China LOSES claim on South China Sea at UN-backed Tribunal, threatens WAR

airtel

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
3,432
Likes
7,816
Country flag
Are you referring to this non-stealthy Pak Fa? The Chinese J-20 would eat it alive.

do you know anything about GaN basd AESA radars and QWIP-based IRST ??? GOOGLE it ......even F-35 dont have these technologies ................. your JUNK -20 will be detected & your poor pilots will be killed ....

China's J-20 and J-31 fighters cannot super-cruise, or fly at supersonic speeds like pak-fa
stealth planes, without using after-burners.After-burners remove a warplane's stealthiness, a capability that allows them to escape radar detection.

and this is your junk Chini engine >>

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/ws10.htm

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0V7083


The WS10, China's flagship jet fighter engine, remained seriously flawed after a quarter of century of development effort. The WS10 engine was intended to equip the new J-10 fighter, low-rate initial production of which was authorised in 2002. But at least the initial run of fifty J-10 aircraft were to be fitted with Russian AL-31F engines instead. The WS10 engine was reverse-engineered from the CFM-56 commercial turbofan, which in turn was a derivative of the General Electric F101 engine originally designed for the 1960s-era Advanced Manned Strategic Aircraft, which was eventually deployed as the B-1 bomber.

That is to say, after nearly a quarter century development effort on a four decade old design, China remained unable to produce a viable high performance fighter engine.

Five Permanent Countries of UN Security Council all produce and possess nuclear weapons. But there are only four powers which can independently manufacture modern turbofan for combat aircraft. The absent one is China
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
423
do you know anything about GaN basd AESA radars and QWIP-based IRST ??? GOOGLE it ......even F-35 dont have these technologies ................. your JUNK -20 will be detected & your poor pilots will be killed ....

China's J-20 and J-31 fighters cannot super-cruise, or fly at supersonic speeds like pak-fa
stealth planes, without using after-burners.After-burners remove a warplane's stealthiness, a capability that allows them to escape radar detection.

and this is your junk Chini engine >>

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/ws10.htm

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0V7083


The WS10, China's flagship jet fighter engine, remained seriously flawed after a quarter of century of development effort. The WS10 engine was intended to equip the new J-10 fighter, low-rate initial production of which was authorised in 2002. But at least the initial run of fifty J-10 aircraft were to be fitted with Russian AL-31F engines instead. The WS10 engine was reverse-engineered from the CFM-56 commercial turbofan, which in turn was a derivative of the General Electric F101 engine originally designed for the 1960s-era Advanced Manned Strategic Aircraft, which was eventually deployed as the B-1 bomber.

That is to say, after nearly a quarter century development effort on a four decade old design, China remained unable to produce a viable high performance fighter engine.

Five Permanent Countries of UN Security Council all produce and possess nuclear weapons. But there are only four powers which can independently manufacture modern turbofan for combat aircraft. The absent one is China
You are ignorant and your claims are not true.

Entire squadrons of Chinese J-11Bs have been flying with Chinese WS-10A engines since 2012, which was four years ago.

Do you see the silver-nozzled engines on all of the J-11Bs in the pictures below? They are all indigenous WS-10A turbofan engines.
----------

Four new Chinese J-11B Shenyang Flanker fighters with domestic WS-10A engines

New-type Fighters in training (2) - People's Daily Online

"New-type Fighters in training (2)
(China Military Online)
September 17, 2012


Recently,four new-type fighters of an aviation unit of the air force under the Jinan Military Area Command (MAC) of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) flew to unfamiliar sea waters and organized training on such subjects as electronic confrontation and medium-range missile attack, penetration and assault, valley flight and so on, in a bid to lay a solid foundation for actual combat.


The fighter formation is in hedge-hopping flight. (Photo by Cui Wenbin/Chinamil)"

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the newslink.]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo

airtel

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
3,432
Likes
7,816
Country flag
metal engine pots of PAK-FA are unstealthy , but it is just a prototype ............will be covered in RAM .

if your engines are so GOOD then why you are using outdated russian engines in JUNK-20 & JUNK-31 , even pakis dont trust chini engines ...............your engines are not reliable .

