In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
hands for full examination
(for fuller background, read the below).

If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
in the open ocean, what were the chances of
the 24 crew surviving?

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/157-157/3730-the-online-threat
Annals of National Security
The Online Threat
Should we be worried about a cyber war?
by Seymour M. Hersh
November 1, 2010
On April 1, 2001, an American EP-3E Aries II reconnaissance plane on an
eavesdropping mission collided with a Chinese interceptor jet over the South
China Sea, triggering the first international crisis of George W. Bush's
Administration. The Chinese jet crashed, and its pilot was killed, but the
pilot of the American aircraft, Navy Lieutenant Shane Osborn, managed to
make an emergency landing at a Chinese F-8 fighter base on Hainan Island,
fifteen miles from the mainland. Osborn later published a memoir, in which
he described the "incessant jackhammer vibration" as the plane fell eight
thousand feet in thirty seconds, before he regained control.

The plane carried twenty-four officers and enlisted men and women attached
to the Naval Security Group Command, a field component of the National
Security Agency. They were repatriated after eleven days; the plane stayed
behind ----

"Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> "a425couple" > wrote:
>>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
>>hands for full examination.
>>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
>>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
>>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
>>the 24 crew surviving?
>
> What a question. If you are in a head-on collision with another car
> what are your chances of surviving?

I'm sorry you do not like it.

> They range from 0% to 100%, don't they?

The reason I asked it on these newsgroups, is that I thought
there might be some who could give historical information
to pin it down better than "from 0% to 100%".

He was able to control it well enough to fly it 70 miles
and land it at an airport (Red Chinese).
Have any Orions been 'ditched' i.e. controled landings
on water?

> If he ditched well the thing should have floated long enough
> for the crew to take to the dinghies. Thereafter it would have been a
> case of how far away (and how competent) was the rescue. If he made a
> dog's mess of the ditching they could have all gone down with it.
> It's a low-wing aircraft so it should ditch fairly well and float well
> too. Sea-state permitting of course. A reasonably competent pilot
> should have been able to handle it if he sea was playing along.
> Eugene L Griessel

On Oct 28, 7:37*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
> "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> > *"a425couple" > wrote:
> >>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
> >>hands for full examination.
> >>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
> >>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
> >>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
> >>the 24 crew surviving?
>
> > What a question. *If you are in a head-on collision with another car
> > what are your chances of surviving? *
>
> I'm sorry you do not like it.
>
> > They range from 0% to 100%, don't they? *
>
> The reason I asked it on these newsgroups, is that I thought
> there might be some who could give historical information
> to pin it down better than "from 0% to 100%".
>
> He was able to control it well enough to fly it 70 miles
> and land it at an airport (Red Chinese).
> Have any Orions been 'ditched' *i.e. controled landings
> on water?
>
>
>
> > If he ditched well the thing should have floated long enough
> > for the crew to take to the dinghies. *Thereafter it would have been a
> > case of how far away (and how competent) was the rescue. *If he made a
> > dog's mess of the ditching they could have all gone down with it.
> > It's a low-wing aircraft so it should ditch fairly well and float well
> > too. *Sea-state permitting of course. *A reasonably competent pilot
> > should have been able to handle it if he sea was playing along.
> > Eugene L Griessel- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

yes, one did -- all (or nearly all) of the enlisted aircrew died when
they went down in the Northern Pacific. The fallout for that event
was the requirement that all enlisted aircrews go to survival schools
and get some training before they end up in a raft (prior to that, it
was possible to bootstrap into aircrew status and not necessarily go
through the aircrew pipeline that would include all that).

The P-3 is not a very good platform for ditching -- relatively short
wings, long tail that would likely pitch you forward if you trying
aero-braking in surface effect at the final moment -- I wouldn't do
it. Personally, I would have had the crew bail out over land, radio
the Chinese that the aircraft was not controllable at slow speeds and
aim it for the nearest mountain. Reverse engineering doesn't work
well with melted aluminum.

During my very limited time on P-3s (14 months), we had one really
exciting flight that lasted less than half an hour, trying to get all
the way airborne in a 3-engine, overloaded Orion on a 90-degree day.
We skimmed the lagoon, flying between ships on our way out to sea,
hoping we could get it all in hand. Eventually, we got everything
sorted out, but in the meantime, we discussed ditching and ruled it
out -- we prepared for ditching but the likelihood was that we
wouldn't make it, so it was more "prepare to crash -- get out as best
you can and good luck" as opposed to "get the raft after we settle
into the water".

In a similar situation (balky helicopter nearing the point of falling
out of the sky) we had the choice to land on a Soviet aircraft carrier
(Novorosiisk) or ditching in the Northern Pacific -- the two pilots
voted for landing on the Soviet ship, delivering an intact modern
(cof) ASW helo into our enemies hands. My rather loud dissenting vote
was that we should crash it into the bridge of the Novoro (we had
intel that Admiral Gorchkov was on board - the modern era's version of
Admiral Doenitz or Isoroku Yamamoto), or anything else but to give it
to the damn Russians. Fate intervened -- our tiny frigate realized
we were off the radio and likely in trouble and had doubled back to
reach us. We got aboard, barely, and the helicopter never flew
again.

Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. I
was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..

v/r Gordon

"Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> "a425couple" > wrote:
>>"Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
>>> "a425couple" > wrote:
>>>>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
>>>>hands for full examination.
>>>>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
>>>>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
>>>>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
>>>>the 24 crew surviving?
>>>
>>> What a question. If you are in a head-on collision with another car
>>> what are your chances of surviving?
>>
>>I'm sorry you do not like it.
>>> They range from 0% to 100%, don't they?
>>The reason I asked it on these newsgroups, is that I thought
>>there might be some who could give historical information
>>to pin it down better than "from 0% to 100%".
>
> Explain how anyone could do that?
> No matter how many prior successful ditchings have occurred you have
> no way of knowing the one you are heading into will be survivable.
> You can console yourself with prior statistics until you are blue in
> the face but you will not know until you either survive or otherwise.
> Each ditching is in a way unique - just as most crash-landings are.
> People have walked away from mangled twisted burning wreckage without
> a crease in their trousers and others have been killed when the
> aircraft appears undamaged. I recall a Spitfire making a controlled
> wheels down "crash-landing" on a long stretch of sandy beach due to
> engine failure. Ideal, but at the very last the thing tipped up -
> and the pilot having loosened his harness for a quick getout was
> thrown out of the cockpit and his head contacted the only rock in 1/2
> a mile in any direction. Those days they still wore leather helmets
> otherwise he might have survived. The aircraft was righted, the engine
> problem repaired and it was flown back to base - not even the prop was
> damaged. The pilot however had a load of mush in a leather helmet
> where his head used to be.
>
>>He was able to control it well enough to fly it 70 miles
>>and land it at an airport (Red Chinese).
>>Have any Orions been 'ditched' i.e. controled landings
>>on water?

Is something else going on with you today Eugene?
(From reading a question to launching a criticism in 12 minutes!?)

> Explain how anyone could do that?

Odds and probabilities.
That is how most of us make many decisions each
and every day. Yes, every action MIGHT result in
disaster. But we still get out and do things.
But we do try to do things in a reasonable manner
to increase the odds of a reasonable outcome.
And this is even more important when something
has already gone badly wrong.

Even with your logic, and example. By the same token
Osborn trying to land at the airport could have gone
very wrong and killed everyone.
He considered odds and probabilities.
What likely were some of the prior facts that he considered in
his calculations?

{ 'No matter how many prior successful *
* insert choice of
sail boatings / sports car races / vacations / rock climbs
have occurred you have no way of knowing the one you are
heading into will be survivable. You can console yourself with prior
statistics until you are blue in the face but you will not know until
you either survive or otherwise.' }

"Gordon" > wrote in message...
- "a425couple" > wrote:
-> "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
-> > "a425couple" > wrote:
-> >>In 2001 a US (big snip)
-Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
-but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
-obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
-must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. I
-was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
-v/r Gordon

Thank you Gordon.

