text:
The Paracel Islands, also known as the Xisha Islands () and the Hoang Sa Archipelago (), are a disputed archipelago in the South China Sea.

The archipelago includes about 130 small coral islands and reefs, most grouped into the northeastern Amphitrite Group or the western Crescent Group. They are distributed over a maritime area of around , with a land area of approximately . The name Paracel is of Portuguese origin, and appears on 16th-century Portuguese maps. The archipelago is approximately equidistant from the coastlines of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and Vietnam, and approximately one-third of the way from central Vietnam to the northern Philippines. The archipelago includes Dragon Hole, the deepest underwater sinkhole in the world. Turtles and seabirds are native to the islands, which have a hot and humid climate, abundant rainfall and frequent typhoons. The archipelago is surrounded by productive fishing grounds and a seabed with potential, but as yet unexplored, oil and gas reserves.

The colonial government of French Indochina set up telecommunication and weather stations on Pattle Island in the Crescent Group and Woody Island ('Boisée' in French) in the Amphitrite Group in the 1930s, which they regularly supplied until 1945. Imperial Japan established a military presence on the Paracel Islands during the Second Sino-Japanese War, and Japanese troops lived alongside French troops on Woody Island throughout much of the war. After the end of the war, in 1946, the Republic of China sent naval expeditions to the South China Sea and established a garrison on Woody Island. Later, in January 1947, French and Vietnamese forces landed on Pattle Island in the Crescent Group. By 1955, South Vietnam had taken possession of the Crescent Group. In 1956, the PRC took control of and established a permanent presence on Woody Island, which by then was only seasonally inhabited by fishermen from Hainan. After the Battle of the Paracel Islands in January 1974, the PRC expelled the South Vietnamese from the Crescent Group and took full control of the Paracels. South Vietnam's claim to the islands was inherited by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, which has ruled all of Vietnam since 1975.

The ownership of the islands remains hotly contested. People's Republic of China on Mainland China, Vietnam, and Republic of China on Taiwan all claim de jure sovereignty, although the PRC has de facto control of the islands. In July 2012, China (PRC) established Sansha, Hainan Province, as administering the area. In February 2017, the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative reported 20 outposts of the PRC built on reclaimed land in the Paracels, three of which have small harbors capable of berthing naval and commercial ships.

Geography

 Geographic coordinates:
 Coastline:
 Climate: tropical
 Elevation extremes:
 Lowest point: South China Sea, sea level
 Highest point: unnamed location on Rocky Island
 Natural resources: fish, coral reefs, possible reserves of oil and gas of unknown size
 Natural hazards: typhoons

Climate

Amphitrite group

The Amphitrite group was named after the French frigate Amphitrite, which observed the islands while carrying a Jesuit mission to Canton in 1698–1700.

Lying in the northeast of the Paracel Islands at , the group consists of low, narrow islands with sand cays and enclosed shallow lagoons connected by reefs of rock.  It is about  northwest of Lincoln Island. The group approximately forms an ellipse with a north–south axis of .

The northern section of the group comprises West Sand, Tree Island and the Qilian Yu sub-group (The "Seven Sisters": North Island, Middle Island, South Island, North Sand, Middle Sand, South Sand and two small "sands".) The center of the group consists of Woody Island and Rocky Island, approximately  south of the southern tip of the eastern extremity of the northern section. The southwest corner of the group is occupied by the Iltis Bank.

The largest island of the Paracels, Woody Island (which has an area of ), has over 1,000 residents including fishermen and their families, military personnel and civilian administrators.

Crescent group

Lying about  southwest of the Amphitrite group, at , the Crescent group consists of islands and reefs that form a crescent-like structure from west to east, enclosing a deep central lagoon. The group measures  east-west and north–south. All of the islands in the group support vegetation except on their small cays.

The islands are named after former senior figures in the British East India Company (EIC). Three were members of the EIC's 'Select Committee' in Canton: James Drummond, Thomas Pattle and John William Roberts. Jonathan Duncan was Governor in Council of Bombay, and William Taylor Money was Superintendent of the Bombay Marine.

Money Island lies at the southwest extremity of the group, and has some small cays on the southern side. The Chinese name for Money Island, Jin Yin Dao, is simply the translation of the English name.
Antelope Reef, submerged at high tide and containing a central lagoon, lies  east of Money Island.
Northeast of this are Robert Island (also named Round Island) and Pattle Island, separated from each other by a  wide deep channel. A weather station was built on Pattle Island (by the French) in 1932, and a lighthouse and radio station in 1937.
Northeast of this is Quanfu Dao ("All Wealth Island").
Observation Bank, also named Silver Islet, and the Lesser Silver Islet, are the northernmost of the group and contain a small cay.
Just south of them are Yagong Dao (He Duck) and Xianshe Yu (Salty Hut).

At the eastern side of the group lies a  long boomerang shaped reef with Stone Islet at its north end and Drummond Island at its south end. Near the centre of the reef is Dragon Hole  the deepest known sinkhole in the world.

The Duncan Islands (), consisting of Duncan Island and Palm Island, lie approximately  west of Drummond Island and about  east of Antelope Reef. Kuangzai Shazhou (Little Basket) lies about halfway between Palm Island and Antelope Reef.

Other features
Taking  as the center of the Paracel Islands, then the Amphitrite Group is ENE, and the Crescent Group is West.

Southeast
 Bombay Reef: This elongated reef is situated at the southeastern corner of the Paracel Islands () and lies approximately  southeast of the Crescent group. With most parts submerged, the reef measures approximately  (E-W by N-S). Bombay Reef encloses a deep lagoon with rocks on its edge.

Eastern sub-group
 Bremen Bank: Located  north of Bombay Reef (), is the southwesternmost feature of this subgroup. This submerged shallow bank measures approximately  in length from northeast to southwest. The shallowest area reaches a depth of about  and is located in the southwestern part of the bank.
 Jehangire Bank: East of the Bremen Bank at
 Neptuna Bank: North of the Bremen Bank at
 Pyramid Rock: NE of the Neptuna Bank at
 Lincoln Island: Surrounded by a coral reef, located  southeast from the Amphitrite Group at , the island is covered with brushes and fairly high trees, including coconut palm trees. The depth increases sharply on the northern and eastern sides of the island but the southern and south western regions are shallow. An observation post on the western side was found by officers of the German government surveys in 1883. In 1948, Great Britain requested France for permission to use the feature for military exercises.

Northeast
 Dido Bank: Separate from, and NE of, the Eastern sub-group at

(ENE: Ampitrite group)

Northwest
 North Reef: Situated approximately  north from the Crescent group and about  west-northwest from the Amphitrite group at , the reef is the most northwesterly feature of the Paracel Islands. Most parts of the reef are submerged. There are rugged rocks are around the edge that are barely above water. There is a passage into the lagoon on the southwestern side of the reef.

(West: Crescent group)

Inner southwest
 Discovery Reef: Measuring approximately  in length from east to west, and  from north to south, the reef is located about  south of the Crescent Group at . Completely submerged, the elongated ring structure is the largest single reef in the Paracel Islands. The reef has two large, deep openings into the lagoon on its southern side.
 Passu Keah: This small reef encloses a shallow lagoon and is located about  south of the eastern side of Discovery Reef at , approximately  east-northeast from Triton Island. The sand cay measures  in length.

Outer southwest
 Triton Island: The sand cay supports vegetation and stands on a steep-sided coral reef measuring  in length. This southwesternmost island of the Paracels is situated about  from Discovery Reef at .

Central
 Vuladdore Reef: Located slightly south of the center of the group at , this mostly submerged reef is orientated east–west and measures approximately  by . Some small spiral rocks are to be seen on the reef.

List of entities

Satellite images

Etymology

Hoàng Sa
The Vietnamese call the islands Hoang Sa, (黃沙 or Yellow Sands), and this name is found in historic Vietnamese documents dating back to 1483, included "An Nam quốc họa đồ" which was published in 1490. In the modern language system it is written as Hoàng Sa or Cát Vàng. They all have the same meaning — the Yellow Sands or the Yellow Sandbank. Before the early 19th century, the present-day Spratly Islands were treated as features of Hoàng Sa. It was not until the reign of Emperor Minh Mạng (1820–1841) that the Spratlys were distinctly delineated and officially named Vạn Lý Trường Sa (萬里長沙), the Ten-thousand League-long Sandbank.

Xisha and other Chinese names

The Chinese name Xisha (), literally "western sands" or "shoals", is a name adopted in the 20th century to distinguish it from the "eastern sands" (Pratas; also Tungsha/Dongsha), the "southern sands" (the Nansha or Spratlys), and the "central sands" (the Zhongsha or Macclesfield Bank).  Prior to that, there had been no consistent designation of these islands in early Chinese sources, with names such as Changsha, Shitang, Shichuang and others being used for Paracel and Spratly inconsistently.   In the 14th century Song Dynasty work Zhu fan zhi by Zhao Rugua, the names Qianli Changsha (,   "Thousand mile-Long Sands") and Wanli Shichuang (  "Ten-thousand mile-Rock Bed") were given, interpreted by some to refer to Paracel and Spratly respectively, but opinions differed.   The Yuan dynasty work Daoyi Zhilüe by Wang Dayuan considers that Shitang (石塘) to be the same as Wanli Shitang (,  "Ten-thousand mile-Rock Embankment"), which starts from Chaozhou and extends to Borneo, west to Côn Sơn Island off Vietnam and down as far as Java.  The History of Yuan uses the terms Qizhouyang (七洲洋, "The Ocean of Seven Islands") and Wanli Shitang, which are taken to mean Paracel and Spratly respectively.  In the Mao Kun map from the Zheng He's voyage of the early 15th century, groups of islands were named as Shitang (石塘), Wansheng Shitangyu (萬生石塘嶼), and Shixing Shitang (石星石塘), with Shitang (sometimes including Wansheng Shitangyu) being taken by some to mean Paracel.  Another Ming text, Haiyu (On the Sea), uses  Wanli Shitang to refer to Paracel and Wanli Changsha for Spratly.

During the Qing dynasty, a set of maps refer to Paracel as Qizhouyang (Shitang became Spratly, and Changsha became Zhongsha), while a book Hai Lu (Illustrations of the Sea) refers to Paracel as Changsha  and Spratly as Shitang.  A sea chart prepared in the Daoguang era, Yiban Lu (Particular Illustrations) by Zheng Guangzu, uses Xisha to refer to Paracel.  Xisha became the standard name used in China in the 20th century, and was used in 20th century maps published by the Republic of China, for example in 1935, and the 1947 11-dash line map which claimed Paracel and Spratly as its territories.

Pracel and Paracel

The name 'Paracel' is found in the first Portuguese maps of the region. The Portuguese, whose vessels frequented the South China Sea as early as at the beginning of the 16th century, were the first to refer to these islands as 'Ilhas do Pracel' in the 16th century. Regarding the likely origin of the term Paracel, the word is a variant of the more common form pracel or parcel, from the , which was used by the Portuguese and Spanish navigators to designate shallow sandy seas or submerged banks, such as Placer de los Roques.

