跳至主要内容

On the Details of Japan’s Liaoning Carrier Report

 


On May 25, Japan’s Joint Staff published a report on the Liaoning carrier. Here are some interesting details from it

:
  • Discovery Position: The Liaoning flotilla was spotted about 200 km north of Huangwei Island.

    Last year on September 17, the flotilla was detected near 210 km northwest of the Diaoyu Islands.

    The proximity of these positions suggests that Japan’s method and route for searching and confirming the Liaoning flotilla are similar this time.
  • Trackers: According to Japan’s report, the surface vessel involved in tracking was the Takanami from the 6th Escort Flotilla, and the aircraft was the P-3C from the 5th Air Group. The Takanami is an old acquaintance, as it also tracked the Liaoning flotilla last September. Compared to that September mission, the P-1 from Kagoshima is absent this time, or rather, the P-1 from Kagoshima failed to locate the target.
  • Relative Position: Judging from the photos released in Japan’s report, which seem to be taken from the Takanami, it is positioned on the right side of the Liaoning flotilla.

    Normally, after searching for and confirming the Liaoning, the Takanami should accompany it on the port side.

    But now it’s in this position.

    The most likely explanation is that the Takanami overshot and didn’t find the Liaoning flotilla in the predetermined contact area. It then sailed west for a while before turning south. This is quite interesting and indicates that Japan doesn’t fully the Liaoning flotilla’s movements. The turn to the south was probably guided remotely by the P-3C. However, the P-3C didn’t enter the visual confirmation range, so the Takanami eventually caught up and confirmed the flotilla. This is why Japan’s report stated that the Liaoning was detected at 7 a.m.
  • Air Self-Defense Force Deployment: Japan’s report mentioned that the Liaoning conducted carrier-based aircraft takeoffs and landings in the East China Sea, prompting the Air Self-Defense Force (ASDF), namely the 9th Wing from Naha, to scramble fighter jets in response. But during the September 2024 mission, despite similar aircraft operations, no ASDF planes were reported. One possible reason for this discrepancy is that the P-3C was intercepted, necessitating ASDF support.

    Comparing the photos from both reports, this time all the photos seem to be taken from the Takanami. Last time, there were aerial shots. Also, from this set of photos, the Liaoning’s blast deflector hasn’t been retracted, indicating that the J-15 must have taken off.
  • Anhui Flotilla: Comparing with the Anhui flotilla that went through the Miyako Strait on May 16,

    it was detected only 100 km away from Miyako Island, with no surface vessels accompanying it—only the P-3C conducted aerial surveillance. It seems Japan was caught off guard this time. This also reflects a problem: Japan’s ability to monitor the movements of surface vessels without early intelligence warnings is lacking. Moreover, Naha Port isn’t suitable for large warships to be stationed permanently. Without prior intelligence, it’s impossible to dispatch surface vessels for search and accompaniment. This also reveals the deep collusion between the Taiwan authorities and Japan. For instance, every time the Shandong carrier heads out into the Pacific, similar situations occur.

评论

发表评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...
发表评论
阅读全文

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...
发表评论
阅读全文

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...
发表评论
阅读全文