East China Sea ADIZ

[Rosevidney1]

And the potential for misunderstanding incurring precipitate action increases by the day. Add the mindset that goes with losing face and we are indeed living in interesting times.

[Herod]

It seems also, from the press, that Japan is sending its airliners through the ADIZ. Not doing so tacitly accepts the Chinese move, and weakens Japan's claim to the islands. If this goes on, someone's going to get hurt.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The Chinese ADIZ is fundamentally different to other nations, in that it requires procedures be followed for transiting a/c.
The surrounding nations plus USA have immediately defied it, and not been challenged, and thus the Chinese have badly miscalculated on 3 fronts.

There seemto be 3 likely outcomes.
1. Chinese 'relabel' the ADIZ
2. Chinese maintain ADIZ and claim it's working for internal consumption
3. Chinese shoot somebody down.

Option 2 would be the usual Chinese approach, but the cat may already be out of the bag on this one
Chinese Bloggers Turn Fire on China's Military As U.S. Flies B-52s Over Disputed Islands in East China Sea - China Real Time Report - WSJ

Edit: Worth looking at the Chinese statements in detail
ADIZ Will Reduce East China Sea Tension | CHINA US Focus

One section is interesting
"It should be noted that the ADIZ is not a no-fly zone. China has been consistently respecting every country's freedom of overflight as long as they comply with the international law and can be legally identified by the management of the ADIZ." (my italics)
There is no requirement in International law for an a/c to be "legally" identified if transiting this ADIZ. The "legal" requirement is with Chinese Law, which from an international standpoint is only applicable to Chinese registered a/c.
Classic case of deliberately mixing differing requirements in the same sentence to give the impression of uniformity.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Originally Posted by Herod

It seems also, from the press, that Japan is sending its airliners through the ADIZ.

I hope Charlie C remembers KAL007. I also hope that our Nipponese friends aren't being overly gung ho.

[Fratemate]

I've been through this 'ADIZ' a couple of times now and haven't noticed anything strange at all. There was a bit more Chinese chatter on Guard on the first two days but nobody could understand what they were saying since they chose not to broadcast in English.

I'm all for the Japanese stance. We're flying on established airways with the Japanese FIR, so there is no need whatsoever to copy the flight plan to China. If the Chinese were to hurl a missile at an airliner while they are flying from e.g. Taipei to Tokyo there would be all hell to pay from the international community and the Chinese are not so stupid to ignore that.

In order to save 'face', the Chinese just have to remove their demand regarding themselves as flight plan addressees within the Fukuoka FIR. They can keep their lines on a map, business can continue as usual and everybody can go back to mistrusting each other in the region.

[MFC_Fly]

I can't really see what the fuss is about. China has said all planes transiting the zone must file flight plans and identify themselves, or face "defensive emergency measures". [BBC]

I don't like what is happening, not least since its going to cost commercial airlines millions in fuel to avoid the zone of bickering

Why? File a flight plan, identify yourself if challenged on the 121.5 and expect to have a Chinese fighter or 2 sitting on your wing-tips if you don't. No need to avoid the ADIZ at all. I very much doubt that China would detect an unidentified aircraft and just open fire on it. I also very much doubt China would risk the wrath of the rest of the world (well most of it) by shooting at a foreign military aircraft that is operating normally in INTERNATIONAL airspace. The purpose of an ADIZ is to identify aircraft approaching your national airspace in order to counter any identified threat that may subsequently enter said airspace.

As for airspace around the disputed islands, if they and the routes being flown fall outside of ICAO recognised Chinese airspace then there is no need to address China on any flight plan filed, so by international law China could do nothing about them except maybe intercept them to take a look if they failed to identify themselves. How many of you here have used the phrase "We are a NATO/UK military aircraft operating in international airspace", well the commercial world could use a similar response to any challenge from China.

[ShotOne]

Unfortunately MFC, even if you can't see what the fuss is about, the acceptable risk threshold for commercial operations is not the same as for a B52 or a P3. You "very much doubt" the Chinese would open fire. That's nice. But do you know what's going to happen? Did you predict the 2001 midair collision with the Chinese fighter, or the establishment of this ADIZ, come to that?

[MFC_Fly]

Did you predict the 2001 midair collision with the Chinese fighter, or the establishment of this ADIZ, come to that?

No, ShotOne, you are totaly correct, I didn't.

But likewise I did not predict the mid-air collision between the civilian airliner and the military jet over California in 1971, or the mid-air collision between the civilian airliner and the military jet over Russia in 1981, or the mid-air collision between the civilian airliner and the military aircraft over Libya in 1992, or the one over Iran in 1993, or the one in Syria last year. None of those individual incidents have lead to commercial airlines spending millions on fuel to avoid those areas, so why should a mid-air collision between 2 military aircraft make them do so?

I also did not predict the establishment of the ADIZ's around Canada, India, Japan, Pakistan, Norway, the United Kingdom, South Korea, Taiwan, or the United States of America.

[ShotOne]

Not asking you to predict all the troubles of the world, MPC just pointing out that you have no idea what action the Chinese will take if an airline followed your advice not to file a flight plan as they are demanding. I suspect the least likely option would be "nothing". The one instance we do have to draw on resulted in a fatal midair collision.

