International Aerospace Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1598
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby andy B » 22 May 2011 05:03

Austin, et all can someone please identify this gunpod thanks:

Image

Image

Looks like its a Hind that is carrying it...interesting concept with three gatling guns :twisted:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 22 May 2011 20:14

^^From mp.net I got thats a GUV-8700 gun pod with 9-A-669 with 2 x 9-A-622 cal. 7,62 mm and 1 9-A-624 cal. 12,7 mm gun.

A better view of the gun pod link

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 26 May 2011 14:42

A shot in the arm for Korea Aerospace Industries

Indonesia buys $400M of Korean jets
Image

Korea yesterday signed a massive deal with Indonesia to export T-50 trainer jets, the first sale abroad of the country’s supersonic aircraft.

Korea Aerospace Industries agreed with Indonesia’s Defense Ministry to sell 16 T-50 Golden Eagle jets in the $400 million deal. The aircraft will be delivered by the end of 2013, according to the agreement.

Indonesia has been looking to replace its aged fleet of training jets, and Jakarta short-listed the T-50s last year with two other jets from Russia and the Czech Republic. After Korea’s state-run aerospace company was selected as the preferred bidder on April 12, 20 KAI officials in charge of exports have stayed in Indonesia to negotiate the specifics. After 50 days of talks, Indonesia decided on the Korean jets.

The T-50s were jointly developed with U.S.-based Lockheed Martin in a 13-year project that cost 2 trillion won ($1.8 billion).

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Klaus » 27 May 2011 02:13

The June 2011 edition of Rotor & Wing featuring an article on the stealth aspects of the JSOC choppers used in the Abbottabad raid operation is out now. The cover story highlights the increasing options and availability of customised choppers for governments and militaries.

Link 1.
This is an ifile.it link: http://ifile.it/rvsaj8q.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 27 May 2011 21:47

Russia, U.S. seal Afghan helicopter deal

The U.S. Army Forces Command and Russian state-controlled arms exporter Rosoboronexport have sealed a contract for the supply of 21 Mi-17V5 multipurpose helicopters to Afghanistan, a spokesman for the Russian Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation said on Friday.

The United States and Russia have been in talks for more than a year on the deal to provide the much needed vehicles for the NATO mission in Afghanistan.

General Abdul Wahab Wardak, Chief of Staff of the Air Force in Afghanistan, earlier said the cost of one helicopter had been agreed at $17.5 million.

"Apart from the helicopters, the contract stipulates the procurement of reserve units, ground support equipment, and maintenance support," the spokesman said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 29 May 2011 08:08

Military Ka-60 Eclipses Civil Ka-62
Maxim Pyadushkin

MOSCOW — Development of the new Kamov Ka-60/62 medium twin helicopter — the first Kamov non-coaxial rotor aircraft — is gaining momentum through military orders and government subsidies.

Russian Helicopters, the holding company for the country’s rotorcraft industry and Kamov’s parent company, is simultaneously preparing both the Ka-60 military transport and the Ka-62 civil version. The latter has a maximum takeoff weight of 6,500 kg (14,300 lb.) and can carry 12-15 passengers at 290 kph (180 mph) speed over a range of 750 km (460 mi.).

The development of this type started in the late 1980s, and the initial prototype made its first flight in 1998. Capable of carrying up to a 2,500-kg payload, the Ka-60/62 was designed to fill a niche between the Ka-226 light twin and medium-class Ka-32 and Mil Mi-8/17 helicopters.

Unlike all other Kamov models that feature distinctive co-axial rotors, Ka-60 has a classic helicopter design with a five-bladed main rotor and shrouded tail rotor. According to the designers, its rotor blades and more than half of the fuselage are made from composites. Kamov currently has only one prototype in flight, powered by 1,300-hp NPO Saturn RD-600V turboshafts. Another prototype was lost in a crash during a test flight near Moscow in June 2010.

According to Russian Helicopters CEO Dmitry Petrov, the development efforts are now focused on the Ka-60, with Russia’s military having ordered more than 100 such helicopters. He said that two new prototypes are currently being built to join flight trials this year. One more test helicopter will join the trials in 2012.

