 70s, of whom are now facing retirement over the next 10 years, and low birth rates over the past 20 years, young labour force not enough to replace those retirements and will be at a loss to the economy. The one child policy came in early 1980’s, still high’is then.

          • On your point Meirion, I can see labour cost increases coming into play in China in the future. I saw a BBC world economic report stating 20% of new build homes can’t be sold. Not to mention large corporate type debt and inflationary pressures.

          • The one child policy only really applied to the han ethnic group China still has / had a growing population. Biggest challenge is the increasing expectation of continuing wealth for the Middle and wealthier sections of society and keeping the Party relevant. Plenty house of cards enterprises that could come tumbling down very quickly due to bogus accounting through the growth periods.

          • The demographic slump is going to hit Europe, Japan,South Korea and Taiwan worse than China. Reporters only report China’s problem, but ignore the fact that same problem applies to most developed countries.

          • NIGEL , RUSSIA has just test fired a Hypersonic missle from a Submarine fair enough the sub was on the surface but the Claim that no WESTERN, misdle defence system would be able too intercept is the same type of Rhetoric that was banded about during the Cold War if Russia and China instead of border scrapping are now conducting Joint exercises how long will it be before China has Hypersonic missiles as well ?

          • I’m guessing by the end of this decade. Hypersonic missile technology is still in its infancy to some degree so don’t expect too much too soon!

            Their engine technology is, without question, knocking on the door of modern western 4th gen fighters hence the reason for speeding up the introduction of AETP technology to keep us ahead of the pack!

          • Seems Russia will never learn. China and the USSR used to commonly have division sized “skirmishes” along the Amur river and even though China is playing nice, they still need natural resources badly. It just so happens that Siberia has plenty and it has barely been tapped so far. I can easily foresee China turning on Russia one day.

          • China’s neighbours woke up to her military expansion long ago & there’s a full-on arms race to match her. We’re the ones coming late to the party.

          • I foresee that most of our future CSG deployments will also be in China’s ‘neck of the woods’.

          • Well they’ve announced that Prince of Wales will be going to Australia in the next two years. So I guess you’re right.

          • Personally I doubt the Chinese increases will up by by two thirds in 9 years. Good old economic forces are starting to come into play . I foresee significant price increases in the cost of labour in China, plus there are real indicators their economy is facing internal trouble, particularly inflationary pressures.

            I think much of their defence spend increases will be to keep pace with inflation.

          • It’s interesting and we can see why the Australians are taking China seriously….

            I would think the Vietnamese are increasingly nervous about their expansionist neighbour.

            Though it’s a concern, China does have a sensible stable leadership and takes measured (if aggressive) actions, but these things can shift on a dime.

            A change of Chinese leadership to a more Hawkish regime, would make the situation in the Far East considerably more unstable and volatile overnight…

          • Well worryingly their present leader is taking actions to extend and ultimately remain in power indefinitely and to remove opposition like that from his predecessor who’s supporters are being progressively removed from positions of power, so hawkishness is certainly on the rise. Even more depressingly however I find is the deeply naive vote at the Labour Party Conference condemning the AUKUS pact, they seem to exhibit no understanding whatsoever of what is happening in the South Pacific or any understanding of the right for a relatively small in power but growing state like Australia or indeed all the smaller weak nations of the Pacific to have a right to defend themselves against an expansionist Imperial power like China. Even it seems when that power through its mouthpiece continually threatens ballistic attack if it doesn’t accept the leash they wish to place upon it now let alone what that pressure would be in ten or twenty years.

          • 25 aircraft, but all kept within international airspace. Threatening but no more than we do to others(plus we’ve overflown the USSR/Russia & PRC, not just buzzed the border.)& Russia does regularly to us.

          • China usually plays the long game. Will they have upped their amphibious capability sufficiently by 2026 to seize Taiwan? Might they try a more inscrutable way, anyway – using cyber warfare and PsyOps, fomenting rebellion against Taipei by Taiwanese dissidents etc.

          • The PLAN recently conducted a theoretical loading exercise for a maximum amphibious lift. They managed 10 brigades. This was widely reported and contributed to the recent Large Scale Group Exercises by US navy and its allies.
            China cant have failed to notice the mobilisation for this exercise 4 US carrier groups, Japanese and Australian navies heavily involved and HMS QE carrier group in pacific with Prince of Wales exercising simultaneously off Scotland.
            US strategy will be for 2nd fleet and Europeans to keep Russia under check whilst elements of willing supporters eg Royal Navy, possibly dutch and Danes support a single carrier group centred around QE or POW deployment to Asia.
            What the Germans and French would do if there is a conflict with China is anyones guess.