[Eclectic]

Some exceptionally good political analysis of the situation:

Search | The Economist

[NorthernKestrel]

One possible scenario simulated here...


A hypothetical East China Sea air combat clash | Aerospace | The Royal Aeronautical Society


NB: is this the same wargame as in the WW3: Battle of Britain thread?

[ORAC]

More Chinese Air ID Zones Predicted

TAIPEI, SEOUL AND TOKYO — China’s establishment of an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) last week over the East China Sea has given the US an unexpected challenge as Vice President Joseph Biden prepares for a trip to China, Japan and South Korea beginning this week. The trip was scheduled to address economic issues, but the Nov. 23 ADIZ announcement raised a troubling new issue for the US and allies in the region. China’s ADIZ overlaps the zones of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

Sources indicate China’s ADIZ could be part of its larger anti-access/area-denial strategy designed to force the US military to operate farther from China’s shorelines. China might also be planning additional identification zones in the South China Sea and near contested areas along India’s border, US and local sources say. China’s ADIZ might be an attempt by Beijing to improve its claim to disputed islands in the East China Sea also claimed by Japan, sources said. These islands — known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China — are under the administrative control of Japan.

Mike Green, senior vice president for Asia and Japan chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said this is part of a larger Chinese strategy beyond disputes over islands. “This should be viewed as a part of a Chinese effort to assert greater denial capacity and eventual pre-eminence over the First Island Chain” off the coast, he said. Green, who served on the US National Security Council from 2001 to 2005, said China’s Central Military Commission in 2008 “promulgated the ‘Near Sea Doctrine,’ and is following it to the letter, testing the US, Japan, Philippines and others to see how far they can push.”

June Teufel Dreyer, a veteran China watcher at the University of Miami, Fla., said “salami slicing” is a large part of China’s strategic policy. “The salami tactic has been stunningly successful, so incremental that it’s hard to decide what Japan, or any other country, should respond forcefully to. No clear ‘red line’ seems to have been established,” Dreyer said. The Chinese refer to it as “ling chi” or “death from a thousand cuts.”.........................

[khaki83]

South Korea debates on expanding it's own ADIZ

Debate on Air Zones Continues in South Korea - Korea Real Time - WSJ

"South Korea on Tuesday continued to debate its response to China’s move to include an area of ocean disputed by the two nations in its own new air-defense identification zone.

On Thursday, South Korea said it would consider extending its own air-defense zone to respond to China’s move after Beijing refused a demand from Seoul to redraw its new zone.

Since then, the issue has been on the agenda at a series of high-level meetings in Korea’s capital as the government considers how to proceed."

[ShotOne]

, At least they haven't carved off huge areas of ocean and declared them "fleet weapons ranges" under de facto military control...yet. As you sow...

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

They are not de facto. Sail through them if you like. The USN will turn up and ask you to move along, but that's as far as it goes. Same for UK sea ranges. In practice, they are hardly ever penetrated when in use, as the times of use are published and almost to a man or woman, mariners appreciate the need for them. Same goes for aircraft.

[ShotOne]

That's simply not the case, fox. If the US navy decide it's active, international waters or not, there's no question of going that way. If that means spending a couple of thousand dollars extra on fuel then it's just tough luck.

"Mariners appreciate the need..." Really? Did anyone ask them?, or aviators for that matter?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

My info on US ranges is secondhand from 3 captains who have done it. About the same from UK ranges. I've done oversea range clearance from the air. We simply waited for boats to clear the area or shifted the area a bit (if possible).
I'm a yacht and aircraft captain. The other skippers I've discussed this issue with have all agreed with the sentiments I expressed.

edit: I believe the MoD do consult with the RYA, etc.

edit 2: just rechecked the regs for a range off Hawaii extending into international waters. What I said originally is the case. If commercial companies choose to go around them, it's their choice.

[ShotOne]

I'll take your word for boating protocol but ATC will in no way allow a flight through an active danger area and disregarding this would be a career limiting move, irrespective of whether any firing was taking place. We're not talking a few square miles off the South coast. Some of the Atlantic fleet ranges cover huge areas. As for consultation, they did exactly as the Chinese did; none at all.

[Lima Juliet]

Fox3

Re: Clear Range Procedures (warning thread drift!)

I can remember doing this off the coast of a well known Mediterrean island. We saw something floating in the sea and found an inflatable lie-low (spelling?) drifting ~20 miles off the coast. After several low passes we decided that the area (and inflatable) was clear and then strafed it within the notified Range and its procedures.

I often wondered if we had missed the fact that there may have been a fat German laying on it waving frantically thinking they were finally to be rescued! No one was reported missing that week having drifted out to sea in the media, so nothing to answer to, thankfully.

So my total 'kills' in the mighty F3 total 3:

1. A Jindivik
2. A Recreational Vehicle
3. An inflatable Lie-Low (sp?)

Quite a haul to be proud of!

LJ

PS. In fact, make that 6, if I include 3x Upland Geese!

[Ronald Reagan]

CrossTalk: China's New March - YouTube