On 28 Oct, 16:31, Gordon > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 7:37*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> > > *"a425couple" > wrote:
> > >>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
> > >>hands for full examination.
> > >>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
> > >>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
> > >>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
> > >>the 24 crew surviving?
>
> > > What a question. *If you are in a head-on collision with another car
> > > what are your chances of surviving? *
>
> > I'm sorry you do not like it.
>
> > > They range from 0% to 100%, don't they? *
>
> > The reason I asked it on these newsgroups, is that I thought
> > there might be some who could give historical information
> > to pin it down better than "from 0% to 100%".
>
> > He was able to control it well enough to fly it 70 miles
> > and land it at an airport (Red Chinese).
> > Have any Orions been 'ditched' *i.e. controled landings
> > on water?
>
> > > If he ditched well the thing should have floated long enough
> > > for the crew to take to the dinghies. *Thereafter it would have been a
> > > case of how far away (and how competent) was the rescue. *If he made a
> > > dog's mess of the ditching they could have all gone down with it.
> > > It's a low-wing aircraft so it should ditch fairly well and float well
> > > too. *Sea-state permitting of course. *A reasonably competent pilot
> > > should have been able to handle it if he sea was playing along.
> > > Eugene L Griessel- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> yes, one did -- all (or nearly all) of the enlisted aircrew died when
> they went down in the Northern Pacific. *The fallout for that event
> was the requirement that all enlisted aircrews go to survival schools
> and get some training before they end up in a raft (prior to that, it
> was possible to bootstrap into aircrew status and not necessarily go
> through the aircrew pipeline that would include all that).
>
> The P-3 is not a very good platform for ditching -- relatively short
> wings, long tail that would likely pitch you forward if you trying
> aero-braking in surface effect at the final moment -- *I wouldn't do
> it. *Personally, I would have had the crew bail out over land, radio
> the Chinese that the aircraft was not controllable at slow speeds and
> aim it for the nearest mountain. *Reverse engineering doesn't work
> well with melted aluminum.
>
> During my very limited time on P-3s (14 months), we had one really
> exciting flight that lasted less than half an hour, trying to get all
> the way airborne in a 3-engine, overloaded Orion on a 90-degree day.
> We skimmed the lagoon, flying between ships on our way out to sea,
> hoping we could get it all in hand. * Eventually, we got everything
> sorted out, but in the meantime, we discussed ditching and ruled it
> out -- we prepared for ditching but the likelihood was that we
> wouldn't make it, so it was more "prepare to crash -- get out as best
> you can and good luck" as opposed to "get the raft after we settle
> into the water".
>
> In a similar situation (balky helicopter nearing the point of falling
> out of the sky) we had the choice to land on a Soviet aircraft carrier
> (Novorosiisk) or ditching in the Northern Pacific -- the two pilots
> voted for landing on the Soviet ship, delivering an intact modern
> (cof) ASW helo into our enemies hands. *My rather loud dissenting vote
> was that we should crash it into the bridge of the Novoro *(we had
> intel that Admiral Gorchkov was on board - the modern era's version of
> Admiral Doenitz or Isoroku Yamamoto), or anything else but to give it
> to the damn Russians. * Fate intervened -- our tiny frigate realized
> we were off the radio and likely in trouble and had doubled back to
> reach us. *We got aboard, barely, and the helicopter never flew
> again.
>
> Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
> but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
> obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
> must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. *I
> was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
>
> v/r Gordon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Fascinating Gordon, thank you, However it leads to another question,
how easy is it to bale out of a P-3, especially the last man out?

Guy

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 06:44:33 -0700, "a425couple"
> wrote:

>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
>hands for full examination
>(for fuller background, read the below).
>
>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
>the 24 crew surviving?

There have been at least two P-3 ditchings.

One was in the North Pacific after a "prop fails to feather" emergency
(a VERY serious failure in a P-3). They frequently lead to engine
fires, which is what happened here.

http://www.vpnavy.com/vp9586.html

I did not, in quick search, find a the story but I'm sure some time
with Google will turn it up. It was written up at least in APPROACH
in years past.

One was in the Gulf:

http://www.vpnavy.com/vp47ditch.html

Ditching at sea is a very dicey proposition if the aircraft is
undamaged and easily controlable. With major airframe damage it's not
something I'd look forward to. Further, the A/C did not KNOW what his
status actually was. For all he knew a wing was going to fall off
without much warning. So picking even a potentially hostile airfield
was probably the wisest choice under the circumstances.

An ASW crew is smaller than an ELINT crew so there is the question of
egress.

The P-3 is a nice aircraft to fly with boosted controlls. Boost out
it's a real chore to keep it under control.

On Oct 28, 10:56*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
> "Gordon" > wrote in message...
> - "a425couple" > wrote:
>
> -> "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> -> > "a425couple" > wrote:
> -> >>In 2001 a US (big snip)
> -Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
> -but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
> -obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
> -must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. *I
> -was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
> -v/r Gordon
>
> Thank you Gordon.

Which is why you tey to destroy as much as you can as they did. most
secret stuff first. Like when the U boat gets the surrender order to
the merchantman. once the captain shows up, its where is the codebook
and log, pretty much standard answer was, those went over the side
when you surfaced.

They should have only had current code cards for the encryption gear,
most of the rest is, lets get our frustrations out on the government
issued equipment.

Supposedly we did learn from USS Pueblo where way too much COMSEC
stuff was packed into that boat.

On Oct 28, 11:11*am, guy > wrote:
> On 28 Oct, 16:31, Gordon > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 28, 7:37*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
>
> > > "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> > > > *"a425couple" > wrote:
> > > >>In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
> > > >>hands for full examination.
> > > >>If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
> > > >>toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
> > > >>in the open ocean, what were the chances of
> > > >>the 24 crew surviving?
>
> > > > What a question. *If you are in a head-on collision with another car
> > > > what are your chances of surviving? *
>
> > > I'm sorry you do not like it.
>
> > > > They range from 0% to 100%, don't they? *
>
> > > The reason I asked it on these newsgroups, is that I thought
> > > there might be some who could give historical information
> > > to pin it down better than "from 0% to 100%".
>
> > > He was able to control it well enough to fly it 70 miles
> > > and land it at an airport (Red Chinese).
> > > Have any Orions been 'ditched' *i.e. controled landings
> > > on water?
>
> > > > If he ditched well the thing should have floated long enough
> > > > for the crew to take to the dinghies. *Thereafter it would have been a
> > > > case of how far away (and how competent) was the rescue. *If he made a
> > > > dog's mess of the ditching they could have all gone down with it.
> > > > It's a low-wing aircraft so it should ditch fairly well and float well
> > > > too. *Sea-state permitting of course. *A reasonably competent pilot
> > > > should have been able to handle it if he sea was playing along.
> > > > Eugene L Griessel- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > yes, one did -- all (or nearly all) of the enlisted aircrew died when
> > they went down in the Northern Pacific. *The fallout for that event
> > was the requirement that all enlisted aircrews go to survival schools
> > and get some training before they end up in a raft (prior to that, it
> > was possible to bootstrap into aircrew status and not necessarily go
> > through the aircrew pipeline that would include all that).
>
> > The P-3 is not a very good platform for ditching -- relatively short
> > wings, long tail that would likely pitch you forward if you trying
> > aero-braking in surface effect at the final moment -- *I wouldn't do
> > it. *Personally, I would have had the crew bail out over land, radio
> > the Chinese that the aircraft was not controllable at slow speeds and
> > aim it for the nearest mountain. *Reverse engineering doesn't work
> > well with melted aluminum.
>
> > During my very limited time on P-3s (14 months), we had one really
> > exciting flight that lasted less than half an hour, trying to get all
> > the way airborne in a 3-engine, overloaded Orion on a 90-degree day.
> > We skimmed the lagoon, flying between ships on our way out to sea,
> > hoping we could get it all in hand. * Eventually, we got everything
> > sorted out, but in the meantime, we discussed ditching and ruled it
> > out -- we prepared for ditching but the likelihood was that we
> > wouldn't make it, so it was more "prepare to crash -- get out as best
> > you can and good luck" as opposed to "get the raft after we settle
> > into the water".
>
> > In a similar situation (balky helicopter nearing the point of falling
> > out of the sky) we had the choice to land on a Soviet aircraft carrier
> > (Novorosiisk) or ditching in the Northern Pacific -- the two pilots
> > voted for landing on the Soviet ship, delivering an intact modern
> > (cof) ASW helo into our enemies hands. *My rather loud dissenting vote
> > was that we should crash it into the bridge of the Novoro *(we had
> > intel that Admiral Gorchkov was on board - the modern era's version of
> > Admiral Doenitz or Isoroku Yamamoto), or anything else but to give it
> > to the damn Russians. * Fate intervened -- our tiny frigate realized
> > we were off the radio and likely in trouble and had doubled back to
> > reach us. *We got aboard, barely, and the helicopter never flew
> > again.
>
> > Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
> > but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
> > obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
> > must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. *I
> > was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
>
> > v/r Gordon- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Fascinating Gordon, thank you, However it leads to another question,
> how easy is it to bale out of a P-3, especially the last man out?
>
> Guy

