Spy Plane : Put it in Chinese Museum
 

Located on the northern edge of Beijing in the Peoples Republic of China is the Chinese Aviation Museum. It is my fervent hope that the American Navy EP3 ends up in this museum and becomes a reminder of the constant intrusion and trespassing that is going on over the South China sea. It would also be a fitting memorial to the patriotism of fighter pilot Wang Wei. Now that the “ born to fly heroes “ ( press quote) are home there is much loud rhetoric of skill and ability. No mention though of the panic that caused a perfectly flyable aircraft to be flung onto the nearest available airfield.

KIFIS

Lets put it into perspective here eh, you have a Navy aircraft carrying 24 souls on board with 2 jets either side of it, do you really believe that the EP3 played dodgems in the sky against the 2 jets, I think not.

OK there is an argument why were they there in the first place but there is no doubt in my mind that the dumb ass chinese pilot got too close for his own good and here is the result.

Made me laugh when the crew were relaesed because then the apology was withdrawn and quite rightly so.

Who cares what they do with the EP3 most of the intelligence was withdrawn anyway and the rest of it the chinese probably already knew so who cares a toss.

In my mind the chinese are full of crap, and are going the right way about making life difficult for themselves, because they need the US more than the US needs them.

------------------
Better to be up there wishing you were down here than be down here wishing you were up there!

Deeko1
Well wouldn't I just love to pull up outside your house with a pair of binoculars and a listening device. Wonder how long it would be before you came out and smacked me in the mouth!

The Yanks made a big issue out of this and the poor Chinese made to look bad for all the wrong reasons.
Yes the crew should have been returned immediately (to ease/maintain diplomatic relations)but the plane should be seized. I hope the Chinese get a lot out it.

KIFIS - Haven't forgotten the code! Hope to pick up a book to help in HKG early next month.

[This message has been edited by Icarus (edited 18 April 2001).]

Icarus,

People all over America have scanners to listen in on cellphones and parabolic mikes. We don't mind at all, we simply buy better technology to protect us from it. We don't run out in the street and punch em in the mouth, and we don't ram their cars with our cars. If a cop saw me going down the street at 60 miles an hour tailgating another car by 3 feet, with today's roadrage laws I would arrested for reckless endangerment and quite possibly attempted murder.

We buy DIGITAL cellular phones and cordless phones instead of anolog. We put up firewalls on our computers, and we go on with our life.

We don't rush 60 miles off shore and attempt to murder 24 people.

China was required to allow that aircraft to land under international law. Their objection to it landing just proves that they follow no law and deserve to be treated like a rogue state.

Not much better than Iran, and maybe worse because not only are they proving to be outlaws, but they are stealing jobs, intelectual property and technology as well.

Cheers
Wino

[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 18 April 2001).]

Still don't understand why the chinese got that much upset about the whole thing.
How can they expect to get future support from the U.S. in any (political, economical, cultural/sports) way? Reminds me of the most stupid cold war rituals. Wonder if they ever return the plane. Likely that Taiwan will get more U.S. aid now.

Kifis, being an Australian, I would suggest that you have more to fear from the Chinese than your provocative post suggests. It is quite clear that China has large expansionist ideas and without the restraining influence of the US would certainly have invaded Taiwan by now. Do you really think that they would stop there?

The loss of the spy plane is no big deal, it's all part of the game. However, China's petulant attitude is. If they want to play with the big boys and join the rest of the civilized world then it is about time they did some growing up.

From what I understand the EP3 crew said that the Chinese pilot saluted them before gesturing for their aircraft to move away. To me that would suggest a certain amount of respect from one military organisation to another.

It's a shame that the US was cracking open the yellow-ribbon and missing-hero boxes so early on in the game. I suppose Bush would have sent a Chinese spyplane and crew back home immediately, no questions asked. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Back in the bad old days the russians used the crews they caught to mine salt...i think we got off lucky

Kolsman and Waxenwings, please tell us that your either wind up merchants or Chinese.

KIFIS,

Hey, if the Chinese had nothing to hide, they wouldn't be so concerned - right?