          • Interesting.
            Is it just RN then that has tilted towards Asia-Pacific with CSG deployments, and that the role of the Army and RAF is to assist Continental Europeans to keep Russia in check. That would be a fair strategy. Doesn’t do much for jointery though!
            If there is conflict with China, then Germany and France should stay Euro-centric in the counter-Russia alliance.

          • Except that, at the moment, the Chinese military is on a technical learng curve. 10 years will most like be approaching their peak.

          • Good commentary and observation Douglas , I concur. China is not immune to economic cyclic pressure – both internal and external. Watch the banking and property sectors as early indicators

      • 65%? that is a scary plan. pity the u.k can’t match it. if we found the £’s for two supercarriers we could do it again right across the board. to benifit all of our servvices

    • When their Economy has a Budget Surplus that could wipe out our National Debt in one stroke I don’t think they will lose much sleep over Funding for their Navy.

      • According to their stats. The level of indebtedness of their ‘private’ corporations looks very like our 2008 crash. Theirs lots going on in Chinas economy and very little of it is reassuring from a Chinese perspective.

    • Last time I heard China was heading towards superpower status largely on the back of its economy which might overtake the US economy in a few years time. So she must have the money to buy all this kit, unlike the Soviet Union which had a weak economy all along.
      I don’t think that restricting some teenage gamers will really hit their economy too much.

      • Anytime you pick something to buy, see where it’s made, very hard on amazon at times as I’ve fell foul to iffy advertising there. But 90% of Chinese exports is garbage, flooding the market with poor quality steel is a good example, all these covid testing kits are mostly from China…sigh

        • The Chinese are past masters at building to contract. Order low quality or don’t check from them and that’s exactly what you’ll get. On the other hand, their TV (LG), computers (Lenovo) and phones (Apple) are among the best. So perhaps blaming the Chinese isn’t the answer. If an item is low cost there is a reason!

          • I suppose using Apple as one example, that specific company has very strict quality controls if for no reason than to ensure that the country who has been chosen to piece together their equipment, MUST be spot on. Since Apple have a vast share of that particular market, it would be a foolish and costly move to provide the Contractor with an inferior product!

          • Spot on. They operate a multi tier system of steel mills. Top quality down-to exclusively domestic low end the top end mills are sound as you say..it’s how you specify and manage them.

            P

          • IBM Thinkpad (sold to Lenovo) used to be the best business class laptop, but now the gaps between them are nearly inexistent. Laptops like HP ProBook/EliteBook, Acer Travelmate and
            Fujitsu Lifebook, Panasonic Toughbook are better replacement for Lenovo Thinkpad series.

          • Indeed, I just picked Lenovo as I have an old Thinkpad. Pretty sure all the others you list are Chinese made or have Chinese motherboards.

        • We in the West will still buy cheap stuff from China, except perhaps cars. Quality British products are unaffordable for many on less than the average salary.
          Its ironic that China gave us Covid then made a packet selling us test kits.

      • In part, this is also directed toward Nigel Collins for his comments…………….It seems to me that the old Soviet Union which predominantly includes the essence of their new ‘Russia’, placed their money on the wrong horse from the outset, hence their continuing and relatively speaking, ‘weak’ economy. In other words, they have poured so much of their monetary resources into creating and maintaining a pretty powerful military – possibly with the exception of their naval element – that the rest of the country and alternative non-military/commercial industries have ultimately suffered enormously. They have a lot to gain by remaining on the ‘good side’ of China if for no other reason than Russia still has that military upper-hand experience as a bargaining chip.

    • Kinda like GB has been doing since ww2? Or the usa? The usa has an untenable debt,china just has to be patient and cool while USA and her cant keep living in the past gb… Silly wasted game playing and polluting while we wreck our planet quicker…Great idea for the future..

    • Big difference between china and the west is debt and long term planning. China has managed to capitalise heavily on western / African need for finance and build up a long term strategy, which should in theory keep china economy balanced for decades to come. A bit like norway and their oil fund.

      The west however is in huge debt and small shakes have massive impacts on the barely balanced public finance. Just repaying the interest on the national debt takes up a large chunk of the tax revenue for the UK/US.

      Saying that china has a pending potential massive property crash, a bit like the banking crisis the west went through, so their long term strategy might come crumbling down.