Ideally, its straight and level then set the autopilot. realistically,
it all depends. even if you have an ejection seat, if you're out of
parameters, you're a goner. They probably would have had no problems,
but in a flyable airplane, much safer to land. You could have chute
problems, separation during bailout, drown getting out of the chute.
Its like throwing a pass in football, 2 out of 3 things that could
happen are bad.

a425couple wrote:
> "Gordon" > wrote in message...
> - "a425couple" > wrote:
> -> "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
> -> > "a425couple" > wrote:
> -> >>In 2001 a US (big snip)
> -Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew
> --
> -but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
> -obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
> -must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. I
> -was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
> -v/r Gordon
>
> Thank you Gordon.

I took the liberty of looking up Gordon's website: www.oldboldpilots.org

Some really good reading, including bios, there. Lots of distinguished
members too.

- nilita

"a425couple" > wrote in message
...
> In 2001 a US reconisance plane fell into Chinese
> hands for full examination
> (for fuller background, read the below).
>
> If pilot Osburn had tried to fly as far as he could
> toward an 'authorized' airport and had to 'ditch'
> in the open ocean, what were the chances of
> the 24 crew surviving?
>
> http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/157-157/3730-the-online-threat
> Annals of National Security
> The Online Threat
> Should we be worried about a cyber war?
> by Seymour M. Hersh
> November 1, 2010
> On April 1, 2001, an American EP-3E Aries II reconnaissance plane on an
> eavesdropping mission collided with a Chinese interceptor jet over the
> South China Sea, triggering the first international crisis of George W.
> Bush's Administration. The Chinese jet crashed, and its pilot was killed,
> but the pilot of the American aircraft, Navy Lieutenant Shane Osborn,
> managed to make an emergency landing at a Chinese F-8 fighter base on
> Hainan Island, fifteen miles from the mainland. Osborn later published a
> memoir, in which he described the "incessant jackhammer vibration" as the
> plane fell eight thousand feet in thirty seconds, before he regained
> control.
>
> The plane carried twenty-four officers and enlisted men and women attached
> to the Naval Security Group Command, a field component of the National
> Security Agency. They were repatriated after eleven days; the plane stayed
> behind ----
>
>




Wasn't this subject done to death at the time ? ISTR the pilot's decision
was examined relentlessly by people nowhere near the scene when it mattered.



For what it's worth, the odd Orion has been ditched successfully

http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/Orion-3A9-754/RC_DG_3A9_754

This is an RAAF Orion that ditched in the lagoon and was dragged back to the
beach for salvage.



From http://www.adf-serials.com/


"On the 26th April 1991 the aircraft took off from Cocos Island and
commenced a right hand climbing turn to a height of 5,000 ft above mean sea
level (AMSL). The aircraft was then placed into a shallow dive and
positioned for a low level pass across the airfield. As the aircraft crossed
the runway at 380 knots indicated airspeed and 300 ft AMSL, the pilot began
a straight pull-out from the dive with all engines at full power. At this
point, eyewitnesses saw a number of items separate from the aircraft. These
items were later identified as wing leading edge components. A shallow climb
was then achieved with the aircraft vibrating violently. The pilot attempted
to complete a circuit preparatory to landing but height could not be
maintained and the aircraft was ditched into the shallow water of the
lagoon. Fin displayed at 492 Sqn HQ RAAF Edinburgh. Remainder of airframe
dumped at sea."



IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying circumstances.
He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive gear to be
destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the plane was flown
back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.

Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
hardware via other means anyway. If you fly these missions along an
"enemy" coast and don't plan for this contingency, then you deserve to get
boned up the arse.



Oh yes, did I mention, Osborn got his crew home alive......





--



Cheers

Dave Kearton

In message >, Dave Kearton
> writes
>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
>sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
>left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
>with it.

If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.

Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?

The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
most important asset.

>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>hardware via other means anyway.

A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
matter.

--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.

Paul J. Adam

"Paul J. Adam" > wrote in message
...
> In message >, Dave Kearton
> > writes
>>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
>>gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the
>>plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio receivers
> feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value there: it's an
> ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability: keeping
> them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the most
> important asset.
>
>>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>>hardware via other means anyway.
>
> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they feed,
> what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that matter.
>
> --
> He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
>
> Paul J. Adam





Just parenthetical to all of this, I showed up in Beijing the day after the
incident.


My trip was booked for weeks beforehand, but my engineer and I showed up at
the airport, on 28-day tourist visas with bags full of electronics to work
at the Australian Embassy.


It's a lot more pedestrian than it sounds, but we sailed through customs and
immigration at the airport. During our routine briefing, the security
officer at the embassy told us that the Chinese _knew_ we were spooks. (NO -
we weren't, but that didn't matter) The Chinese didn't care, as long
as they knew what we were up to and what we found out while we were there.
It's only if there is some doubt on this last part that we'd be detained at
the airport - at the end of our 28 days - by the guy with the rubber gloves.


It was a time of slightly elevated tension between the US and China and the
internal security crowd were working overtime on 'visitors' who pretended to
be tourists. We were followed, tailed, politely questioned by locals
and my hotel room was bugged.

Apart from all that, China's a lovely country and we got lots of work
done.....





--



Cheers

Dave Kearton

In article >,
says...
>
> In message >, Dave Kearton
> > writes
> >IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
> >sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
> >left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
> >with it.
>
> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
> most important asset.
>
> >Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> >hardware via other means anyway.
>
> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
> matter.

I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
fire didn't break out onboard...

"Tankfixer" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...

> I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
> fire didn't break out onboard...
>


We can only speculate how the Chinese would have reacted to that.


When you're facing the possibility of time in a Chinese gulag, it's best not
to **** them off more than you have to.



--



Cheers

Dave Kearton

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:05:59 -0700, Tankfixer
> wrote:

>In article >,
says...
>>
>> In message >, Dave Kearton
>> > writes
>> >IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>> >circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
>> >sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
>> >left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
>> >with it.
>>
>> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
>> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
>> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
>> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
>> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
>> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
>> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
>> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
>> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>>
>> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
>> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
>> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
>> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>>
>> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
>> most important asset.
>>
>> >Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>> >hardware via other means anyway.
>>
>> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
>> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
>> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
>> matter.
>
>I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
>fire didn't break out onboard...

