what's the big deal? Retired UK Pilots took jobs in China

[Raider 21]

Ya ya.. Anybody can make up BS from just random typing. PAF also claim PLAAF will adopt JF-17 into their fleet and guess what....

PAF knows very little about PLAAF and the fact, PAF personnel cant even get 100m close to a J-20, more or less shows PLAAF are secretive about their tech and not to reveal their card in front of foreigner.

Cool

 

[S10]

No, having a nice Knob Creek after sharing a tomahawk ribeye.

Contractors like these UK pilots usually take their pay up front and usually at 6-figures. Then they deposit their monies somewhere safe. So what make you believe that I will tell you the factual truths about NATO combat tactics?

Investigative interviewing 101

1. Isolate your candidates and have them provide information individually so they cannot cook up misinformation.

2. Use standardized set of questions and check for common themes.

3. Test and experiment

Really, it wasn't that hard to get former NATO pilots to spill, especially for the right money. The very first group of carrier-based PLAN pilots were reportedly trained by a retired US Navy CAG in the early 2000's, when he was flying civilian airlines for China.

 

[gambit]

No, you have to be stupid to believe what people say at face value. That could be a misdirect or could be a trap. They could have been saying that to put you in that regime so they know how you would react when you do face off the NATO

You can't just go ahead and believe anyone said without seriously thinking if that is a trap they are setting you with.

The problem here is that once implemented, the only way to know if 'it' works is in combat, but by then it is too late.

Or are you telling me China will take in anyone who claim they can help with the knowledge processed from the west without vetting them?? Sure, then I have the entire NATO playbook on how combine warfare is conduct, how much are you willing to pay me to come over there and "Teach" your tanker?? LOL

Give me a couple weeks, and I can come up with NATO air doctrines based on Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Really, it wasn't that hard to get former NATO pilots to spill, especially for the right money. The very first group of carrier-based PLAN pilots were reportedly trained by a retired US Navy CAG in the early 2000's, when he was flying civilian airlines for China.

And the guy never said anything since then...

 

[gambit]

Investigative interviewing 101

1. Isolate your candidates and have them provide information individually so they cannot cook up misinformation.

2. Use standardized set of questions and check for common themes.

3. Test and experiment

Did some fool from a Chinese forum told you to post that here? Probably. For starter, you are not investigating a crime. But since you and whoever told you to post that nonsense have never served, you do not know how military people work and think. Simple as that.

People talk. In joint exercises, people talk. From maintainers to pilots to group leaders -- people talk. And they talk about everything they see.

Regarding item one -- stupid. The most you can do is establish their bona fides, meaning their IDs, and that is all. You have a bunch of pilots so of course their TECHNICAL backgrounds will be %90 similar if not %100 identical. So trying to interrogate them as if they are suspected of a crime would get laughs and if any walk there is not a damn thing you can do about that. They are not Chinese citizens that you can intimidate. Lastly, when they talked to you, the British embassy would know where they would be.

Regarding item two -- also stupid. There is a difference between technical and tactical and here is the difference...Teaching you how to take off and land is technical. Pull the yoke this way, kick the rudder that way, and move the flaps so and so. How to take off and land in a crosswind is tactical. The crosswind create variable flight conditions and that would necessitate slightly different flight controls actions in the cockpit.

Regarding item three -- also stupid. Sure, you can propose some test questions to experiment if each of them know what they are talking about, and sure, all of them would agree to that reasonable argument. But once your questions breach into the tactical realm, they would shut up. Why should they continue? What they know are valuable and as the Joker said to the gang leaders: "If you're good at something never do it for free." You are the one offering me money for what I know of air combat tactics, and now you are trying to get that knowledge for free just for 'testing'? Sorry, pal, but you came to me, remember? Either pay me my contract or am walking, and my embassy know where I am.

Once you paid me my contract price, what can you do to me? I can train your pilots outdated air combat tactics and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. For starter, your pilots have no combat experience in the first place, so how would they know BS from facts? You think I cannot cook up BS? You are at a disadvantage here. In a joint exercise, everyone observe everyone else. But you came to me, remember? I am retired. I came alone and in your playhouse. I notice everything while there is nothing for you to take note. People talk.

 

[Chat SAMOSA]

Did some fool from a Chinese forum told you to post that here? Probably. For starter, you are not investigating a crime. But since you and whoever told you to post that nonsense have never served, you do not know how military people work and think. Simple as that.

People talk. In joint exercises, people talk. From maintainers to pilots to group leaders -- people talk. And they talk about everything they see.

Regarding item one -- stupid. The most you can do is establish their bona fides, meaning their IDs, and that is all. You have a bunch of pilots so of course their TECHNICAL backgrounds will be %90 similar if not %100 identical. So trying to interrogate them as if they are suspected of a crime would get laughs and if any walk there is not a damn thing you can do about that. They are not Chinese citizens that you can intimidate. Lastly, when they talked to you, the British embassy would know where they would be.