The Americans, French, Japanese, Australians, Mexicans, etc. have the right to fly any aircraft they want in international waters - that right is extended to anyone who wants to fly 12 miles off the coast of the US as well.
Only a blind idiot couldn't see that the Chinese pilot was incredibly reckless and cocky in his ludicrous actions. Have you seen the video of the very same pilot waving a piece of paper with his email address from his plane (the same identification number as the aircraft that crashed) on a previous reckless interception? Video proof of his recklessness - do you think they show that video on Chinese TV? No chance in hell...

The Chinese are guilty of taking hostages in a crisis they created themselves. What a joke!

Yeah, I'd like to see the Chinese fighter pilots try to do the same thing with a U.S. Navy F-18. It's easy to beat-up on a slower, bigger turboprop. I bet the F-18 pilot would teach the Chinese pilot some manners over international waters...

KFIS, if you are not a wind up you are truly a sad, sad, credulous dupe.

"Trespassing, intrusion, patriotism" indeed!

Your profile shows you to be a retired airline pilot. I wonder how you've got through a career like that without understanding concepts like "international waters", "international airspace", "piracy", good airmanship and the necessity for the free world to protect itself from dangerous maverick regimes cuch as the ludicrously misnamed "Peoples" "Republic" of China. Two lies for the price of none if ever there was one!

KFIS, your "patriotic" Wang Wei was a pretty poor example of a fighter pilot, he clearly let his temper/emotions get in the way of his flying as evidenced by the film of his idiotic behaviour waving bits of paper in the recently released film from Uncle Sam. Eventually he allowed the red mist to take over so much that he caused a mid air collision by flying into a lumbering old 1950s transport aeroplane in his super maneuverable fighter...! I wouldnt want a muppet like that in my squadron, even if it was a bicycle unit. Wang Wei was evidently an inept, unprofessional hot head and got what he deserved for perpetrating aerial piracy. Serve him right.

And you claim to believe the Chinese propaganda??

Open eyes, engage brain mate.

Omigod!

Wino, I understand china was required to allow the aircraft to land under international law but didn't the U.S refuse to allow a Canadian aircraft permission to land because it had departed Cuba.

Piston broke and LAVDUMPER

It is obvious that you two gentlemen do not understand patriotism and it is equally obvious that you are not made from the same clay as Wang Wei. You might care to know that as a long time pilot (and with fighter time behind me) I would feel very very comfortable with Wang Wei (or his ilk) tucked up close as my wingman. I salute his memory. (As will one quarter of the world population honour him tomorrow.)

KIFIS

P.S. As regards the F8 versus the F-18 I’d like to see that too. The problem is that if you managed to arrange a one on one the Americans would turn up with six.

Icarus

Good to see a cool head and some intelligent reasoning.
I haven't had any success with the Chinese code. Every avenue I've explored has brought up a " Too hard ". People shy off when they see the date 1910. Appreciate your efforts.

Regards,

KIFIS

Porpoise.

Not that I am aware of.

Wino

KIFIS,

It is obvious you have not seen the video showing your favorite pilot "hotdogging" or flying recklessly-close in previous interceptions. The video is shown quite frequently here in the States - where the media is not controlled by the government.
The Chinese government has reason to surpress this video because it demonstrates how cocky and wild that pilot was - and that would destroy the Chinese "rally cry."

KIFIS, your bio claims that you were a former pilot. You are supposed to be familiar with concepts like "international airspace" and flying "professionally" vs. flying "provocatively." Do you honestly believe that a large, defenseless turboprop would act aggressively toward more-nimble Chinese fighters? Do you really? I can't tell if this post is a wind-up or not...

Do yourself a favor and check out CNN.com - you can find online videos of your esteemed Chinese pilot - pictures of him flying in a reckless manner (flying so close to another P-3 that you can see the hand-written sign he held-up in the cockpit showing his own email address - is that nuts?). Wow - what a great reason to be proud of him - he was a cocky pilot who endangered the lives of others over international waters...

This post really must be a wind-up. Or, it shows just how little of the truth the Chinese people are actually "given" by the Chinese government. Surely, just watching the video alone would demonstrate that this pilot had a history of flying in a wild manner. The Chinese pilot was a reckless jerk who was 100% responsible for the incident, case closed. Not so honorable, I would think...



