US sends bombers into China ADIZ

China huh? At the last big party some tiny islanders decimated that place, mostly with swords.
 
When I returned from Shanghai earlier this year having been over to talk to an erstwhile manufacturer of commercial aircraft, cough cough, someone asked me for my opinion of the Chinese, I responded:

"Imagine all of the arrogance of the French, with none of the competency."

Everything is big and bright and very impressive, from the outside - but there is an impressive use of facades/false faces to make things look bigger and more impressive than they actually are.

Visiting at length with technical leaders for their aerospace industry all I can say is that Boeing and Airbus have nothing to fear, probably for another 15-20 years.

Back to the military option, we had plans for dealing with the numerical superiority we would have faced against the Soviets in Eastern/Western Europe, both conventional and nuclear plans - I am confident the same exists for China with respect to clashes over South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

'Gimp
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you just credit the French with competency?
Click to expand...
With respect to aviation and aerospace engineering, absolutely. I spent some time supporting Dassault FalconJet a few year ago - very impressive planes, and went to Paris to see parent Dassault a couple times as well - a reasonably well run company making a wide variety of very good aircraft.

It didn't even hurt to say it...:D

'Gimp
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you just credit the French with competency?
Click to expand...

Hey, I fly a French made aircraft! Well laid out. Handles great. My mechanic loves it. He can actually get to what he needs to work on.

Now the Renault LeCar I had in West Germany in high school...another story...all I can say is that it is a good thing that there we only two of us in the whole school with cars.

Jim
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did you just credit the French with competency?
Click to expand...

Actually, as much as some of us like to poke fun (and I do too), the French are incredibly competent with many things including war, they have a war-winning record better than most champion boxers :D
 
Fearless Tower said:
They stop lending us money and we stop buying their crap. For better or worse, our economies are inextricably intertwined.
Click to expand...
Based on observation, I'd say that their tinderbox would go off before ours would in terms of civil unrest if the current status quo changed radically (they stop lending us money vs we stop importing their goods).

They are already struggling significantly with reduced demand/output due to the global recession, we have each other by the short and curlies but they'd flinch before we would - they are one Tiananmen Square away from chaos IMO.

'Gimp
 
Fearless Tower said:
They stop lending us money and we stop buying their crap. For better or worse, our economies are inextricably intertwined.
Click to expand...

No more crap from China, and many businesses here go under. Our economies may be intertwined, but we are dependent on crap from China more than China needs a market for their stuff. Having our economy dependent on a country which views us as their enemy is not exactly a good situation to be in.
 
Last edited:
us AAirways said:
No more crap from China, and many businesses here go under. Our economies may be intertwined, but we are dependent on crap from China more than China needs a market for their stuff. Having our economy dependent on a country which views us as their enemy is not exactly a good situation to be in.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was good. Just pointing out that our two economies are almost entirely dependent on each other. War would be very bad and not in the best interest of either regardless of who wins.

We seen talking about suicidalists like the North Koreans who have nothing to lose.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Um, China may call themselves communist, but they have fully embraced capitalism. They are completely drunk on it.
Click to expand...

Another reason the Chinese will not attack the US or its allies. Who are they gonna sell all that crap they produce too?

You can't be a capitalist without a market.:rolleyes:
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
...
It is MORE of a response than running a P-3 through there. That did not work so well for us last time. They forced it down and it was a big political mess.

Jim
Click to expand...

If by 'forced it down', you mean 'sending up China's version of Tom Cruz to collide with the P-3 while shining his a**'.
 
I'm wondering why they chose a B-52 instead of some other plane.

Was the logic something like this?

As a symbol of strength, a warplane and not a spy plane like the P-3
To avoid a fight, a plane that is mostly defenseless
To make a conspicuous statement, a plane that's really big

Or was the B-52 just the only thing that was readily available that had the range?
 
NoHeat said:
I'm wondering why they chose a B-52 instead of some other plane.

Was the logic something like this?

