Longjap
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2011
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 41
- Points
- 28
:rofl: Do you work at the harbour?
I've dodged some containers and harbour fuel related unscheduled "anomalies" during my time. Yes.
:rofl: Do you work at the harbour?
That White Cliffs photo would make an excellent PR shot for the Russian NavyLooking at the amount of carbon coming out of the flagship, we are going to have to rename the White Cliffs of Dover.
http://news.sky.com/story/russian-w...-dover-strait-shadowed-by-royal-navy-10625732
N.
Looking at the amount of carbon coming out of the flagship, we are going to have to rename the White Cliffs of Dover.
http://news.sky.com/story/russian-w...-dover-strait-shadowed-by-royal-navy-10625732
N.
"Russia has the right to operate in international waters. There are plans in place for NATO navies to monitor the Russian ships as they head for the Mediterranean."
Its 20 odd miles across the channel at its narrowest, I think. Isn't there a 3 mile limit for national territory?
N.
I wouldn't call the dover straight international waters. Are there agreements with Russians for Navy pass through?
Another way of effectively negating the right of innocent passage to warships was advanced by the USSR in the 80s 5. The USSR designated certain sea-lanes within its territorial waters - which it is allowed to do according to Art. 22 - and declared, any passage other than through these sea-lanes would be considered non-innocent. No sea-lanes were designated in the Black Sea, which basically excluded the territorial sea from all innocent passage. In principle, the USSR declared every passage outside the designated sea lanes as non-authorized.
A differentiation between the categories appears not to be necessary as the question of a permission of innocent passage is a matter of principle at this point: if certain ships can be required to give prior notice the right of innocent passage as such is qualified. If states do so, they generally claim that the right to require notification or authorization is inherently coupled with the right of innocent passage.
Is it my limited English or is this just badly written? I don't understand a flying weasel.
Are they required to notify the state for a passage or not?
Thanks for clearing that up.The British do not own the strait, neither do the French. Which state would you notify? Neither appear to have been notified in any case, as the Russian route is estimated by observation.
Meh.. I'd rather simulate it.But if they don't keep to the shipping lanes and speeds, they could technically be intercepted and by either side. I'd like to see that.
But if they don't keep to the shipping lanes and speeds, they could technically be intercepted and by either side. I'd like to see that. They certainly didn't ask for permission . . .
Heh and when they have a few loaded jets parked on the deck, they don't need to ask for permission
Americans: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a Collision.
Canadians: Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.
Americans: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.
Canadians: No. I say again, you divert YOUR course.
Americans: This is the aircraft carrier USS Lincoln, the second largest ship in the United States' Atlantic fleet. We are accompanied by three destroyers, three cruisers and numerous support vessels. I demand that YOU change your course 15 degrees north, that's one five degrees north, or countermeasures will be undertaken to ensure the safety of this ship.
Canadians: This is a lighthouse. Your call.
Yes I love the old tale of the Battleship versus the Lighthouse - though in the version I heard I think it was the Enterprise
"Mars: I'm a planet. Your call."