    • Very much like the USN and the USA, you can produce and produce bigger better ships, but there comes a time when those ships need repairs and maintenance. Chinas biggest weakness is coal, doesn’t have its own sustainable supply, so would need to stockpile huge reserves, currently, companies moving manufactory away from china.

    • ot was largely the wests ability to outspend and increase its technology advantage was something the western block couldn’t keep up with. china could well face the same situation if things like trade embargos were placed on them could rresult in the same thing. china needs the sea as much as anyone to maintain its economy the u.kcsg ignoring petty childish name calling is exactly the right thing to do.

  2. With China behaving like bullies and thugs in the Asia-Pacific region, it’s a pretty good reason why the Oz Government has made the decision to go nuclear with the RAN submarine fleet.

    And to also procure long rage strike weapons for the ADF such as Tomahawk, JASSM-ER and LRASM, and eventually hypersonic weapons too.

    China’s behaviour is pushing everyone else closer together, forming stronger alliances too.

    Cheers,

    • Here we go again , Doesn’t China as a well-known Master of the 7 Seas (sarcasm) Get what international waters mean or are they only trying too impress their own populous with deeds of daring-do against Western imperialist warmongers encroaching on their Mao giving right to ownership of the Oceans —–ditto Paper tiger springs to mind

      • Honestly hard to know.

        The other side of the coin is how well China crew all of this massive new navy of theirs?

        I know it sounds a strange question given the size of the country etc but it is worth a thought.

        Quality in depth is very hard to generate.

        I’m also dubious of how readily China can support and sustain this massive navy. There are no real Chinese economic statistics and it seems to be becoming clearer that China has been obfuscating. With its crazy levels of leveraging it won’t take much to knock large segments of the Chinese economy off their perch.

        • Their ships are not maintained to the same state of readiness as western navies. They use the Soviet/Russian model of on paper = operational.

          Their submarine fleet rides the struggle bus hard. If you listen to Jive Turkey’s podcast on YouTube, they not only have the loudest subs on the planet, but also don’t know how to sail them.

          They have some decent tech in places, but it’s a really poorly rehearsed navy with zero operational experience. They make the Russians look like subject matter experts.

          SM has said the eastern med was the most difficult part of the CSG21 cruise so far. The Russians were flying out every day.

          • Quite correct Chris what they show on state media of their Glorious Peoples Navy firing X amount of weaponry usually entails a lot of Slicing and Dicing footage of either Russian ,and other countries Film Stock to Placate the masses of their Superior Armed forces ready to defend

          • It is hard to differentiate between poor quality parts and poor maintenance. The net result is, however, the same.

            The Russians do have a lot experience and some know how. Fortunately they don’t have too much cash!

          • Maybe so, maybe not. Don’t forget how the west wrote off & belittled the Japs before WW2 but had a huge surprise & suffered many defeats until the tide was turned. The way the RN has been run in recent time we virtually fight with one arm tied behind our backs with all the gapping of capabilities & FFBNW.

          • The Japanese lost almost every naval battle in ww2, so maybe they were right. If someone sucker-punches you, there isn’t much you can do about it.

          • Chris, thats not quite true, the Imperial Japanese Navy won most of its surface to surface battles (guns/torps no aircraft) with the USN. Only when there were carriers involved did the US win. A good read on the battle history of the Imperial Japanese Navy 1941-1945 by Paul Dull.

          • The Americans did , Britain did have a more cautious approach too their Navy after Japan took the Russian navy apart in 1904 , It was the Japanese Air arm that inflicted the damage to both American vessels as well as Britain’s task force z , America on Dec7th us on Dec 10th 1941 Carrier and land based , surface warships played little or no role in either

          • All early 1942, look up Battle of Badung Strait, Battle of the Java Sea & Battle of Sunda Strait, Second Battle of the Java Sea. Superior long ranged & more powerful torpedoes caught us by surprise & we were roundly defeated each time. USN/RN/RAN/RNZN & RNethN.

          • Also Battles around Guadacanal’s Savo Island & the Battle of Leyte gulf were major surface actions.

          • Thanks but my post was about what Chris had posted my reply was about 7 an 10 Dec when we lost POW and Repulse by Japanese Air power from Carriers that was all but thanks for your post HMAS Sidney was only located a few years ago Frank

          • Badung – 6 combatants total, 1 destroyer sunk,
            Java Sea – I’ll give you that one
            Sundra Strait- ??? A cruiser and it’s two light escorts were ambushed by 78 Japanese surface combatants. Not a battle.