[This message has been edited by LAVDUMPER (edited 19 April 2001).]

Porpoise, you're comparing apples and oranges. I don't think the Canuk aircraft in question had both its radome and pitot tube missing and two of its engines shut down. Neiither do I think its crew were declaring a mayday at the time.

-----

As for the person who opened this thread with, among other ridiculous comments, the following: "No mention though of the panic that caused a perfectly flyable aircraft to be flung onto the nearest available airfield."

Hmmmm... So, after suffering a midair collision of unknown severity, where his aircraft:
- fell, uncontrolled, some 8000 feet
- suffered who knows what degree of overstress in the radical recovery he was forced to make,
- lost two engines, or 50% of his power plants,
- suffered a depressurisation, implying to the most inexperienced pilot that the aircraft might have suffered God only knows what degree of structural damage,
- lost its radome, (To the uninitiated, this alone, with none of the other problems, would have had a massive effect on the aircraft's handling, performance and specific air range.)
- lost its pitot system, (Again, for those not familiar with the term, this would have left the pilot without an airspeed indicator, [a minor matter to an ace like KIFIS].) I know, I know, he probably had a still serviceable INS...
- suffered damage to the flap system, (making a landing with no IAS even more interesting, to say nothing of a potential ditching, which is what he risked in turning for more 'friendly' territory).

I understand you call yourself a retired airline pilot, KIFIS. I'd love to see a potted history of your airline/fighter pilot ummm... career. I also understand you're an Australian. Rubbish the Yanks as mush as you like, but if you are an Australian, be very, very glad they're there "meddling" in the affairs of countries like China. Such "meddling" might keep you and your children speaking English into their old age.


[This message has been edited by Wiley (edited 19 April 2001).]

KIFIS, if you need to worship Wang Wei's memory go here :

http://sg.netor.com/m/box200104/m60.asp?BoardID=60

Please don't come back.

Regards,

X-QUORK.

I am just a pilot, not a politician nor a diplomat, so I'll leave out the discussion whether the EP3 was in "international Airspace" or not. I truly believe it was an accident. Could it have caused by the Chinese pilot or by the American pilots, we don't know for sure. As yet, there is no proof from the FDRs or other means to confirm or dispute the claim from either side. Regardless as to whose fault it was, no sane pilot will intentionally ram his/her plane against another plane, and size does not matter in anycase.

Hey KIFIS,

Like someone else said, open eyes and engage brain.

Do you honestly believe the Chinese propaganda? China is a rogue nation, operating entirely outside international law. They have no regard for human rights, including yours.

Does it ever occur to you, that by having EP-3's do surveillance flights we are keeping this rabid dog on a very short leash. Probably not. United States, trhought their armed forces, is providing a stabilizing force in the world. You may not like it or find it incomprehensible, but United States will continue to do so. If China was such a peaceloving nation, then why object to overflights, why continue to build ICBM's?

United States is being kept at gunpoint by the Chinese, we are their biggest trading partner, bar none, without the American market, China would be in big dodo. So as much as we would like to put sanctions on them, it is not a viable option. So not only is the United States watching the Chinese making sure they play "nice", we are also paying them for it.

D8

Smith,

I appreciate your opinion. However, this pilot, Wang Wei, had a history of reckless flying and "hotdogging" - I have seen multiple photos and videos (CNN) showing his aircraft (and yes, his ID# has been confirmed) literally a meter or two off of the wing of another P3 cruising in international waters. There is absolutely no excuse for flying that close to a large, slow turboprop. Why not fly 30 meters off the wing? - you make the same point that way...

I don't understand why it is so difficult for people to contemplate the only rational explanation in this case - Wang Wei had a wild history and was reckless - he needlessly flew too close to the P3 and caused a collision that led to an international incident. He had flown too close before, and this time it bit him in the a$$. If I were a Chinese citizen and I had "free" access to this story through the press, I'd be pretty embarrassed - I wouldn't be glorifying a cocky, reckless individual like Wang Wei. But given that so much disinformation has been propogated by the government, most Chinese will NEVER know and instead view him as a martyr. Talk about manipulation of peoples' minds... I'm sure most Chines people still believe that the P3 intentionally collided with the fighter and then forcably landed at an airbase on Hainan - does that make any sense to you? It apparently does to a number of Chinese interviewed on TV... Never any mention in the Chinese press of the 8-10 "mayday" calls from the P3 pilot as the P3 limped to the airbase. I wonder why?

