U.S., China military planes come inadvertently close over South China Sea

[ahojunk]

SOUTH CHINA SEA | Thu Feb 9, 2017 | 11:04pm EST
U.S., China military planes come inadvertently close over South China Sea

A U.S. Navy P-3 plane and a Chinese military aircraft came close to each other over the South China Sea in an incident the Navy believes was inadvertent, a U.S. official told Reuters on Thursday.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the aircraft came within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of each other on Wednesday in the vicinity of the Scarborough Shoal, between the Philippines and the Chinese mainland.

The official added that such incidents involving Chinese and American aircraft are infrequent, with only two having taken place in 2016.

The U.S. aircraft was "on a routine mission operating in accordance with international law," U.S. Pacific Command said in a statement to Reuters.

"On Feb. 8, an interaction characterized by U.S. Pacific Command as 'unsafe' occurred in international air space above the South China Sea, between a Chinese KJ-200 aircraft and a U.S. Navy P-3C aircraft," it said.

The KJ-200 is a propeller airborne early warning and control aircraft based originally on the old Soviet-designed An-12.

"The Department of Defense and U.S. Pacific Command are always concerned about unsafe interactions with Chinese military forces," Pacific Command added.

"We will address the issue in appropriate diplomatic and military channels."

China's defense and foreign ministries did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

China's blockade of Scarborough Shoal, a prime fishing spot, prompted the previous Philippine government to file a legal case in 2013 at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, infuriating Beijing, which refused to take part.

While the court last year largely rejected China's claims, new Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte has sought to mend ties with Beijing and the situation around the shoal has largely calmed down.

China is deeply suspicious of any U.S. military activity in the resource-rich South China Sea.

In December, a Chinese naval vessel picked up a U.S. underwater drone in the South China Sea near the Philippines, triggering a U.S. diplomatic protest. China later handed it back.

The United States has previously criticized what it called China's militarization of its maritime outposts in the South China Sea, and stressed the need for freedom of navigation by conducting periodic air and naval patrols near them that have angered Beijing.


(Reporting by Idrees Ali; Additional reporting by Ben Blanchard in Beijing; Editing by Sandra Maler and Clarence Fernandez)

 

[AlyxMS]

That's odd.
Normally only interception gets that close. But the Chinese aircraft is a AWACS, strange indeed.

 

[mzeeshanfahd]

howcome it's always the US that is acting in accordence with the international law ............ and every other ...... is acting against the law .....

 

[shah1398]

Oh boy...That was close

 

[gambit]

howcome it's always the US that is acting in accordence with the international law ............ and every other ...... is acting against the law .....

We did not argue that the Chinese aircraft flew 'against' international law. In your eagerness to defend the Chinese, you missed the point about SAFETY.

I will repeat...SAFETY.

Am willing to guess that you have never been at the controls of an aircraft before in your life. Because if you have, you would have recognized that 1000 ft or 300 meters is actually not that safe of a separation distance between aircrafts in formation, and yes, what the Chinese KJ-2000 did was indeed formation flying.

Turbulence can erase that 300 meters in less than one second. The result ? Two aircrafts and their aircrew lives -- lost.

This is not airshow flying with elite pilots at the cockpit.

For civilian airliners, the IDEAL MINIMUM safe separation is 4 km laterally and/or 300 meters vertically. For radar tracking, this separation will enable ground controllers to electronically 'see' two aircrafts instead of one. You probably do not know it, but even under normal conditions, if two airliners are close enough to each other, they will electronically appears as one to ground radars.

If the Chinese aircraft wanted to make its presence known to the Americans, a couple of kms will suffice.

This is just another example of the lack of flight discipline by the Chinese, either by the individual pilots, or from orders.

 

[Deino]

We did not argue that the Chinese aircraft flew 'against' international law. In your eagerness to defend the Chinese, you missed the point about SAFETY.

I will repeat...SAFETY.

....

Your concern is surely well reasoned, but why is it always the other side, who flies against these standard safety issues?

Can we really be sure that the Chinese pilots flew "either by the individual pilots, or from orders" in an inappropriate manner or could it be that these are also "alternative facts" ?

Deino

 

[gambit]

Your concern is surely well reasoned, but why is it always the other side, who flies against these standard safety issues?

Can we really be sure that the Chinese pilots flew "either by the individual pilots, or from orders" in an inappropriate manner or could it be that these are also "alternative facts" ?

