South Korean man rescued from drowning near Koh Racha, Phuket

[webfact]

China launches first domestically-built aircraft carrier

By Michael Martina

REUTERS

 

BEIJING (Reuters) - China on Wednesday launched its first domestically built aircraft carrier, which will join an existing one bought second-hand, amid rising tensions over North Korea and worries about Beijing's assertiveness in the South China Sea.

 

State media has quoted military experts as saying the carrier, designed in China and built in the northeast port of Dalian, is not expected to enter service until 2020, as it will take time to fully kit out and arm.

 

The launch had been well-flagged as foreign military analysts and Chinese media have for months published satellite images, photographs and news stories about the second carrier's development. China confirmed its existence in late 2015.

 

The carrier's hull is fully constructed, the official Xinhua news agency said, adding that the propulsion, power and other main systems are in place.

 

The ship's launch "shows our country's indigenous aircraft carrier design and construction has achieved major step by step results," Xinhua said.

 

State television showed the carrier, its deck lined in red flags, being pushed by tug boats into its berth.

 

Fan Changlong, a vice chairman of China's powerful Central Military Commission, presided over the launch ceremony, Xinhua said, during which a bottle of champagne was broken on the bow.

 

The launch follows China's celebration on Sunday of the 68th birthday of the founding of the Chinese navy, and comes amid renewed tensions between North Korea and the United States over Pyongyang's nuclear and missile programmes.

 

Little is known about China's aircraft carrier programme, which is a state secret.

 

But the government has said the carrier's design draws on experiences from the country's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, bought from Ukraine in 1998 and refitted in China.

 

The new conventionally powered carrier has a displacement of 50,000 tonnes and will be able to operate China's Shenyang J-15 fighter jets.

 

China's navy has been taking an increasingly prominent role in recent months, with a rising star admiral taking command, its first aircraft carrier sailing around self-ruled Taiwan and new Chinese warships popping up in far-flung places.

 

China claims almost all the South China Sea, believed to have huge deposits of oil and gas, through which about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year, and has been building up military facilities like runways on the islands it controls.

 

Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims.

 

Self-ruled Taiwan, claimed by Beijing as its own, has said China is actually building two new aircraft carriers, but China has not officially confirmed the existence of another carrier.

 

Chinese state media has quoted experts as saying that the country needs at least six carriers, and a network of bases around the world to support their operations, though the government has been coy about suggestions it wants a global military presence to match the United States.

 

The Liaoning has taken part in military exercises, including in the South China Sea and more recently near Taiwan, but is expected to serve more as a training vessel than having an actual combat role.

 

The People's Liberation Army Navy significantly lags the United States, which operates 10 aircraft carriers.

 

(Additionnal reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Michael Perry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-04-26

[ilostmypassword]

The People's Liberation Army Navy significantly lags the United States, which operates 10 aircraft carriers.

 

Chinese has got an army navy? Does that mean its troops can walk on the water? Who needs boats?

[petermik]

Ideal for bringing in the big spenders to LOS..............just what TAT requires

[Dexlowe]

Guess who wants one?

[Andaman Al]

Nimitz class have a displacement of 100K tons, almost double that of the Chinese effort. The Chinese have a long way to go yet.

[Mosha]

On BBC this morning, they showed a state issued picture. There were Russian MIGs flying above it, land based aircraft. The escort ships were American

Sent from my iris 505 using Tapatalk

[daveAustin]

Cue the my-dad's-bigger-than-yours yanky contingent.

[boomerangutang]

.....only about 100 years behind UK and US.

 

Seriously tho, China has a crappy reputation building simple tools, how can we expect them to do a decent job building giant complicated tools?  

 

                     Sorry if this sounds churlish, but I've bought dozens of various Chinese-made tools, and each has had at least one glaring flaw.  Everything from caulk-guns, to electric saws, has problems from the get-go.  I heard that their spiffiest fighter jet, copied piece-by-piece from one of the US's, is not even good enough to be used by the Chinese AF.  Instead, they're making them to sell to places like Uganda, maybe trading them for bananas. 

 

                   You might ask, "if they're copied, down to the last rivet, from US tech, then aren't they as good as the jet they copy?"   Answer:  resounding 'NO.'   Reason:  Chinese skimp on metal quality and on tolerances.  

 

                            A true story from WWII:    3 US B-29 bombers were low on fuel after doing a bombing run in Asia.  They asked for, and were given permission, to land in Russia.  Surprise!  the Soviets kept the planes.  Bonanza!   Stalin then demanded top mechanics make exact replicas of them.   One was stripped down to its bolts, one was used for pilot training, and one was used for reference.  The Soviets (who are much better skilled mechanics than the Chinese), did as ordered, but by the time they got a fleet of B-29s (they named 'em Tupolev Tu4), they were out-moded, because American ingenuity were making improvements for each of the many years it took for Soviets to build up their fleet of copies.  