I feel sorry that a pilot had to die in this case, but you need to give credit when credit is due... Not in this case.

KIFIS,
the most important bit of information I gleaned from all your interesting entries is that you are "retired." Thank goodness.

Intersting thread, definitely

In 1978, during one of the biggest NATO exercise war, 2 lybian migs 21 (or 23) decided to tease the allied defences. As soon as they showed up on the NATO radar screens, all of the NATO fighters(hundreds were airborne) around locked their toys on the 2 bogeys.
The lybians flew toward a DC9, and hided below for a couple of minutes, until they dived toward the sea trying to fly back toward the lybian shores.
As soon as they left the peaceful DC9, the hunt was engaged, and one of the NATO jockey (nationality still unknwon) who was probably a bit "trigger happy", fired one of his missile, which hit the DC9, nobody survived ...
to add to the realism of the battlefield, all navaids were jammed, and lot of civilian A/C were lost or off track (that was the case of the DC9)

More recently, I remember an intruder trying to "intercept" an UFO, full of tourists, wearing skiing clothes, over italia ...hopefully the US crew survived.(hero never dies)

It's interesting to note that in this both cases, most of the victims are civilians, and not from enemy countries

I am not saying that all NATO or US pilots are stupid, but it seems some are also reckless and can't resist a bit of "show off".
Stupidity is equally shared by any nation.

And I totally agree with KIFIS, this EP3 will look fantastic in the people's museum !

------------------
[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

[This message has been edited by PorcoRosso (edited 19 April 2001).]

The Chinese TV shows the damage to the P3 and the conclusion is that the P3 turned toward the F8, striking it from behind. For proof, they show that the damage on the left prop is on the forward face of the prop, and there is no mark on the rear. The antenna on the left wing is bent back, not forward, and the marks on the fuselage from the F8 stab shows that the P3 was running over the F8. This info may or may not show what they claim, but even if it does, the airplane formating has the duty to keep clear, and the F8 should have been able to avoid the bigger airplane, even at the low speed when it would be presumed the fighter would have had limited maneuverability. The Chinese airplane should have stayed clear even if the P3 had tried to "run them down".
Nevertheless it is damaging stuff; if they are right, how much else are they right about? It will be interesting to hear the spin the "US Side" puts on this.

I have read this thread and the other thread on the F-8/P-3 incident with great interest. Sorry to say I have a hard time believing that some people who appear to be fairly intelligent are buying into the dribble the Chinese Government is spouting. First that the P-3 rammed the poor F-8. Secondly that the United States had no business having a military aircraft near China in international airspace over international water. How vehemently anti-American does one have to be to believe the garbage that the Chinese are saying?

I think that a lot of people don't quite understand what the Chinese press (strictly government controlled) is making all the fuss about. They are not making these false, if not outright laughable, incredibly stupid press releases to try to shape world opinion. The Chinese government must publish these type press releases to keep their own people under control. The Chinese could really give a rat's butt about world opinion (well up to a point). Under the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) style of government there cannot be any type of free press, what so ever, period. There also must be a common enemy so that the oppressed citizens of China has their hate focused outward rather than inward against their own oppressive government.

Many other people here at PPRUNE has made many excellent posts about the oppression of the PRC against the average Chinese citizens, and I will not repeat them. I also do understand the average Chinese has been oppressed all throughout history, but that is no excuse in today's enlightened era of communication and global electronic information highways. We the subscribers and users of PPRUNE are proof of the previous statement. PPRUNers share ideas, ideals, philosophy and thoughts from around the world. Wither one is posting in the forums or in the chat rooms one is exchanging with people from all around the world. PPRUNE is just a small (but the best) aviation web site in an unimaginably huge world of Internet communication. But one has to ask a question, how many PPRUNers are from the PRC? As a matter of fact, for you people that surf the World Wide Web, have you ever communicated with an average citizen of the PRC? That was a serious question, I would really like to know.