Maybe they discovered that destruct packages were more trouble than
they were worth. After they brought in the F-4Ds at Ubon in
May 1967 we had problems with the destruct packages in the APS-107
Omni Analyzer in one of the forward missile wells going off on the
ground. Interesting watching the reaction of people seeing smoke come
out of the forward bottom part of the aircraft. If I remember right
they were all out within a month...

They had a little box called the destruct power supply that went along
with the destruct package. We had them all sitting on a shelf awaiting
instruction on what to do with them. The canon plugs were oddball so
we couldn't get a tight fitting cap.
Maintenance supervisor came in one day and reached for an uncovered
plug, the cap had fallen off, and said you should have a cap on this.
He must have touched the plug and bam he was flying out the door of
the little storage room. Impressive. They actually store power as
advertised. He was not amused!

In article >,
"Dave Kearton" > wrote:

> "Paul J. Adam" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In message >, Dave Kearton
> > > writes
> >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
> >>gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the
> >>plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.
> >
> > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
> >
> > Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> > dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio receivers
> > feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value there: it's an
> > ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
> >
> > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability: keeping
> > them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the most
> > important asset.
> >
> >>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> >>hardware via other means anyway.
> >
> > A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> > anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they feed,
> > what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that matter.
> >
> > --
> > He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
> >
> > Paul J. Adam
>
>
>
>
>
> Just parenthetical to all of this, I showed up in Beijing the day after the
> incident.
>
>
> My trip was booked for weeks beforehand, but my engineer and I showed up at
> the airport, on 28-day tourist visas with bags full of electronics to work
> at the Australian Embassy.
>
>
> It's a lot more pedestrian than it sounds, but we sailed through customs and
> immigration at the airport. During our routine briefing, the security
> officer at the embassy told us that the Chinese _knew_ we were spooks. (NO -
> we weren't, but that didn't matter) The Chinese didn't care, as long
> as they knew what we were up to and what we found out while we were there.
> It's only if there is some doubt on this last part that we'd be detained at
> the airport - at the end of our 28 days - by the guy with the rubber gloves.
>
>
> It was a time of slightly elevated tension between the US and China and the
> internal security crowd were working overtime on 'visitors' who pretended to
> be tourists. We were followed, tailed, politely questioned by locals
> and my hotel room was bugged.
>
> Apart from all that, China's a lovely country and we got lots of work
> done.....

This reminds me of a story of a married couple of friends who fly for a
major international airline (Both are pilots). He was also an AF Reserve
BG.

We liked to play the board game Risk together, so thy bought an
electronic version to play on layovers. They had a layover in Beijing
and played Risk in the hotel room. I can just hear, "I just captured
Japan" -- "I just took Great Britain", etc. Of course, the room HAD to
be bugged!

Anyway, they took a guided tour of Beijing the next morning. She
remarked to us that they were the only people on the bus and got a
personal guided tour.

I can just imaging the conversation in Chinese Intel: "What's an
American BG doing in Beijing, masquerading as an airline pilot?"

***********

Another friend visited Beijing about 25 years ago, as a member of a
scientific exchange team. At that time, there were two kinds of cars
there: green (military) and black (government). They were moved through
Customs and sent to a black car, with Chinese driver, to go to their
quarters and told that the drivers did not speak English. As they were
going down the road, a pig crossed in front of them. Ben,always the
joker, exclaimed, "There goes dinner!" The driver giggled -- they had
another driver the next morning and did not get the original one back.

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Dave Kearton" > wrote:
>
>> "Paul J. Adam" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In message >, Dave Kearton
>> > > writes
>> >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>> >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
>> >>sensitive
>> >>gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the
>> >>plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>> >
>> > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
>> > nasty
>> > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
>> > Supervisor
>> > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its
>> > mission
>> > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..."
>> > And
>> > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other,
>> > there's
>> > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout,
>> > drowned
>> > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to
>> > port,
>> > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
>> > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>> >
>> > Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
>> > dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
>> > receivers
>> > feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value there: it's
>> > an
>> > ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>> >
>> > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>> > keeping
>> > them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the most
>> > important asset.
>> >
>> >>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>> >>hardware via other means anyway.
>> >
>> > A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in
>> > China"
>> > anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
>> > feed,
>> > what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
>> > matter.
>> >
>> > --
>> > He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
>> >
>> > Paul J. Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Just parenthetical to all of this, I showed up in Beijing the day after
>> the
>> incident.
>>
>>
>> My trip was booked for weeks beforehand, but my engineer and I showed up
>> at
>> the airport, on 28-day tourist visas with bags full of electronics to
>> work
>> at the Australian Embassy.
>>
>>
>> It's a lot more pedestrian than it sounds, but we sailed through customs
>> and
>> immigration at the airport. During our routine briefing, the security
>> officer at the embassy told us that the Chinese _knew_ we were spooks.
>> (NO -
>> we weren't, but that didn't matter) The Chinese didn't care, as
>> long
>> as they knew what we were up to and what we found out while we were
>> there.
>> It's only if there is some doubt on this last part that we'd be detained
>> at
>> the airport - at the end of our 28 days - by the guy with the rubber
>> gloves.
>>
>>
>> It was a time of slightly elevated tension between the US and China and
>> the
>> internal security crowd were working overtime on 'visitors' who pretended
>> to
>> be tourists. We were followed, tailed, politely questioned by locals
>> and my hotel room was bugged.
>>
>> Apart from all that, China's a lovely country and we got lots of work
>> done.....
>
> This reminds me of a story of a married couple of friends who fly for a
> major international airline (Both are pilots). He was also an AF Reserve
> BG.
>
> We liked to play the board game Risk together, so thy bought an
> electronic version to play on layovers. They had a layover in Beijing
> and played Risk in the hotel room. I can just hear, "I just captured
> Japan" -- "I just took Great Britain", etc. Of course, the room HAD to
> be bugged!
>
> Anyway, they took a guided tour of Beijing the next morning. She
> remarked to us that they were the only people on the bus and got a
> personal guided tour.
>
> I can just imaging the conversation in Chinese Intel: "What's an
> American BG doing in Beijing, masquerading as an airline pilot?"
>
> ***********
>
> Another friend visited Beijing about 25 years ago, as a member of a
> scientific exchange team. At that time, there were two kinds of cars
> there: green (military) and black (government). They were moved through
> Customs and sent to a black car, with Chinese driver, to go to their
> quarters and told that the drivers did not speak English. As they were
> going down the road, a pig crossed in front of them. Ben,always the
> joker, exclaimed, "There goes dinner!" The driver giggled -- they had
> another driver the next morning and did not get the original one back.



Two stories - that happened to me ...


My hotel room - in the Great Wall Sheraton



My hotel room had hidden cameras, I found at least two. One covered
the bedroom area, from an air-conditioning grille and just gets an overall
view.


The other ???? You know when you have a shower and the bathroom
mirror fogs up ? When I took a shower, the mirror fogged up -
with the exception of a brick-sized space that remained clear.


There are only three things in a hotel bathroom; a bath/shower, a hand basin
and the toilet. If there was a camera hidden in that space, it
wouldn't see the shower, it might see the edge of the hand basin area,
<try not to form a mental image> it would see the back of your head when
you were sitting on the porcelain.


I don't know how much they were paying the poor guy who had to watch that
video of me on the can - but it certainly wasn't enough.




Rocky & Bullwinkle

Can't say a lot about what we were up to at the embassy - it's not a
secret, just bad manners to talk about other customers' premises.
What I can say is we were servicing CCTV cameras. To make the job
easier, we took a couple of handheld CB radios (hoping the CB band in China
was the same as ours). I'd be up on a ladder, tweaking a camera
lens and Peter, my engineer would be at the monitor telling me how the
picture looked.