China’s J-20 and J-31 fighter jets are hobbled by the lack of powerful engines that permit them to “supercruise,” that is, go supersonic without the need for afterburners. This, in turn, compromises the stealthiness of such aircraft, which is one of their prime advantages.


Noted aerospace expert Richard Aboulafia once laid out ten essential features of a 5th-generation combat aircraft; he concluded that the J-20 possessed perhaps two of them.

http://atimes.com/2016/02/chinas-not-so-wonderful-weapons/

Show me any non-chini reliable source .
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
423
metal engine pots of PAK-FA are unstealthy , but it is just a prototype ............will be covered in RAM .

if your engines are so GOOD then why you are using outdated russian engines in JUNK-20 & JUNK-31 , even pakis dont trust chini engines ...............your engines are not reliable .

China’s J-20 and J-31 fighter jets are hobbled by the lack of powerful engines that permit them to “supercruise,” that is, go supersonic without the need for afterburners. This, in turn, compromises the stealthiness of such aircraft, which is one of their prime advantages.


Noted aerospace expert Richard Aboulafia once laid out ten essential features of a 5th-generation combat aircraft; he concluded that the J-20 possessed perhaps two of them.

http://atimes.com/2016/02/chinas-not-so-wonderful-weapons/

Show me any non-chini reliable source .
The Russian Pak Fa has never been covered in RAM for the last five years. I think the Pak Fa CAN'T be covered with RAM due to the need for cooling of the engines.

Richard Aboulafia is a nobody. He has never designed a stealth fighter. He's merely a journalist.
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
Help yourself...
US Congress house and senate seek to enforce MDT and other action Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative Act to protect the Philippines.
http://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Bill.pdf
U.S. says its forces will keep operating in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
US navy chief vows more patrols in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden left some none-too-subtle hints that America would intervene in the South China Sea dispute if needed, and potentially laid the groundwork for a request that Australia join the fray also.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...outh-china-sea-intervention-and-expresses-gr/
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
A full day has gone by.

Has Obama said anything? Nope. He's giving a speech on police killings of blacks.

Has the Department of Defense said anything? Silence there too.

How about Vice President Biden? Zippo.

How about the EU? Haven't heard a peep.

There is no one to help you.

Your MDT is just a piece of paper.
----------

In the United States, the South China Sea isn't even a top story. (See left hand column of Google page below)
US reactions after the ruling..
Help yourself...

US Congress house and senate seek to enforce MDT and other action Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative Act to protect the Philippines.
http://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Bill.pdf
U.S. says its forces will keep operating in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
US navy chief vows more patrols in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden left some none-too-subtle hints that America would intervene in the South China Sea dispute if needed, and potentially laid the groundwork for a request that Australia join the fray also.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...outh-china-sea-intervention-and-expresses-gr/
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
423
US reactions after the ruling..
Help yourself...

US Congress house and senate seek to enforce MDT and other action Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative Act to protect the Philippines.
http://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Bill.pdf
U.S. says its forces will keep operating in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
US navy chief vows more patrols in South China Sea
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-usa-idUSKCN1000PD
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden left some none-too-subtle hints that America would intervene in the South China Sea dispute if needed, and potentially laid the groundwork for a request that Australia join the fray also.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...outh-china-sea-intervention-and-expresses-gr/
They have been saying that for the last five years. That is not new.
 

tsunami

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
3,250
Likes
15,278
Country flag
South China Sea: US asks China to learn from India on handling maritime dispute

The US has asked China to follow India in dealing with territorial disputes with its neighbours, ahead of an arbitration ruling on the South China Sea. It referred to how India complied with the UN court's ruling in 2014 in favour of Bangladesh in a three-decade-old maritime dispute between the two South Asian countries.

China's position of non-participation and non-acceptance on the Permanent Court of Arbitration's ruling on the hotly contested waters has drawn severe criticism from the US.

"To India's great credit, it accepted the decision and has abided by it, noting that settlement of the issue would enhance mutual understanding and goodwill between the two countries. This is an example we would encourage China to follow," The Hindu newspaper quoted top Pentagon official Abraham Denmark as saying.

He pointed out how other countries in the region too found "peaceful ways to resolve difference over overlapping maritime zones", referring to successful negotiation of boundary issues between Indonesia and the Philippines.