The new versions apparently will differ from the existing rotorcraft by featuring a more streamlined fuselage and improved tail controls.

The other difference will be the powerplants — the prototypes will start trials with RD-600s, but recently received more powerful 1,680-hp Turbomeca Ardiden 3G engines.

At HeliRussia 2011, the annual helicopter industry exhibition recently held in Moscow, Russian Helicopters announced an order for 40 Ardiden 3Gs, with deliveries to begin in 2014.

The order is the first part of a contract for 308 powerplants signed between the Russian manufacturer and Turbomeca in April. According to Petrov, the French engines will be installed on all serial production helicopters. During the internal tender, Ardiden 3G “won over Russian engines on all key parameters,” he says. Earlier, the designers planned to use them only on civil Ka-62s, while the military Ka-60 retained the Russian RD-600V. “Now the [Russian] military [has] become more open to foreign equipment,” Petrov says.

Image
KBO-62 Avionics Suite

The improved Ka-60/62 prototypes will also receive a new glass cockpit from St. Petersburg-based avionics specialist Transas Aviation. This avionics suite, called KBO-62 and unveiled at the show, is built around two 12.1-in. TDS-12 primary flight/navigation displays and two 8.4-in. TDS-84 MFDs, all with an LED backlight. Also included is the TTA-12H(S) terrain awareness and warning system with a built-in terrain and obstacles database; two TNC-1G flight management systems with built-in Glonass/GPS sensors; flight computers and TDC-17 cockpit indication control interfaces. The basic package weighs 19.5 kg.

This configuration can operate using digital maps and terrain models, and supports all typical helicopter applications.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 29 May 2011 16:26

Compare the old and new cockpit of Mi-26T and Mi-26T-2

Mi-26T
versus
Mi-26T2
Last edited by Austin on 30 May 2011 06:55, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 29 May 2011 17:01


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 30 May 2011 09:04

Lockheed Martin reveals F-35 to feature nanocomposite structures
By Stephen Trimble

Lockheed Martin has revealed the F-35 Lightning II will be the first mass-produced aircraft to integrate structural nanocomposites in non-load bearing airframe components.

A thermoset epoxy reinforced by carbon nanotubes will replace carbon fibre as the material used to produce F-35 wingtip fairings beginning with low rate initial production (LRIP)-4 aircraft, said Travis Earles, a manager for corporate nanotechnology initiatives.

Meanwhile, the same carbon nanotube reinforced polymer (CNRP) material is being considered to replace about 100 components made with other composites or metals throughout the F-35's airframe, he said.

The shift to CNRP as an airframe material has been anticipated ever since carbon nanotubes were discovered in 1991. It is widely considered one of the strongest materials ever invented - several times stronger than carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP), yet lighter by about 25-30%.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 01 Jun 2011 11:28

so Russia is finally getting their Dhruv type heli via the KA60.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 01 Jun 2011 11:33

UK has loudly tom tommed that they will send helicopter gunships to libyan shores (and france has also announced).

looks like they are completing the tests now per Austin's link

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 01 Jun 2011 13:12

Singha wrote:so Russia is finally getting their Dhruv type heli via the KA60.


Yes almost close , Dhruv is in 5.5T class and Ka-60 is in 6.5T class but specs are almost similar.

It would have been good if HAL/GOI could have pushed in Dhruv as part of some quid-pro-quo arrangement , since there is a big demand for chopper of similar class in civil and military.

arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby arunsrinivasan » 01 Jun 2011 19:48

Decoy Swarm Could Overload Enemy Defenses

Like nuclear submarines and heavy artillery, it’s one of those weapon systems you don’t read much about during peacetime — but which, during a major war, could prove decisive. It doesn’t help that this particular gadget, unlike Seawolf-class subs and Paladin artillery pieces, has an utterly forgettable name.