After several hours of this tedium, I clicked on the mike and said "OK
Boris, first we do cameras, then we kill Moose and Squirrel"


As it happened, the Embassy's head of security was in the security room
with Peter, when all this happened. Frank ***** was a year away
from retirement, a chain smoker and nothing ever bothered him anymore.
He casually wandered over to where I was up a ladder, cuddling the camera,
lit up a nail and took a drag.


Then in the most laconic voice he could be bothered to muster, he said "
you know Dave, <big exhale> the Chinese secret police never watched Rocky
and Bullwinkle when they were kids, <big drag with drawback> unless you
want to spend 12 hours at the airport with the guy with the long rubber
glove, you might not want to muck about on the radio"

(well he didn't say 'muck' about, but it was close)





--



Cheers

Dave Kearton

On Oct 28, 7:35*pm, BobP > wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:05:59 -0700, Tankfixer
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >In article >,
> says...
>
> >> In message >, Dave Kearton
> >> > writes
> >> >IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >> >circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
> >> >sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
> >> >left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
> >> >with it.
>
> >> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> >> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> >> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
> >> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
> >> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
> >> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
> >> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
> >> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
> >> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> >> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> >> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
> >> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
> >> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> >> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
> >> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
> >> most important asset.
>
> >> >Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> >> >hardware via other means anyway.
>
> >> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> >> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
> >> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
> >> matter.
>
> >I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
> >fire didn't break out onboard...
>
> Maybe they discovered that destruct packages were more trouble than
> they were worth. After they brought in the F-4Ds at Ubon in
> May 1967 we had problems with the destruct packages in the APS-107
> Omni Analyzer in one of the forward missile wells going off on the
> ground. Interesting watching the reaction of people seeing smoke come
> out of the forward bottom part of the aircraft. If I remember right
> they were all out within a month...
>
> They had a little box called the destruct power supply that went along
> with the destruct package. We had them all sitting on a shelf awaiting
> instruction on what to do with them. The canon plugs were oddball so
> we couldn't get a tight fitting cap.
> Maintenance supervisor came in one day and reached for an uncovered
> plug, the cap had fallen off, and said you should have a cap on this.
> He must have touched the plug and bam he was flying out the door of
> the little storage room. Impressive. They actually store power as
> advertised. He was not amused!

Generally best way to kill electronics is turn the cooling fans off.
Let all the electrons run around in circles and heat up.

On Oct 28, 9:49*pm, Orval Fairbairn >
wrote:
> In article >,
> *"Dave Kearton" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Paul J. Adam" > wrote in message
> ...
> > > In message >, Dave Kearton
> > > > writes
> > >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> > >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
> > >>gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the
> > >>plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> > > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> > > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> > > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> > > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> > > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> > > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> > > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> > > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> > > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> > > Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> > > dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio receivers
> > > feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value there: it's an
> > > ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> > > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability: keeping
> > > them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the most
> > > important asset.
>
> > >>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> > >>hardware via other means anyway.
>
> > > A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> > > anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they feed,
> > > what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that matter.
>
> > > --
> > > He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
>
> > > Paul J. Adam
>
> > Just parenthetical to all of this, I showed up in Beijing the day after the
> > incident.
>
> > My trip was booked for weeks beforehand, but my engineer and I showed up at
> > the airport, on 28-day tourist visas with bags full of electronics to work
> > at the Australian Embassy.
>
> > It's a lot more pedestrian than it sounds, but we sailed through customs and
> > immigration at the airport. * * During our routine briefing, the security
> > officer at the embassy told us that the Chinese _knew_ we were spooks. (NO -
> > we weren't, but that didn't matter) * * * *The Chinese didn't care, as long
> > as they knew what we were up to and what we found out while we were there.
> > It's only if there is some doubt on this last part that we'd be detained at
> > the airport - at the end of our 28 days - by the guy with the rubber gloves.
>
> > It was a time of slightly elevated tension between the US and China and the
> > internal security crowd were working overtime on 'visitors' who pretended to
> > be tourists. * * *We were followed, tailed, politely questioned by locals
> > and my hotel room was bugged.
>
> > Apart from all that, China's a lovely country and we got lots of work
> > done.....
>
> This reminds me of a story of a married couple of friends who fly for a
> major international airline (Both are pilots). He was also an AF Reserve
> BG.
>
> We liked to play the board game Risk together, so thy bought an
> electronic version to play on layovers. They had a layover in Beijing
> and played Risk in the hotel room. I can just hear, "I just captured
> Japan" *-- "I just took Great Britain", etc. Of course, the room HAD to
> be bugged!
>
> Anyway, they took a guided tour of Beijing the next morning. She
> remarked to us that they were the only people on the bus and got a
> personal guided tour.
>
> I can just imaging the conversation in Chinese Intel: "What's an
> American BG doing in Beijing, masquerading as an airline pilot?"
>
> * * ************
>
> Another friend visited Beijing about 25 years ago, as a member of a
> scientific exchange team. At that time, there were two kinds of cars
> there: green (military) and black (government). They were moved through
> Customs and sent to a black car, with Chinese driver, to go to their
> quarters and told that the drivers did not speak English. As they were
> going down the road, a pig crossed in front of them. Ben,always the
> joker, exclaimed, "There goes dinner!" The driver giggled -- they had
> another driver the next morning and did not get the original one back.

Had lots of local drivers driving VIPs in Japan that supposedly did
not speak English. All interpreters and drivers were thought to be if
not official Japanese intelligence, reporting to them. Not to mention
the waiters at the clubs. All the hired nationals. Yeah, leaked like a
sieve....