Speaking at a congressional hearing, Denmark said there is a "degree of uncertainty" about how some "claimants" would act in the next couple of months after the court pronounces its verdict on 12 July. However, he promised Washington's support in shaping the future of the region.

He added that the tribunal ruling would help in determining "whether the Asia-Pacific's future will be defined by adherence to international laws and norms that have helped keep the peace and enabled it to prosper, or whether the region's future will be determined by raw calculations of power".

Beijing has maintained that it has historic sovereignty over most of the South China Sea in which the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei and Malaysia have overlapping claims. It has also snubbed the US saying it has no business to interfere in the case that was filed by the Philippines, besides questioning the tribunal's jurisdictional rights to hear the case.

Another Pentagon official, Colin Willett of the Multilateral Affairs Bureau, spoke at the same hearing and accused China of double standards when it comes to following international law. He said no country can cherry pick when and where the international maritime law applies over disputed seas, and that the US would not accept "having rights and freedoms apply differently in the SCS (South China Sea) than they do everywhere else in the world".

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/south-china-sea-us-asks-china-learn-india-handling-maritime-dispute-1569643
 

Martian

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
1,624
Likes
423
South China Sea: US asks China to learn from India on handling maritime dispute

The US has asked China to follow India in dealing with territorial disputes with its neighbours, ahead of an arbitration ruling on the South China Sea. It referred to how India complied with the UN court's ruling in 2014 in favour of Bangladesh in a three-decade-old maritime dispute between the two South Asian countries.

China's position of non-participation and non-acceptance on the Permanent Court of Arbitration's ruling on the hotly contested waters has drawn severe criticism from the US.

"To India's great credit, it accepted the decision and has abided by it, noting that settlement of the issue would enhance mutual understanding and goodwill between the two countries. This is an example we would encourage China to follow," The Hindu newspaper quoted top Pentagon official Abraham Denmark as saying.

He pointed out how other countries in the region too found "peaceful ways to resolve difference over overlapping maritime zones", referring to successful negotiation of boundary issues between Indonesia and the Philippines.

Speaking at a congressional hearing, Denmark said there is a "degree of uncertainty" about how some "claimants" would act in the next couple of months after the court pronounces its verdict on 12 July. However, he promised Washington's support in shaping the future of the region.

He added that the tribunal ruling would help in determining "whether the Asia-Pacific's future will be defined by adherence to international laws and norms that have helped keep the peace and enabled it to prosper, or whether the region's future will be determined by raw calculations of power".

Beijing has maintained that it has historic sovereignty over most of the South China Sea in which the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei and Malaysia have overlapping claims. It has also snubbed the US saying it has no business to interfere in the case that was filed by the Philippines, besides questioning the tribunal's jurisdictional rights to hear the case.

Another Pentagon official, Colin Willett of the Multilateral Affairs Bureau, spoke at the same hearing and accused China of double standards when it comes to following international law. He said no country can cherry pick when and where the international maritime law applies over disputed seas, and that the US would not accept "having rights and freedoms apply differently in the SCS (South China Sea) than they do everywhere else in the world".

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/south-china-sea-us-asks-china-learn-india-handling-maritime-dispute-1569643
Why are you posting outdated news?

China has repeatedly said it is not interested in following India's choice of binding arbitration.

The facts are as follows.

1. China said The Hague has no jurisdiction.

2. China said it will ignore any opinion by The Hague.

3. China said its military will enforce China's nine-dash-line territorial claim.

As far as I can see, nothing has changed in the South China Sea.
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
They have been saying that for the last five years. That is not new.
The only "not new" here is that China's is still unable and will never be able to enforce it's 9-dashed lie !!!!

While your short shortsightedness and biases hinders you from seeing other scenarios, let me brief you:

There are three ways for the Philippines to affirm is exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the area and prevent China from exploiting the natural resources even if China rejects the ruling.

