New signs for Chinese Airforce pilots

[midnight Target]

I'm used to it.

[Syzygyone]

Originally posted by midnight Target


I'm used to it.

Quote: The P-3 Orion is now sporting this sign off the rudder...  

Hey, I can't see these dang pictures of this new sign.  Were the deleted?  What am I missing, besides the obvious?

[midnight Target]

[capt. apathy]

Here on TV noone said that the crew was arrested (?) to secure evidence. It was given just as if Canadians had to arrest Russian crew because "yankees" wanted their blood for something they didn't do  

seems like your news gave the story in a way to slant your way of thinking, possible misleading through innuendo while not stating any lies.

the post I read (suplied by you) said the crew was removed from the ship and then went and stayed at hotels.

Canadian police arrested the ship captain and two other crew members in the airport of St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada on Tuesday when the Russians attempted to fly home.

Carey Dearnley, a spokeswoman for Primorsk in Canada, said the three face criminal charges of manslaughter, misconduct and aiding and abetting, The Associated Press reported.

manslaughter would be the charge for causing another persons death through carelesnes or neglect,  misconduct and aiding and abetting would be charges from activities like trying to leave the country during a criminal investigation, hiding or destroying evidence, or helping someone else do these things.


I do have to agree somewhat on the Orion thing.  I don't want to second guess the decisions of the pilot. but I did find it strange that they decided to take this plane to china to land it.  seems like with the equipment on board they'd have destroyed the equipment and ditched the plane

[MrCoffee]

When I was a kid, went on a field trip to a NAS. There were several VP squadrons based there and got to go to the area where the pilots hang out and sat at every station aboard the P-3. Neat aircraft.

Oh yeah, and above the door into the entrance to the pilot quarters and areas, the sign read. "Through these doors walk the best something something pilots in the world". I thought they were kinda cocky for a VP squadron but thought it was funny as well.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Boroda
Well, MiG-21 isn't an "agile" plane.

Smaller boat has an opportunity to turn/stop/accelerate, while a huge cargo ship is like a train...

Are all Russians like this?  I'm beginning to understand why their gov't failed, and their country is in ruins.

Baroda, pick up a copy of International Rules of the Road.  Then come back and repost.

[capt. apathy]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Boroda
Well, MiG-21 isn't an "agile" plane.

Smaller boat has an opportunity to turn/stop/accelerate, while a huge cargo ship is like a train...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

while it is true that a basic rule is 'the larger ship has the right of way', this only applies if all other rules are being followed, and both ships are under power.  this wouldn't apply if the smaller ship where at anchor. that’s why it's hard to draw a direct comparison between maritime and air rules.  you can't really anchor a plane in the sky, you are always under power.

besides all of this the fact remains that this wasn't a traffic accident (as the shipping incident appears to be).  the Mig was in the area for the direct purpose of harassing the plane the Mig could have left the area at any time, he would have had to intentionally put himself in danger, slowed to speeds that cut into his maneuverability, and basically there's no way this could be interpreted to be anything but the Migs fault.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
and basically there's no way this could be interpreted to be anything but the Migs fault.

Unless of course you are a diehard brainwashed communist like Boroda who will always see America as the evil capitalist pig enemy...

[wulfie]

miko2d was right on a couple of points.

1. Anything sensitive was pitched/ejected overboard on the way down. And yes that type of equipment/documentation/etc. is made to be 'got rid of' very quickly.

2. I know alot of P-3 crewmen, Naval Aviators who were/are P-3 drivers, etc. The P-3 is a death trap when it comes to ditching on water. The most 'sucessful' 'wet ditching' of a P-3, in which 'only' roughly half of the crew ended up dying, was done by a P-3 driver that had ~15 years of previous experience flying amphibians for the USN. Putting it down on the water, especially when knowing that anything remotely sensitive was already falling towards the ocean, would have meant writing off the lives of no small % of that EP-3s crew.

3. On pilot quality and P-3s and EP-3s - by all accounts that EP-3 driver pulled at least a couple of 'Han Solo moments' out of his hat to even regain control of that EP-3, let alone land it. Also, there was (Is? I'm a little out of the current loop on this topic) 'equal dispersal of skill' when it comes to Naval Aviator flight assignments. The top 5% of the class can choose what they want to fly. The rest of the graduating class is assigned 'equally' to the USN Aviation community. In other words, the 4th best graduate gets assigned to tactical aircraft (F/A-18s and such), and the 5th best gets assigned to P-3s, and the 6th best goes to rotary wing, etc. And I know P-3 drivers that could have gone and flown jets, but didn't because they wanted to be shore based and have multi-engine command time to be more competitive for commercial airline hiring purposes. Just because a guy is flying a P-3 does not mean he isn't a damn good Aviator. And the EP-3 squadrons (VQs) are very selective when it comes to Aviators, both in terms of skill and experience. I know more than one P-3 driver who had a good reputation and tried to get assigned to a VQ, was turned down, and got out of the USN to flying commercial. If you are flying for a VQ odds are you know your stuff.