Regarding item two -- also stupid. There is a difference between technical and tactical and here is the difference...Teaching you how to take off and land is technical. Pull the yoke this way, kick the rudder that way, and move the flaps so and so. How to take off and land in a crosswind is tactical. The crosswind create variable flight conditions and that would necessitate slightly different flight controls actions in the cockpit.

Regarding item three -- also stupid. Sure, you can propose some test questions to experiment if each of them know what they are talking about, and sure, all of them would agree to that reasonable argument. But once your questions breach into the tactical realm, they would shut up. Why should they continue? What they know are valuable and as the Joker said to the gang leaders: "If you're good at something never do it for free." You are the one offering me money for what I know of air combat tactics, and now you are trying to get that knowledge for free just for 'testing'? Sorry, pal, but you came to me, remember? Either pay me my contract or am walking, and my embassy know where I am.

Once you paid me my contract price, what can you do to me? I can train your pilots outdated air combat tactics and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. For starter, your pilots have no combat experience in the first place, so how would they know BS from facts? You think I cannot cook up BS? You are at a disadvantage here. In a joint exercise, everyone observe everyone else. But you came to me, remember? I am retired. I came alone and in your playhouse. I notice everything while there is nothing for you to take note. People talk.

Sir John Smiley done proud

 

[Irfan Baloch]

They not there to teach but tell Chinese all the military doctrine of NATO while NATO know zero of Chinese fighting doctrine.

maybe there is nothing much to learn.
the air encounters have told NATO enough to learn?

Viktor Belenko defected to the West via JPN. The book 'MIG Pilot' is a great telling of his life story. As a MIG-25 pilot, he was one rung below the cosmonauts on the 'hero' ladder. And he threw all away. Belenko revealed how the Soviet Air Force would fight.

Now...All China did was offered some retired pilots money for information that China cannot really reliably verify. At least we had the MIG-25 for a few days to examine.

tell me.
how much more the UK pilots would've told the Chinese which is not already available on the open source?
I seriously doubt if they would've divulged any sensitive information. if they had any such ill intent they would've kept their interaction secret.

finally , if Western pilots really need to teach Chinese how to fly then I would suggest CCP to throw the white towel.

Did some fool from a Chinese forum told you to post that here? Probably. For starter, you are not investigating a crime. But since you and whoever told you to post that nonsense have never served, you do not know how military people work and think. Simple as that.

People talk. In joint exercises, people talk. From maintainers to pilots to group leaders -- people talk. And they talk about everything they see.

Regarding item one -- stupid. The most you can do is establish their bona fides, meaning their IDs, and that is all. You have a bunch of pilots so of course their TECHNICAL backgrounds will be %90 similar if not %100 identical. So trying to interrogate them as if they are suspected of a crime would get laughs and if any walk there is not a damn thing you can do about that. They are not Chinese citizens that you can intimidate. Lastly, when they talked to you, the British embassy would know where they would be.

Regarding item two -- also stupid. There is a difference between technical and tactical and here is the difference...Teaching you how to take off and land is technical. Pull the yoke this way, kick the rudder that way, and move the flaps so and so. How to take off and land in a crosswind is tactical. The crosswind create variable flight conditions and that would necessitate slightly different flight controls actions in the cockpit.

Regarding item three -- also stupid. Sure, you can propose some test questions to experiment if each of them know what they are talking about, and sure, all of them would agree to that reasonable argument. But once your questions breach into the tactical realm, they would shut up. Why should they continue? What they know are valuable and as the Joker said to the gang leaders: "If you're good at something never do it for free." You are the one offering me money for what I know of air combat tactics, and now you are trying to get that knowledge for free just for 'testing'? Sorry, pal, but you came to me, remember? Either pay me my contract or am walking, and my embassy know where I am.

Once you paid me my contract price, what can you do to me? I can train your pilots outdated air combat tactics and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. For starter, your pilots have no combat experience in the first place, so how would they know BS from facts? You think I cannot cook up BS? You are at a disadvantage here. In a joint exercise, everyone observe everyone else. But you came to me, remember? I am retired. I came alone and in your playhouse. I notice everything while there is nothing for you to take note. People talk.

you are brutal. still same flare as always,

 

[Horse_Rider]

LOL... Typical BS slandering. Same for the VT-4 tank, J-10CE and 054 Type frigate... From from the make up friends or so called close BS nonsense.


I heard from my friend, pilot fighter of reliable source , PLAAF are some of the best pilot in the world,. Far better than USAF elite pilots.


Are you saying NATO doctrine is stupid?