            Look up the real sh*t;
            Battle of Midway
            Guadalcanal
            Marshall Islands
            Philippine SeaLeyte Gulf – 400+ combatants, USN/RAN victory,Okinawa

            The Japanese never won a battle that meant anything.

          • . . . and we brits courted the Jap navy in the 1920’s with our carrier technology with one of our senior pilots spying for them !

          • Chris, When I did multiple BAOR tours we convinced ourselves that the Warsaw Pact forces were paper tigers – lots of kit but low tech with poor ergonomics and probably poorly maintained. I think we were fooling ourselves. We would have had to generate a 3:1 or more kill ratio just to survive in place, let alone advance.

          • And changing from 7.62mm too 5 .56mm in the 1980ts I doubt if one had been shot by 5.56mm two would have stopped to help ,We might stop and attend to our Wounded but would the Warsaw pact had as they storm across West Germany ? Graham Just a thought thank the Lord it didn’t come too it (that Cold War paranoia I’d starting too rear it’s head again)

        • Especially if the World would clamp down on China for its Cheap knock off copyright stolen tacky electrical goods On the positive Side hope their Navy uses the same equipment as Del Boy sold god I’m pushing the boat out so too speak

          • I’ve made the point about build quality and battle damage resistance on here before and it is sometimes met with squalls of indignant ‘how do you know’….

            There are some bits of a ship and a lot of bits of a warship where you cannot compromise.

          • Quite correct with those posts Chinese Steel to start with I doubt if the longethaty is half as long as British Steel Quantity doesn’t mean Quality SB

          • China operates a multi tier quality accreditation system for its steel mills with those mills in tiers 1 & 2 as good as anything outside china for the equivalent products they produce. Top tier stuff generally goes to international markets or flagship domestic projects. They have relied on Japanese, European and South American quality control resources to build that capability. The bottom 3 or 4 tiers (which are the vast majority) are producing lower grade products to lower quality standards mostly for domestic civil purposes

          • Unless they’ve changed tack , then why are Hmrc forever finding Containers full off Counterfeit Goods emanating from China ? And the Improper Act statement was ,what was Said About HMS Richmonds passage in the Sc sea was theirs .

          • I have seen their counterfeit goods whilst working at my last job. A customer complained about “Loctite Industrial Grade Super Glue” which he had procured from E Bay did not work properly. The adhesive had been sourced from China, we tested it in the lab, the test results showed it was vastly inferior. One other observation was that the labelling on the bottle was incorrect. So the customer lost out, since he had to buy the adhesive a second time from proper distributer.

          • IF its too good to be true , then yes it’s too good to be true The fire brigade can confirm that supposed Dysons Ladies hair dryers and heated hair tongs IPhone chargers don’t even go down the road of Medications the List is Ad Infinitum J mk

        • They have 1.4 billion people (US superpower has only 330 million) , so they can certainly crew their growing Navy.

          China plays their economic growth carefully – watch how they will soon switch from building coal-fired power stations (cheap, but dirty) to being the biggest producer and exporter to the West of green energy technology.They will raise the standard of living of their people so they will all start to buy consumer goods (including cars) not just the aspitring middle classes – which will kick theri economy into super-drive.

          • The size of the populous isn’t really the issue.

            As the populous gets increasingly sophisticated the best of them won’t want to be serving in the forces of a state like China. Where are you going to get a great officer class from then?

            I think you misunderstand the Chinese economic conundrum. The whole of the Chinese export economy is predicated on being the workshop of the world (sweat shop). It is, even now, increasingly hard for the factories to recruit workers who will put up with the conditions and pay that make all of this work.

            China struggles with its agriculture at the best of times.

            So if all of the Chinese people become ‘middle class’, to translate to UK speak, as you suggest then where is the Chinese upsell coming from? And whom is making the pile tat-tasctic that whole things revolves around now?

            Belt & Road depends on huge high interest ‘commercial’ loans. It is very likely that a lot of those will be defaulted on as with the EverGrande situation.

            As with any economic ‘miracle’, remember the Celtic Tiger anyone (?), if it is too monocultural (in a biodiversity sense) then it inevitably blows itself up.

          • Yes I agree! The low birth rates over the last 20 years will certainly make it much harder to fill those sweat shop jobs in the future. The young will become choosers!

