PLA Navy news, pics and videos

Yeap this discussion is really going places............... guys can we just call it even and drop the subject altogether ?
We can argue till the chickens come home on who is in the wrong here and everyone is going to have their own little opinions on the subject.

Due to navigation rules, and the photos, the Decatur was aft of 112.5 degrees from the bow of the PLAN ship, and thus was in the Stern sector of the PLAN vessel, it did not have the right of way and had to give way. The Decatur captain needs a refresher course back at Annapolis.

In terms of the reckless use of the word "unprofessional" by US media, it was unprofessional and a violation of navigation rules, to come close to the stern of a ship and prevent it from maneuvering, risking a collision, thus the Stern sector rule of 112.5 degrees from the bow of the leading ship, as the stern has to swing out in any maneuver.

To illustrate the rule, what was the PLAN ship supposed to do? Turn away and swing its stern into the US ship, or turn across the bow of the US ship? This why we have rules of the road on the sea. Only the US ship had the ability to maneuver to avoid a collision, the fact that it didn't and endangered international relations, should see the captain of the US ship removed from duty.

PLAN had the right of way. The US ship should have reduced speed, or turned earlier. I would have removed that US captain and demoted him to a shore office job.

Hyperwarp said:

Nothing wrong with shadowing the USS Decatur, but this very, very risky behavior. The PLAN ship (052C?) is putting both ships in danger. USS Decatur has to be commended for the quick reaction and avoiding further escalation. China can stake their claim but no need to get that risky. We are talking about 8400t and a 7000t vessels literally on a collision course. Next time send a bunch of wooden fishing boats.

Click to expand...

No, it was the US that engaged in very very risky behavior by coming too close. 12 miles is too close to Chinese territory; the US assumes all responsibility for what happens after it attempts to invade other countries' territories. The 052C should be commended for not driving up to 12 miles of Hawaii and playing ship-chicken with the USN there.

SinoSoldier said:

Like when they built islands out of seabed in the SCS (which they claim for themselves), militarized those islands despite earlier promises not to do so, and ignored an UN court ruling? Oh wait...

I don't think any great power can lay claim to a spotless record in obeying every single ratified law, but let's not pretend that China has the higher moral ground in this instance.

Click to expand...

I pretend nothing. It was the USN that deliberately sailed half the way of the world across to antagonize China. It does not belong there; in Asia, China will always hold the higher moral ground over the US.

It was the US that militarized the region by sending military aircraft and ships there. China only responded. If someone else says he comes with peaceful intentions and you take that as a statement that you can provoke him endlessly without a hostile response, that is an interpretation error on your part. No sham foreign court can rule to strip China of its territory; this is 2018, not 1918. They can wear black robes and talk to themselves all they want but it doesn't mean anything LOL

manqiangrexue said:

No, it was the US that engaged in very very risky behavior by coming too close. 12 miles is too close to Chinese territory; the US assumes all responsibility for what happens after it attempts to invade other countries' territories. The 052C should be commended for not driving up to 12 miles of Hawaii and playing ship-chicken with the USN there.

***

Click to expand...

The PLAN can do that if they so wish to. In fact, they can (if they wanted to) go right into the Gulf of Mexico. They can send surveillance ships, warships, submarines, etc.

SinoSoldier said:

Like when they built islands out of seabed in the SCS (which they claim for themselves), militarized those islands despite earlier promises not to do so, and ignored an UN court ruling? Oh wait...

I don't think any great power can lay claim to a spotless record in obeying every single ratified law, but let's not pretend that China has the higher moral ground in this instance.

Click to expand...

Having a default position weakens your argument.

chlosy said:

Careful, The American destroyers might hit fishing vessels.

Click to expand...

yeah, I am sure Chinese trawling fishing ships may likely come close to these American destroyers if things go tense if you know what trawling ship is.

t2contra said:

I see the danger. They have problem avoiding even container ships.

Click to expand...

let alone trawling net on their path underwater.

SinoSoldier said:

Like when they built islands out of seabed in the SCS (which they claim for themselves), militarized those islands despite earlier promises not to do so, and ignored an UN court ruling? Oh wait...

I don't think any great power can lay claim to a spotless record in obeying every single ratified law, but let's not pretend that China has the higher moral ground in this instance.

Click to expand...

what UN court? Give the reference to a UN registration and document number of that ruling from the UN archive. Everyone has access to UN web site of archived documents.

Hyperwarp said:

The PLAN can do that if they so wish to. In fact, they can (if they wanted to) go right into the Gulf of Mexico. They can send surveillance ships, warships, submarines, etc.

Click to expand...

If we all take that attitude, USN can do that if they so wish to. In fact, they (USN) can (if they wanted to) have their DDG sail ahead of PLAN DDG and maintain course, forcing PLAN into 41 meters to USN ship's stern, then I think PLAN is willing to make sudden turn and cry provocative of USN.

This scenario is much easier to happen since USN ships frequently come to SCS. I will wait to hear from you when this happens.