The Portuguese were later followed by the Dutch, the English, the Spanish, and the French in the waters of the island group. On the "Map of the coast of Tonquin and Cochinchina", made in 1747 by Pierre d'Hondt, the dangerous band of rugged rocks was labeled "Le Paracel", a French phonetic notation. Because of their location on an important seaborne route the Paracel Islands drew much attention from navigators and hydrographers in the Age of Exploration. Disputes in the area since the Second World War have again drawn attention to the islands.

On the "Map of Europe, Africa and Asia" published in 1598 by Cornelis Claesz, an unnamed band of rocks and sandbanks are shown near the present-day location of the Paracel and Spratly Islands. About two decades later, the names Pracel and Costa de Pracel (Coast of Pracel) appeared on the Chart of Asia and eight city maps published in 1617 by Willem Jansz Blaeu, a Dutch map maker. The coast belonged to the Kingdom of Cauchi China.

East India Company
The islands were first scientifically surveyed by Daniel Ross of the British East India Company in 1808. The names of Duncan, Drummond, Money, Pattle and Roberts islands were all chosen in honor of senior figures in the East India Company.

Infrastructure and natural resources

Infrastructure
China has historically had a presence in the islands and, as of 2016, was engaged in major infrastructure development to support its territorial claims over the archipelago, and as a result there has been, and continues to be, a lot of construction activity. In recent years Woody Island has acquired an upgraded airport, an upgraded sea port, and a city hall. There is a post office, hospital and a school on Woody Island.

Fresh water
There is limited supply of fresh water on the islands. In 2012, it was reported that China (PRC) planned to build a solar-energy-powered desalination plant on the islands. In 2016, it was reported that the first desalination plant was activated. This reduces the occupant's reliance on water supply coming in barrels by boat.

Electricity
Both wind and solar powered facilities exist, but most of the electricity is supplied by diesel generators. This led to considerations by the Chinese government to use floating nuclear power plants. It was reported in October 2020 that an experimental wave power generator was installed off Woody Island.

On land, in August 2020, Millennium Energy Viêtnam Co., Ltd, a member of Millennium Petroleum Corporation announced plans to develop a 600 ha, US$15 billion LNG project in the south Vân Phong area of the Khánh Hòa province, i.e. Nha Trang, near by Cam Ranh, with capacity of 9,600 MW, project which include a dock warehouse system, may be terminals, to provide gas to the power plant as well as distribute LNG in South-East Asia, supplied presumably by the offshore gas deposit along the coast of Quảng Nam province, discovered by ExxonMobil in October 2011, at 200 nautical miles (roughly 370 km), amid the area disputed by China (PRC), surrounded the Paracel
Islands, in Chinese maritime border sovereignty claimed by Beijing (refer to "Battle of the Paracel Islands"). Trung Nam Group also announced in early April 2021, a wind power 900 ha complex US$174 million with capacity of 423 GW/h/year, directly connected to the country's grid through Tháp Chàm 220 kV transformer station.

Communication
The Chinese postal zip code of the island is 572000, and the telephone area code is +86 (898). There is cellphone reception on the island.

Transport
There is an airport on Woody Island with a  long runway, which can handle take-offs and landings of Boeing-737s or planes of similar size. Flight services operate on the Haikou – Xisha route. There are three main roads on Woody Island as well as an  long cement causeway that connects Woody Island and Rocky Island. Extensive port facilities have been constructed on Duncan Island.

Ecology and tourism
Paracel Islands' geographical and ecological traits are often likened as "China's Maldives", however, controversial conflicts between environment conservation and human activities including military operations, developments, and tourism on Paracel Islands have become public concerns in recent years. Local ecosystem include endangered fish such as whale sharks, oceanic birds, marine mammals (at least historically) such as blue whales, fin whales, and Chinese white dolphins, and marine reptile species such as critically endangered green sea turtles, hawksbill sea turtles, and Leatherback sea turtles; however, direct damaging of the ecosystem by military group and tourists has been documented. Governmental actions to cease illegal tourism are ongoing.

The islands have been open for tourists since 1997. Chinese tourists can take a 20-hour ferry to the Islands, paying up to US$2,000 for a 5-day cruise, and are placed on a long waitlist before being accepted. The BBC article states that "Chinese tourism has strong political implications, as the Chinese tourists are being used as 'foot soldiers of China' by Beijing to further China's territorial claims there".  The video also states "Vietnam is considered unlikely to send military vessels to stop them".

There are two museums on Woody Island; a Naval Museum and a Maritime Museum. In April 2012, the Vice-Mayor and officials from the Haikou Municipal Government made several announcements about developing new docking facilities and hotels within the Crescent Group - on Duncan and Drummond Islands specifically. Promotion of the naturally unspoilt reef system was cited as the driver for new tourism potential with other such reefs, such as the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, now placed under threat of extinction due to human activities. However, according to The China Post, this was denied by a PRC Government official in April 2012, due to sensitivities surrounding the islands.

Territorial disputes and their historical background

After the 1884–1885 Sino-French War, in an international context, France officially gained control of Annam and Tonkin as protectorates and fully established French colonial rule in Vietnam by signing a number of treaties with the Chinese and Vietnamese governments including Tientsin Accord, Treaty of Huế (1884) and Treaty of Tientsin (1885). Article 2 of the Treaty of Tientsin (1885) forced China to stop any claims to suzerainty all over Vietnam. Therefore, the French also took over the control of the Paracel Islands which were under the Nguyễn dynasty's administration, still nominally ruled Annam at the time.

Between 1881 and 1883 the German navy surveyed the islands continuously for three months each year without seeking the permission of either France or China. No protest was issued by either government and the German government published the results of the survey in 1885. In 1932, France nonetheless formally claimed both the Paracel and Spratly Islands.  China and Japan both protested.  In 1933, France seized the Paracels and Spratlys, announced their annexation, formally included them in French Indochina, and built a couple of weather stations on them, but did not disturb the numerous Chinese fishermen it found there.  In 1941, the Japanese Empire made the Paracel and Spratly islands part of Taiwan, then under its rule.

The Paracels and Spratlys were handed over to the Republic of China control after the 1945 surrender of Japan, since the Allied powers had assigned the Republic of China to receive Japanese surrenders in that area. At the end of the war (Asian-Pacific Region), Nationalist China formally retook the Paracels, Spratlys, and other islands in the South China Sea in October and November 1946. In the Geneva accord of 1954 Japan formally renounced all of its claims to, inter alia, the South China Sea islands that it had occupied during World War II. After WW2 ended, the Republic of China was the "most active claimant". The Republic of China then garrisoned Woody Island in the Paracels in 1946 and posted Chinese flags and markers on it; France tried, but failed, to make them leave Woody island. The aim of the Republic of China was to block the French claims. In December 1947, the Republic of China drew up a map showing its eleven-dotted line U shaped claim to the entire South China Sea, including the Spratly and Paracel Islands as Chinese territory.

After the communists gained control of China in 1949, they occupied Woody Island, the main island of the Amphitrite group and the only island that was occupied at the time. Pattle Island in the Crescent group, on the other hand, was taken by French Indochina and then controlled by South Vietnam following independence in 1956. Tensions over the islands have continued to rise unceasingly since then.

UNCLOS EEZ
The Paracel islands are claimed by both China and Vietnam and the majority of those islands lie within 200 NM of both China's and Vietnam's geographic baselines under the Law of the Sea.

Historical perspectives

Vietnam

15th–17th centuries

 1460–1497, under the reign of Emperor Lê Thánh Tông of the Lê dynasty (1428–1789), the Vietnamese began conducting commercial activities on and around Hoàng Sa, including harvesting abundant sea-products and conducting salvage operations on shipwrecks.
 In 1634, during year fifth of Emperor Đức Long of Vietnam (1629–1635), the ship Grootebroek of the Dutch East India Company sank in the vicinity of the Paracel archipelago. Using a small boat, captain Huijch Jansen and 12 sailors managed to reach Đàng Trong, territory of Lord Nguyễn Phúc Nguyên (1613–1635), to seek rescue for other castaways still on the islands.
 1680–1705, Lord Trịnh Căn of Tonkin instructed Đỗ Bá Công Đạo to publish Thiên Nam tứ chí lộ đồ (天南四至路圖), an encyclopedia consisting of four series of maps that detail routes from Thăng Long, capital of Đại Việt, to other countries in Southeast Asia. Part of this work was based on the Hồng Đức Atlas (Hồng Đức Bản Đồ) developed during the time of Emperor Lê Thánh Tông (1460–1497). This encyclopedia was considered one of the oldest and rarely preserved Vietnamese documents regarding the islands. The volume "Đường từ phủ Phụng Thiên đến Chiêm Thành" (The Route to Champa from Phụng Thiên Province), remarkably described the archipelago with maps. For instance, a statement found in the volume read "In the middle of the sea, there is a long sandbank called Bãi Cát Vàng, which is approximately 400-league long and 20-league wide rising up above the sea." Bãi Cát Vàng means Hoàng Sa, Golden Sandbank.
 In the 18th century, under instructions of the Nguyễn lords, the salvage operations officially started with the formation of Hoàng Sa and Bắc Hải Companies. Their responsibility was to carry out the mission at Hoàng Sa (Golden Sandbank) and Vạn Lý Trường Sa (Ten-thousand-league Long Sandbank) respectively. This effort was continued thereafter with successive establishments of other naval task units in accordance with strategic policies toward the two archipelagos under the Nguyễn dynasty. Noticeably, a number of naval battles between the Dutch fleet and the Nguyễn Royal Navy occurred in 1643 and 1644. The Hoàng Sa naval task unit consisted of 70 men recruited from An Vĩnh and An Hải villages of Quảng Ngãi, while the majority of members of the Bắc Hải Company came from Bình Thuận province.

1700–1799
 In 1776, the Phủ Biên Tạp Lục (撫邊雜錄), the Miscellaneous Records on the Pacification of the Frontiers, published by Lê Quý Đôn, a philosopher, an encyclopedist, and a Minister of Construction during the Lê dynasty (1428–1789). These six volumes detail the Nguyễn dynasty's territories, including the exploitation of the Paracel and Spratly Islands from 1702 onwards.
 1777–1784, when traveling to Cochinchina, Father Jean-Baptiste Grosier recorded his impression about maritime activities of the Vietnamese from Huế, Đà Nẵng, and Quảng Ngãi. The abbot Grosier wrote that the people from those ports were excellent and cleverest navigators in this Kingdom. One of their activities was making long-distance sailing every year to the long chain of islands and rocks known as the Paracels to collect debris from shipwrecks.