And as much as I disagree with almost everything Boroda says, the KAL was a communications screwup on a number of levels - not some Soviet Air Force general saying "The Yankees are hiding their ELINT missions behind hundreds of civilians serving as human shields - shoot it down". It was a dumb accident. It was an accident when the (my) USN shot down an Iranian airliner as well. Remember the story about glass houses and chucking rocks?

Mike/wulfie

[MarkVZ]

Does anyone know what became of that P-3 airframe?  Was it broken up permanantly or is it being restored to flying status?

[Sox62]

Originally posted by Boroda
Well, MiG-21 isn't an "agile" plane.

Smaller boat has an opportunity to turn/stop/accelerate, while a huge cargo ship is like a train...

I have owned boats all of my life,and quite frankly,you are full of it.

You tell me how a boat that has HALF the top speed at best can get out of the way of a huge boat travelling at over twice it's speed,with little warning.

Stop?Ok,get nailed at rest.Turn?Ok get nailed turning.Accelerate?Ok get run down by a boat travelling at a speed much greater than your boat could ever hope to obtain.

But you know what?This is all irrelevant...because the fishing boat trawler ALWAYS has right of way over the much larger vessel.

This is from a boating safety website...these are general rules that any Navy or Coast Guard person can verify.




A power driven vessel underway must keep out of the way of the following:

A sailing vessel, under sail only, and vessels propelled by oars or paddles. (Note: when a sailboat has its motor running, it is considered a power driven vessel).
A vessel engaged in fishing, whose fishing equipment restricts its maneuverability. This does not include a sport fisher or party boat and generally means a commercial fishing vessel.
A vessel with restricted maneuverability such as a dredge or tow boat, a boat engaged in work that restricts it to a certain area, or a vessel transferring supplies to another vessel.
A vessel not under command – broken down.






I'm fairly sure that a trawler qualifies as a commercial fishing vessel.

[Ike 2K#]

anyone here remember the 1984 Kamchakta peninsula incident?

[midnight Target]

I saw an interview with that P-3 Pilot and he mentioned that he executed a manouver that hadn't been done by that plane before (not on purpose). Can't for the life of me remember what it was though. Barrel roll?

[GRUNHERZ]

And as much as I disagree with almost everything Boroda says, the KAL was a communications screwup on a number of levels - not some Soviet Air Force general saying "The Yankees are hiding their ELINT missions behind hundreds of civilians serving as human shields - shoot it down". It was a dumb accident. It was an accident when the (my) USN shot down an Iranian airliner as well. Remember the story about glass houses and chucking rocks?

Except for the fact that the bloodthirsty fanatic communist murderer knew it was a civilan passenger airplane...

Heres what the bastard said:

"I was just next to him, on the same altitude, 150 meters to 200 meters away," he recalled in conversations with a reporter this weekend.

From the flashing lights and the configuration of the windows, he recognized the aircraft as a civilian type of plane, he said.

"I saw two rows of windows and knew that this was a Boeing," he said. "I knew this was a civilian plane. But for me this meant nothing. It is easy to turn a civilian type of plane into one for military use."

****ing degenerate brinwashed robot idiopt who should have been shot...

[wulfie]

"I saw two rows of windows and knew that this was a Boeing," he said. "I knew this was a civilian plane. But for me this meant nothing. It is easy to turn a civilian type of plane into one for military use."

As horrible as the outcome was, from a military standpoint he was correct.

He was the business end of a chain of command that had many links. And if he didn't execute those orders he was probably as good as dead when he landed. You could safely bet that any family he had would be imprisoned at worst, or ostracized at least as well - 'to make an example'.

I'm not defending him - but having not been raised in a communist society, and indoctrinated like this guy surely was - I'm not comfortable saying that I can gurantee I wouldn't have shot had I lived his life.

And it's far more than the 'cold act of a brainwashed evil man'.

The KAL flight was way off course - in a very sensitive part of the world.

Warning shots were fired by the interceptor and the KAL flight didn't respond.

Like it or not - communist military forces, by the nature of communist ideology, have a very rigid doctrine with great emphasis on chain of command. When the order is given, the actual button pushers are just that - button pushers and nothing else. This is probably part of the reason that the Soviet Union had more than one chain of command involved when it came to their strategic nuclear arsenal.

It was a tragedy, and it would never have happened off the coast of the U.S.A. But it wasn't as 'evil' in intent as the Western 'propoganda' of the time (I remember - I read the articles in Time, U.S. News & World Report, etc. - I was in school when it happened) made it out to be.

If you're an interceptor pilot, defending a very sensitive part of Soviet airspace, near the 'height' of the cold war (in terms of perceived threat)...you need to look at it from that perspective as well.

I lived during those times as a kid. My Dad had an emergency plan for nuclear war - and we lived in the middle of upper-middle-class suburbia at the time and my Dad is as far from a survivalist as you can get. Perceptions were way, way off back then in 'free information is our name' America - who knows what school kids raised in the Soviet Union believed?

Mike/wulfie