Jump to content


China on the South China Seas

  • Please log in to reply
170 replies to this topic

#166 amberjack1234


    Tell it like it is.

  • Members
  • 1,780 posts

Posted 10 February 2017 - 02:56 PM

I read that Randy after the wife told me about it first.

#167 Randy W

Randy W

    玉林,桂 resident

  • Admin
  • 22,896 posts

Posted 15 February 2017 - 06:53 AM

in the Global Times


Draft maritime law revisions say China may bar foreign ships from passing through its waters

The Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council announced Tuesday it is soliciting public opinions on the revisions.
The revisions are based on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and Chinese laws on the sea, adjacent areas and exclusive economic zones, the office said.
The draft would empower Chinese maritime authorities to prevent foreign ships from entering Chinese waters if it is decided that the ships may harm traffic safety and order.
The revisions stipulate that the authorities will be able to designate specific areas and bar foreign ships from passing through those areas according to their own assessment of maritime traffic safety.
Foreign submersibles should travel on the surface, display national flags and report to Chinese maritime management administrations when they pass China's water areas, the draft says. They should also get approval from the relevant administration to enter China's internal waters and ports.
Foreign ships that violate Chinese laws should be expelled, according to the draft.
The draft also states that people in distress at sea have the right to be rescued without charge, adding that human lives should come before the environment and assets.
The State Council and local governments should set up maritime search and rescue centers, if needed, to organize, coordinate and command rescue operations, the draft says. Civilian groups are also encouraged by the revised regulations to set up rescue teams and participate in such operations.



#168 Allon


    Senior Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 333 posts

Posted 15 February 2017 - 03:45 PM

Interesting article here. People claim he is very popular in the Philippines but that popularity is suspect. He does not have the highest compared to his predecessors or his opposition. And his opinions are not that popular with the people themselves, especially about Americans and his chumming with China.


He also has not said anything about the 5 bases that were built before his administration started. He wants money.





I could go on, but in short, Duterte’s popularity ratings are higher, but not that much higher than his predecessors to warrant any special attention.

Popularity vs. Policies

Second, it is important not to conflate Duterte’s popularity with support for his policies, which appears to be far lower and could in fact impact his popularity further down the line.

There is of course the general caveat that while Filipinos, as with other publics, may support the election of an outsider to signal their discontent with the status quo and their desire for something different, they may not necessarily also approve of all the things that he or she may do to accomplish that. But in Duterte’s case, that is additionally significant since some of the policies he has planned – like constitutional change and a federalist system of government or a peace process with communist rebels – are bold, risky, and not necessarily all that popular. Furthermore, some of his positions can easily feed into a narrative already forming in the Philippines of the emergency of another Marcos-style dictator bent on subverting democracy.

#169 Randy W

Randy W

    玉林,桂 resident

  • Admin
  • 22,896 posts

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:42 AM

in the SCMP



Nearly two dozen of the structures that resemble housings for long-range, surface-to-air missiles have been built on disputed islands, officials say


The US intelligence official said the structures did not pose a significant military threat to American forces in the region, given their visibility and vulnerability.
Building them appeared to be more of a political test of how the Trump administration would respond, he said.
“The logical response would also be political – something that should not lead to military escalation in a vital strategic area,” the official said.



#170 Randy W

Randy W

    玉林,桂 resident

  • Admin
  • 22,896 posts

Posted 16 March 2017 - 12:50 AM

New aircraft launching systems - no, not the "ski jump". In the SCMP. Seems like their "news" is jumping the gun a little bit, but here it is:



China’s jet launch system for next carrier ‘better than US design’, top military engineer claims





“The Gerald Ford cancelled its AAG and reverted to its original [arresting wire] system. We have no such problem,” he said, referring to the US’ new class of aircraft carrier.
He also said China’s electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) was more advanced than comparable US technology.


“We have long overcome [all technical difficulties in EMALS]. I have ­already moved on from this [area of research and development],” he said.
Saying he was just a scientific researcher, Ma declined to say when his advanced technologies would be installed on China’s homegrown carriers.
 . . .
An earlier report by the South China Morning Postsaid China would not adopt the highly ­advanced EMALS technology on the Type 002 but instead rely on a conventional system.
Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said Ma had made “a certain advances” in AAG technology, compared with the US.
Macau-based military observer Antony Wong Dong said the US AAG engineers had underestimated the difficulty of developing the technology and China may have been able to take note of this to make progress.
“Ma’s team .... may have learned lessons from their US counterparts, and made some breakthrough on AAG development,” Wong said.



#171 Allon


    Senior Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 333 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:03 PM

I cannot believe the Chinese actually have implemented an AAC (airborne aircraft carrier). I actually don't believe they have. And if they have they are way too vulnerable now.


But gotta firstest with the mostest. Nothing like a flying target the size of an aircraft carrier.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users