The Miniature Air-Launched Decoy, or “MALD,” is a cross between a cruise missile and an aerial drone, able to distract or confuse enemy air defenses to protect attacking U.S. jets. It was already on its way to becoming one of America’s most important unsung weapons when this happened: MALD-maker Raytheon figured out a way to “deliver hundreds of MALDs during a single combat sortie,” company vice president Harry Schulte announced in a recent statement.

Raytheon recently tested the MALD Cargo Air-Launched System, a complex of racks attached to the cargo ramp of an airlifter, on a borrowed C-130. The racks could allow the Air Force to deploy cloud-like swarms of the smart, man-size missiles. In doing so, the MALD (pictured above) would become America’s first true swarming drone, and a potentially powerful countermeasure against ever-more-sophisticated enemy air defenses.

The original MALD began as a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency experiment, aimed at producing a relatively cheap flying robot, able to mimic the flight characteristics of American warplanes. The idea was for MALD decoys, launched by F-16s, F/A-18s or B-52s, to fly ahead of the bombers during an air campaign. The enemy would turn on all its radars and waste its Surface-to-Air Missiles on the decoys. Meanwhile, the Navy’s Prowler and Growler jets would jam or destroy the radars busily tracking the MALDs.

MALD had its share of development problems. The first edition lacked the range to be truly useful, so the Pentagon scrapped it and started over. But a new version with a 500-mile range that debuted in 2009 was a huge hit. The Navy said it would buy some. And the Air Force, after announcing plans to buy potentially thousands of the decoys, ordered up a version of MALD with its own tiny radar jammer fitted inside the missile-shaped body. That way, a mixed formation of MALDs could do more than just soak up enemy missiles; it could electronically fight back.

Now, with the airlifter mass-deployment system, the Air Force could put so many MALDs into the air, so fast, that any real warplanes would be safely hidden against any surviving air defenses able to see through the MALD-generated jamming. It’s a high-tech version of the swarm tactics that pirates and poor countries have devised to overpower U.S. forces’ own defenses.

And as if that weren’t enough, Raytheon is also offering to put sensors or warheads inside future MALD versions, adding “eyes” and explosive potential to the swarm.

The Air Force hasn’t decided yet whether to buy the mass-launching racks or the warhead- or sensor-equipped MALDs.

All the same, with every new development, MALD and similar weapons gradually erode the privileged position that radar-evading stealth occupies in the American military-industrial mindset. Stealth exists to thwart enemy defenses. But there’s more than one way to defeat radars: as MALD proves, you can distract, confuse and overwhelm them, too — and potentially at much lower cost than trying to appear invisible.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 02 Jun 2011 07:02

pandyan wrote:They tried to sell Dhruv as part of another helicopter transaction (I believe it was we buy Mi-17, you buy dhruv kinda of transaction). Bears laughed, laughed and laughed and said we dont need dhruv..we are the bestest helicopter maker in the world and you keep the helicopter to yourself. Grateful SDREs said ok.


I never came across this news before , any source for this ?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 02 Jun 2011 07:32

The same article says that it was part of discussion but there was no agreement reached , the only way to sell Dhruv is first in the civil market there and tie up with local company to sell Dhruv , that should also help judge the chopper market.

The tricky point is that India conditions the contract to Russia’s commitment to acquire light Dhruv helicopters of Indian HAL. “The principal decision on purchasing Dhruvs has been made at the level of Russia’s and Indian Intergovernmental Commission for Military and Technical Cooperation, but the issue hasn’t been agreed to the end,” a source with Russia’s government said on condition of anonymity. “There are no plans to buy this helicopter for Russia’s Air Forces, if only for some civil clients.”

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 02 Jun 2011 07:43

I agree for the military it may be difficult atm because of their own design bureau having similar types.

But we need to look beyond military and look at selling it in Civil Market of Russia/CIS since Dhruv is more then a military chopper , tie up with local manufacturer to sell it is the best way to make inroads , considering they do buy similar chopper from Europe.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 03 Jun 2011 08:32


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 03 Jun 2011 18:23

http://www.gizmag.com/longbow-apache-at ... tem/18527/

apache helicopter to get small arms muzzle flash detection and auto targeting system.