        • SIMON They’ve been pushing up against India as well in the past 6mnths So it’s not just countries around the disputed South Xxxxx Sea that Beijing is Flexing her military muscle at , Testing the Waters so too speak

    • It really has no choice. In the end even advanced diesel subs will be little more than a last line of defence for Australia. However should that happen then Australia would be lost and their actions purely a delay to the inevitable. Their only true defence and independence is to become a full working partner to a greater defensive pact(s) and in particular with US, Japan and even India. As such their defence will rely on being part of their efforts well away from Australian shores for the most part to ensure that allied presence in the Pacific is not broken or worse defeated as well as offering a southern bulwark to that greater need to hold the line. In that circumstance nuclear subs with long range weapons will be able to form a powerful element of wider Pacific defence and divide Chinese region strategising meaning it can’t simply concentrate on defeating others more motherly and deal with Australia as and when it wants thereafter. You can see why the US sees the importance of this though it probably only needs to look back to the 40s to recognise Australia’s strategic location in any potential conflict.

    • I posted a link above that looks at the problem from an Australian perspective on Daniele’s thread. Worth watching!

      China’s President Xi Jinping has said that “reunification” with Taiwan “must be fulfilled”, as heightened tensions over the island continue.

      “The historical task of the complete reunification of the motherland must be fulfilled, and will definitely be fulfilled,” he said.”

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-58854081

  3. Any perceived agression by China will over time result in the populations of western counties taking a closer look at the money they are pushing in the direction of China. Governments may well also look at their reliance on China for key goods. Is this really what China wants?

    • I hope so but will it? It’s so well integrated now. Most scary is the approaching launch of numerous electric car brands building up their launches into Europe and the US. The perception of shabby ness will likely soon be overcome considering we all know that out phones and electronics are already built there. I fear even the often mythical and much overblown regard for German technology in cars will be put under much stress as time goes on. I fear whatever Govts do now it may well be a tide to late to turn back in terms of Chinese economic expansion. Hell the US govt is putting millions into Intel to simply try to retain some semblance of chip production in-house, Europe has no front line influence in this prime positioner at all even if technically the biggest chip designer in the World is nominally British. The best hope immediately is as is gradually happening Taiwanese companies like Foxconn are moving much of their production out of Taiwan and China hopefully with the ability to be sustained if the worst happens and over time perhaps as mentioned, if missteps within China cause a substantial hit on their economy and political stability, not that that necessarily ultimately works out good for us.

  5. What raises tensions is the PRC outrageously trying to annex virtually the entire SCS, building island military bases on atols(Trashing the enviroment of these) others have better claims to & trying to bully the rest of the world to comply.
    They are the true “improper acts”

    Let’s hope it’s not the start of a move to deny the ROtW transit to the far east, as we all have trade with Taiwan, Japan, S Korea, the Phillipnes etc. Nor to try to isolate even further Taiwan prior to attempting taking it.

  6. So where is the PLAN?
    when western ships go into the Black Sea the Russians are always there or about! Here we are for the second time in the SCS and despite lots of shouting no PLAN.

    • PLAN subs are louder than a Chelsea football game and planes aren’t stealthy or reliable. According to the USN, their MO is hiding behind firebrand newspaper articles in the global times as you sail past.

      RN will have good intel after this deployment.

      • Any truth in that rumour from years ago that during a NATO exercise in the Atlantic a Chinese sub got right in the middle of it before being discovered and then forced to withdraw ?

    • Sort of yes…
      In a TG you don’t all sail around together all of the time.
      You do multinational exercises together then bomb burst all over the place to do individual visits and defence engagement. You can be a good couple of days sailing away from everyone else so well over 500-1000 miles separation.
      You then rejoin together for more exercises as required.
      On my final Far East deployment Taurus 09 we had ships at various times in places such as Kota, Singers, Penang, Phuket, Visakhapatnam, Brunei.
      In 97 on Ocean Wave which I also did the spread was even wider with units in VietNam, Aus, Japan, Singers, Thailand, Malaysia and one also went to Russia!

      • Yes, even further back (as I’m so old) on Global ’86, the only times I can remember the deployment group being fully together were the Rimpac ’86 exercises, Shanghai and Sydney for the RAN 75th anniversary p### up. Otherwise, dotted all over the place.

    • Everyone studies the Falklands. Its one of the only naval/amphibious wars in modern history. The Americans still Q&A the RN about it.

    • Realistically Argentina could never have had a domestic arms industry to produce Sea Dart and Exocet or the control radars.