1800–1899

 1802–1820, under the reign of Emperor Gia Long, the territory of his kingdom included Tonkin, Cochin China, part of Cambodia, and "certain islands off the coast including the well known Paracels which bear such an evil reputation as a source of danger to navigation in the China Seas."
 In 1807, the East India Company sent Captain Daniel Ross to Cochinchina to survey the Paracel Islands. Upon arriving to the kingdom, he presented a letter of introduction entrusted by the English company to the reigning king, who was believed to be Emperor Gia Long at that time. Subsequently, Captain Ross completed chartering the south coast of China in 1807, the Paracel Islands in 1808, part of the coast of Cochin China in 1809, and the coast of Palawan in 1810. Most notably, in his surveys published in 1821 under the title "(South) China Sea, Sheet I & II", the Spratly Islands was referred to as The Dangerous Ground and was later renamed as Storm Island on the 1859 edition of the chart. Separately, in another document, the "Correct Chart of the China Sea", published by Herbert in 1758, the Paracel archipelago was described as a long group of islands and reefs extending from 13 to 17 degrees North, which approximately correspond to the geographic latitudes of the present-day Spratly and Paracel Islands, respectively. It is quite clearly that the captain himself, and probably most navigators of his time, did not differentiate the two archipelagos, but instead had delineated the present-day Spratly Islands as part of the Paracels. Captain Daniel Ross was a well known hydrographer of the Navy of Government of English Bengal and founder of the Bombay Geographical Society.
 In 1815, Emperor Gia Long ordered Phạm Quang Anh's Hoàng Sa naval task unit to sail to the islands to make surveys and report on maritime routes and draw up maps.
 In 1816, according to Jean-Baptiste Chaigneau, Emperor Gia Long officially claimed the sovereignty of the Paracel Islands, which would include the present-day Spratly archipelago. These two islands were later delineated distinctly under the reign of his successor, Emperor Minh Mạng. Chaigneau was one of the most respected advisors to Emperor Gia Long. He spent more than 30 years in Cochinchina and became the first French Consul to this kingdom in 1821.
 In 1821, the Lịch triều hiến chương loại chí (歷朝憲章類誌) published by Phan Huy Chú, a historian, an encyclopedist, and an officer of the Ministry of Construction in the time of emperor Minh Mạng. This remarkable work was prepared in 10 years (1809–1819) and consisted of 10 volumes. One of them, the Địa Dư Chí volume, details territories of Dai Nam Kingdom. In 1838, he published the Đại Nam Thống Nhất Toàn Đồ, the Unified Đại Nam Complete Map, that distinctly delineated Vạn Lý Trường Sa (the Ten-thousand-league Long Sandbank) and Hoàng Sa (the Golden Sandbank).
 In 1827, a world atlas produced by Belgian geographer Philippe Vandermaelen was published in Belgium. Vietnam was described by four maps in this atlas. One of these maps has the title "Partie de la Cochinchine", in which Paracel Islands was included, indicating that it was part of Cochinchine (southern Vietnam region). The map also featured geography, politics, minerals and statistics about the Empire of An Nam (former name of Vietnam). Moreover, the map titled "Partie de la Chine" in the atlas had identified Hainan Island as the southernmost point of China at that time.
 In 1833, Emperor Minh Mạng ordered the Ministry of Construction to build a temple, erect steles, and plant many trees on the islands for navigation purposes.
 In 1834, Emperor Minh Mạng ordered Trương Phúc Sĩ, a naval task unit commander, accompanied by 21 men sailing to the islands to survey and draw map of Hoàng Sa.
 In 1835, Emperor Minh Mạng issued a royal ordinance to order 24 troops to the Paracel Islands. The royal ordinance has been preserved by generations of Đặng family and was publicly disclosed in early 2009.
 In 1835, the King ordered Phạm Văn Nguyên's naval task unit, accompanied by workers from Bình Định and Quãng Ngãi provinces, to build Hoàng Sa temple with a wind screen and erect steles on Bàn Than Thạch (Bàn Than Rock) of the present-day Woody Island. The mission was completed in 10 days. Notably, about 33m southwest from the erection, there was a little ancient temple where a stele engraved with the words "Vạn Lý Ba Bình" found. This inscription means Ten Thousand Leagues of Calming Waves. The date of the actual erection of the ancient temple remains unknown
 In 1836, Emperor Minh Mạng received a report from his Ministry of Construction that recommended a comprehensive survey of all the East Sea islands because of their "great strategic importance to our maritime borders." The King ordered Phạm Hữu Nhật, a royal navy commander, to erect a wooden stele on the islands. The post was engraved with the following inscription: The 17th of the reign of Minh Mạng by the royal ordinance commander of the navy Phạm Hữu Nhật came here to Hoàng Sa for reconnaissance to make topographical measurements and leave this stele as record thereof.
 In 1838, Bishop Jean-Louis Taberd published the "Latin-Annamese Dictionary". The dictionary contains the "An Nam Đại Quốc Họa Đồ" (The Great Annam Map). In the neighborhood of the present-day coordinate of the islands, words found on the map read "Paracel seu Cát Vàng" (Paracel or Cát Vàng). Cát Vàng means Hoàng Sa, Golden Sands or Golden Sandbank.
 In 1842, Hai Lu Do Chi, a historical Chinese document was written in the 22nd year of the reign of the Daoguang Emperor (1820–1850) of the Qing dynasty (1644 to 1912) of China. A statement found in this book read: Wang Li Shi Tang (万里石塘) is a sandbank rising above the sea. Several thousand leagues in length, it forms a rampart on the periphery of the Kingdom of Annam. Wang Li Shi Tang means Ten-thousand-league Long Sandbank.
 In 1858, Napoleon III ordered French troops to attack Tourane, the present-day Đà Nẳng city. Subsequently, France launched more attacks and forced Cochin China and some provinces in the South to become her colonies. French Indochina was formed in 1887 and consisted of Tonkin, Annam, Cochin China, and Cambodia.
 The 1887 Chinese-Vietnamese Boundary Convention signed between France and China after the Sino-French War, which, according to China, put the islands in the Chinese territory. In fact, the treaty only clarified Gulf of Tonkin sea border and other land border issues between Vietnam and China.
 1895–1896, German vessel Bellona and Japanese ship Himeji Maru sank at the islands. Chinese fishermen looted and resold them at Hainan. These countries protested but local Chinese authorities, the Governor of Liang Guang, denied any responsibilities on the ground that the Paracels were abandoned and belonged to neither country.

China

618–1279

There are some Chinese cultural relics in the Paracel islands dating from the Tang and Song eras, and there is some evidence of Chinese habitation on the islands during these periods. According to the Wujing Zongyao, a book published in the Northern Song dynasty in 1044, the Song government then included the Islands in the patrol areas of the Navy of the Court.

1279–1368
In 1279, the Yuan dynasty emperor sent the high-level official and astronomer, Guo Shoujing, to the South China Sea to survey and measure the islands and the surrounding sea area. Guo's base of survey was claimed by China to be located in the Paracel Islands, although this is considered unlikely by many Chinese scholars. His activities were recorded in the Yuan Shi, or History of Yuan. According to the Yuan Shi, the South China Sea islands were within the boundary of the Yuan dynasty. Maps published in the Yuan era invariably included the Changsha (the Paracels) and the Shitang (the Spratlys) within the domain of Yuan.

1368–1912
Relevant local annals and other historic materials of the Ming (1368–1644) and the Qing (1644–1912) dynasties continued to make reference to the South China Sea islands as China's territory. The Qiongzhou Prefecture (the highest administrative authority in Hainan), exercised jurisdiction over the Paracel and Spratly Islands in the Ming and Qing Dynasties.

In the 19th century, Europeans found that Chinese fishermen from Hainan annually sojourned on the Paracel and Spratly Islands for part of the year. For three months each year between 1881 and 1884, the German Imperial Navy sent two boats (the ship Freya and the warship Iltis) to study and map the Paracel Islands without either seeking the permission of or incurring protest by the Chinese government. This mission was finished without any problems and the German Admiralty published the results in 1885 in a document called "Die Paracel-Inseln" (The Paracel Islands).

In 1909, Zhang Renjun (), the Viceroy of Liangguang, ordered Guangdong Fleet Admiral Li Zhun () to sail to the Paracel Islands. In June, with over 170 sailors in three warships named Fubo (), Guangjin () and Shenhang (), he inspected 15 islands, erected stone tablets engraved with each island's name, raised China's flag and fired cannons to declare the islands "sacred territory of China", which France did not protest. In 1910, the Qing government decided to invite Chinese merchants to contract for the administration of the development affairs of the South China Sea islands, and demanded that officials shall provide protection and maintenance in order to highlight Chinese territory and protect its titles and interests.

1912–1950s
After the fall of the Qing dynasty, the new Government of Guangdong Province decided to place the Paracel Islands under the jurisdiction of the Ya Xian County of Hainan Prefecture in 1911. The Southern Military Government in 1921 reaffirmed the 1911 decision. China continued to exercise authority over the South China Sea islands by such means as granting licenses or contracts to private Chinese merchants for the development and exploitation of guano and other resources on those islands and protesting against foreign nations' claims, occupations, and other activities. For example, in May 1928, the Guangdong provincial government sent a naval vessel, the Hai-jui (), with an investigation team organized by the provincial government and Sun Yat-Sen University to investigate and survey the islets, after which the investigation team produced a detailed Report of Surveys on the Paracel Islands.

On July27, 1932, the Chinese Foreign Ministry instructed the Chinese Envoy to France to lodge a diplomatic protest to the French Foreign Ministry and to deny France's claims to the Paracel Islands. On November 30 of the same year, Zhu Zhaoshen, a high-level inspection official of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, issued public correspondence Number 66 to the French Consul in Guangzhou, reiterating that "it is absolutely beyond doubt that the Xisha [Paracel] Islands fall within the boundary of China". Despite repeated Chinese protests, French troops, who had colonized French Indochina in the 19th century, invaded and occupied the Paracel Islands on July 3, 1938. This took place shortly after the breakout of the Second Sino-Japanese War, when the armed forces of China and Japan were busy elsewhere. Three days later, on July 6, the Japanese Foreign Ministry also issued a declaration in protest of the French occupation

During the Second World War, the Japanese expelled the French troops and took over the islands in spite of the 1938 declarations. The Spratlys and the Paracels were conquered by Japan in 1939. Japan administered the Spratlys via Taiwan's jurisdiction and the Paracels via Hainan's jurisdiction. The Paracels and Spratlys were handed over to Republic of China control after the 1945 surrender of Japan, since the Allied powers had assigned the Republic of China to receive Japanese surrenders in that area. At the end of the war (Asian-Pacific Region), Nationalist China formally retook the Paracels, Spratlys and other islands in the South China Sea in October and November 1946. In the Geneva accord of 1954 Japan formally renounced all of its claims to, inter alia, the South China Sea islands which it had occupied during the World War II. After WW2 ended, the Republic of China was the "most active claimant". The Republic of China then garrisoned Woody Island in the Paracels in 1946 and posted Chinese flags and markers on it; France tried, but failed, to make them leave Woody island. The aim of the Republic of China was to block the French claims. In December 1947, the Republic of China drew up a map showing its eleven-dotted line U shaped claim to the entire South China Sea, including the Spratly and Paracel Islands as Chinese territory.