On Oct 28, 10:02*pm, "Dave Kearton" >
wrote:
> "Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
>
> ....
>
>
>
> > In article >,
> > "Dave Kearton" > wrote:
>
> >> "Paul J. Adam" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> > In message >, Dave Kearton
> >> > > writes
> >> >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >> >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
> >> >>sensitive
> >> >>gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the
> >> >>plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> >> > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> >> > nasty
> >> > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> >> > Supervisor
> >> > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its
> >> > mission
> >> > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..."
> >> > And
> >> > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other,
> >> > there's
> >> > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout,
> >> > drowned
> >> > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to
> >> > port,
> >> > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> >> > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> >> > Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> >> > dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
> >> > receivers
> >> > feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value there: it's
> >> > an
> >> > ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> >> > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
> >> > keeping
> >> > them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the most
> >> > important asset.
>
> >> >>Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> >> >>hardware via other means anyway.
>
> >> > A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in
> >> > China"
> >> > anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
> >> > feed,
> >> > what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
> >> > matter.
>
> >> > --
> >> > He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
>
> >> > Paul J. Adam
>
> >> Just parenthetical to all of this, I showed up in Beijing the day after
> >> the
> >> incident.
>
> >> My trip was booked for weeks beforehand, but my engineer and I showed up
> >> at
> >> the airport, on 28-day tourist visas with bags full of electronics to
> >> work
> >> at the Australian Embassy.
>
> >> It's a lot more pedestrian than it sounds, but we sailed through customs
> >> and
> >> immigration at the airport. * * During our routine briefing, the security
> >> officer at the embassy told us that the Chinese _knew_ we were spooks.
> >> (NO -
> >> we weren't, but that didn't matter) * * * *The Chinese didn't care, as
> >> long
> >> as they knew what we were up to and what we found out while we were
> >> there.
> >> It's only if there is some doubt on this last part that we'd be detained
> >> at
> >> the airport - at the end of our 28 days - by the guy with the rubber
> >> gloves.
>
> >> It was a time of slightly elevated tension between the US and China and
> >> the
> >> internal security crowd were working overtime on 'visitors' who pretended
> >> to
> >> be tourists. * * *We were followed, tailed, politely questioned by locals
> >> and my hotel room was bugged.
>
> >> Apart from all that, China's a lovely country and we got lots of work
> >> done.....
>
> > This reminds me of a story of a married couple of friends who fly for a
> > major international airline (Both are pilots). He was also an AF Reserve
> > BG.
>
> > We liked to play the board game Risk together, so thy bought an
> > electronic version to play on layovers. They had a layover in Beijing
> > and played Risk in the hotel room. I can just hear, "I just captured
> > Japan" *-- "I just took Great Britain", etc. Of course, the room HAD to
> > be bugged!
>
> > Anyway, they took a guided tour of Beijing the next morning. She
> > remarked to us that they were the only people on the bus and got a
> > personal guided tour.
>
> > I can just imaging the conversation in Chinese Intel: "What's an
> > American BG doing in Beijing, masquerading as an airline pilot?"
>
> > * * ***********
>
> > Another friend visited Beijing about 25 years ago, as a member of a
> > scientific exchange team. At that time, there were two kinds of cars
> > there: green (military) and black (government). They were moved through
> > Customs and sent to a black car, with Chinese driver, to go to their
> > quarters and told that the drivers did not speak English. As they were
> > going down the road, a pig crossed in front of them. Ben,always the
> > joker, exclaimed, "There goes dinner!" The driver giggled -- they had
> > another driver the next morning and did not get the original one back.
>
> Two stories - that happened to me ...
>
> My hotel room - in the Great Wall Sheraton
>
> My hotel room had hidden cameras, I found at least two. * * * * One covered
> the bedroom area, from an air-conditioning grille and just gets an overall
> view.
>
> The other ???? * * * * * * You know when you have a shower and the bathroom
> mirror fogs up ? * * * * * *When I took a shower, *the mirror fogged up -
> with the exception of a brick-sized space that remained clear.
>
> There are only three things in a hotel bathroom; a bath/shower, a hand basin
> and the toilet. * * * * * * *If there was a camera hidden in that space, *it
> wouldn't see the shower, *it might see the edge of the hand basin area,
> <try not to form a mental image> * it would see the back of your head when
> you were sitting on the porcelain.
>
> I don't know how much they were paying the poor guy who had to watch that
> video of me on the can - but it certainly wasn't enough.
>
> Rocky & Bullwinkle
>
> Can't say a lot about what we were up to at the embassy *- *it's not a
> secret, just bad manners to talk about other customers' premises.
> What I can say is we were servicing CCTV cameras. * * * * * To make the job
> easier, we took a couple of handheld CB radios (hoping the CB band in China
> was the same as ours). * * * * *I'd be up on a ladder, tweaking a camera
> lens and Peter, my engineer would be at the monitor telling me how the
> picture looked.
>
> After several hours of this tedium, *I clicked on the mike and said *"OK
> Boris, first we do cameras, then we kill Moose and Squirrel"
>
> As it happened, *the Embassy's head of security was in the security room
> with Peter, when all this happened. * * * * * Frank ***** was a year away
> from retirement, a chain smoker and nothing ever bothered him anymore.
> He casually wandered over to where I was up a ladder, cuddling the camera,
> lit up a nail and took a drag.
>
> Then in the most laconic voice he could be bothered to muster, *he said * *"
> you know Dave, *<big exhale> the Chinese secret police never watched Rocky
> and Bullwinkle when they were kids, *<big drag with drawback> unless you
> want to spend 12 hours at the airport with the guy with the long rubber
> glove, *you might not want to muck about on the radio"
>
> (well he didn't say 'muck' about, *but it was close)
>
> --
>
> Cheers
>
> Dave Kearton

Way back in the dark ages, we used to have the location of the nearest
Ruskie trawler posted at the site in the secure area to keep people
aware Boris was watching. Or listening to Armed Forces Radio.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 22:33:47 -0700 (PDT), frank
> wrote:

>On Oct 28, 7:35*pm, BobP > wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:05:59 -0700, Tankfixer
>>
>>
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >In article >,
>> says...
>>
>> >> In message >, Dave Kearton
>> >> > writes
>> >> >IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>> >> >circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
>> >> >sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
>> >> >left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
>> >> >with it.
>>
>> >> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
>> >> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
>> >> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
>> >> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
>> >> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
>> >> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
>> >> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
>> >> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
>> >> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>>
>> >> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
>> >> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
>> >> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
>> >> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>>
>> >> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>> >> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
>> >> most important asset.
>>
>> >> >Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>> >> >hardware via other means anyway.
>>
>> >> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
>> >> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
>> >> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
>> >> matter.
>>
>> >I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
>> >fire didn't break out onboard...
>>
>> Maybe they discovered that destruct packages were more trouble than
>> they were worth. After they brought in the F-4Ds at Ubon in
>> May 1967 we had problems with the destruct packages in the APS-107
>> Omni Analyzer in one of the forward missile wells going off on the
>> ground. Interesting watching the reaction of people seeing smoke come
>> out of the forward bottom part of the aircraft. If I remember right
>> they were all out within a month...
>>
>> They had a little box called the destruct power supply that went along
>> with the destruct package. We had them all sitting on a shelf awaiting
>> instruction on what to do with them. The canon plugs were oddball so
>> we couldn't get a tight fitting cap.
>> Maintenance supervisor came in one day and reached for an uncovered
>> plug, the cap had fallen off, and said you should have a cap on this.
>> He must have touched the plug and bam he was flying out the door of
>> the little storage room. Impressive. They actually store power as
>> advertised. He was not amused!
>
>Generally best way to kill electronics is turn the cooling fans off.
>Let all the electrons run around in circles and heat up.

No fans in the F-4s RHAW equipment back then. No problems even on 100
degree days on the flight line. Long time ago, but I don't remember
fans for the little magnetrons in the ALQ-160/71 jamming pods. If I
remember the different pods right there was a requirement that they be
above 250 kts before they were turned on so they would be up fairly
high and cool.
The BWOs in the later pods were cooled by circulating fluid through
them and tubing on the inside of the metal barrel of the pods.

The destruct package on the APS-107 was rather ridiculous anyway. The
enemy had to know we could detect a launch when the APR-26 came out
and planes took evasive action. There was also a magazine article that
came out around that time about how that Secret equipment worked.<G>
The APR-26 used an analog method of launch detection and the APS-107
actually decoded the pulse train to the missile. The destruct package,
a metal plate, was designed to fry the little board with ICs on it
that did the decoding. The later APR-37 also used the pulse detection
method.

On 29/10/10 00:05, Tankfixer wrote:
> In >,
> says...
>>
>> In >, Dave Kearton
>> > writes
>>> IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>>> circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
>>> sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
>>> left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
>>> with it.
>>
>> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
>> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
>> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
>> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
>> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
>> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
>> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
>> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
>> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>>
>> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
>> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
>> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
>> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>>
>> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
>> most important asset.
>>
>>> Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
>>> hardware via other means anyway.
>>
>> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
>> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
>> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
>> matter.
>
> I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
> fire didn't break out onboard...

I read somewhere that the Chinese were unable to gain access for almost
an hour after the aircraft landed.

Oner is forced to assume that everything too big to dump out of the
aircraft was comprehensibly smashed before they opened the doors...


--
William Black

Free men have open minds
If you want loyalty, buy a dog...

"La N" > wrote in message...
> a425couple wrote:
>> "Gordon" > wrote in message...
>> - "a425couple" > wrote:
>> -> "Eugene Griessel" > wrote in message...
>> -> > "a425couple" > wrote:
>> -> >>In 2001 a US (big snip)
>> -Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew
>> -but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
>> -obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
>> -must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. I
>> -was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..
>> -v/r Gordon
>> Thank you Gordon.
>
> I took the liberty of looking up Gordon's website: www.oldboldpilots.org
> Some really good reading, including bios, there. Lots of distinguished
> members too.
> - nilita

Yes, indeed.

