Printable View
Ivan
Not disputing any of that however I am sure that they would have to make the New one much deeper and possibly wider to accommodate these new Giant Monsters that are being built,and ones that have already been built and cannot at present get through!??
Cheers
Once built maybe the Egyptians could sell the other one to USA, they could put it alongside London Bridge!
Doc, can only report what I've read in my Maritime Press and from colleagues in the industry, it didn't mention what the final depths/widths would be. Also these giant monsters are on trades that don't go anywhere near the Suez Canal, e.g. Brazil/China and Aussie/China. Canals by their very topography will limit the size of vessel that can utilise them, the larger the vessel the more damage it will cause to banks and other structures by suction as it traverses the canal and the administration will have taken this into consideration when thinking of the expense upkeep by dredging etc in the future, the object was to increase flow not necessarily size. Note that the new Panama Canal Locks will not take extraordinarily larger ships because of the damage larger ships can cause if things go wrong and for maintenance reasons and the main reason for the new locks was to increase flow and not size. Ship sizes are dictated by the ports that are available and have the ability to handle them and the larger ones are built for dedicated trades. As an aside Nicaragua has decided to go ahead with a Canal from the Atlantic to the Pacific and doesn't have the topographical problems that the Panama faced and modern equipment makes it possible that this canal will be operational within five years, it is being financed by the Chinese who will have a minimum 51% share holding, so we know who will control that Canal and whose military (in any guise) will be stationed there to 'protect it from terrorists'!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Vernon
The mention of China building a canal in Nicaragua is something new to me, and very interesting.
They built the railway in Tanzania a few decades back. A recent television documentary showed how they had totally taken over the administration of it in the wake of local incompetence and implied corruption.
The Chinese honchos were strangely reticent when interviewed.
The producer/s of the documentary seemed to be alluding to the not infrequently mentioned suspicion of China's long term global aims.
#10... That word Logical , Ivan springs to mind and the various ways it is used. Ref. ABC warfare which many who did the course during the Cuban crisis. (Atomic, Biological and Chemical warfare) Could now be called Logical, Biological and Chemical warfare. Sounds better with the Atomic bit cut out. LBC warfare sounds more appropriate. Cheers JS
---------- Post added at 02:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 AM ----------
#12 .. Believe John in Oz, already has the literature out in London for any american tourists interested in buying. Should go pretty quick, shows how shrewd a businessman he is. Cheers John S
China will within a decade or so be the major player in world affairs, they are into so mnay countries now. Half of Cambodia is Chinese owned now and here in Oz they own about 5% of the country, they have th emoney and the will to do business which is a worry to many in the west.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bridgen
I personally dont have any anti feelings re countries who are not run by religious fantacies, of running the world and running their own laws. Business is business and the rest is b...sh..t. I do have anti feelings against such religions and there so called permission to run ones lives. We are now living in very dangerous times which have been further accentuated by wrong decisions in the past. A lot of those decisions were encouraged by the bleeding hearts and the soft belly of the west. Its about time people stood up for their own beliefs and werent brainwashed by the minority groups. JS
[QUOTE=David Bridgen;178818]The mention of China building a canal in Nicaragua is something new to me, and very interesting.
David the land and lake route across Nicaragua from Atlantic to Pacific was in competition with the land and lake route across Panama in the 18th and 19th centuries, but because the route land across Panama was shorter everyone thought the Panama route would be more viable. During the gold rush era (prior Panama Canal) two large American Shipping companies each offered a service from the East coast USA to West coast USA, one via Panama and one via Nicaragua. The then Nicaraguan Govt offered their armies as a protection unit to travellers using their route which involved in the beginning mule trains, lake steamers and mule trains from east to west and vice versa, the Panama offered the same facilities but shorter mule rides, however the Nicaraguan route turned out to be the quickest route from New York to the Yukon, each shipping company having ships on dedicated routes from New York to either Nicaragua or Panama, thence from the Wc ports to Yukon, transporting gold back. The USA company using the Nicaraguan route decided that the Nicaraguan Army was too expensive to employ and decided to use 'in house' protection services for passengers and bullion thus upsetting the Nicaraguan Govt who started to levy high transit and lake charges, also many in the army deserted and became bandits holding up passenger lake ships and stealing bullion on the homeward journey from the mule and later rail transits, this ruined the reputation of the American operator and he was forced to sell his ships to his competitor on the Panama route. The Scots had in the 16th century made great progress across the Panamanian Isthmus in surveying properly the topography for a route that was later used, some 5000 Scots were involved in the project over the years but alas nearly 90% of them never saw their homeland again succumbing to malaria and other sickness, De Lessops then tried and nearly bankrupt the French Govt and the equipment was bought some years later by the USA for peppercorn money and the job completed in 1914. Had the USA company using the Nicaraguan route not been so greedy then there would have been no Panama Canal as the route from East to Yukon was five days quicker in sailing ship days by Nicaragua lake and land than it was by Panama lake and land. There is an interesting book about American Shipping companies in the 17th - 19th centuries and all wanted to keep the British off the route and had many run in with the British Navy in those areas. PSNC tried the West Coast route up to Yukon sailing around the Horn but its ships were sabotaged and it wasn't financially viable. The topographical route in Nicaragua is well surveyed and been constantly updated by the Nicaraguan Govt who have never given up the idea of a Canal across their country, but never had the finance to follow the dream, but now they have and the USA will lose some of its power in the region
Up to at least 1986 the B.A. charts covering Nicaragua always showed the proposed route of the canal there. There was also the stupid suggestion that maybe atomic bombs could be used in a controlled manner to blast the route through the mountains.
rgds
JA
Panama Canal opened 100 years ago today.
Regards.
jim.B.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...acular-4051471