20th-century events
In the 1910-20s, the French Ministry of Colonies and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs agreed that the Paracel Islands were under Chinese sovereignty, and that France should not try to claim them, either on behalf of itself, or Annam. Therefore, France did not protest in 1921 when the government of Guangdong province declared the Paracels to be under the administration of Hainan Island. 5 years later in 1926, France refused an application from a French company to exploit guano in the Paracels. It also refused a similar application from a Japanese company.
 In 1932, France nonetheless formally claimed both the Paracel and Spratly Islands.  China and Japan both protested.  On 6 April 1933, France occupied the Spratlys, announced their annexation, formally included them in French Indochina, and built a couple of weather stations on them.
 On 3 July 1938, French Indochinese colonial troops, headed by sub-lieutenant Edmond Grethen, occupy the Paracels islands in turn.
 In March 1939 Japan took the islands from France, garrisoned them, and built a submarine base at Itu Aba (now Taiping / 太平) Island. In 1941, the Japanese Empire made the Paracel and Spratly islands part of Taiwan, then under its rule.
 After World War II, Nationalist China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea, and dispatched a patrol force to the islands, but this was challenged by the French.
 After the fall of the nationalist regime in China in 1949, the PRC gained control of the eastern half of the Paracel islands. Several small clashes occurred between the French and the communist Chinese naval forces during this period, but eventually a de facto line of control was established with the PRC occupying Woody Island, while the remainder was held by Franco -Vietnamese forces.
 In 1951, at the international Treaty of San Francisco conference, Vietnam's representative claimed that both the Paracels and Spratlys are territories of Vietnam, and was met with no challenge from all nations at the event. However, neither the PRC nor the ROC participated in the conference. Separately, the ROC negotiated and signed its own treaty with Japan regarding the islands on April 29, 1952.
 In 1954, according to the Geneva Agreements, which were signed by a number of nations including the PRC, Vietnam was partitioned into two states, North Vietnam and South Vietnam. The 17th parallel was used as the provisional military demarcation line, which was effectively extended into the territorial waters.
 In 1956, after the French withdrawal from Vietnam, South Vietnam replaced French control of the islands. By February 1956, the South Vietnamese Navy was already stationed on Pattle Island by Ngô Đình Diệm, though both the PRC and ROC politically and diplomatically condemned the decision and reaffirmed their claims to the islands. Following on the former French claim, Vietnam claimed the entire Paracel Islands,
 On September 4, 1958, the government of the PRC proclaimed the breadth of its territorial sea to be twelve nautical miles (22 km) which applied to all its territory, including the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Ten days later, the prime minister of North Vietnam, Phạm Văn Đồng, in his letter to Zhou Enlai stated that his government had respected the declaration of the PRC government. The PRC government used this letter as justification for their occupation, in fact, according to PhD Nguyen Van Canh: "The note of a prime minister, that is, the executive, is just an administrative document in the field of diplomacy, and in the matter of territorial transfers, the constitutions of countries stipulate that there must be a treaty regulating the transfer of territory and determine that problem. In other words, the National Assembly decides on that issue, and the National Assembly reflects the will of the entire people when transferring territory."
  On January 19, 1974, the Battle of the Paracel Islands between the PRC and South Vietnam took place, leaving the PRC in control of the entire archipelago. On January 16, South Vietnamese naval officers and an American observer had reported to Saigon some suspected military activities of the Chinese navy on the Drummond and Duncan islands. After receiving the report, the government of South Vietnam decided to counter the Chinese forces, to defend the South Vietnamese-controlled section (the western half of the Paracels) from Chinese occupation, and sent a unit of frigates to the area. On January 19, there were sea and land battles between the Chinese and Vietnamese forces with casualties on both sides. At the end, the Chinese fleet defeated the naval force of South Vietnam. With the ongoing civil war with the Viet Cong embroiling South Vietnam's attention and the absence of the USA's support, no military attempt was made to re-engage the PRC over the islands. After the military engagement and the subsequent victory, the PRC gained the entire archipelago and has taken control of Paracel Islands ever since. It was a significant turning point for the PRC but the sovereignty dispute on the islands remains unresolved with Vietnam.
 In 1982, Vietnam established Hoang Sa District in Quang Nam-Da Nang covering these islands.
 In a statement released on 13 July 1999 by the foreign ministry of Taiwan, under President Lee Teng-hui stated that "legally, historically, geographically, or in reality", all of the South China Sea and the islands were Taiwan's territory and under Taiwanese sovereignty. The ROC's and the PRC's claims "mirror" each other. Taiwan and China are largely strategically aligned on the islands issue, since they both claim exactly the same area, so Taiwan's claims are viewed as an extension of China's claims. Taiwan and China both claim the entire island chains, while all the other claimants only claim portions of them, and China has proposed cooperation with Taiwan against all the other countries claiming the islands, such as Vietnam. China has urged Taiwan to cooperate and offered Taiwan a share in oil and gas resources while shutting out all the other rival claimants. Board director Chiu Yi of Taiwan's state run oil company, CPC Corp, has named Vietnam as the "greatest threat" to Taiwan. The United States has regularly ignored Taiwan's claims in the South China Sea and does not include Taiwan in any talks on dispute resolution for the area.

21st-century events and land reclamation
In July 2012 the National Assembly of Vietnam passed a law demarcating Vietnamese sea borders to include the Paracel and Spratly Islands.

The Philippines and Vietnam promptly lodged diplomatic protests strongly opposing the establishment of the Sansha City under Chinese jurisdiction.

In April 2013, a representative from the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry's National Boundary Commission gave a diplomatic note to a representative of the Chinese Embassy in Hanoi demanding that China cancel its plan to bring tourists to the Paracel archipelago.

According to reports from Chinese state media, at the beginning of May 2014, Chinese and Vietnamese naval vessels collided near the islands as Hanoi sought to prevent a Chinese oil rig from setting up in the area. On May 26, a Vietnamese fishing boat sank near the oil rig, after colliding with a Chinese vessel. As both sides imputed the blame to each other, Vietnam released a video footage in a week later, showing a Chinese vessel ramming into its ship before it sank; the Chinese said they were on the defensive while Vietnamese vessels were attacking the Chinese fishing boats.

On May 9, 2014, Taiwan reiterated its claim to the Paracel islands, rejecting all rival claims amidst the standoff and repeating its position that all of the Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands, Macclesfield Bank and Pratas Islands belong to the Republic of China along with "their surrounding waters and respective seabed and subsoil", and that Taiwan views both Vietnam and mainland China's claims as illegitimate.  This statement was released by Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which added – "There is no doubt that the Republic of China has sovereignty over the archipelagos and waters."
In January 2016, photographs emerged that indicate that China is reclaiming land and expanding military facilities in the Paracels, including at Duncan Island, North Island, and Tree Island. Commentators have likened this work to the initial stages of China's large-scale construction in the Spratly Islands.
 On July 12, 2016, an arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) backed the Philippines against China's claims of resources and maritime areas within the nine-dash line that exceeded its entitlements under the UNCLOS. The tribunal argued that China had not historically exercised exclusive control within, hence has "no legal basis" to claim "historic rights" over resources. The ruling was rejected by both China and Taiwan.
 In February 2017, the AMTI project under the Center for Strategic and International Studies reported that Chinese authorities had carried out land reclamation on 20 reefs, thus establishing 20 Chinese outposts so far. These include Duncan Island and Drummond Island which also have small helipads. Of these, three were capable of berthing small naval and commercial merchant ships. Vietnam had responded to this by expanding its already existing facilities on some of the Spratly islands occupied by it.

In popular culture
 The film Storm in the South China Sea () was produced in China in 1976, showing the Battle of the Paracel Islands in 1974.
 Battlefield 4, a 2013 first-person shooter video game, includes a map based on the Paracel Islands, titled "Paracel Storm".

United States FIPS country code
The United States FIPS 10-4 country code for the Paracel Islands is PF.

See also

 Great Wall of Sand
 Spratly Islands

Notes

References

Citations

Sources

 (1686) Do Ba Cong Dao (translated by Buu Cam), "Toan Tap Thien Nam Tu Chí Lo Do Thu ", Hong Duc Ban Do, Saigon, 1962.
 (1776) Le Quí Don (translated by Le Xuan Giao), "Phu Bien Tap Luc", Saigon, 1972.
 (1821) Phan Huy Chu (translated by Nguyen Tho Duc), "Lich Trieu Hien Chuong Loai Chí", Saigon, 1972.
 (1837) Jean Louis TABERD, "Note on the Geography of Cochinchina", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, Vol. VI, 9/1837.
 (1838) Jean Louis TABERD, "Additional Notice on the Geography of Cochinchina", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, Vol. VII, 4/1838, pp 317–324.
 (1849) GUTZLAFF, "Geography of the Cochinchinese Empire", Journal of The Geographical Society of London, vol the 19th, p. 93.
 (1999) Vietnamese Claims to the Truong Sa Archipelago. Todd C. Kelly, August 1999.
  p. 9 p. 11
  p. 74 p. 76
 (2017)
 (????) Dr. Phan Van Hoang's historical and geographical analysis on Vietnam and China's claims on the Paracels – Vietnamese language link

Further reading
Menon, Rajan, "Worry about Asia, Not Europe", The National Interest, Sept–Oct 2012 Issue, September 11, 2012

 (in Vietnam, Que Huong-series 2-episode 1)

External links

 CIA World Factbook for Paracel Islands
 Territorial claims in the Spratly and Paracel Islands

Archipelagoes of the Pacific Ocean
Archipelagoes of Southeast Asia
Maritime Southeast Asia
Disputed islands
Disputed territories in Southeast Asia
Territorial disputes of China
Territorial disputes of the Republic of China
Territorial disputes of Vietnam
Archipelagoes of China
Archipelagoes of Taiwan
Archipelagoes of Vietnam

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Contact Ian
Full30
Support Forgotten Weapons
Enjoy what you read on Forgotten Weapons? Please consider supporting me on Patreon with $1/month! Thanks!
M1 Carbine Development
M1 Garand Development
Bergmann Automatic Pistols
Carbine Williams and Winchester
Machine Pistols
Semi-Auto Pistols
Anti-Tank Rifles
Revolving Rifle
Select Fire Rifles
Aircraft MGs
GPMGs
LMGs
Manual Machine Guns
Flare Guns
HomeRiflesSelect-fire RiflesH&K G41: The HK33 Meets the M16
H&K G41: The HK33 Meets the M16
January 25, 2019 Ian McCollum Select-fire Rifles, Video 34
The H&K G41 was developed for the NATO trials of the early 1980s, which were set up to look at both rifles and cartridges for NATO standardization (although they did not end up choosing a rifle). The gun is a basically an HK33 roller-delayed system set up to use standard M16 magazines and with a selection of other M16 features like a dust cover, forward assist, catty handle, and bolt holdopen/release. Two versions were made, a standard length rifle and a shorter barreled carbine with a collapsing stock. The system was not a commercial success; most potential clients opted to either buy the HK33 or the M16, rather than this sort-of hybrid.
It is worth noting that the G41 was the first H&K rifle to offer a 3-round limited burst option and the first to use the universal bullet icon selector markings, both of which have become commonplace on all their other weapons since. Thanks to H&K for giving me access to these rifles to bring to you!
How Does it Work: Operating vs Locking Systems
Shooting the HK G41: Like an HK33 But Worse
MP-40/I: The Dual-Magazine Experimental MP-40
September 23, 2017 Ian McCollum Conversion, Submachine Guns, Video 17
The MP40/I was an experimental modification of the MP-40 submachine gun developed by the Erma company (we think) in late 1942. It was presumably developed in response to complaints of Soviet fire superiority with […]
Light MGs
A Soviet Look at Cold War Small Arms Development
December 29, 2015 Ian McCollum Light MGs, Medium MGs, Select-fire Rifles 73
I have covered various elements of small arms development during the Cold War more than a few times – usually involving the contentious process that led to the 7.62mm NATO cartridge being adopted, and the […]
A Rifle of Many Travels
February 19, 2015 Ian McCollum Bolt Action Rifles 33
I was visiting a friend recently (James, who runs Tombstone Territorial Firearms, which you should definitely visit if you are ever in Tombstone – it's a remarkably well-stocked shop), and he had pulled out a […]
"Catty handle" even Gun Jesus gets screwed by Autocorrect.
Fixedincomeretiree says:
That's why they invented proof reading, lol.
Cherndog says:
The best way to get it right is to reread, revise, and then post. Before that, get a dictionary for difficult words…
neat, never heard of those.
I wonder if PTR can get the tooling for these.
Ian, you forgot to show the G41 bolt head differing from the HK33 pattern. The extractor claw has been changed from the simple spring pushing down to a pivoting arrangement gripping around the bolthead. The bolt head looks more like the bolt head of an HK13 lMG.
(repost to see why the posts do not get through anymore)
Have I gotten on some blacklist or something?
Sommerbiwak
Excellent show as always on FWs.
If I understand it correctly, this was in fact the last roller locked HK rifle (part for commercial variations which followed).
HK: Remember that time FN got everyone to agree on the FAL, but then the US decided to go with their own rifle instead? We won't get caught like that, we've made it just like a US rifle, so they'll have no excuse not to agree with it.
USA: Hey, this is just like our rifle! Might as well keep the one we already have.
Good try, HK, but going up against the US military procurement system? You never had a chance.
The G41 was for a) German Bundeswehr who didn't get the "kraut-space-magic" wunderwaffe Geh-Elf caseless but still needed a rifle, preferably one with AR-type de facto Nato magazines, b) Maybe Sweden? I mean they are only a pro-Nato neutral, but they did use the G3 in the form of the AK4… Nah. They thought long and hard about the Galil before going with the FN FNC, c) Italy, which was looking for a replacement for the 7.62x51mm BM59, preferably a 5.56mm rifle that used AR de facto Nato magazines, and d) maybe Eire? Nah, they went for the Steyr AUG.
e) Possible foreign sales.
a) The G36 was a separate research track, and it used more polymer so cheaper and lighter.
b) FN FNC as AK5.
c) Beretta 5.56mm rifle. G41 too heavy.
d) Steyr AUG.
e) With tons of nations already building G3s, why would the G41 elicit a contract when it is too heavy for the caliber? No sales interest.
Beretta 70/90 is very heavy rifle for its caliber, but it has one advantage: it works positively and reliably. Not the same can be said about HK33/41. So, at the end who was left to be serious about this 'shot in the dark'?
The parent model – HK33 was also heavy has a pig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK33
Daweo says:
Well, some says that compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied and this seems to be example of it: not German enough or not American enough for customer.
There is no way in hell that the G41 would have ever been adopted by the US, and HK knew that going in. What would the point have been? Substitute a much heavier underdeveloped weapon for an already-issued one that was fully developed…? Yeah; just "No.".
The G41 offered nothing to anyone who already had a 5.56mm rifle, and didn't even make much sense to anyone looking to buy one–That weight was the key thing, plus the recoil operation.
Yes. As it happened, some went to Turkey–A G3 user–and Italy, which as noted adopted the Beretta AR70/90.
The Canadian M16 was adopted by the Netherlands and Denmark as well as Canada. Portugal still doesn't have a standard 5.56mm rifle, although the elite and "snake eater" airborne types do have them, Israeli Galil, G36 like the Spaniards, and some SIGs. Spain went for the CETME-L and later the G36. France had some SIGs and G3s, but adopted the FAMAS. Turkey ultimately retained 7.62mm.
Fast forward to the current moment and HK has done rather better by Nato:
Tinkered and re-tinkered the L85.
416 used by ultra-elite-special-forces-snake-eaters worldwide. Adopted by France as the "tip of the spear" as far as infantry armament goes.
Norway too.
Germany appears undecided about a Haenel design or still another Hochler und Keck produkt. At least it seems that die Ingenieure in Oberndorf a/d Neckar have any number of prototypes they can dust off, "breathe on" and repurpose to potential marekts.
Why did HK abandon the roller delayed system ?
Was it cost of manufacture ?
It requires a too heavy bolt carrier mass to function ?
It couldn't be developed any further into something like the G36 ?
The UK paid them £90 million to sort out the problems with the SA80, and that free R&D into the AR18 type locking system gifted them the G36 ?
chanman says:
Aren't delay blowback systems a lot more ammunition sensitive compared to gas-operated (DI/piston) systems?
The only place I've seen the G41 before is the old PC game Jagged Alliance 2. Certainly a bit of an oddball choice even in the late 90s.
It requires a too heavy bolt carrier mass to function in today's lightweight weapons ?
No meaningful future for it.
Keith in England says:
All cartridge powered repeating systems are sensitive to variations in ammunition.
Unfortunately the blowback and delayed blowback systems tend to be among the more sensitive mechanisms.
With short recoil (with a gas trap on the end of the barrel casing) and gas powered systems, it is possible to give a little bit more momentum to the bolt carrier than it actually needs, so it will still function with lower powered ammunition or cope with dirt and ice
And design in a healthy free travel for the bolt carrier before unlocking begins, to allow even the highest pressure ammunition's pressure to subside, before the locking surfaces are moved,
Then to buffer the bolt carrier at the end of its rearward travel.
You can also play tunes by increasing the upswept volume of the gas system, to give a slower impulse.
These can be done at the design stage, and the gun shouldn't require any drastic changes after that.
For delayed blowback, there's a smaller range of reliable operation
On one encourage of that range is failure to cycle, at the other end are burst case heads and hot gas escaping, and sometimes even separated cases, with the front end of the case left stuck in the chamber.
I gather that H&K had tens of different angles of wedges available on bolt carriers, to fine tune their guns to a client's ammunition.
But what happens on a joint operation?
Actually, the picture isn't very pretty for some gas operated guns either; I can't remember which way round it was, but with British and American guns in Iraq and Afghanistan
One wouldn't cycle reliably with the other's ammunition
And the other way around, the extractors tore through the case rims. The pressures at the gas ports were different.
Gas-operated fire-arms might be equipped with gas regulator, allowing user to adjust it depending on ammunition and condition of guns. Was similar feature implemented in any delayed-blow-back fire-arm?
super390 says:
If the gas itself is used to perform the function of delay, like pushing a piston forward to offset the pressure on the bolt, then it is self-regulating because a stronger charge will lead to more delay. But then you have to keep that piston clean. And this does no good for roller-delay, which has been the most successful in the field. Has anyone heard of a gas-delay that doesn't use some form of piston sliding in a cylinder?
I vaguely recall a discussion in the US to move to ammo that would provide better MV in their 14.5″ carbines, so if they existed, it doesn't seem outlandish that a loading with much faster burning powder could cause problems for other guns.
Ian mentions the barrels with different twist rates. 1 in 7 or 1 in 12 in relationship to bullet weight. Could someone explain the differences in barrel twist and how this affects ballistics? Thanks.
Harold says:
They were changing to from a 55 grain lead core bullet to a 62 gr one with a steel penetrator. Heavier = longer & lighter material = longer still. Shorter bullets require slower twists and longer bullets need fast twist rates. You'll see most .223 rifles designed for varmint hunting using 45 – 55 gr bullets have 1/14 – 1/12 twist, while 5.56 msr's will have have 1/9 – 1/7 twists for 62 – 77+ gr bullets.
While lighter bullets usually shoot reasonably well through a fast twist barrel, long, heavy ones shoot terrible with a slow twist. A long bullet needs to be stabilized properly: think of a tall spinning top, when it's spinning rapidly it stays upright & doesn't move around. When it slows down, it wobbles & wanders.
Not having a phd in physics, this is the best I can do. Hope it helps!
Assuming that your bullets have approximately the same nose and tail shapes.
A heavier bullet in the same calibre, will be longer.
The aerodynamic pressure on a bullet, is normally in front of the centre of gravity.
That means that the bullet is constantly trying to tumble.
Spinning the bullet results in it stabilising like a gyroscope, and travelling point first.
It is important that the bullet is not under stabilised (it would tumble end over end)
Or over stabilised, which would result in it keeping the nose up attitude that it was fired in, through outline it's flight.
exceptions to that are some shotgun and air rifle slugs, that are aerodynamically stable
The NATO standard 5.56mm bullets changed from a 55 grain to a 70 grain bullet. The heavier bullet had better aerodynamics (actually equivalent to the 150gr 7.62 boat tail bullet) and better retention of velocity and penetration at longer ranges than the 55 grain bullet.
However the longer bullet and associated tracer bullets, required a faster rotation to stabilise them.
Hence the changeneral from rifling that gave one complete rotation in 10 inches of travel
To rifling that gave one complete rotation in about 7 inches of travel.
As a side note, the larger the calibre (greater the bullet diameter), the less the rate of spin that is needed to stabilise a bullet of a given aerodynamic performance
So, for roughly the same aerodynamic properties, 5.56mm 70 grain requires around 1 turn in 7 inches
7.62mm 150gr requires a spin of about 1 turn in 10 to 12 inches.
A lot of very successful target rifles for that load had a rifling pitch of one turn in 14 inches (that was popularised by Schulz and Larsson).
You can also look at Wiki, if you want to learn more. At the end there is Greenhill formula; it is easy to use. Weight, length and diameter of projectile are major factors. It is more-less approximation based on experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifling
"Could someone explain the differences in barrel twist and how this affects ballistics?"
To fully answer that would produce book, if not books.
Keeping simple: every bullet designed as spin-stabilized need proper rotation speed for stable flight. Problem will appear not only if rotation is too slow, but also if it is too fast, c.f. diagram: http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2013/07/over-stabilization-of-bullets-why-is-too-much-spin-a-problem/
Moreover keep in mind that powder charge inside cartridge contain finite quantity of Joules, more Joules you will use for rotation, less will remain for pushing and thus lower muzzle velocity you gets. Soviet 5,45×39 round is example of properly balanced twisting/pushing – it was noted for creating serious wounds due to tumbling. But why it tumbled? Because in flight its rotation speed was bit more than enough to keep it stable, but if it meet obstacle it easily go between stable-unstable border as it was anyway near it.
For those asking "Why did the roller-delay HK system go away…?", welllll… There are a lot of reasons. Primary one was that the production of those guns was always a bit of a stretch of the system, with the direction modern cartridges took.
Many people fail to understand the complexities of it all. There's a subtle set of things that influence what sort of action a particular cartridge, or even loading of the same cartridge works best with. What powder, what projectile weight, shape of the cartridge case–All that influences design. A particular powder combination may have a distinctly different pressure curve, which works well in a recoil-operated system, because of the timing of the pressure impulse, while another will work better with a gas-actuated system.
Most economical 5.56mm loadings do not work well with recoil-operated weapons; the pressure curves are too short, sharp, and powerful to work well with the roller-delay systems. Roller-delay works best with cartridges like the 7.92×33, which have relatively long and slow pressure curves, and are not generating as much pressure to begin with. The NATO cartridges, following US lead, are all short-fast-high pressure curves, and so you almost have to go with a gas-actuated system that those have an affinity for.
Many people fail to understand the complexities of all this–Recoil-actuated systems require consistent loads that are tuned to the action (or, vice-versa…) and if you don't do that, you're going to experience decreased reliability. Gas systems are more forgiving, and can be designed to be adjustable–Which makes for a more versatile weapon that can use multiple loadings effectively and reliably in its caliber.
I think HK finally recognized this, and abandoned the gimmick that they'd built their reputation on. Honestly, I think the roller-delay system should have been DOA the moment they went with the high-pressure 7.62 NATO round, and what HK should have done was transition to a roller-locked gas-actuated version. The freakin' G3 is a much more painful rifle to fire than the FAL, in my experience, and I lay that on the recoil actuation entirely. They'd have done a lot better to recognize the facts–Some things that are mechanically possible are simply not advisable, due to the side effects.
The straight-sided 5.56 case might have been a problem for HK too; not a good shape for clean extraction. It's a shame we didn't have more 7.62×39 HK rifles to mess with and see if its tapered cartridge inherently functioned better. Then you have its distant and slightly less-tapered relative the 6.5 Grendel…
There's a lot more to the whole thing than just "yeah, make it roller-delayed…". As you allude to, the case design itself is important.
People just don't consider these things when they talk about firearms design. Perhaps, back when it was single-shot blackpowder breechloaders and revolvers, it really wasn't–You could make anything work in any prevalent design. Once modern propellants came on the scene, along with repeating technology? The scale of the complexities went up exponentially. When you look at the HK line of rifles, one striking thing is this: The fluted chamber. The requirement for that feature is an indicator for just how far out of its comfort zone the 7.62mm NATO was pushing the roller-delay principle.
Personally, I think a lot of designers go at this stuff from the wrong end, and fall in love with an idea which they then take to ridiculous extremes–The guys at HK are a perfect example. What, precisely, did the roller-delay mechanism bring to a pistol, pray tell? Other than a neat technical exercise, what was the damn point of the P9 series of pistols? To be able to say "Yeah, we made a pistol using our favorite operating principle…"?
You have to look at the pressure curves, the pressures themselves, the projectile, the mechanics of the case, and a whole host of other things when it comes to designing around a cartridge. Not every mechanism is appropriate for every combination of features, nor is every mechanism cost-effective to implement in a given cartridge. Case in point–CETME "Modelo L".
Personally, I think that the process of military small arms design needs to begin with the question of "What effect am I trying to attain with this weapon?", followed by working up a cartridge and ballistic solution to meet that requirement. Once you've managed that, then you start selecting your operating principles, which need to be appropriate to the cartridge selection, and work up your mechanism from there. Attempting to shoehorn in things after the fact, by designing your weapon first and then creating the cartridge, or doing like the Soviets did and adapting a new cartridge into an old rifle? That's back-asswards, and is unlikely to result in nice things happening. The AK-74 was probably a bit of a fluke, given the actual history of these caliber and cartridge conversions.
There is a hell of a lot more that goes into weapons design than just cool mechanisms and machinery. The complexities include basic physics, chemistry, mechanics, materials science, and a host of things relating to how all that interacts. You go to pick up a reliable rifle and shoot it, and what you're actually working with is a product of an entire series of complex interactions that happened behind the scenes, and are sometimes not even fully understood by the people that designed and built the weapon. Witness all the dysfunction around the .40 S&W pistols that were converted over from 9mm, rather than clean-sheeted design-wise… Cartridge and caliber conversion ain't necessarily as easy as some people seem to think it is. Not on every weapon mechanism, that's for sure… Although, some can give you a seriously mistaken impression of the possibilities, like the Maxim MGs or the Madsen LMG.
"P9 series of pistols"
Note that P9 fixed barrel allowed for easier adding of suppressor than short-recoil/tilt operating automatic pistols.
And, just how many users actually need to use silencers…?
"how many users actually need to use silencers"
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_P9
P9S was adopted by the US Navy for use with a sound suppressor. so answer is "enough to provide profits for HK". Now I am wondering if P9S wasn't covered by patent (patents?). If so this allowed legal action if knock-off would appear.
Good example for that is ·303 Browning machine gun, according to http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/RAF%20guns.htm
It was not just converted from .30 to .303 inch calibre but also modified to fire from an open rather than a closed bolt because the cordite-loaded .303 rounds tended to explode if left in a hot chamber.
Forgotten Weapons Merch!
Shirts, jackets, hats, and much more!
Sites we enjoy reading
British Royal Armouries
GunLab
Historical Firearms (Tumblr)
Joel's Gulch
MicroBalrog's Soviet Outpost
Vuurwapen Blog
WeaponsMan
American Society of Arms Collectors
Artillery Luger
C&Rsenal
Carbines for Collectors
Gothia Arms Historical Society
GunPictures.net
James Julia auction archive
Manowar's Hungarian Weapons & History
Milsurps.com
Modern Firearms
Municion.org
Old Colts
Pistols of the German Wehrmacht
The Paul Mauser Archive
The Spanish Civil War Mosin Nagant
Unblinking Eye
What I'm Currently Reading
Subscribe to Forgotten Weapons via Email
6281 N. Oracle #36270
© 2018 Forgotten Weapons.
Site developed by Cardinal Acres Web Development.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


In December of 1903, traveling by night under the cover of darkness, Alexander Graham Bell led a team of scientists to Geno, Italy for a top-secret mission. There, they searched for the remains of James Smithson, the founder of the Smithsonian Institute. After weeks of going about obtaining Smithson's remains the right and legal way, only to have the Italian government repeatedly shut down their efforts, the group finally decided to act on their own.
In the present day, Commander Gray Pierce, following the events detailed in The Seventh Plague (2016), is enjoying some much-needed vacation time on a remote sandy beach off the island of Maui. Gray, one of the top operators for Sigma Force, a covert group tied to DARPA, has spent time traveling the world with Seichan, his significant other. Together, the two witnessed a bizarre event when a small plane dumped a black cloud above the water before them, and then flew into the cliffs in a fiery explosion.
The black cloud, it turns out, was a swarm of three-inch long, poisonous black wasps.
With their vacation decidedly over, Pierce and Seichan contacted Painter Crowe, director of Sigma Force, to fill him in. Upon hearing that similar incidents had been reported on Oahu and the big island of Hawaii, it becomes clear that the wasps' attack wasn't an act of mother nature, but rather a coordinated biological assault.
Director Crowe, whose Sigma Force team lives by the motto of "get there first," is shocked when they loop in Dr. Samuel Bennett, a leading entomologist expert, who informs them that Crow is actually the second person to inquire about this specific description of the wasps Gray forwarded to them. As further attacks terrorize Hawaii and its surrounding islands, Crowe begins to question the motive behind them, even wondering if the entire plan was meant to be a direct assault on Sigma.
As Rollins' story surges forward at breakneck speeds, two haunting realities become painfully apparent for the Sigma Force gang. First, someone woke an ancient, deadly threat unlike anything humanity has ever seen. Secondly, this species of killer wasps displays the frightening ability to adapt in real time, changing their tactics and adjusting to their opponents on the fly.
Facing their most dangerous threat yet, Sigma Force's only chance to save mankind is for Painter Crowe and his operators to team up with their longtime sworn enemy…the Guild.
James Rollins takes his series to a whole new level with The Demon Crown, which features a chilling plot, plenty of action, and several well-timed twists that'll keep readers flipping pages at a blazing clip. The early attack scenes are terrifying, with shades of M. Night Shyamalan-like fright and intensity. Those opening sequences set the tone and feel for the rest of the book, as the chapters unfold with a sense of urgency and purpose, creating a relentless pace that never lets up.
Bold plotting, colorful characters, a mystery dating back to the days of James Smithsonan, and hard-hitting action…The Demon Crown has it all. Twelve books in, James Rollins proves once again that his Sigma Force franchise is one of the best series the thriller genre has to offer.


As budgets tighten in tough economic climates, marketing is often the first place the CEO and CFO look to cut expenses.
So how does the CMO protect the marketing budget? The answer: position it as an investment rather than an expense.
Management and peers must agree with the evaluation criteria used by marketing to reduce, retain or increase the advertising budget. Ultimately, that means access to a dashboard on the computer that yields the latest metrics for all marketing channels in the format that company leaders understand.
In a recent Forrester report dated November 13, 2008 "Getting Started With Marketing Dashboards Protecting Marketing budgets in an Economic Downturn," Cindy Commander and her team addressed dashboard development in detail.
It is well researched and written. I recommend it to any CMO looking to create a new or better dashboard.
The report lists a few key points that demand special attention.
The executive summary in this report states that "marketers today use dashboards to align the organization to standard objectives, communicate the value of specific marketing initiatives, increase the transparency of marketing budget spending, or highlight opportunities for more efficient budget allocations or performance improvement."
In my experience, the need for dashboard access to marketing intelligence has become mandatory for a number of reasons.
-The phenomenal growth of data muddies the water and hides the answers about what is and is not working.
-Marketing budgets are under siege as economy places pressure on all non-accountable marketing costs.
-The complexity of the marketing options have focused more attention to marketing as well the credibility of the true value of marketing to peers and the CEO.
-The growing complexity of the channels has made measurement more difficult for all marketers.
-The report says, "...40% of chief marketing officers list improving marketing return on investment (ROI) as a top objective...marketing leaders believed that the economic slowdown would result in their budgets being cut."
Dashboards designed to show the contribution of marketing in metrics the company understands and agrees to.
But there is a significant obstacle encountered by CMOs according to Forrester. The marketing team lacks the analytical skill needed to create metrics that drive the dashboard.
And there are additional challenges.
-It's hard to fix the leaks when it's pouring rain. The dashboard issue should have been addressed when times were good. But better late than never. So many companies outsource the dashboard development working with internal staff as needed.
-Internal disagreements on what measurements or metrics will drive the marketing budgets. For example, B2B tracks leads but not the conversion of leads to sales or retention data. Every silo has its own set of evaluation criteria. One CMO was noted by Forrester as saying, "Despite having consistent metrics, he was unable to use them to offer comparable insights across the company because of the organization's vague definition of customer satisfaction."
-"Absence of a single marketing dashboard technology platform."
The report goes into some detail about how to go about dashboard development and recommends a focus on People, Process, and Technology. "As companies look to mature their dashboards and include more sophisticated modeling and analysis, the need for analytics skills will increase; a recent Forrester survey indicates that 71% of chief and senior marketers believe that analytics capabilities will be important to the future success of their marketing organization."
The ultimate challenge for the CMO lies in working collaboratively with silos to create the dashboard. The dashboard assembles marketing budgets, circulation and divisional sales relying heavily upon the different operational areas of the company. Without CEO support, some companies will never be able to create a useful dashboard that validates the marketing budget.
What experiences have you encountered with your efforts to use or develop a dashboard? What are the things to watch out for that spell the difference between success and failure in such an effort?
Posted on November 26, 2008 by Ted Grigg and filed under Direct Marketing Strategy.


text:
La Final del Campeonato Nacional Copa BancoEstado Apertura 2005 de la Primera División de Chile fue una serie de partidos de ida y vuelta, que se disputaron los días domingo 3 de julio y sábado 9 de julio de 2005, y que definió al primer campeón del año del fútbol en Chile. Lo disputaron los dos ganadores de las semifinales del torneo: Coquimbo Unido (8.º) y Unión Española (10.º), quienes venían de vencer a Huachipato y Universidad Católica respectivamente, la primera final se jugó en el Estadio Santa Laura de Santiago, mientras que la serie se definió en el Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso de Coquimbo.

En esta final, no habrá 30 minutos de tiempo suplementario, por lo que en caso de igualdad en los 180 minutos, el campeón se definirá mediante los tiros desde el punto penal.

Antecedentes

Desde que se instauró el sistema de campeonatos cortos con play-offs en 2002, Coquimbo Unido clasificó a sus quintos Playoffs (tercero al hilo), pasando por primera vez a cuartos de final y por ende, alcanzando su primera final y con la posibilidad de salir campeón del fútbol chileno por primera vez en su historia. Por su parte Unión Española disputaba sus 6.º Playoffs (de 7 posibles), habiéndose perdido solo el primero en el Apertura 2002 y disputará su segunda final consecutiva en este tipo de torneos, su única final la perdieron en el torneo anterior contra Cobreloa, por lo que volverían a tener la opción de salir campeones del fútbol chileno por primera vez desde 1977. Ambos equipos llegaron a la final habiendo ganado todas sus llaves definiendo de visitante, respecto a llaves entre sí, el más recordado es de 1998 cuando los piratas le negaron a los hispanos el retorno a Primera División tras vencerlo en la liguilla de promoción. El equipo coquimbano era dirigido por Raúl Toro, mientras que los "hispanos" eran dirigidos por Fernando Díaz.

Esta era la primera vez que definían un título oficial.

Enfrentamientos durante el año

Finales jugadas

Nota: En Negrita, finales que ganaron.

Camino a la Final

Coquimbo Unido

{| class="wikitable"
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
! Fecha
! Fase
! Sede
! Equipo
! Resultado
! Equipo
|-----
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Coquimbo Unido acabó segundo en el Grupo B y octavo en la tabla general con 29 puntos, no le alcanzó para clasificar directamente a "play-offs", por lo que primero debió jugar Repechaje.
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 1 de junio
| Repechaje
| Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso, Coquimbo
| Coquimbo Unido
| 2 - 1
| Everton
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Coquimbo Unido clasificó a play-offs tras imponerse en el repechaje.
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 11 de junio
| Cuartos de Final (Ida)
| Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso, Coquimbo
| Coquimbo Unido
| 1 - 0
| Cobreloa
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 18 de junio
| Cuartos de Final (Vuelta)
| Estadio Municipal, Calama
| Cobreloa
| 1 - 1
| Coquimbo Unido
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Coquimbo Unido avanzó a semifinales con un global de 2-1.
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 22 de junio
| Semifinal (Ida)
| Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso, Coquimbo
| Coquimbo Unido
| 2 - 1
| Huachipato
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 25 de junio
| Semifinal (Vuelta)
| Estadio Las Higueras, Talcahuano
| Huachipato
| 1 - 1
| Coquimbo Unido
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Coquimbo Unido avanzó a la final con un global de 3-2.
|}

Unión Española

{| class="wikitable"
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
! Fecha
! Fase
! Sede
! Equipo
! Resultado
! Equipo
|-----
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Unión Española avanzó a play-offs, primero en el Grupo C y décimo en la tabla general con 26 puntos.
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 12 de junio
| Cuartos de Final (Ida)
| Estadio Nacional, Santiago (Ñuñoa)
| Unión Española
| 1 - 2
| Universidad de Chile
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 19 de junio
| Cuartos de Final (Vuelta)
| Estadio Nacional, Santiago (Ñuñoa)
| Universidad de Chile
| 0 (2) - (3) 1
| Unión Española
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Unión Española avanzó a semifinales por haber ganado la tanda de penales 3-2, tras haber obtenido un global de 2-2.
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 23 de junio
| Semifinal (Ida)
| Estadio Santa Laura, Santiago (Independencia)
| Unión Española
| 0 - 0
| Universidad Católica
|-bgcolor="#EFEFEF"
| 26 de junio
| Semifinal (Vuelta)
| Estadio San Carlos de Apoquindo, Santiago (Las Condes)
| Universidad Católica
| 1 (9) - (10) 1
| Unión Española
|-align=center
|colspan=9 |Unión Española avanzó a la final por haber ganado la tanda de penales 10-9, tras haber obtenido un global de 1-1.
|}

Estadísticas previas
Total de partidos jugados en el Torneo Apertura 2005 por ambos equipos:

Pts=Puntos; PJ=Partidos jugados; G=Partidos ganados; E=Partidos empatados; P=Partidos perdidos; GF=Goles a favor; GC=Goles en contra; Dif=Diferencia de gol; Rend=Porcentaje de rendimiento.

Llave

Desarrollo de la final

La primera final se jugó el domingo 3 de julio a las 17:00 horas (UTC-4) en el Estadio Santa Laura. Los locales dominaron el primer tiempo, las llegadas más claras al pórtico "pirata" fueron al minuto 6' (disparo al travesaño de Ribera) y 14' (José Luis Jerez con un remate cruzado desde el sector izquierdo que salió apenas desviado), por parte de los coquimbanos, no hubo opciones de peligro destacadas. La mayor ocasión de peligro a favor de Coquimbo ocurrió recién comenzando el segundo tiempo, cuando un centro por la derecha fue despejado por el lateral hispano Norambuena y el balón casi se coló en el arco de Bravo, enviándola al córner, y dejando a los hinchas de la Unión con el corazón en la mano literalmente. Al minuto 63 José Luis Sierra provo con un zapatazo desde fuera del área y el meta Corvalán con portentosa atajada desvío el balón al tiro de esquina, en la que fue la mejor atajada del partido, cinco minutos después un centro desde la derecha de Joel Reyes fue cabeceado por Manuel Neira que choco en el vertical, se mantenía la tónica de todo el partido con una Unión Española (ahora algo más ansiosa) machacando en busca de un gol o un buen resultado para la revancha, pero que no podía frente al buen cerrojo "aurinegro", hasta que al minuto 76 José Luis Sierra envió un pase largo para Jerez, tras un par de pases, la pelota le cayó nuevamente al capitán hispano, quien se la cedió nuevamente a Jerez, que con un toque sutil se la paso a Neira en el área grande, quien se quitó la marca de Cristián Leiva y con un derechazo arrastrado logró batir a Corvalán y al fin romper el cerrojo pirata en Independencia, desatando la alegría de los hinchas hispanos en las tribunas, de esta forma, los pupilos de Fernando Díaz lograron ganar el partido de ida por la cuenta mínima sobre los "piratas", quienes gracias a la gran labor defensiva de sus centrales, el experimentado Héctor Robles, y el joven Alí Manouchehri, lograron neutralizar muy bien a Jerez, Neira y Vidangossy, el juego ofensivo de la Unión, llevándose un muy buen resultado desde la Capital a la cuarta región, donde se definirá al primer campeón chileno de 2005.

La revancha se jugó 6 días después el sábado 9 de julio a las 20:00 horas (UTC-4) frente a 14 mil espectadores en el Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso de Coquimbo, los "piratas" iban en busca de su primera estrella, y también del primer campeonato nacional en la historia de la cuarta región, mientras que los "rojos" iban en busca de su sexta estrella. El equipo de Raúl Toro fue con todo en busca de igualar el global, y lo consiguió al minuto 13 tras una falta peligrosa de Ribera sobre Germán Navea se cobró tiro libre a favor de los locales, el argentino Miguel Ángel Romero centro al área y el central campeón con Santiago Wanderers en 2001, Héctor Robles abrió el marcador en el puerto, con este resultado parcial, el primer campeón del año se definía en penales, nueve minutos después se produce la primera gran polémica del partido, ya que cobraron un offside de Unión Española tras un centro de Roberto Órdenes que cabeceo Robles y la desvío hacia su propio arco marcando un autogol, pero Rubén Selmán decidió anular la jugada y por ende el gol, causando los reclamos en el equipo visitante al no participar en la jugada Manuel Neira (el hombre en posición de adelanto en cuestión), después al 38' ocurrió quizás el punto de inflexión en la final, tras un piqué el veterano delantero pirata Marcelo Corrales sintió un pinchazo y sufrió un desgarro en el isquiotibial izquierdo debiendo abandonar la cancha, la lesión de Corrales le vino en el peor momento a Coquimbo porque estaba siendo el jugador más activo en ataque y ellos dominaban el partido al momento de su lesión, cinco minutos después se produjo el zarpazo rojo, Joel Reyes dio un gran pase al área chica que fue interceptado de primera por el ex-mundialista sub-17 Manuel Neira de semivolea para marcar el empate en Coquimbo, y de momento, la Copa se iba para Plaza Chacabuco, además anotando su décimo gol en el Apertura 2005, este gol fue un balde de agua fría para el equipo local que estaba haciendo un buen partido y un envión anímico para Unión que logró tranquilizarse y quitarle el dominio del balón al equipo pirata para el segundo tiempo, tras el gol de Neira, se produjo el ingreso de Pedro "Heidi" González al minuto 44 por el lesionado Corrales, otro histórico goleador del fútbol chileno que volvía a jugar después 9 semanas sin fútbol por lesiones. Al minuto 52' Juan José Ribera marcó un golazo desde 30 metros mediante tiro libre para remontar el marcador y dejar la serie 3–1 a favor del cuadro de Independencia, a pesar de tener la final muy en contra Coquimbo no se rindió y a base de garra intento volver al partido, once minutos después un tiro libre desde la izquierda ejecutado por Nicolás Corvetto y nuevamente Héctor Robles con otro testazo devolvió a los "aurinegros" a la lucha por su primera estrella, repitiéndose la misma fórmula local del primer gol, marcando su doblete personal y quedando a un solo gol de ir a los penales, aunque el gol fue convertido en evidente fuera de juego ocurriendo la segunda gran polémica de la final, el árbitro Rubén Selmán decidió validar la decisión del juez de línea Lorenzo Acuña, lo cual volvió a ocasionar fuertes reclamos por parte de los hispanos por segunda vez en el partido, los "piratas" siguieron luchando por igualar el global e ir a penales, pero el cansancio era muy evidente, hasta que al minuto 88 un contragolpe iniciado por Jaime Bravo tras un córner, un pase largo del arquero le llegó al "Coto" Sierra, este se la paso al recién ingresado Mauricio Risso y el meta Luis Corvalán lo derribo en el área, Selmán no dudo en cobrar penal a favor del equipo capitalino, el que se paró frente al balón fue el capitán José Luis Sierra, quien tenía en sus pies la responsabilidad de abrochar el primer título de liga de Unión en casi 30 años, y no fallo, con un tiro raso y suave al medio, engaño a Corvalán para anotar el 3–2 final, logrando abrochar el título y la sexta estrella de su historia para el equipo de sus amores en unos Playoffs que fueron tremendamente difíciles para el cuadro de Independencia, al tener que prevalecer en 2 tandas penales para llegar a la final y asegurando el título recién en los minutos finales de la segunda final, con el pitazo de Rubén Selmán, se desató la algarabía en el cerca de millar de hinchas hispanos que acompañaron a su equipo en la cuarta región volviendo a celebrar un campeonato nacional tras casi 3 décadas de espera.