      The biggest mistake was selling a fully functional T42 to Argentina and then letting them license build another one so they knew exactly the limitations of the systems and how to get round them.

      IRL what was Argentina going to do about supply line? If they started messing around with surface fleet anywhere near Ascension they would antagonise the Americans who were also based there and they would then put themselves in range of a well equipped military airport where the UK could and would fly out anything it had to hand to deal with the threat. It was also perfectly possibly for persistent MRA patrols to be in that zone as well as SSN.

      If the Argentinians were steaming around banging away with active radar to find supply ships they knew the British could easily find them. If they had no active radar they would struggle to find much. They could have tried pot luck visual searches with 737’s etc – which they did before things got hot.

    • So the lesson leaned will be
      1.That its bloody difficult to find an offensive Carrier Group that doesn’t want to be found on the ocean blue.
      2.Nuclear Subs are king when it comes to killing surface ships
      3.If you put your vessels within range of shore based air and missiles they are going to get hit.
      4.Damage control lets you fight on despite damage.
      5.Leadership and the manpower you have make the difference.

  9. Perhaps the UK should require the return of Hong Kong due to breach of the terms of the transfer of the colony by China, that would put a nice pocket of UK sovereign water right in the SCS…After all, the leased territory that was returned was the New Territories, on the mainland. The rest of Hong Kong was ceded to the UK in perpetuity from what I have read…

    • It was…I was based their April 93 – Aug 96 with the family and went back on a ship in 97 for the handover. We where one of trhe vessels that got a visit before the handover. Some of the HK LEP’s had already gone to Canada and Aus by then but a few I knew stayed on. South of Boundary Street in Kowloon and the island of HK did not need to go back . Problem was that the power stations and water reservoirs where all in the territories. It was an unsustainable outpost without the territories.

      • Yeah I can see your position, though I think that better planning could have provided for desalination plants & power stations to maintain independence, as Lusty says below, what were they thinking of demanding a 99 year lease when a 999 year lease would have been just as easy to obtain…
        Also, is communist china legally the successors of Qing China? Effectively yes, I suppose, but the Kuomintang were the successors of Qing China before being confined to Taiwan and effectively still exist or their successors on Taiwan do. Interesting legally, but likely not enforceable in reality.🙂

    • That’s true. Only the New Territories fell under the famous ’99 year lease’. The rest of Hong Kong was ceded in perpetuity. One could argue that there are similarities in that regard between Hong Kong and Gibraltar, although Gibraltar hasn’t expanded through the direct acquisition of new territories from Spain.

      They should have made it a 999-year lease back in the day.😅

  10. Will GB instigate another Opim war to fund jingo? Stayed tuned as world powers revert to yesterday.. Those 11 or 9 points are just as jingoistic…

  11. Meanwhile the French made fun of HMS Richmond small size in Vietnam compared to the French warship there 😃

    Why does HMS Queen Elizabeth not cross the taiwan straits? Rather sending a frigate and send a strong message to China ?

    • There has been no public ally released information on how the three Crowsnest Marlins have been doing on this trip. Unlike the F35s where there’s been loads of “air time”! No news is said to be good news, but in this case I’m not sure?

      • Isn’t the Crowsnest deployed not the fully developed version as we hadn’t quite finished developing it before the CSG sailed? So after 40 years we only just caught the boat as it where.

        • Loads of stuff goes to sea without being fully accepted into service.
          You have specific paperwork listing limitations and known issues with the systems (CCUs- Certificates of Clearance for Use) that the Operators and Weapons Engineers have access to.
          Some kit, that has been in service for decades, never gets to full acceptance. It doesnt mean it doesn’t work or that it doesn’t do its job…its just never reached final acceptance because of some minor very rarely seen issues with performance under certain specific conditions and so it doesn’t meet the contractual acceptance requirement.

          I have worked on and relied on systems that provided 80 – 99% of the designed performance. I would not argue about the 20-1 % that was missing or do without it until it got to 100%

      • Maybe we get the future EV-22. Seems we lack the over the horizon coverage; I wonder how far the lobe is penetrated for a Merlin at 15,000ft?

          • What physical distance from the Merlin can they see to sea level as the lobe is the blind spot to the ship due to earth curvature. I was trying to sound more knowledgeable than I actually am and is a result of me being friends with an ex RAF radar expert. Me being civil aircraft maintenance; I am intersted in such things.