--
I am not sure if people just add a flash hider to the small arms barrels how this system will work? sniper rifles do seem to feature flash hiders as SOP.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 04 Jun 2011 21:14

another scary new capability for the khan - the ability to fire dozens of 500km range programmable decoys from C130 cargo pallets that can mimic the rcs and flight profile of nato aircraft to mislead and trigger defences

http://defense-update.com/wp/20110531_m ... +Update%29

UBanerjee
BRFite
Posts: 502
Joined: 20 Mar 2011 01:41
Location: Washington DC

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby UBanerjee » 04 Jun 2011 21:47

X-posted from India-US strategic thread
Decoding India's MMRCA Decision - Ashley Tellis

A long and involved piece detailing how the US planes were rejected on technical grounds rather than political or strategic ones, and what they could have done about it.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby pragnya » 05 Jun 2011 18:37


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Jun 2011 18:40

does not sound like too much of a game changer. we shall see how things progress...

arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby arunsrinivasan » 07 Jun 2011 12:58

A good read on the development of combat drones by Boeing & how the US Military Industrial complex operates warts & all ...

The Secret History of Boeing’s Killer Drone

BENNY
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 11:53

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby BENNY » 08 Jun 2011 02:37

Jun 7, 2011
Dan Seal, program manager of Boeing's immersive development environment, briefs reporters on the company's new tools for designing the next generation of air dominance fighters. The 7 June brief in St. Louis shows Boeing is serious about competing for the US Navy's long-term requirement for replacing the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSTTK4bzRSg


sampat
BRFite
Posts: 476
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 23:54

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby sampat » 08 Jun 2011 18:26

RAF Eurofighter Typhoons 'beaten by Pakistani F-16s'

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08 ... en_by_f16/

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby pragnya » 08 Jun 2011 19:19

sampat wrote:RAF Eurofighter Typhoons 'beaten by Pakistani F-16s'

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08 ... en_by_f16/


there may be a bit of truth in the pakistan pilot's claim.

for one pakistani pilots are well versed with wvr game (they have got BVR capability only recently) and their F-16s are the leaner ones (unlike the fat block 60sm - India was offered for the MMRCA) and the fact that they are used to it and have honed tactics around them for years also lends credence to the claim.

f-16 block 50/52s are quite capable too.

what is important to know is at what altitudes the game was fought. if it is is in low to medium then there is good reason to beleive though the pilot may be overhyping it - how normally pakistanis do.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 08 Jun 2011 20:23

sampat wrote:RAF Eurofighter Typhoons 'beaten by Pakistani F-16s'
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08 ... en_by_f16/

Pakees know that they cannot get the EF Typhoon which the Yindoos might buy, so the best way to increase ech Undee is to diss it, make it inferior to F16 (or even Bhandaar). The passive sensors and radar on the Typhoon would have detected the f-16 way before the f-16s detected them. Unless we know what simulated condition they were exercising it is hard to conclude. Was it a regular Typhoon or was it dumbed down? When Typhoon came to Kalaikunda, they held their own against SU30MKIs so this is hard to beleive.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 08 Jun 2011 20:57

the last dogfighter F16 was apparently the bigmouth block40. the pakis have something like block30 I think via the MLU from original block15. so the original lot of paki F16s will still be plenty good at dogfights which I suspect was what was being tried vs the eurofighters.

the F16-block50/52 had already put on weight and has CFTs. slimmer than the block60 for sure, but definitely not the usain bolt of the track.

anishns
BRFite
Posts: 1342
Joined: 16 Dec 2007 09:43
Location: being victim onlee...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby anishns » 10 Jun 2011 08:43

Biraders! from the unmentionable forum, there's an ongoing debate that the Fizzleya's F-16's never even met the RAF Typhoons...
They did however meet the Tornado's....which sucks at WVR :roll:


Read the comments below:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/06/must-read-tell-all-interview-w-1.html