It is obvious that there is e-mail available to some of the citizens of the PRC. The U.S. Navy film of the Chinese pilot Wei trying to give his e-mail address to another P-3 crew is proof of that. As a matter of fact I feel very sorry about the loss of Wei, it looks like he might have been trying to open up some lines of communications with his fellow pilots from the free world. I also have to wonder what will become of his widow and family now the PRC government has proof that Wei was trying to e-mail U.S. Navy pilots and crewmembers. Sadly we may never know.

The analogy of someone standing on the street looking into some one's home just doesn't hold water. It is an extremely over simplification of the complex world we live in today. Intelligence information gathering activity must maintained by all the free societies of the world against those societies who would oppress the free. It may not be pretty, it may not be nice and it is definitely not PC, but it must be maintained. Sometimes these intelligence information agencies overstep their bounds. When they do, it is the freedom that we who live in free societies enjoy that can and does put them back into their place. When the PRC overstep their bounds who can take them to task? Not the average Chinese citizen, that's for sure.

The Unites States is afraid of China, and we should be. The PRC is a nuclear power, they have the power to take out Japan, South Korea, Thailand, just to mention a few. Let me pose this question? If China invaded Thailand and backed up the invasion with the threat of the use of nuclear weapons would the rest of the free world go to war to free Thailand? My guess is probably not. What about Japan? Hopefully this will never happen. Throughout history China has never been overly aggressive in conquering territories that has not been theirs. It is mandatory that the free world keep tabs on these countries that do not allow the free exchange of information. Some one must have the desire, will and capabilities to undertake these responsibilities. As there is only one super power left in the world, it obviously has to be the United States. Hell, if was left up to me I'd let the French do it. No more Pearl Harbors, the world can't afford it in this day and age.

We who are lucky to live in truly free societies with a free press sometime, justifiably so in certain cases, get very mad at some of the inaccuracies we read and hear about. But, I would much rather live in a country that has a free press that occasionally gets the facts wrong as compared to living in an oppressive country with no free press.

Ok, off the soapbox. I'm going to go have a few beers.

Kifis
certainly agree with your comments..ie 6x1,thats the game they play...but barring nationalites,politics,and the fact that both sides have their fair share of w*****s...what happened to the code of "least manuverable aircraft has the right of way"..to my knowledge,the yanks/chinese arent at war yet...kapai

lavdumper
tell me...in your infinite wisdom,have the yanks ever been guilty of hotdogging etc etc...I flew in alaska for many years,you are probably familiar with "Galena",I flew into the civilian airstrip many times and talked to a lot of the pilots that were stationed in this"high alert" airfield....unless they were blowing smoke up my bottom,they had some bloody good stories themselves....the yanks are just as guilty of these tactics as the chinese...if you believe that the military in the usa tells you all...then you have been sucking on to many lollie-pops...kapai

Conny, thanks for injecting some sense into this f*****g piece of crap.

KIFIS,

First of all, I don't believe that the Chinese have ever claimed that the EP-3 was in their territorial waters, although technically they claim the whole China Sea as their waters.

You also mention stacking up the Chinese F8 against the U.S. F18, unless you mean the U.S. F8 -- the time-honored Corsair of the 60s and the 70s.

The Chinese designation for this particular interceptor is the J8 which has inferior everything on it. They tried to pump it up with some advanced radar and INS for an export version and called it an F8.

Well, if they are using their own export version for home defense, that just goes to show you that nobody was willing to put any money down on the F8.

And as far as Wang Wei is concerned, he certainly flew the "Wrong Way."

I have 'held my tongue' over pointing out to Roc that 'we got a result' in apologizing to China and getting the crew back pronto.

Having read this thread and the fact that the PRC fighters 'hot-dogged' the EP3 - this goes with the territory and the USAF/USN/USMC guys never do it do they.

They also, historically, have had quite a deal of success in shooting down their own people eg Pair of Blackhawks in Turkey to name but a recent one.

Surely isn't this the same 'gung-ho' spirit, but its only wrong when someone else does it?