  1. Sue the private sector partner. If a Chinese oil company brings a gas platform to Reed Bank, within the Philippine EEZ, to extract gas, the Philippines can sue the company in a state where the company holds its assets. The Philippines can show the court the ruling that the gas in the Reed Bank belongs to the Philippines. The Philippines can ask the court to seize the assets of the Chinese firm in Canada to compensate the country for the loss of the gas.
  2. Seek reparations from China for damages. the PCA ruling held that China’s dredging inflicted irreparable injury to the fragile marine ecosystem in the Spratly Islands, including Mischief Reef and Subi Reef, which form part of the Philippine continental shelf. Under the United Nations Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a state is liable for damages for causing harm to the marine environment of a coastal state.
  3. Seek suspension of exploration permits. Carpio noted that the Philippines can also ask the UNCLOS’s International Seabed Authority to suspend the four permits issued to China to explore the seabed in the high seas beyond national jurisdiction. “States that ratified UNCLOS agreed to accept it as a “package deal”—accepting its provisions entirely and not selectively. If China rejects the ruling, the Philippines can assert that China is accepting the benefits of UNCLOS under its seabed provisions but rejecting its provisions under its dispute settlement mechanism,” Carpio said.
 

aditya g

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,962
Likes
4,651
Country flag
Fact #4 It doesn't really matter whether China is right or wrong, what matters is that they have the muscle and nukes on their side.

Why are you posting outdated news?

China has repeatedly said it is not interested in following India's choice of binding arbitration.

The facts are as follows.

1. China said The Hague has no jurisdiction.

2. China said it will ignore any opinion by The Hague.

3. China said its military will enforce China's nine-dash-line territorial claim.

As far as I can see, nothing has changed in the South China Sea.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Th
South China Sea: US asks China to learn from India on handling maritime dispute

The US has asked China to follow India in dealing with territorial disputes with its neighbours, ahead of an arbitration ruling on the South China Sea. It referred to how India complied with the UN court's ruling in 2014 in favour of Bangladesh in a three-decade-old maritime dispute between the two South Asian countries.

China's position of non-participation and non-acceptance on the Permanent Court of Arbitration's ruling on the hotly contested waters has drawn severe criticism from the US.

"To India's great credit, it accepted the decision and has abided by it, noting that settlement of the issue would enhance mutual understanding and goodwill between the two countries. This is an example we would encourage China to follow," The Hindu newspaper quoted top Pentagon official Abraham Denmark as saying.

He pointed out how other countries in the region too found "peaceful ways to resolve difference over overlapping maritime zones", referring to successful negotiation of boundary issues between Indonesia and the Philippines.

Speaking at a congressional hearing, Denmark said there is a "degree of uncertainty" about how some "claimants" would act in the next couple of months after the court pronounces its verdict on 12 July. However, he promised Washington's support in shaping the future of the region.

He added that the tribunal ruling would help in determining "whether the Asia-Pacific's future will be defined by adherence to international laws and norms that have helped keep the peace and enabled it to prosper, or whether the region's future will be determined by raw calculations of power".

Beijing has maintained that it has historic sovereignty over most of the South China Sea in which the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei and Malaysia have overlapping claims. It has also snubbed the US saying it has no business to interfere in the case that was filed by the Philippines, besides questioning the tribunal's jurisdictional rights to hear the case.

Another Pentagon official, Colin Willett of the Multilateral Affairs Bureau, spoke at the same hearing and accused China of double standards when it comes to following international law. He said no country can cherry pick when and where the international maritime law applies over disputed seas, and that the US would not accept "having rights and freedoms apply differently in the SCS (South China Sea) than they do everywhere else in the world".

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/south-china-sea-us-asks-china-learn-india-handling-maritime-dispute-1569643
Its interesting that the US cannot advise China to follow THE US's OWN EXAMPLE.

After Nicaragua won its case against the US at the ICJ for mining its harbors in violation of "freedom of navigation", the US REFUSED TO ABIDE BY THE COURTS BINDING RULING.

So spare us all the US's double-speak. Its not even a signatory to UNCLOS yet it preaches "adherence to international law". Can the US force China to abide by the PCA's predetermined ruling? Not even close. Even sanctions wouldn't be an option for the State Department.
 

adrenalin

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 25, 2009
Messages
445
Likes
225
Th


Its interesting that the US cannot advise China to follow THE US's OWN EXAMPLE.

After Nicaragua won its case against the US at the ICJ for mining its harbors in violation of "freedom of navigation", the US REFUSED TO ABIDE BY THE COURTS BINDING RULING.

