Chinese jets "unsafely" intercept U.S. military plane over South China Sea

[Penguin]

Who disciplined whom? Next time Chinese pilots should take the opportunity to practice their skill sets on their opponents which comes free.

Far from sloppy, we only see professionalism.

The same kind of professionalism that got that J-8II pilot killed back in 2001, you mean?

 

[oprih]

It's great to see american supporters and defenders crying hard in this thread

 

[Zsari]

There is a difference between Territorial waters and economic zones.
Economic Zones are outside Territorial Waters.

Yes, and US has repeatly sailed into 12nm of Chinese territorial water in case you haven't been paying attention to the news.

 

[ahojunk]

It's great to see american supporters and defenders crying hard in this thread

.
oprih or whatever your name is, where were you the last few weeks or months?

I miss your insightful one liners. lol.

Sometimes, I ROTFL on some of your posts.

Good amusement and entertainment!

By the way, any thoughts or comments on your new President Duterte?

 

[Tiqiu]

The same kind of professionalism that got that J-8II pilot killed back in 2001, you mean?

Yeah,now you're talking. To protect the national interest by whatever means is the highest form of professionalism for soldiers. It was the same professionalism that inspired many other pilots to do the same. Why are you scared?

On Aug.19, 2014 about 217 kms east of Hainan island in the South China Sea, a Chinese warplane flew alongside US Navy P-8 aircraft putting their wingtips as close as 30 feet (nine metres) apart. The encounter ended with the Chinese pilot doing a barrel roll over the top of the US plane, with its belly packed with weaponry.

 

[dy1022]

The same kind of professionalism that got that J-8II pilot killed back in 2001, you mean?

We mean 1950-1953 in korea and 1960-1970 in Vietnam !!!

 

[Penguin]

We mean 1950-1953 in korea and 1960-1970 in Vietnam !!!

Yeah, sure, ground combat is excellent example of pilot professionalism

Yeah,now you're talking. To protect the national interest by whatever means is the highest form of professionalism for soldiers. It was the same professionalism that inspired many other pilots to do the same. Why are you scared?

You mean, since the Hainan incident, many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly, costing their State all the time and money investment in their training for no effect. I'm not scared. Why do you cry?

On Aug.19, 2014 about 217 kms east of Hainan island in the South China Sea, a Chinese warplane flew alongside US Navy P-8 aircraft putting their wingtips as close as 30 feet (nine metres) apart. The encounter ended with the Chinese pilot doing a barrel roll over the top of the US plane, with its belly packed with weaponry.

Wonderful. And what did that achieve, besides endangering all involved? Exactly.... 0, zip, zero. And that's why it is called unprofessional, not my be but by the pro's in the business.

 

[Tiqiu]

You mean, since the Hainan incident, many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly, costing their State all the time and money investment in their training for no effect. I'm not scared. Why do you cry?

Any body knows what I mean but you, a so called "think tank". let me elaborate for you, unlike what you have wished for by you above remarks, no Chinese pilots has died, and no P-8 ever dare to fly back to this close to China since then. Why do I cry? I do cry for your slowness.

I guess you will start call me "dick" as you did just a while ago to someone arguing with you. What a joke, you were complaining others to put word in your mouth.

Hey Dick (or Tom or Harry, or whatever you name is), don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Penguin]

Any body knows what I mean but you, a so called "think tank". let me elaborate for you, unlike what you have wished for by you above remarks, no Chinese pilots has died, and no P-8 ever dare to fly back to this close to China since then. Why do I cry? I do cry for your slowness.

I've not appointed myself nor have I asked to be appointed 'PDF TT analyst'. So, if you have a problem with that, I defer to PDF forum management and so should you.

I've not at any point stated or suggested that I wish for any pilot(s), Chinese or otherwise to die. Quite the contrary. Which is why I agree with judgements by the professionals of the piloting profession themselves that certain behaviours displayed while making an air intercept are unprofessional.

I sincerely doubt any P-8 was available during the socalled Hainan incident. The EP-3 in question was operating in international airspace about 70 miles (110 km) away from the PRC island province of Hainan, and about 100 miles (160 km) away from the Chinese military installation in the Paracel Islands, when it was intercepted by two J-8 fighters.

The incident in 2014 which you referred to involved a Chinese J-11 fighter and a P-8 Poseidon and it took place on about 135 miles (217 kilometers) east of Hainan Island
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-barrel-rolls-over-u-s-plane-bringing-protest

So, I also sincerely doubt that flights by EP-3 and other intelligence aircraft in international airspace have since stopped, including by P-8 of today. (What's 107km distance difference to a plane that cruises at 815 km/h? A little over 8 minutes of flight)
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-spy-plane-territory-tensions-south-china-sea

Even leaving out of consideration its sigint system, 217km distance is certainly close enough for a good radar peek.