Come on boys, get real. The USAF/CIA/RAF and probably others I don't know about regularly (and I believe for valid reasons) infringed and damn well violated sovereign countries' airspace. Don't whinge like school kids who have had the ice cream knocked off their cones if it goes wrong from time to time. It really does go with the territory.

Roc thought that an 'apology' would have been a 'slap in the face' for the US Military. A damn sight worse one would have been action like the aborted Iranian Hostage Rescue which went to absolute rat**** and gave the US Specials quite a bad rep for years.

Which is worse.

Bugger the EP 3, there probably isn't a secret left in the damn thing anyway, scrap it and save a lot of hot air being pumped. Its not a symbol, its an old airframe thats been stripped to the bone - why not make it into a Chinese Restaurant, or even a Hamburger Joint?

Con-pilot: Concur!

pakeha-boy: Concur

LAVDUMPER: All fighter pilots fly the same way. They are aggressive, eager to win, and sometimes, down right hostile but they are not malicious. If you have been a fighter pilot, you will know what I mean. Was Wang Wei a reckless pilot? I don’t know. I never saw his flying. Was he flying too close? He probably was. Did he make a mistake by flying too close? Probably. But do we have proof that he made the mistake? No, because it is the other Chinese pilot’s words against the American pilots’ words and that’s exactly my point. In any accident, we rely on proper authority such as NTSB to investigate the accidents and draw the conclusions. It’s been said many times here on pprune, do not speculate.

Now, here is my version of the story. The night before Wang was killed, his superior gave him a copy of the movie “Top Gun”. Wang was told by his superior to review and evaluate the flying techniques of the American. He watched the movie numerous times and learnt the different techniques used by the US Navy in dogfight and communications. Neither Wang nor his superior knew that “Top Gun” was only a movie produced by the Hollywood. The next day, Wang went flying and he intercepted a US spy plane. He remembered the scene where Tom Cruise went inverted and gave his middle finger to the Russian pilot. The Russian pilot broke off the engagement immediately and flew home. Wang thought that was a standard US Navy signal to tell the bandit to go home, so he slowed down his plane and flew within feet (or metres) to the US spy plane cockpit. Before Wang could go inverted and give the finger, his plane was hit by the propellers of the US spy plane. Wang’s plane broke into pieces and Wang was knocked unconscious by the handheld GPS that was velcroed to his control column when he ejected from the plane. His parachute opened and landed safely into the South China Sea. A Chinese fishing boat picked him up and he was taken to the police in China. Wang lost all his memory and could not describe his ordeal to the Chinese police. The Chinese police thought Wang was a spy from Taiwan and was trying to sneak into China. Wang is now imprisoned somewhere near Tibet.


[This message has been edited by smith (edited 19 April 2001).]

You have to be kidding me.

You don't seriously advocate that a nuclear power gets its rules of engagement from a scene in Hollywood?

China is a nuclear power, they have a duty to act in a responsible way, especially during intercepts. That is how misunderstandings are avoided. There is no way that china could have been following protocol and been rammed by a P3 even if the p3's crew life depended on hitting the chinese fighter.

More importantly we thought they wanted to be friends. After all they want to be a most favored nation. If it was a british plane we would have sent the crew home, had our crew landed in a british base they would have been repatriated immediately.

We needed china as a buffer against the Soviets, that is why Nixon went to china. We don't NEED china at all anymore, if they want to act like enemies, fine lets be enemies. Lets atleast be honest about it.

That is what no one is getting here.

Cheers
Wino

[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 19 April 2001).]

smith,

Great story. I've always had the suspicion that "Wrong Way" Wang did surface after the collision and is now actually having his butt kicked by People's Air Force. Something we'll never know.

Seriously, has anyone caught a statement from his "Wing Wang" about actually seeing a chute deployed, or did he Roman candle? Anybody?

If china is the big bad buggerman that so many here point out, howcome they (still) are "the most favorite trading partner" of the US.

Maybe there never was an incident, maybe Bush just needed a divertion, just like daddy did in Kuwait.

Maybe this is like the brilliant movie "wag the dog"

Maybe this post is a windup

Brgds
Doc

DocBus,

If the United States does not continue to trade with China, what do you think would happen?