          • According with WIKI TARS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tethered_Aerostat_Radar_System) has range of 200Miles and is stable in winds upto 65Kts, why not fit out a POINT class? Ships usually cruise below 20kts and tend to avoid sailing through 45kt gales where they can? they could pull it down into hold in really bad weather. Otherwise would have good radar coverage, hell you could put load of VLS on it for Sea Ceptor (self defence) & Aster 30/RIM-174 for task group AAW arsenal controlled by the t-45. backed up by Crowsnest.

          • As your friend may know, a radar’s detection range is determined by a number of factors. One of these is the base operating frequency. Depending on the frequency, you have atmospheric conditions to take into account. The low frequency radars are less affected by atmospheric attenuation, therefore for the same transmitter output power they can transmit further than a higher frequency radar. Also HF/VHF/UHF and some of the lower L band can you the ground wave phenomenon. Which allows the beam to see past the horizon. Though you can’t really use this for fixing a target’s specific location/altitude.

            Crowsnest uses the Searchwater 2000 radar. This is a developed version of the Nimrod’s original radar. It was originally designed to detect a submarine’s periscope, snorkel or communications antenna. To that end they chose a X-band radar. This frequency is known to have very good clutter rejection, especially finding targets in choppy seas. With each iteration of the radar it’s transmitter power was improved. But is also provides really good target resolution. So with a bit of software manipulation, you can determine what the target is.

            To that end Searchwater is a direct line of sight radar. So when operating at 15,000ft it has a published detection range of 200 miles. At 15,000ft the visual horizon is 150 miles away. The Searchwater will provide very good target detection for threats popping over the horizon.

            There are some issues with this radar, but as an interim choice it’s good enough.

          • Thank you for the clear reply! 150 miles seems impressive. So the only real advantage of an EV-22 at 24,000 ft is its detection range due to its altitude? If so, maybe its not worth the extra cost.

          • Height/altitude does have a significant advantage, so long as the radar has good look down and anti-clutter performance. This is partially due to the nature of radars when looking down at choppy seas. Higher frequency radars, due to their shorter wavelength and possibly narrower beam angle (depending on antenna design) generate less spurious (ghosting) returns off waves. But perhaps more importantly is the additional time height can give you. It takes time to classify a threat from a number of unknowns that have been detected. The more time you have the easier it is to make a judgement, but also allows your combat management system time (relative) to work out the interception. It also means that if your first missile misses, you have time to send another. So, the further out you can push the horizon the better, especially when dealing with supersonic sea skimming anti-ship missiles.

            The placement of the radar on the aircraft will also play a part. On the Sea King, the rotating side pod, swung down so that the radar had a clear unobstructed view to the horizon and looking down. This placement had a negative effect when looking up however, as the aircraft blocked a lot of the view. The RN believed looking down was more important than placing the radar “above” the aircraft, which provides a decent view to the horizon but also an excellent view up. Ther Navy, believed that a ship’s 3D radar was adequate enough to provide the medium to high altitude searching. Whilst the Sea King concentrated on the low level stuff. As they rightly believed the main threat was from submarines and sea skimming missiles.

            Today the threat has evolved. Not only are there still the sea skimmers and high angle divers, but also a ballistic and the supposed “hypersonic” threat. A ship’s radar is still more than adequate to provide the 3D volume search. But they need to look at the very steep angled high diving threat, with a radar that looks directly up, to remove that blind spot. There is still a need for extending the radar horizon.

            For a Crowsnest replacement aircraft, the placement and operating frequency will be critical on how they perform. Something like the E2D Hawkeye with its UHF AESA radar, produces fantastic detection ranges, but they will struggle tracking low level targets close to the sea, especially as it gets closer. This is due to the fixed limited look down angle of the radar. AESA radars in general have a elevation field of view from the antenna’s boresight of +/-45 degrees, plus the aircraft’s wings and fuselage get in the way, which doesn’t help.

            The V22 Osprey, on the face of it would seem like a good solution. However, the issue would be where do you mount the radar. The aircraft, has quite a small gap between the lower fuselage and the ground when it’s resting on its wheels. Thus limiting the size and shape of the antenna, if placed there. You could mount it on the sides, but the wing, nacelles and especially the prop-rotors will get in the way. Above the wing, it’s a similar problem, the long length of the prop-rotors will cause doppler problems. I would see the V22 as another interim solution, as we can do better, so long as the carriers get the EMALS (lite)?