So spare us all the US's double-speak. Its not even a signatory to UNCLOS yet it preaches "adherence to international law". Can the US force China to abide by the PCA's predetermined ruling? Not even close. Even sanctions wouldn't be an option for the State Department.
US did not say follow US. US said follow the world's biggest democracy INDIA. don't twist meanings of articles.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
US did not say follow US. US said follow the world's biggest democracy INDIA. don't twist meanings of articles.
Try reading what I wrote.

The very fact that the US CANNOT tell China to follow its example regarding International Arbitration exemplifies the hypocrisy of US foreign policy. This is all about US military dominance in Asia, not international law.

If the State Dept actually valued international law, they would advocate for their so-called "freedom-of-navigation" patrols through the 400 000km2 EEZ claimed by japan around a 5ft2 atol thousands of kilometers away from the Japanese mainland.

By the way an international ruling found the EEZ claim to be illegal, yet the state dept couldn't bring itself to ask Japan to "follow India's example". Even the US doesn't "follow India's example", why should China?
 
Last edited:

adrenalin

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 25, 2009
Messages
445
Likes
225
Try reading what I wrote.

The very fact that the US CANNOT tell China to follow its example regarding International Arbitration exemplifies the hypocrisy of US foreign policy. This is all about US military dominance in Asia, not international law.

If the State Dept actually valued international law, they would advocate for their so-called "freedom-of-navigation" patrols through the 400 000km2 EEZ claimed by japan around a 5ft2 atol thousands of kilometers away from the Japanese mainland.

By the way an international ruling found the EEZ claim to be illegal, yet the state dept couldn't bring itself to ask Japan to "follow India's example". Even the US doesn't "follow India's example", why should China?
china should follow because china is not US. or china wants to go back to qing/Ming dynasty? :pound::pound:
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
china should follow because china is not US. or china wants to go back to qing/Ming dynasty? :pound::pound:
What's the point of "International Law" if they apply to only 1 group of states whilst another group of states is above the law?

Its pretty sad that you're LMAO'ing at being a second class citizen of planet earth; since India will always be part of the first group whilst the US and others reap the Geopolitical benefits of being "exceptional".
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,874
Country flag
What's the point of "International Law" if they apply to only 1 group of states whilst another group of states is above the law?

Its pretty sad that you're LMAO'ing at being a second class citizen of planet earth; since India will always be part of the first group whilst the US and others reap the Geopolitical benefits of being "exceptional".
Well, we can end this "exceptionalism" by granting the status of recognized nuclear power to India which has been blocked by P5.:)
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Well, we can end this "exceptionalism" by granting the status of recognized nuclear power to India which has been blocked by P5.:)
Hahaha! I see what you did there. Nice one.

I believe both India and Pakistan should be inducted into the NSG since they are both already recognized Nuclear Powers. But that withstanding, it wouldn't change the impunity with which "exceptional" states violate international law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,874
Country flag
Hahaha! I see what you did there. Nice one.

I believe both India and Pakistan should be inducted into the NSG since they are both already recognized Nuclear Powers. But that withstanding, it wouldn't change the impunity with which "exceptional" states violate international law.
Why do you guys always link our inclusion with Pakistan?
From nuclear weapons to conventional, space sector and nuclear triad, India achieved most of what P5 has. Moreover, India has got enough expertise in civil to do at least better than 1998 for making thermonuclear weapons.


India didn't sign NPT because it snatches away nuclear weapons from every country except P5.
But even then, India has a nice Nice non nuclear proliferation record with a no first use policy.
India is 7th major nominal economy and soon will be third. We have ICBMs, Carriers, nuclear subs, Chemical and Biological weapons and tested lasers last year.
Hence, we deserve a wavier in NPT and to be a permanent member of UNSC.

Except making nuclear weapons, Pakistan has done nothing of above (nuclear weapons were also made because they heavily invest in percentage).



Moreover, Pakistan is not even a real country. It's a mere province got detached from India 70 years ago.
Why do you guys equate daughter country with the parent? Tell me.:p
We try our best to avoid to be compared with a terror sponser but you guys.

It's frustrating when you are compared with a small piece of land which was itself part of your country at once.
:D

Just imagine, Vietnam gets nuclear weapons somehow and world starts calling China and Vietnam arch rivals. How would you feel then?:biggrin2:
Same is going on here.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top