I give you one guess and no, you cannot poll the audience!

D8

[This message has been edited by Diesel8 (edited 21 April 2001).]

Doc

You sound like a bitter democrat to me. Get over it, Gore even lost the recount.

Paterbrat:

Wind up no, Chinese no, Australian yes, ( many generations Anglo Saxon). I liked your reference to Kolsman and Waxenwings. Very perceptive!!

To All:

May I suggest that you gentlemen who hurl abuse and use the word “ cowboy “ so freely go back to page 2 here and read the excellent post by PorcoRosso. He mentions the destruction of the DC-9 and its occupants and the ski run killings. He leaves out the bombing of the Chinese Embassy and the deaths it caused, the killing of the New Zealand officer and the killing of the Japanese fishermen. Perhaps the users of this word “ cowboy “ would care to give me a simple definition of what it means ?

KIFIS

All these Anti-Chinese sentiments.

You read on these US media exaggerate the threat from China, and all you lot beleive them.
Actually there are public opinion in China, its not like the totalitarian state in the 1950s , much as changed and if you have never been to China and only listen to USA opinion of China, its not surprising that you are misled.

J-8 is armed with Python-3 cloned missiles.
Not surprising the USA has ICBMs as well, one of the largest nuclear missile stockpile.
Developing JSF, just commissioned USS Winston Churchill, Airborne laser weapon developments,
You lot are a bunch of hypocrites.
Of course USA fears Cina, it is on the rise.

As for comparing China to rogue states, this just shows alot of ignorance.
Taiwan is the issue and USA should not interfere.

KIFIS/Sigma - Hear! Hear!

Today is a good day.

Today I realise how lucky I was not be born in the USA (United States of Arrogance!).

Icarus,

Hey, we Americans are glad you weren't born here too. It's obvious you are jealous of America and, as a result, openly hostile toward it. No need to defend yourself on this one - you will only embarrass yourself further... America's foreign policy is irrelevant - it is easy to hide behind anti-American views. Icarus takes the easy route and slams America versus debating the true issue - whether Wang Wei is culpable - and we know the answer to that - he is 100% responsible.

In any case, back to the main point of this ridiculous post. Wang Wei had a self-inflated ego and enjoyed "showing off." In one example, he waived a sign from the cockpit of his close-flying fighter showing his email address (is that either professional or diplomatic?). He was too reckless and too aggressive.

Smith - I know that fighter pilots tend to be aggressive, and interceptions are all about "intimidation," but flying within 3-5 feet of the P3's wing is a bit too close - it's dangerous and stupid. The P3 had already initiated a departure from the area and shouldn't have been perceived as a threat (it was leaving the area and was far beyond any Chinese boundaries). Why continue to "hotdog" like that? The P3 was on autopilot and was not aggressive - the collision was caused by Wang Wei. I don't care what Wang Wei's wingman had to say about it - he would be unlikely to implicate his wild wingman - it's better to glorify him from his standpoint so that he himself is not implicated. Is that too difficult to understand? Any rational people out there disagree?

I am finished commenting on this post. The pervasive irrationality is beginning to tire me. How blind and/or stupid can people be? The Chinese government continues to dispense misinformation about a lunatic pilot who endangered the lives of 24 Americans who were legally flying in international waters. Wang Wei's reckless history has been documented - there can be no argument over that (I have seen the videos - most Chinese people will never see them). People who can't understand this issue are either misinformed, stupid, or drug-induced. Bringing in ideas related to America's foreign policy just obscures the point - a reckless pilot caused the collision - that's the point. If you disagree, just consider what the result would have been had Wang Wei flown 15 feet off the wing versus 3-5 feet - nothing would have happened and we
would be welcoming China into the WTO - like brothers... We should thank Wang Wei for demonstrating his "cool" flying skills and derailing US-China foreign relations in the process. Increased trade between the two countries would benefit both sides significantly - Wang Wei has ended up hurting his own country's opportunity to accelerate economic improvement. Great job!

People are entitled to their own opinions. But, as Clint Eastwood used to say, "Opinions are like a$$holes, everybody's got one..."