At the front of the plane, the P-8A sports an exclusive radar system supplied by Raytheon. In certain detection modes, the 408-pound radar system has a range of 200 nautical miles [edit: 370 km] and provides ultra-high resolution images. A shorter-ranged setting offers enough precision to pick up on "small targets with limited exposure time in high sea states," according to Raytheon's fact sheet on the product.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-t...rcraft-sees-under-the-waves-2014-11?r=US&IR=T

I guess you will start call me "dick" as you did just a while ago to someone arguing with you. What a joke, you were complaining others to put word in your mouth.

For yor information: Dick is a perfectly normal first name, just like Tom and Harry. The way I used it is as in a normal English language expression.

The phrase "Tom, Dick and Harry" is a placeholder for multiple unspecified people; "Tom, Dick or Harry" plays the same role for one unspecified person. The phrase most commonly occurs as "every Tom, Dick and Harry", meaning everyone, and "any Tom, Dick or Harry", meaning anyone, although Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable defines the term to specify "a set of nobodies; persons of no note"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom,_Dick_and_Harry

I don't know what "putting words into someone's mouth" and "namecalling" have in common.

put words in someone's mouth = To imply or state that [someone] has said a thing; to erect a straw man.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/put_words_in_someone's_mouth

Please don't cry no more.

 

[rott]

I challenge you guys to find a few pilots, even civilian ones, who says flying within 50 ft of another aircraft is safe.

Buddy, nothing is safe when you're in the air especially when it has everything to do with air force of two different countries. Leave civilian out of this. Unrelated.
Find me a defence pilot who says it's very SAFE when it comes to interception of an alien craft.

 

[Tiqiu]

I've not appointed myself nor have I asked to be appointed 'PDF TT analyst'. So, if you have a problem with that, I defer PDF forum management and so should you.

I've not at any point stated or suggested that I wish for any pilot(s), Chinese or otherwise to die. Quite the contrary. Which is why I agree with judgements by the professionals of the piloting profession themselves that certain behaviours displayed while making an air intercept are unprofessional.

I sincerely doubt any P-8 was available during the socalled Hainan incident. The EP-3 in question was operating in international airspace about 70 miles (110 km) away from the PRC island province of Hainan, and about 100 miles (160 km) away from the Chinese military installation in the Paracel Islands, when it was intercepted by two J-8 fighters.

The incident in 2014 which you referred to involved a Chinese J-11 fighter and a P-8 Poseidon and it took place on about 135 miles (217 kilometers) east of Hainan Island
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-barrel-rolls-over-u-s-plane-bringing-protest

So, I also sincerely doubt that flights by EP-3 and other intelligence aircraft in international airspace have since stopped, including by P-8 of today. (What's 57km distance difference to a plane that cruises at 815 km/h? A little over 4 minutes of flight)
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-spy-plane-territory-tensions-south-china-sea


For yor information: Dick is a perfectly normal first name. The way I used it is as in a normal English language expression.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom,_Dick_and_Harry

I don't know what "putting words into someone's mouth" and "namecalling" have in common.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/put_words_in_someone's_mouth

Please don't cry no more.

The more you talked, the more hang-ups of yours were revealed to us.
"Putting words into someone's mouth" means exactly the way in which you have replied to me when I said:

Yeah,now you're talking. To protect the national interest by whatever means is the highest form of professionalism for soldiers. It was the same professionalism that inspired many other pilots to do the same. Why are you scared?

and you replied:

You mean, since the Hainan incident, many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly, costing their State all the time and money investment in their training for no effect. I'm not scared. Why do you cry?

In my post did I say or did I mean "many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly"? Mind you, you used the word "got killed", then do tell us which Chinese pilots got killed since the 2001 incident?
People like you are called hypocrite when you are calling others "putting words into someone's mouth" while you are putting words into someone's mouth.

I don't know what "putting words into someone's mouth" and "namecalling" have in common.

That is what in common when you said to someone just minutes ago in other thread: "Hey Dick (or Tom or Harry, or whatever you name is), don't put words in my mouth."
Get it, think tank?

 

[xunzi]

Fact is that the plane You intercepted was NOT from Sweden.
You still have not answered the hypotetical question:
If a fighter pilot flies within 50 feet of another plane, over International Waters,
should he be punished?

I know but you are from Sweden but in my mind, I consider Sweden to be a US's offshore satellite territory so I speak of that same regard.

Now to answer you...my friend. LOL Like I said, our investigation and report back is that the pilot instructs to intercept within safety distance according to international normal standard. So the 50ft accusation is hard for us to swallow when there is no evidence beside the US big mouth.