As a symbol of strength, a warplane and not a spy plane like the P-3
To avoid a fight, a plane that is mostly defenseless
To make a conspicuous statement, a plane that's really big

Or was the B-52 just the only thing that was readily available that had the range?
Click to expand...

Do you really think the B-52s were alone? There were F-15s or F-22s nearby. Besides, the US had to be sure the Chinese would "see" the aircraft on radar and the -52 filled the bill as an offensive weapons system.
 
The Buff's are based in Guam and nothing says power projection without going over the top like 16 TF-33's spinning and smoking.

Bone's or B-2's would have been a true provocaton, if the Chinese had seen them.

Must say, I am pleasantly surprised at this move - would not have expected Dear Leader to do it, but glad he did.

'Gimp
 
Clark1961 said:
Do you really think the B-52s were alone? There were F-15s or F-22s nearby. Besides, the US had to be sure the Chinese would "see" the aircraft on radar and the -52 filled the bill as an offensive weapons system.
Click to expand...

Well, we paid enough for the F-22s out there, might as well let them do one of their design jobs lol.
 
JimNtexas said:
If by 'forced it down', you mean 'sending up China's version of Tom Cruz to collide with the P-3 while shining his a**'.
Click to expand...

Nothing like responding to a post that has already been straightened out to show that you have not read the whole thread! ;)

We hashed this out back in posts 16, 19, & 20, but thanks jumping in! :wink2:
I especially loved the Caution sign in post 20.

(I'm giving you crap about it, but I catch myself doing the same thing all the time. :redface:)

Jim
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
It would not be pretty. Probably why they are sending B-52s. Better not to risk an aircraft carrier.
Click to expand...

Because we don't think they'd launch SAMs? Tactically, that probably isn't the reason.
China could hurt a B-52 very badly, easily.

I suspect he real reason is, since the waters are disputed, the Administration decided plopping a carrier and an entire air wing in there would be viewed as us over-escalating, whereas a bomber in International airspace is easier to defend politically.

Especially considering the general lack of foreign policy expertise in the current Administration, the bombers make more sense to them.

The problem is, a carrier group can probably do a better job of defending itself if shooting were to actually start.

Here's a raise of the glass to the folks flying hicap for the bombers, if the Administration has seen fit to make sure they're up, not just sitting somewhere ready to scramble. And another tip of the hat to the unsung folks... the flying gas station, probably hanging 'round just outside the goofiness area. ;)

And the carrier will eventually be there, if it isn't already. No getting around it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I imagine China's Russian carrier will be there as well. I heard India has the other one, interesting to see where it will be.
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
The GW is busy in the Philippines.

Jim
Click to expand...
True.

The reality of this is that we do this stuff ALL the time with ships and aircraft. It is called Freedom of Navigation ops. The press is just highlighting it because it followed right after the US public response to China's airspace grab.
 
Fearless Tower said:
True.

The reality of this is that we do this stuff ALL the time with ships and aircraft. It is called Freedom of Navigation ops. The press is just highlighting it because it followed right after the US public response to China's airspace grab.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

And a little bit of prodding of the press by the White House to divert some attention. :rolleyes:

Cheers
 
According to either Reuters or Yahoo, B-52s are "Spy Planes"!!! Check the attached screen shot. I bet it was a quality Yahoo headline job. The Reuters article does not mention us Spy Planes...
Or maybe it is because one of the Reuters writers is in Beijing as is required to follow the official Chinese story...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/china-military-sends-air-patrols-defense-zone-033423305.html

Or did I totally misread that?

Jim
 

Attachments

  • US Spy Planes Reuters.jpg
    US Spy Planes Reuters.jpg
    35.5 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
Kiddo's Driver said:
Or did I totally misread that?

Jim
Click to expand...

I think this, but only because of the first line in the article "China scrambled jets on Friday" while the B-52 flight was prior to that. Also, the U.S. "regularly transits" the area. I would actually be surprised if there were not intelligence gathering aircraft of some type in the area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top