 

                    Then there are the Thais, who are buying several subs from the Chinese.   Not only will the subs be sub-standard (pun intended) they will also be out-dated.  Thais would have been smarter to buy German subs for much cheaper.   Smarter yet, would have been to not buy any subs, and use the money for more useful and smarter things.    What do you expect from a bunch of self-appointed generals who don't give a crap for people outside their inner circle of privilege?  The Thai purchase of Chinese subs has tea money written all over it, possibly in the billions of baht.

 

                          Any guy reading this who wants to get rich very quickly?  Here's how: marry one of the daughters of the Thai generals who are setting up the Chinese sub deal.

 

 

[thequietman]

This just in, from the press secretary of the military government in Thailand.......

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

.....only about 100 years behind UK and US.

 

Seriously tho, China has a crappy reputation building simple tools, how can we expect them to do a decent job building giant complicated tools?  

 

                     Sorry if this sounds churlish, but I've bought dozens of various Chinese-made tools, and each has had at least one glaring flaw.  Everything from caulk-guns, to electric saws, has problems from the get-go.  I heard that their spiffiest fighter jet, copied piece-by-piece from one of the US's, is not even good enough to be used by the Chinese AF.  Instead, they're making them to sell to places like Uganda, maybe trading them for bananas. 

 

                   You might ask, "if they're copied, down to the last rivet, from US tech, then aren't they as good as the jet they copy?"   Answer:  resounding 'NO.'   Reason:  Chinese skimp on metal quality and on tolerances.  

 

                            A true story from WWII:    3 US B-29 bombers were low on fuel after doing a bombing run in Asia.  They asked for, and were given permission, to land in Russia.  Surprise!  the Soviets kept the planes.  Bonanza!   Stalin then demanded top mechanics make exact replicas of them.   One was stripped down to its bolts, one was used for pilot training, and one was used for reference.  The Soviets (who are much better skilled mechanics than the Chinese), did as ordered, but by the time they got a fleet of B-29s (they named 'em Tupolev Tu4), they were out-moded, because American ingenuity were making improvements for each of the many years it took for Soviets to build up their fleet of copies.  

 

                    Then there are the Thais, who are buying several subs from the Chinese.   Not only will the subs be sub-standard (pun intended) they will also be out-dated.  Thais would have been smarter to buy German subs for much cheaper.   Smarter yet, would have been to not buy any subs, and use the money for more useful and smarter things.    What do you expect from a bunch of self-appointed generals who don't give a crap for people outside their inner circle of privilege?  The Thai purchase of Chinese subs has tea money written all over it, possibly in the billions of baht.

 

                          Any guy reading this who wants to get rich very quickly?  Here's how: marry one of the daughters of the Thai generals who are setting up the Chinese sub deal.

 

 

 

China does produce some high quality products, some average products and some low quality ones. The problem is you can buy any Chinese made product and get high, average or low, regardless of cost and intended functionality. 

 

The reason is they simply cannot control quality of manufacture - of anything. So the raw material, the production conversion processes, the assemblies and final fit and finish are all subject to a high degree of variability. Some of the old Eastern bloc communist countries had very similar issues with quality control and consistency.

 

So, would you want to fly in a Chinese made fighter, or submerge in a Chinese made submarine? 

 

Not me.

[schlog]

So we have to wait till 2020 till it anchor in Patong Bay. Then let the red flood finalize what starts years ago.

[Dustdevil]

Tactical warships are one thing, and China's navy now has more ships than the United States. Of course that includes all types such as patrol boats. In any catastrophic scenario, and in current deterrence doctrine, the real power lies with the Trident-type submarines with MIRV missiles. The US Navy operates 18 Tridents, 14 of which are armed with 192 nuclear warheads atop 24 ICBMs. Each warhead is individually targetable and is anywhere from 100 to 495 kilotons. (Hiroshima's was 14 kilotons). So you can see that a mere 16 or so Trident warheads would totally obliterate North Korea. I believe the latter simply wants a deterrent, not to be so stupid as to launch a nuclear attack on the US mainland. You can be sure there's always a Trident somewhere near Korea and around China and Russia. They are not so easily found, as they were designed to be permanently "rigged for silent running." Of course, Russia and China have a few nuclear-armed subs as well, but not in the scope of the Trident fleet, and China's missiles are not multiple warheads as far as I know.

Edited April 26, 2017 by Dustdevil

[Johnnyngai]

One billion Chinese working like horses 12 hours a day, 6 days a week.   A fleet of high quality air craft carriers will be built in about 10 years time.  I have seen plenty examples of how much can be done by driving people like horses.