By nichomach
on June 9, 2011 12:40 PM | Reply

A bit of fact checking would reveal that the RAF have never put Typhoons into an AE when the PAF were present. The RAF went to AE 07/2, where Pakistan were present, but sent GR4 Tornadoes not Typhoons. The RAF sent six Typhoons to AE-09/2 but Pakistan were not present at AE-09/2. Consequently, I call bullshit.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Jun 2011 09:06

:rotfl:
which kind of puts in doubt the rest of the PAF pilots remarks about the US black boxes monitoring though

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Jun 2011 16:16

gates blasts NATO in farwell address

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43351604/ns ... ws-europe/

"Despite more than 2 million troops in uniform, not counting the U.S. military, NATO has struggled, at times desperately, to sustain a deployment of 25,000 to 45,000 troops, not just in boots on the ground, but in crucial support assets such as helicopters, transport aircraft, maintenance, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and much more," Gates said.
.....
To illustrate his concerns about Europe's lack of appetite for defense, Gates noted the difficulty NATO has encountered in carrying out an air campaign in Libya.

"The mightiest military alliance in history is only 11 weeks into an operation against a poorly armed regime in a sparsely populated country, yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the U.S., once more, to make up the difference," he said. :rotfl:
.....
A NATO air operations center designed to handle more than 300 flights a day is struggling to launch about 150 a day against Libya, Gates said. :oops:

On a political level, the problem of alliance purpose in Libya is even more troubling, he said.

"While every alliance member voted for the Libya mission, less than half have participated, and fewer than a third have been willing to participate in the strike mission," he said. "Frankly, many of those allies sitting on the sidelines do so not because they do not want to participate, but simply because they can't. The military capabilities simply aren't there." :oops:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 10 Jun 2011 16:36

Amazing!!!

Wonder how their support performs.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 10 Jun 2011 16:43

Singha wrote:gates blasts NATO in farwell address

The military capabilities simply aren't there." :oops:


I can't wait for the strategic and logistical support from the EU if and when we get into a tangle with the Panda. We'll have to have UPS and Fedex pick up parts and make sure we don't use them up during the euro workers holidays.

The Brits are down to saying they can afford a carrier (PoW) or the JSF but not both :) WTF is a strategic partnership worth with these guys? All they are interested in is selling us luxury price goods made in China.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Jun 2011 17:12

we will have to provision a very deep pipeline of spares and weapons and bury it 100ft below the ground in ten places to 'work around' such issues no matter which way the MRCA deal swings.

the only guy capable of delivering a wheelbarrow of goodies anywhere on the planet 24x7 using C5/C17 air bridge is no longer in the boxing ring.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 10 Jun 2011 18:20

Singha wrote:we will have to provision a very deep pipeline of spares and weapons and bury it 100ft below the ground in ten places to 'work around' such issues no matter which way the MRCA deal swings.

the only guy capable of delivering a wheelbarrow of goodies anywhere on the planet 24x7 using C5/C17 air bridge is no longer in the boxing ring.


Don't be too sure, the PRC-South China Sea "All your oils and minerals are belong to us" game is on. We should really be getting much closer to the Vietnamese: Brahmos (the Russkies will probably veto that), Prithvis etc. Damn it, we can't even supply our own forces after all this time.

But the big guy is looking for PRC to frighten the hens before offering roostering services..


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 15 Jun 2011 20:31


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Jun 2011 20:41

the PRC has apparently pulled a old Kuomintang(KMT) map out of its posterior and claimed the entire resources of the south china sea belongs to it....a huge area adjacent to vietnam, okinawa and the philippine islands. I had heard the KMT had more maximalist maps on the land frontier, but they seem to have claimed the seas too!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/world ... china.html

A Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, asserted on June 7 that “China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and adjacent waters.” Though China has not explicitly delineated its territorial claims, critics in the region say it is relying on a map, drawn up by the old Kuomintang government and supported by the current Communist government, that shows virtually the entire South China Sea under Chinese dominion. Mr. Hong said China’s position on the sea “has remained unchanged for centuries,” and has called on Vietnam and the Philippines to stop oil exploration there.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests