Air collision at South China Sea 2001, pictures!

[BigTree.CN]

Still pathetic...There is something called 'territorial airspace'. Look it up. Outside of that region ANYONE can listen to anything for as long as he can and want.

Listen, gambit. Don't lecture me on the rules. We all know what will happen if others are spying on US the way US is spying on China.

You are entitled to gloat as if US didn't do anything wrong, because you know it well China can do nothing to punish US.

其他的中国童鞋们，也不用跟他辩论了。姑且不说这是一场毫无结果的辩论，就算是有结果又如何呢？仍然改变不了敌强我弱的局面。

 

[gambit]

Wrong. It is like telling someone where the toilet is when the person doesn't need the toilet or is interested in where the toilet is. Perhaps you should seperate that section of the post rather than randomly linking it to me.

But it is relevant. In flying, an aircraft needs far more room to execute a maneuver than a car. People naturally questions as to why would anyone wants to fly that close to another aircraft and if such maneuver was done, what happened? How did a much smaller and more maneuverable aircraft like a jet fighter could collide with a lumbering four engine aircraft? When they see something like how large aircrafts can generate turbulence that could send the much smaller aircraft out of control, they will come to the conclusion that Wang Wei was foolish.

This further proves that (for me) the nonsense bit of information was irrelevant to me and doesn't support your argument against me.
Unfortunately you are not the representative of all pilots either. So your way of painting the situation doesn't translate well to the opinion of others.

Actually...One does not need to be a pilot to INSTINCTIVELY know that one should not fly so close to another aircraft in the first place. That mean there is no debate that Wang Wei was foolish.

Just to inform you. I too can edit wikidepia and tailor it against your argument. To cite that as a source is poor.

As if wiki is the only source...

Nope it is not an act of war but an intrusion to ones privacy.

Since when is an EM emission interception qualify as an invasion of privacy?

If a russian long range bomber flew to the US, they too would be intercepted and no questions asked.

This is not about the interception but to answer your question since you seems to be ignorant of Cold War history...Yes...There were many Soviet Bears aircrafts and 'fishing' trawlers that conducted reconnaissance off US coasts.

Truth is, anyone can have its claim. The fact that America did not step up with further action is because they do not want to risk further deteriation of relationship with China and further smeering its image on the global scale. Asif having the spies detained and hi-tech spy plane dismantled wasn't enough.

This has nothing to do with the fact that it was Wang Wei's foolishness and possibly incompetence that caused the incidence in the first place.

 

[gambit]

Listen, gambit. Don't lecture me on the rules. We all know what will happen if others are spying on US the way US is spying on China.

You are entitled to gloat as if US didn't do anything wrong, because you know it well China can do nothing to punish US.

其他的中国童鞋们，也不用跟他辩论了。姑且不说这是一场毫无结果的辩论，就算是有结果又如何呢？仍然改变不了敌强我弱的局面。

No...'We' do not. If China sends such a recon aircraft towards US, our pilots would not be so foolish in their flying.

 

[Black Widow]

Wrong. He is a hero. Because of his competence and professionalism he did not fire at the plane, making it go 'poof' and killing all the spies onboard.
Instead he forced it to land. China then got to inspect the plane and take it apart into tiny little pieces depsite pentagon warning for not boarding the plane.

@ shooting down the plane: I don think that SPY planes are shot down without warning... Not only spy plane, any flying object Intercepted are asked to surrender... If its retaliate, you can bring it down... In this case, I don't see that US plane retaliated... So your claim that you could have shot it down is "an act of cowardliness"

When a plane is escorted for landing, It should maintain a clear distance . I can see it as pilot error...

By the way the J8 strip-off the nose of USAF... (the E3 nose was destroyed in accident...)


And teh pilot was not acting foolish, It was human error... or may be one of the aircraft would have taken sharp turn and reach near to each other.. (As per American pilot claim, the Elephant E3 was in autopilot mode, and possibility of taking sharp turn by elephant is less...)

 

[blackops]

am unaware of this incident can any one tell me what had happened

 

[Black Widow]

am unaware of this incident can any one tell me what had happened

I will narrate the story... Chinies AF saw an unidentified flying object in their air space (as they claim), Two J8 intercepted it. It was ES3 (bigger, bulkier and heavier). they asked ES3 to surrender. in between one of the J8 Hit the ES3.. It damage the ES3, USAF had no choice, they landed to nearest port (a brave act of landing damaged machine).. "Accident ho gaya..."

Thats all... Later China ask heavy compensation and apology from USA.. USA didn't apologize niether paid compensation, but felt sorry bout the dead fighter plane.. USA prez send condolence to deceased fighter's wife...

Gambit is saying it human error , while chinies member believe that J8 fighter was hero (No reason)... Thats all going on here...

 

[Obambam]

But it is relevant. In flying, an aircraft needs far more room to execute a maneuver than a car. People naturally questions as to why would anyone wants to fly that close to another aircraft and if such maneuver was done, what happened? How did a much smaller and more maneuverable aircraft like a jet fighter could collide with a lumbering four engine aircraft? When they see something like how large aircrafts can generate turbulence that could send the much smaller aircraft out of control, they will come to the conclusion that Wang Wei was foolish.

You can say he was foolish. There are others who will still say he was gutsy and forced it to land. It doesn't matter about the American claims of the situations are.

Actually...One does not need to be a pilot to INSTINCTIVELY know that one should not fly so close to another aircraft in the first place. That mean there is no debate that Wang Wei was foolish.

No one needs to be a pilot to know that what he did was probably intentional to an extent. Minus the getting killed part. Regardless of how you paint it, there are still plenty who view him as a brave hero who died serving the country.

As if wiki is the only source...

Exactly.

Since when is an EM emission interception qualify as an invasion of privacy?

It doesn't matter. What matter is having a 'spy plane' there in the first place.

This is not about the interception but to answer your question since you seems to be ignorant of Cold War history...Yes...There were many Soviet Bears aircrafts and 'fishing' trawlers that conducted reconnaissance off US coasts.

It is not about being ignorant about the cold war. It is there is no cold war but somehow Americans are still very much stuck with the mindset.

This has nothing to do with the fact that it was Wang Wei's foolishness and possibly incompetence that caused the incidence in the first place.

Again it can be said that he was brave and possibly competent that cause such controversy in the first place. Making this event even more exicting for the world to read and memorable.

 

[anonymous123]

this somehow reminds me of 1960 U-2 incident............

 

[sino_pak]

why don't shoot down ep3

 

[gambit]

You can say he was foolish. There are others who will still say he was gutsy and forced it to land. It doesn't matter about the American claims of the situations are.

China, let alone Wang Wei, does not legitimate reason to order the EP-3 away in the first place. Your argument is utter nonsense.

No one needs to be a pilot to know that what he did was probably intentional to an extent. Minus the getting killed part. Regardless of how you paint it, there are still plenty who view him as a brave hero who died serving the country.

This forum has a former F-15 pilot now a commercial airliner and we all know his handle here. This mean the man has experience at receiving wake turbulence and creating them. If he come out and say that it was foolish to fly so close unnecessarily to a large aircraft would you agree? But that was a rhetorical question towards your intellectual dishonesty.

Exactly.

Yup...In the vast Internet, wikipedia is the only source of information...

It doesn't matter. What matter is having a 'spy plane' there in the first place.

It does matter. If you transmit and your transmission went outside your border, as in no longer in your control, any interception is hardly an 'invasion of privacy', be it deliberate or accidental interception.

It is not about being ignorant about the cold war. It is there is no cold war but somehow Americans are still very much stuck with the mindset.

Again it can be said that he was brave and possibly competent that cause such controversy in the first place. Making this event even more exicting for the world to read and memorable.

If you think that this single incident absolutely deterred US from making more flights you are delusional. There has been other recon flights since then and have we heard anything about them? No. Because the Chinese military leadership learned a valuable lesson and ordered the PLAAF to keep a respectful distance in any interception. China made a national hero out of Wang Wei to distract attention away from the red face the PLAAF received in the international aviation community. As long as the US does not violate China's territorial airspace, there is zilch China can do.

 

[John Doe]

@Obamam:

You are doing a terrible job of arguing with a military professional who knows more about aircraft that most people on this forum. About the pilot, did you not see the photo of him flashing paper signs to earlier US flights? Is this the sign of a professional? Or that of a hot shot fool? You tell me.

 

[Akasa]

From Wikipedia, is this true?

What? You want to add him on MSN?

 

[Akasa]

The EP-3 was within 70 miles of the Chinese coastline. In contrast, the US warns to shoot down any unidentified aircraft within 200 miles of US coastline. Even if international waters extend at 70 miles from the Chinese coastline, the EP-3's close range to the Exclusive Economic Zones and the clear provocation of Chinese territories is more than enough for the Chinese defenses to label it as an attack.

The EP-3, especially modified to spy submarine facilities, further made it clear to the Chinese that this was an American spy mission on the Hainan submarine base, one of the largest submarine bases in China.

From a radio transcript taken from the conversation of the other J-8 pilot and ground radar stations, the J-8 pilot asked for permission to shoot down the US plane, as it had continued to travel towards Chinese airspace and resulted in the loss of his wingman's J-8. He was denied, because the radar operators viewed it as an accident and did not want to start a war.

Clearly, the Chinese restrained from taking serious defensive measures.

As many people asked, what would the US do if a Chinese Y-8T aircraft appeared within 70 miles of the US coastline and continued to fly straight for the US with the clear intention of surveilling US naval bases?

 

[razgriz19]

this is the aircraft that collided

 

[Jackdaws]

I remember this incident quite well. Infact, either the Chinese pilot's mother or his wife wrote a letter to George Bush if I remember and he also happened to answer it. This was before 9/11 and just prior to 9/11 when Muslims became America's target - there was genuine concern over Communist China being the Soviet-like bugbear for the US.