El equipo de Fernando Díaz fue de menos a más durante el campeonato, empezando con muchas dudas al inicio y recién en las últimas fechas empezó a afirmar su táctica de buen toque de balón, con el experimentado José Luis Sierra (de 36 años) como director de orquesta, los goles de Manuel Neira, y la velocidad de José Luis Jerez como principales protagonistas del nuevo título hispano, pero se sumó una última pieza en el camino, el arquero Jaime Bravo, quien asumió la responsabilidad del arco rojo luego que en la Fecha 16 contra Unión San Felipe, el arquero argentino Ignacio González agrediera al árbitro Enrique Osses recibiendo 22 fechas de castigo por parte de la ANFP, el joven arquero chileno de 23 años respondió con creces frente al desafío, siendo clave en cuartos de final contra la Universidad de Chile al atajar un penal en los lanzamientos penales, figura en la semifinal ida contra la Universidad Católica, también en la vuelta al anotar su penal en la dramática definición a penales que los "hispanos" ganaron 10–9, y por último en la segunda final contra Coquimbo Unido al iniciar la jugada del tercer gol hispano que acabó con largos 28 años de sequía que durante ese lapso vieron al equipo lograr un bicampeonato de Copa Chile en 1992 y 1993, un cuartos de final en la Copa Libertadores 1994 y un histórico descenso en 1997 (el único de su historia), todo eso tuvo que pasar para ganar su primer Campeonato Nacional desde 1977, Bravo también fue pieza clave en el equipo de Plaza Chacabuco y logró doblarle la mano al destino dado que hace solo 7 meses atajaba en Tercera División, así fue como un plantel sin grandes contrataciones logró dar el batacazo del año en Chile y coronarse campeón del fútbol chileno bajando su sexta estrella, además adjudicándose el "Chile 1" para la Copa Libertadores 2006, regresando a la máxima competición continental tras 12 años, y por último, logrando cobrarse revancha al perder el anterior torneo contra Cobreloa en la Final.

Partido de ida

Partido de vuelta

Campeón

Datos
A continuación se dan algunos datos tras la Final del Torneo de Apertura 2005:

 Con su 6.º título, Unión Española logró su primer título en 12 años desde la Copa Chile 1993, saliendo campeón del balompié nacional luego de 28 años de espera, al lograr su sexta estrella, quedaron en la 5.º posición de los equipos chilenos con más campeonatos nacionales, quedando muy cerca de Universidad Católica y Cobreloa, ambos con 8 títulos cada uno, y por último, regresarán a la arena internacional tras 12 años cuando en 2006 compitan en la Copa Libertadores de América, siendo la Copa Libertadores 1994 su última actuación internacional (hicieron cuartos), en el máximo certamen continental su mejor actuación fue en 1975 cuando fueron finalistas tras caer ante Independiente de Avellaneda.
 Unión Española fue el tercer campeón de la "Era Playoffs" que definió todas sus llaves de visita: los anteriores Colo-Colo en el Clausura 2002, y Cobreloa en el Clausura 2003.
 Unión Española se convirtió en el cuarto equipo que enlazo 2 finales consecutivas en Playoffs tras Universidad Católica en el 2002, y Colo Colo y Cobreloa en el 2003 (aunque en el caso del conjunto "loíno" fueron 4 al hilo).
 Curiosamente, los "hispanos" eliminaron a los mismos equipos que vencieron en el Clausura 2004 en cuartos y semifinal: Universidad de Chile, y Universidad Católica, y para más coincidencias, de la misma forma (penales), y en los mismos estadios (A la U en el Nacional y a la UC en su estadio en San Carlos de Apoquindo), la única diferencia fue que esta final si la pudieron ganar a diferencia de la del año pasado.
 Al vencer a Coquimbo Unido en la final, fue su primera serie ganada en 180 minutos desde el Apertura 2004, dado que todas sus llaves que ganaron en el Clausura 2004 y Apertura 2005 (hasta semis), fueron en definición a penales.
 Fue la primera final de un torneo playoffs (2002-12) en la que no estuvieron los cuadros más ganadores del fútbol chileno entre los finalistas, la otra excepción fue el Clausura 2012 (también estuvo Unión entre los finalistas).
 Al acabar la Fase Clasificatoria en el décimo lugar, Unión Española fue el campeón con posición más baja durante la "Era Playoffs".
 Fue la final de Playoffs con los 2 equipos finalistas con posiciones más bajas durante la Fase Clasificatoria (Coquimbo 8.º y Unión 10.º).
 Esta fue la primera vez que se definía un título de Primera División en el Estadio Francisco Sánchez Rumoroso.
 La derrota en la final significo el segundo subcampeonato de Coquimbo Unido, y primera final perdida, pero por lo menos el equipo de Raúl Toro logró su mejor campaña en Primera División desde el subcampeonato en 1991.
 El entrenador chileno Fernando Díaz se convirtió en el cuarto entrenador campeón del fútbol chileno con la Unión Española después de Atanasio Pardo, Isidro Lángara, y Luis Santibáñez, logrando también su primer título como entrenador, lo cual estuvo muy cerca de lograr con Universidad de Concepción en el Apertura 2003 (cayó en semifinales ante Colo-Colo), y Cobreloa en el Apertura 2004 (perdió la final contra Universidad de Chile en Calama, siendo esa la única final que perdió Cobreloa entre 2003 y 2004).
 Como último dato, Unión Española volvió a vencer a Coquimbo Unido de visita después de 4 años, también le finalizaron a los "piratas" una racha de 5 triunfos seguidos como local por campeonatos nacionales.

Referencias

Véase también
 Temporada 2005 del fútbol chileno
 Torneo Apertura 2005 (Chile)
 Anexo:Cuartos de final del Torneo Apertura 2005 (Chile)
 Anexo:Semifinales del Torneo Apertura 2005 (Chile)
 Primera División de Chile
 Primera B de Chile 2005
 Tercera División de Chile 2005
 Canal del Fútbol
 ANFP

Enlaces externos
 Partido completo de la Final Vuelta

Temporada 2005 de fútbol en Chile
Final


Trying to send an invoice to Unifoods Indonesia PT? With e-invoicing and early payments on Tradeshift, you can get paid faster, regardless of your existing payment terms. Click on the button below to get started.
Established since 2005, PT Unifoods Indonesia has been manufacturing sugar cones, cake cones, waffle cones and waffle basket, cone sleeves and lids. Aiming to provide the best products and services to our customers, we are certified Halal and we also offer a wide range of cones and waffles. Over the years of establishment, we have received compliments and satisfactory testimonies from our customers. Our crispy-crunchy cone complements the tasty-smooth frosty ice cream.
I consent to Tradeshift and/or Unifoods Indonesia PT processing this data for the purpose of making a connection on the Tradeshift network.
Enter your information below to express your interest in doing business with Unifoods Indonesia PT.


Previously published as Strategic Information Management in Hospitals; An Introduction to Hospital Information Systems, Health Information Systems Architectures and Strategies is a definitive volume written by four authoritative voices in medical informatics. Illustrating the importance of hospital information management in delivering high quality health care at the lowest possible cost, this book provides the essential resources needed by the medical informatics specialist to understand and successfully manage the complex nature of hospital information systems.
Author of the first edition's Foreword, Reed M. Gardner, PhD, Professor and Chair, Department of Medical Informatics, University of Utah and LDS Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah, applauded the text's focus on the underlying administrative systems that are in place in hospitals throughout the world. He wrote, "These challenging systems that acquire, process and manage the patient's clinical information. Hospital information systems provide a major part of the information needed by those paying for health care." their components; health information systems; architectures of hospital information systems; and organizational structures for information management.
Illustrations note 7 Tables, black and white; XLIV, 340 p.
Introduction.- Basic Concepts.- What Do Hospital Information Systems Look Like?- What Are Good Hospital Information Systems?- How To Strategically Manage Hospital Information Systems.- Appendix A: Thesaurus.- AppendixB: Additional Resources.- Appendix C: Examples and Exercises.


Chances are, you probably have plenty of pens, pencils and 3-ring-binders leftover from prior school years. Take some time to clean out areas in your home that might be hiding any school-related items like these. After you've collected everything from old textbooks to mechanical pencils, begin sorting through your inventory so you can start checking off the school supply list. This step instantly saves you money and makes the whole "back to school" season a little less stressful.
When it comes to "back to school", kids probably get most excited about the new clothes. And why wouldn't they? It feels good walking into the first day of class wearing brand new shoes and sporting a new backpack. But if you're shopping on a budget, it's best to say "no" to temptation this time around. You can recycle the clothes they already have. But if you must, you could always by them ONE new outfit for the first day. At least that's reasonable. Just don't give in to their demands and buy them a whole new wardrobe. It's not necessary.
The best deals are often found in apps. We use apps for everything these days; checking the weather, planning our days, paying bills, playing video games, and even tracking our diets. ShopSavvy is a free app available on both iOS and Android. It's the ultimate shopping companion that points you to the lowest price of any item, every time. Use apps like ShopSavvy to help you find the best deals on all your "back to school" shopping. It's a great way to make sure you're staying under-budget by not over-spending.
It goes without saying that planning ahead is always a good choice. Now that school's back in full swing and the "back to school" shopping season is officially over, it's time to make your move. Stores will begin to push back all their leftover school items onto clearance racks to make way for the next wave of seasonal products. This would be a good opportunity to stock up on next year's school items. While you may not know all the things they'll need for school next year, at least you can give yourself a nice head start.