The only way to find out how good the Chinese pilots are, would be to start joining various exercises. I read somewhere that PLAAF contracted with British pilots that had left service 30 years ago or something like it. The tactics change every few years due to speed of net-centric warfare changes. 10+ years is too old. You can probably get older tactics and training methods out to assess from there but that's it. 10+ years ago, we didn't have F-35 in service.....just see how it has changed the face of aerial warfare.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

No, you have to be stupid to believe what people say at face value. That could be a misdirect or could be a trap. They could have been saying that to put you in that regime so they know how you would react when you do face off the NATO

You can't just go ahead and believe anyone said without seriously thinking if that is a trap they are setting you with.

Or are you telling me China will take in anyone who claim they can help with the knowledge processed from the west without vetting them?? Sure, then I have the entire NATO playbook on how combine warfare is conduct, how much are you willing to pay me to come over there and "Teach" your tanker?? LOL

don't tempt them. they got deep pockets.

 

[Horse_Rider]

Don't know about you, but the J-10CE is a great platform, especially for PAF

J-10CE is definitely a great platform for Pakistan. Lots of room to upgrade and advance. I'd highly propose the PAF buys the license production and produces 150 of these as JFT block IV delta-wing version and turn this into a stealthy platform for 5th gen jet too. Would be much easier than acquiring a brand new platform.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

No, you have to be stupid to believe what people say at face value. That could be a misdirect or could be a trap. They could have been saying that to put you in that regime so they know how you would react when you do face off the NATO

You can't just go ahead and believe anyone said without seriously thinking if that is a trap they are setting you with.

Or are you telling me China will take in anyone who claim they can help with the knowledge processed from the west without vetting them?? Sure, then I have the entire NATO playbook on how combine warfare is conduct, how much are you willing to pay me to come over there and "Teach" your tanker?? LOL

in my view recruiting these retired UK pilots for insight about NATO pilot flying is an admission its inferior. I doubt if NATO has any desire to learn about Chinese secret air tactics.
instead of hating those UK pilots on the social media they should be applauded for impressing Chinese that these are the ways these NATO pilots been flying few years back.

I don't know how much exposure PLAAF has beyond some limited training with Pakistani and Thai air force to get a sense of Western style of training keeping in view that PAF F-16s are strictly excluded from exercising with Chinese on request from USA (although for some humbling experience for the Chinese the Americans should reverse that decision and ask the PAF to specially include the F-16s).
but then again these are my uninformed comments and I haven't graduated from Internet warrior school of Top Gun Rants on PDF/ Youtube so what do I know?

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Ya ya.. Anybody can make up BS from just random typing. PAF also claim PLAAF will adopt JF-17 into their fleet and guess what....

PAF knows very little about PLAAF and the fact, PAF personnel cant even get 100m close to a J-20, more or less shows PLAAF are secretive about their tech and not to reveal their card in front of foreigner.

but Indians claim that their SU 30 have been tracking J-20 on regular basis.

 

[INS_Vikrant]

PAF knows very little about PLAAF and the fact, PAF personnel cant even get 100m close to a J-20, more or less shows PLAAF are secretive about their tech and not to reveal their card in front of foreigner.

Pakistan weird relationship vis-a-vis US and China puts them in real dilemma where both US and China won't give it access to sensitive technology in fear that it might fall in the hands of other lol.

 

[gambit]

tell me.
how much more the UK pilots would've told the Chinese which is not already available on the open source?
I seriously doubt if they would've divulged any sensitive information. if they had any such ill intent they would've kept their interaction secret.

finally , if Western pilots really need to teach Chinese how to fly then I would suggest CCP to throw the white towel.

If this story is true -- that China offered retired UK pilots for information -- that begs the question of who/what inside the Parade Line Army (PLA) prompted this plan in the first place? Did a general stashed away enough retirement funds in some offshore accounts and got brave enough to point out serious flaws that got the Party's attention? Seriously.

 

[Beast]

Pakistan weird relationship vis-a-vis US and China puts them in real dilemma where both US and China won't give it access to sensitive technology in fear that it might fall in the hands of other lol.

Precisely. Those who stay in between will end up get nothing. They need to make a choice in the end. This is the same for India.

 

[Dungeness]

If this story is true -- that China offered retired UK pilots for information -- that begs the question of who/what inside the Parade Line Army (PLA) prompted this plan in the first place? Did a general stashed away enough retirement funds in some offshore accounts and got brave enough to point out serious flaws that got the Party's attention? Seriously.

You may need to learn to be respectful, after all PLA was the army that forced "the longest retreat in US military history" in their only war with US. Back then they were nothing more than a poorly equipped peasant army, starving and facing the most powerful army that had all around superiority in every conceivable way.