            The gold plated solution, is to use a combination of radars mounted on an unmanned fixed wing aircraft (or a manned airship) with an internal jet engine. With one radar operating at a low frequency for long range detection and another operating at a higher frequency for medium range detection and better resolution plus clutter rejection. The fixed wing aircraft allows it to cruise more efficiently, at a much higher altitude, but also for a longer unrefueled duration on station. Thus potentially pushing out the radar horizon. The low frequency one would be concentrating on the 3D volume searching, whilst the higher frequency one would be looking towards the horizon and down towards the sea/ground. Thus you can work around the problems of the aircraft’s created blind spots.

            Simples!

  13. It’s singular that in all these previous decades of Chinese economic and military expansion the world at large has had selective amnesia with regards to its continuing to present itself as a communist authoritarian dictatorship.

  14. How does Her Majesty the Queen feel about the brutal crackdown in Australia? A message of support for the citizens being terrorized could help😠

  16. the chinese should remember there are plenty of times Australia and the UK have stood shoulder to shoulder on a battlefield!!!!!! Freedom is precious.

  17. Be it land, sea or air there is going to be a war over Taiwan. Australia where i come from will be attacked in defending Taiwan. To maintain our freedoms from a schoolyard bully you have to take a stand. The price and prize is worth it. Freedom.

  19. Over the last few decades we have all witnessed China become an extremely powerful entity on the global stage, at this point China is almost on par with the US in certain aspects and ahead in others and we know for the majority of this century China will dominate as the US dominated the 20th Century. China will ascend by using an analogous strategy the US used to it success –

    [… global accumulation by British, French and other European impe-
    rialism took the form of territorial acquisition, US globalism, driven
    by US economic ‘lebensraum’, chose the cheaper alternative of forcing
    countries to open up their economies to the demands of US capitalism.
    This policy ‘would allow the US to use its ascendant economic strength
    to beat competitors while remaining free from the burdens of direct
    colonialism … and the grail was the Chinese market’. According to Andrew Bacevich (2009), the ‘open door’ strategy was a US game of global competition for markets rigged in its favour…] ~ Neoliberal Australia and US Imperialism in East Asia By Erik Paul. (in parts quoting Neil Smith). Of course this is all old news to most, nonetheless it is new news to other people.

    Anyway read some of the “topics” on https://chinapower.csis.org.
    or read – https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/tag/china/
    or read – https://www.lowyinstitute.org/issues/china

    I putting these links up because again because I see an awful lot of ignorance regarding China and a lot of cultural racism about their abilities and capabilities; a serious mistake to make. If you think that the Chinese do not have the qualities, skills and disposition to dominate then you have your head buried firmly in the sand, xenophobia won’t save the day.

    Thankfully the Gov, the MoD and the FCDO (a stupid amalgamation of departments) and who ever else – except the UK Labour Party – do not think like this, nor do the gov’s of most western nations, which is why the arms race is well in motion and moving fast. It is however business as usual because that’s the prime driver of our world … until the balloon goes up.

  21. If we do not preserve the rights of not only our nation but others then ine day we will find them in San Francisco claiming California.

  22. The concept of territory and sovereignty of the CCP stinks of criminality and violation of all established values of civilizations.

    If people seek to control the right to sail in the high seas , and speak of in terms of outsiders and insiders , it is time for a devastating war

  23. The most effective way to hit China’s soft part is by boycotting their products, trade sanctions and boycotting Beijing 2022 Olympics. Truly the best non violent act to confront China. West needs to be honest and need to be determined on the principles of standing for Human Rights.

  26. Don’t need worry about China’s economy or population,etc. They are self-sustainable. China today is no longer like 30 years ago. The British fleets come at this time which is monsoon period. Well they may learn some lessons when they got hit by typhoons. If the crews gets hit with the delta variants, I wonder how many will die on board before they can dock. Not really a great timing to parade their fleet, putting their men lives at risk. I wonder what is there to gain.

  27. every opportunity to reinforce the fact that neither the u.k or ANY other nation plying the seas will not be intimidated by a nation of bullies and sabre rattlers should be taken to reinforce the resolve of the free world not to bow to this rogue nation

  28. china has its sight on the world domination! Africa, Afghanistan, South America have been recipients to the mounds of cash dispersed by china! It also wants to “capture” what it deems necessary for its conquest of the West! The South china Sea! The world should change the name to Philippines sea! And restrict china from building anymore islands to INVADE other countries properties! But all the UN are enslaved to china’s corruptive actions.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here