Deino

All we have to do is look at the situation. Sure, it is possible that the American aircraft was in the wrong. What was the American aircraft doing there in the first place ? Checking out the Chinese buildup progress. You can also argue that the Chinese aircraft was flying its normal patrol pattern and it was the American aircraft who got too close. But our interest is not in the Chinese aircraft but on what the Chinese have been building below, therefore, the more logical guess is that it was the Chinese aircraft who was interested in the American aircraft.

In the absence of radio contact for whatever reason why, an intercept can come close to the point where pilots can make out each other's facial expressions, but lost radio contact was unlikely in this case. The American aircraft was a P-3C Orion. What is the likelihood of this aircraft losing all of its radios (plural) ? So if the Chinese wanted to warn off the Americans, first try radio contact. That is standard protocol in trying to establish identity with an unknown aircraft in the first place. The Americans would have responded with an ID. That is all that is needed.

Most likely the Chinese aircraft was already airborne and ground controllers ordered him to intercept. You always wanted to use the best available resource and what can be better than someone already in flight ? Also most likely, both sides were already in contact with each other. The Chinese wanted to make a more forceful point.

 

[mzeeshanfahd]

We did not argue that the Chinese aircraft flew 'against' international law. In your eagerness to defend the Chinese, you missed the point about SAFETY.

I will repeat...SAFETY.

Am willing to guess that you have never been at the controls of an aircraft before in your life. Because if you have, you would have recognized that 1000 ft or 300 meters is actually not that safe of a separation distance between aircrafts in formation, and yes, what the Chinese KJ-2000 did was indeed formation flying.

Turbulence can erase that 300 meters in less than one second. The result ? Two aircrafts and their aircrew lives -- lost.

This is not airshow flying with elite pilots at the cockpit.

For civilian airliners, the IDEAL MINIMUM safe separation is 4 km laterally and/or 300 meters vertically. For radar tracking, this separation will enable ground controllers to electronically 'see' two aircrafts instead of one. You probably do not know it, but even under normal conditions, if two airliners are close enough to each other, they will electronically appears as one to ground radars.

If the Chinese aircraft wanted to make its presence known to the Americans, a couple of kms will suffice.

This is just another example of the lack of flight discipline by the Chinese, either by the individual pilots, or from orders.

I have read your posts before and respected your opinion in technical matters and here again I will not confront you on technical grounds I want to point to another aspect and that is wrongdoing of your government and you know it does not take a aeronautical engineer or air traffic control engineer to figure out what the hell is US doing thousands of KMs away from his home country and trying to teach other people international laws ..... distorting all the neighboring countries and their governments just out of fear/jealousy or what ever you call this insecure feeling of your government that china ( or any other country) should not be allowed to surpass you, have you ever considered that it not any other country that has approached you for war or attacked your homeland ......... but in every single case it was your ......government/military..... who have been vandalizing all around the world. I was pointing to this geopolitical reality not the technical aspect and thus pointing to the root cause.

 

[Globenim]

the more logical guess is that it was the Chinese aircraft who was interested in the American aircraft.

Yeah the "more logical" conclusion for Chinese aircraft to patrol in the SCS is "snopping" on U.S. spy aicraft just being "interested" about Chinese islands.

Not any other perfectly sound reason for a Chinese aircraft to patrol near Chinese islands besides flying for "no reason" around should come to your mind.

Next time we wont move our country and airspace any way near your "lawfull" patrols near Chinese islands. So sorry.

 

[jhungary]

I have read your posts before and respected your opinion in technical matters and here again I will not confront you on technical grounds I want to point to another aspect and that is wrongdoing of your government and you know it does not take a aeronautical engineer or air traffic control engineer to figure out what the hell is US doing thousands of KMs away from his home country and trying to teach other people international laws ..... distorting all the neighboring countries and their governments just out of fear/jealousy or what ever you call this insecure feeling of your government that china ( or any other country) should not be allowed to surpass you, have you ever considered that it not any other country that has approached you for war or attacked your homeland ......... but in every single case it was your ......government/military..... who have been vandalizing all around the world. I was pointing to this geopolitical reality not the technical aspect and thus pointing to the root cause.

You do not understand the term "international"

Let's say the situation reverse, Chinese shipping uses Gulf of Mexico to connect between the Pacific ocean and Atlantic, now, if US starting to claim the gulf of Mexico as their territories and protest Chinese Airliner flew pass the airspace of Gulf Of Mexico and Civil and Naval ship traverse between Panama Canal and into the Gulf of Mexico? Can the US uses the same argument as your's, simply saying why China is trying to teach US international law when they are thousand of mile away from their home country?