As far as our agreement with the US during these encounter, we didn't sign up with the US to allow them to spy in our EEZ which you call international water. It is certainly difficult to talk without further detail as to what happen. Now if it is indeed our agreement with the US included allowing them to spy in our EEZ, not to intercept each other within 50ft, and that the US word is accurate and correct (three very big assumptions that I will take you for granted), then of course our pilot will be discipline according with our national law. We take this very seriously.

Did I answer you, my friend?

 

[Penguin]

and you replied:

Here is where you fail to identify sarcasm.

I admit I put a period there by accident, rather than the question mark I intended.
Like so:

"You mean, since the Hainan incident, many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly, costing their State all the time and money investment in their training for no effect?

Which is in effect asking for a clarification.

In my post did I say or did I mean "many other Chinese pilots got themselves killed needlessly"? Mind you, you used the word "got killed", then do tell us which Chinese pilots got killed since the 2001 incident?

?

People like you are called hypocrite when you are calling others "putting words into someone's mouth" while you are putting words into someone's mouth.

I couldn't care less what 'people like me' are called. Who are these 'people like me'? You pretend to know me?
Youare still confusing 'putting wors in mouth' with namecalling.

That is what in common when you said to someone just minutes ago in other thread: "Hey Dick (or Tom or Harry, or whatever you name is), don't put words in my mouth."

It appears you are not familiar with the concept of a rhetorical question. Anyway, a statement from me that I don't know what two things have in common is not necessarily a question for you to explain.

Get it, think tank?

?

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Yes, and US has repeatly sailed into 12nm of Chinese territorial water in case you haven't been paying attention to the news.

I have been paying attention to the news, and so far I have seen this happening.
The issue has always been waters where China has made claims which are not recognized
by anyone else, and without backing of International Law.
Why don't You post any independent link, if You disagree.

The incident we are discussing happened over International Waters,

Yeah,now you're talking. To protect the national interest by whatever means is the highest form of professionalism for soldiers. It was the same professionalism that inspired many other pilots to do the same. Why are you scared?

On Aug.19, 2014 about 217 kms east of Hainan island in the South China Sea, a Chinese warplane flew alongside US Navy P-8 aircraft putting their wingtips as close as 30 feet (nine metres) apart. The encounter ended with the Chinese pilot doing a barrel roll over the top of the US plane, with its belly packed with weaponry.

So yet another unprofessional maverick.
Who is surprised?

I know but you are from Sweden but in my mind, I consider Sweden to be a US's offshore satellite territory so I speak of that same regard.

Now to answer you...my friend. LOL Like I said, our investigation and report back is that the pilot instructs to intercept within safety distance according to international normal standard. So the 50ft accusation is hard for us to swallow when there is no evidence beside the US big mouth.

As far as our agreement with the US during these encounter, we didn't sign up with the US to allow them to spy in our EEZ which you call international water. It is certainly difficult to talk without further detail as to what happen. Now if it is indeed our agreement with the US included allowing them to spy in our EEZ, not to intercept each other within 50ft, and that the US word is accurate and correct (three very big assumptions that I will take you for granted), then of course our pilot will be discipline according with our national law. We take this very seriously.

Did I answer you, my friend?

An EEZ is by definition OUTSIDE any territorial waters, so anybody can fly there.
That is part of International Law, and the agreement does not even touch the subject - no need.
The agreement is mainly regarding ships, but a clause says that aircraft should keep a safe distance.
50 feet is not considered a safe distance by professional pilots.
It something that is done by teams like the Red Arrows etc, but only after extensive training.

You can close the two first.

The remaining item is whether the Chinese pilot actually flew within 50 feet.
That is claimed by the U.S., so the correct behaviour is for the Chinese Pilot
to be court martialed by the Chinese Government, calling in U.S, Air Force
and PLAAF to provide their evidence.
This will determine whether the Chinese Pilot stepped out of line or not.

 

[Tiqiu]

It appears you are not familiar with the concept of a rhetorical question. Anyway, a statement from me that I don't know what two things have in common is not necessarily a question for you to explain.

It appears you were still trying to create misdirection to avert others' eyes from your name calling and trolling act. Since the Mods already made their verdict in other thread, and also to be respectful to them and the forum rules, I don't wish to go any further arguing with you. I will not quote or reply to you any more and I wish you would do the same. It is not your apposing views that piss me, it is because of the fact that normally I don't want to engage talks with someone who don't introduce themselves at causal encounters or hide name plates in conference. I say it for nothing else, but stating my preference.

So yet another unprofessional maverick.
Who is surprised?

If some one always and continues to peek at my house from the footpath outside my fence, and after all professional requests or talks asking the offender not to do so are failed, I would definitely resort into some of the so called "unprofessional" an-eye-for-an-eye act to the offender to teach him a lesson of how to respect others.

I am very surprised you do not know this. In Australia we call it personal space.