[onthesoi]

2 hours ago, Dustdevil said:

Tactical warships are one thing, and China's navy now has more ships than the United States. Of course that includes all types such as patrol boats. In any catastrophic scenario, and in current deterrence doctrine, the real power lies with the Trident-type submarines with MIRV missiles. The US Navy operates 18 Tridents, 14 of which are armed with 192 nuclear warheads atop 24 ICBMs. Each warhead is individually targetable and is anywhere from 100 to 495 kilotons. (Hiroshima's was 14 kilotons). So you can see that a mere 16 or so Trident warheads would totally obliterate North Korea. I believe the latter simply wants a deterrent, not to be so stupid as to launch a nuclear attack on the US mainland. You can be sure there's always a Trident somewhere near Korea and around China and Russia. They are not so easily found, as they were designed to be permanently "rigged for silent running." Of course, Russia and China have a few nuclear-armed subs as well, but not in the scope of the Trident fleet, and China's missiles are not multiple warheads as far as I know.

If it all kicks off, who nukes who first or who has the most nukes(its Russia) ...wont mean much as the planet will be a radioactive cluster <deleted> pole to pole.

 

Even if(I doubt it), the US has some kind of missile defence system for shooting down nukes in flight, best case scenario is 10,000 dirty bombs scattered around the planet + US nukes detonated/landed in the east...the survivors would be inhabiting a post apocalyptic world similar to 'The Walking Dead' but much much worse.

 

 

 

 

....& it's Kim Jong-un we should be scared of right?

Edited April 26, 2017 by onthesoi

[Dustdevil]

5 hours ago, onthesoi said:

If it all kicks off, who nukes who first or who has the most nukes(its Russia) ...wont mean much as the planet will be a radioactive cluster <deleted> pole to pole.

 

Even if(I doubt it), the US has some kind of missile defence system for shooting down nukes in flight, best case scenario is 10,000 dirty bombs scattered around the planet + US nukes detonated/landed in the east...the survivors would be inhabiting a post apocalyptic world similar to 'The Walking Dead' but much much worse.

 

 

 

 

....& it's Kim Jong-un we should be scared of right?

Kim Jong Mentally iL has six or seven now. As I said, I think he just wants a deterrent. But he's unpredictable.

[boomerangutang]

7 hours ago, Dustdevil said:

Tactical warships are one thing, and China's navy now has more ships than the United States. Of course that includes all types such as patrol boats. In any catastrophic scenario, and in current deterrence doctrine, the real power lies with the Trident-type submarines with MIRV missiles. The US Navy operates 18 Tridents, 14 of which are armed with 192 nuclear warheads atop 24 ICBMs. Each warhead is individually targetable and is anywhere from 100 to 495 kilotons. (Hiroshima's was 14 kilotons). So you can see that a mere 16 or so Trident warheads would totally obliterate North Korea. I believe the latter simply wants a deterrent, not to be so stupid as to launch a nuclear attack on the US mainland. You can be sure there's always a Trident somewhere near Korea and around China and Russia. They are not so easily found, as they were designed to be permanently "rigged for silent running." Of course, Russia and China have a few nuclear-armed subs as well, but not in the scope of the Trident fleet, and China's missiles are not multiple warheads as far as I know.

Sobering wrap, but thanks for articulating that.

History of the world, in a few short sentences;

 

Half billion years, no life. Too hot.

2 billion years, 1 celled organisms.

1 billion years, multi-celled 

half billion years, complex organisms

63 mil. years since dinosaurs

3 million years ago; ascent of hominids from very small population

200k yrs ago:  stone tool users trek out of Africa.

5000 yrs ago, beginning of end of natural world. Beginning of people-crafted world (pyramids, damming rivers, aqueducts, etc).  Up until this time, nature pretty much spread naturally.  From this time onward, nature is constricted, harvested, wiped out piece-by-piece.

200 years ago; industrial revolution, beginnings of burning fossil fuels and blackening forests and lungs.

70 years ago:  ability to split the atom to make giant bombs, concurrent with beginning of plastic trashing the surface of the globe.

3 years from now:   nearly dead oceans.  Plus moonscape wasteland from N holocaust?

 

6 hours ago, Johnnyngai said:

One billion Chinese working like horses 12 hours a day, 6 days a week.   A fleet of high quality air craft carriers will be built in about 10 years time.  I have seen plenty examples of how much can be done by driving people like horses.

I somewhat agree with the above, except for the adjective 'high quality.'   Yes, the Chinese can build many large mechanical things (they currently use about 1/3 of all the concrete ww), but (and it's a big but.......    if quality is lacking in small things, then it will be lacking in large things also.

 

 

[chezy86]

Don't underestimate the Chinese. I remember in the seventies everyone laughing at the first Japanese Datsuns being winched off a ship in England and everyone saying 'sub standard machining,metal etc'. Well I don't have to tell you their not laughing now and British car and motorcycle manufacture is non exhistant. My point is they might not be at the levels of the US but they will be before long just as the Japanese did.

[onthesoi]

6 hours ago, Dustdevil said:

Kim Jong Mentally iL has six or seven now. As I said, I think he just wants a deterrent. But he's unpredictable.

 

The Federation of American Scientists says different, .......I think I would trust them more over anything Trump says.

 

Kim, like his father is very predictable, they haven't invaded or attacked any other countries in the last 70 years so it's unlikely they will start now ....how predictable has the US been over the same 70 year period?