The word international mean it belong to everybody, US, as part of the world, have the right to use any international waterway and international airspace, be it in a Military or Civilian capacity. Being international airspace, it is open to everybody, it doesn't matter where it was located. Be it in the US coast or Chinese coast, it was shared by anyone, even if Somalia starting to patrol South China seas, it's still their right to do so, even tho they are thousand of miles away.

This is not geopolitical standpoint, what you are raising is based on your opinion, because in geopolitical standppoint, China have as much as their right to traverse or flew thru gulf of Mexico as much as the US have the right to traverse or flew thru South China Seas.

 

[Nan Yang]

You do not understand the term "international"

Let's say the situation reverse, Chinese shipping uses Gulf of Mexico to connect between the Pacific ocean and Atlantic, now, if US starting to claim the gulf of Mexico as their territories and protest Chinese Airliner flew pass the airspace of Gulf Of Mexico and Civil and Naval ship traverse between Panama Canal and into the Gulf of Mexico? Can the US uses the same argument as your's, simply saying why China is trying to teach US international law when they are thousand of mile away from their home country?

The word international mean it belong to everybody, US, as part of the world, have the right to use any international waterway and international airspace, be it in a Military or Civilian capacity. Being international airspace, it is open to everybody, it doesn't matter where it was located. Be it in the US coast or Chinese coast, it was shared by anyone, even if Somalia starting to patrol South China seas, it's still their right to do so, even tho they are thousand of miles away.

This is not geopolitical standpoint, what you are raising is based on your opinion, because in geopolitical standppoint, China have as much as their right to traverse or flew thru gulf of Mexico as much as the US have the right to traverse or flew thru South China Seas.

 

[jhungary]

lol......

China is welcome to send their warship within 12 miles of California coast, in fact, if China have to be that far in the Eastern Pacific, they will have to come close or even dock at US States of Hawaii.

By the way, did you actaully watch the video.

That is not the UN Embassdor to Singapore.

This man is the UN Permanent Representative from Singapore - H.E Mr Burhanudeen Gafoor since August 2016

The dude in the youtube video is at least 10 years older, I don't know who he is, or what he does, but that guy is most certainly not the UN representative of Singapore.

 

[TaiShang]

Chinese pilot acted ‘legally’ in encounter with US military plane
By Global Times – Reuters 2017/2/10


China's defense ministry said Friday that a Chinese pilot had responded "legally and professionally" to a close encounter between military planes from China and the US over the South China Sea.

A defense ministry official, who requested anonymity, told the Global Times that a US plane approached a Chinese military jet that was carrying a routine mission near the Huangyan Island and the Chinese pilot responded with legal and professional measures.

"We hope that the US could take the bilateral military relations into consideration and adopt practical measures to eliminate the root cause of air and sea mishaps between the two countries," said the official.

A US Navy P-3 plane and a Chinese military aircraft came close to each other over the South China Sea in an incident the US Navy believes was inadvertent, a US official told Reuters on Thursday.

The US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the aircraft came within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of each other on Wednesday in the vicinity of the Huangyan Island. The official added that such incidents involving Chinese and American aircraft are infrequent, with only two having taken place in 2016.

The US aircraft was "on a routine mission operating in accordance with international law," US Pacific Command said in a statement to Reuters.

"On February 8, an interaction characterized by US Pacific Command as 'unsafe' occurred in international air space above the South China Sea, between a Chinese KJ-200 aircraft and a US Navy P-3C aircraft," the statement said.

The KJ-200 is a propeller airborne early warning and control aircraft based originally on the old Soviet-designed An-12.

 

[Nan Yang]

lol......

China is welcome to send their warship within 12 miles of California coast, in fact, if China have to be that far in the Eastern Pacific, they will have to come close or even dock at US States of Hawaii.

By the way, did you actaully watch the video.

That is not the UN Embassdor to Singapore.

View attachment 376158

This man is the UN Permanent Representative from Singapore - H.E Mr Burhanudeen Gafoor since August 2016

The dude in the youtube video is at least 10 years older, I don't know who he is, or what he does, but that guy is most certainly not the UN representative of Singapore.

The dude WAS the former UN ambassador. Twice.
China do not need to sail it's ship off California now. It's immediate threat is Guam. That's where they will start.

 

[jhungary]

The dude WAS the former UN ambassador. Twice.
China do not need to sail it's ship off California now. It's immediate threat is Guam. That's where they will start.

Then the vid should not say "UN ambassador" instead he should have said "Former Ambassador". How would Ior anyone not singaporean or following singapore politics know he WAS a former UN Ambassador, there were probably hundreds if not thousand of those, I don't even know who he is.

And you are wrong, the immediately thread is Japan, you need to start there. Guam is too far for China to start.