Meanwhile my friend, a while back you asked about current
reading books.
Recently I happened to do a rather interesting light read.
I'd class it as fictional colonial period naval (piracy) and human
relations.
The title was "The only life that mattered."
Check out the preview at (or get a good start at reading it!)
http://books.google.com/books?id=rfYHUifpjjsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+only+life+that+mattered&hl=en&ei=q9TKTJjzDcKVnAeA2v37Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

If it sounds interesting to you, let me know either
here or by private email, and I'll get the book back
from who I loaned it to and mail it to you.

"Paul J. Adam" > wrote...
> In message >, Dave Kearton
> > writes
>>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
>>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
>>gear to be destroyed,

Well, the last above line is the critical question!
Did you read the original cite
http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/157-157/3730-the-online-threat
The Online Threat
Should we be worried about a cyber war?
by Seymour M. Hersh
Read more
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/01/101101fa_fact_hersh?currentPage=all#ixzz13l1jc4sV

and find it unconvincing?

>>he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the plane was flown back to
>>the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> capabilities in a Beijing basement.

Very interesting valid point of view, thanks.

I certainly admit that I do not know what 'equipment' and
software was destroyed and what was still discoverable.
I'm also not sure how knowledgable the crew was!

For example, in WWII it was policy that nobody who
had knowledge of important secrets should ever be allowed
in areas where it might be possible to be captured.

For example, anyone who even knew that we were able
to decipher the Japanese messages (MAGIC) was not to
be in harms way *.

> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:

Are you really sure about that?
Knowing how to use a computer program, does not
at all mean, you know the program. Or the equipment
that runs the program.


*
Leatherneck: Star-Crossed Translator
Story by Dick Camp
Second Lt Merle Ralph Cory was an expert cryptanalyst, who, ---- joined the
Corps and went to war. His comprehensive knowledge of the American
code-breaking successes caused many to second-guess the decision that
allowed him to risk capture by the Japanese.
((It was no "decision", he just slipped through the cracks.))
((he had gone on a 'patrol', and was killed))
Ralph Cory should never have been ---- at Guadalcanal. It was government
policy that anyone connected with MAGIC was expressly prohibited from combat
or duty that put them in close proximity to the enemy. He slipped through
the cracks ---. 2004 Leatherneck Magazine. All rights reserved.

In message >, a425couple
> writes
>"Paul J. Adam" > wrote...
>> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
>>nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
>>Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and
>>what its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're
>>still searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose
>>sight of each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy
>>died during the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing
>>boat with no comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded
>>to be detailed and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
>Very interesting valid point of view, thanks.
>
>I certainly admit that I do not know what 'equipment' and
>software was destroyed and what was still discoverable.
>I'm also not sure how knowledgable the crew was!

They for sure knew enough to deal with "Drop everything, we've got the
Premier's private phone!" or similar prioritisation: they'd know what
they could and could not get, what they were tasked to receive, what
they'd been ordered to be alert to "just in case", and so on.

>For example, in WWII it was policy that nobody who
>had knowledge of important secrets should ever be allowed
>in areas where it might be possible to be captured.

Depends on the compartments. You have to hit the balance between
protecting your secrets, and achieving the mission.

>> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>
>Are you really sure about that?

Utterly certain? No.

Pretty confident? Yes.

>Knowing how to use a computer program, does not
>at all mean, you know the program. Or the equipment
>that runs the program.

But you know what you're listening to, what can be cracked and
translated aboard, what has to be recorded for later analysis, what the
priorities and orders for the mission were, what the aircraft can and
can't achieve.

For a slightly forced armour analogy: the gunner doesn't know how the
code in the ballistic computer runs and couldn't rewrite it from memory.
But, with the computer properly trashed, the gunner is the person who
potentially could be made to say what he can and can't hit in various
circumstances, aided by whatever radar pixies dance inside the little
boxes. "How do we copy that?" is one risk: "Dear God, we never knew they
were that good" is another; and exposing "Is *that* the best they can
actually do?" a third.

--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.

Paul J. Adam

On Oct 29, 7:58*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
> "Paul J. Adam" > wrote...
>
> > In message >, Dave Kearton
> > > writes
> >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
> >>gear to be destroyed,
>
> Well, the last above line is the critical question!
> Did you read the original citehttp://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/157-157/3730-the...
> The Online Threat
> Should we be worried about a cyber war?
> by Seymour M. Hersh
> Read morehttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/01/101101fa_fact_hersh?cur...
>
> and find it unconvincing?
>
> >>he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the plane was flown back to
> >>the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> Very interesting valid point of view, thanks.
>
> I certainly admit that I do not know what 'equipment' and
> software was destroyed and what was still discoverable.
> I'm also not sure how knowledgable the crew was!
>
> For example, in WWII it was policy that nobody who
> had knowledge of important secrets should ever be allowed
> in areas where it might be possible to be captured.
>
> For example, anyone who even knew that we were able
> to decipher the Japanese messages (MAGIC) was not to
> be in harms way *.
>
> > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>
> Are you really sure about that?
> Knowing how to use a computer program, does not
> at all mean, you know the program. *Or the equipment
> that runs the program.
>
> *
> Leatherneck: Star-Crossed Translator
> Story by Dick Camp
> Second Lt Merle Ralph Cory was an expert cryptanalyst, who, ---- *joined the
> Corps and went to war. His comprehensive knowledge of the American
> code-breaking successes caused many to second-guess the decision that
> allowed him to risk capture by the Japanese.
> ((It was no "decision", he just slipped through the cracks.))
> ((he had gone on a 'patrol', and was killed))
> Ralph Cory should never have been ---- at Guadalcanal. It was government
> policy that anyone connected with MAGIC was expressly prohibited from combat
> or duty that put them in close proximity to the enemy. He slipped through
> the cracks ---. 2004 Leatherneck Magazine. All rights reserved.

Anything from Seymour Hersh is unconvincing. He's had an anti-military
bent ever since the '60s.

In article >,
says...
>
> On 29/10/10 00:05, Tankfixer wrote:
> > In >,
> > says...
> >>
> >> In >, Dave Kearton
> >> > writes
> >>> IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> >>> circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
> >>> sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
> >>> left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
> >>> with it.
> >>
> >> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> >> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> >> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
> >> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
> >> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
> >> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
> >> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
> >> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
> >> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
> >>
> >> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> >> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
> >> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
> >> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
> >>
> >> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
> >> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
> >> most important asset.
> >>
> >>> Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> >>> hardware via other means anyway.
> >>
> >> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> >> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
> >> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
> >> matter.
> >
> > I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
> > fire didn't break out onboard...
>
> I read somewhere that the Chinese were unable to gain access for almost
> an hour after the aircraft landed.

That's what I understand..
Seems like plenty of time to do some mischief...

>
> Oner is forced to assume that everything too big to dump out of the
> aircraft was comprehensibly smashed before they opened the doors...

Il 28/10/2010 17:49, a425couple ha scritto:

> Odds and probabilities. That is how most of us make many decisions each
> and every day. Yes, every action MIGHT result in disaster. But we still
> get out and do things. But we do try to do things in a reasonable manner
> to increase the odds of a reasonable outcome. And this is even more
> important when something has already gone badly wrong.

IIRC there was experiments on crew survivability during Victorian age,
done putting mannequins (and in these happy pre-PETA days, also sheeps
&c.) on stricken target ships, and counting splinting &c in the
mannequins after the live fire exercise and counting dead/dying sheeps,
the results was substantially the same: splintered mannequin and intact
mannequin together.


Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

On Oct 29, 4:08*pm, Matt Wiser > wrote:
> On Oct 29, 7:58*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Paul J. Adam" > wrote...
>
> > > In message >, Dave Kearton
> > > > writes
> > >>IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> > >>circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the sensitive
> > >>gear to be destroyed,
>
> > Well, the last above line is the critical question!
> > Did you read the original citehttp://readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/157-157/3730-the...
> > The Online Threat
> > Should we be worried about a cyber war?
> > by Seymour M. Hersh
> > Read morehttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/01/101101fa_fact_hersh?cur...
>
> > and find it unconvincing?
>
> > >>he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was left of the plane was flown back to
> > >>the US after the Chinese were done with it.
>
> > > If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a nasty
> > > option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission Supervisor
> > > Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what its mission
> > > was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still searching..." And
> > > who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of each other, there's
> > > no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during the bailout, drowned
> > > in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no comms on his way to port,
> > > or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed and explicit about EP-3
> > > capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> > Very interesting valid point of view, thanks.
>
> > I certainly admit that I do not know what 'equipment' and
> > software was destroyed and what was still discoverable.
> > I'm also not sure how knowledgable the crew was!
>
> > For example, in WWII it was policy that nobody who
> > had knowledge of important secrets should ever be allowed
> > in areas where it might be possible to be captured.
>
> > For example, anyone who even knew that we were able
> > to decipher the Japanese messages (MAGIC) was not to
> > be in harms way *.
>
> > > The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>
> > Are you really sure about that?
> > Knowing how to use a computer program, does not
> > at all mean, you know the program. *Or the equipment
> > that runs the program.
>
> > *
> > Leatherneck: Star-Crossed Translator
> > Story by Dick Camp
> > Second Lt Merle Ralph Cory was an expert cryptanalyst, who, ---- *joined the
> > Corps and went to war. His comprehensive knowledge of the American
> > code-breaking successes caused many to second-guess the decision that
> > allowed him to risk capture by the Japanese.
> > ((It was no "decision", he just slipped through the cracks.))
> > ((he had gone on a 'patrol', and was killed))
> > Ralph Cory should never have been ---- at Guadalcanal. It was government
> > policy that anyone connected with MAGIC was expressly prohibited from combat
> > or duty that put them in close proximity to the enemy. He slipped through
> > the cracks ---. 2004 Leatherneck Magazine. All rights reserved.
>
> Anything from Seymour Hersh is unconvincing. He's had an anti-military
> bent ever since the '60s.

He may be anti military, but he does have his sources. Consider, if
the powers that be do something stupid and the peons at the bottom
don't like it, they do talk to reporters like a sieve. And DC is bad
about that.

I don't know why people with a clearance feel the need to leak. I
remember some GS whatevers, that really knew better shooting their
mouths off on stuff they should never had knowledge of. We're trying
to keep it secret and compartementalized, meanwhile some damned
bureaucrat is running his mouth all over the base. Go figure.

Which is why some people never told their wives anything. I'd never
tell mine anything. She's blabs. I get back in the real world, not
ever sure I'd tell her where I was.

On Oct 29, 7:49*pm, "dott.Piergiorgio"
> wrote:
> Il 28/10/2010 17:49, a425couple ha scritto:
>
> > Odds and probabilities. That is how most of us make many decisions each
> > and every day. Yes, every action MIGHT result in disaster. But we still
> > get out and do things. But we do try to do things in a reasonable manner
> > to increase the odds of a reasonable outcome. And this is even more
> > important when something has already gone badly wrong.
>
> IIRC there was experiments on crew survivability during Victorian age,
> done putting mannequins (and in these happy pre-PETA days, also sheeps
> &c.) on stricken target ships, and counting splinting &c in the
> mannequins after the live fire exercise and counting dead/dying sheeps,
> the results was substantially the same: splintered mannequin and intact
> mannequin together.
>
> Best regards from Italy,
> dott. Piergiorgio.

Best was a bear in the B-58 escape capsule.

1. One ****ed off bear
2. Lots of bear shat in the capsule.

We used dummies. Then we used enlisted parachute testers. Then we
certified the system. Go figure. Best was the B-1 bottom bailout (are
you out of your @#$^%@$%&@#$ mind????).

On Oct 29, 4:00*pm, "Paul J. Adam"
> wrote:
> In message >, a425couple
> > writes
>
>
>
> >"Paul J. Adam" > wrote...
> >> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> >>nasty *option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> >>Supervisor *Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and
> >>what its mission *was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're
> >>still searching..." And *who's to know different? Once the crew lose
> >>sight of each other, there's *no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy
> >>died during the bailout, drowned *in the ocean, is on a slow fishing
> >>boat with no comms on his way to port, *or is being forcibly persuaded
> >>to be detailed and explicit about EP-3 *capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> >Very interesting valid point of view, thanks.
>
> >I certainly admit that I do not know what 'equipment' and
> >software was destroyed and what was still discoverable.
> >I'm also not sure how knowledgable the crew was!
>
> They for sure knew enough to deal with "Drop everything, we've got the
> Premier's private phone!" or similar prioritisation: they'd know what
> they could and could not get, what they were tasked to receive, what
> they'd been ordered to be alert to "just in case", and so on.
>
> >For example, in WWII it was policy that nobody who
> >had knowledge of important secrets should ever be allowed
> >in areas where it might be possible to be captured.
>
> Depends on the compartments. You have to hit the balance between
> protecting your secrets, and achieving the mission.
>
> >> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
>
> >Are you really sure about that?
>
> Utterly certain? No.
>
> Pretty confident? Yes.
>
> >Knowing how to use a computer program, does not
> >at all mean, you know the program. *Or the equipment
> >that runs the program.
>
> But you know what you're listening to, what can be cracked and
> translated aboard, what has to be recorded for later analysis, what the
> priorities and orders for the mission were, what the aircraft can and
> can't achieve.
>
> For a slightly forced armour analogy: the gunner doesn't know how the
> code in the ballistic computer runs and couldn't rewrite it from memory.
> But, with the computer properly trashed, the gunner is the person who
> potentially could be made to say what he can and can't hit in various
> circumstances, aided by whatever radar pixies dance inside the little
> boxes. "How do we copy that?" is one risk: "Dear God, we never knew they
> were that good" is another; and exposing "Is *that* the best they can
> actually do?" a third.
>
> --
> He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
>
> Paul J. Adam

Sometimes you keep things from people for this reason. Gunner knows he
can hit a target. Not told is limitations or that defensive systems
will keep things away. Or how the AWACS finds the targets for him.

Current example would be, get this package its a bomb. You don't need
to let out Saudis had an ex terrorist who went back then came in from
the cold and gave the plot up. Or how well the bomb was made. Now did
the bad guys know about the bomb, yeah. But going public let other bad
guys know if it was a decent bomb or not. That ex terrorist is not
'burned' as far as other terrorist groups are concerned.

Thing is, you can spin this stuff so much your head hurts.

I recall a secret missive a few decades ago, listing stuff that might
be compromised. One was something on a platform that was shot down in
Vietnam. Well, you either keep it secret, AND DO NOT USE IT, or you
put the secret do hickey out there and do use it and maybe kill
gomers. There is a risk using it against gomers, that gomers will find
it and usually send it out so somebody who does know about whatever it
was can figure things out. But keeping stuff in inventory sort of
negates the reason you built it.

Whining about it being lost pretty much is stupidity. But that's an
intell weenie for you.

In this case, burning key cards would be first priority. Stuff that
could compromise stuff elsewhere. Then you start going over the rest
of the paper stuff and maybe what you can whack inside the airframe.
Hopefully this has been thought out before hand.

In one case I worked on,it was paper and computer tapes. Set up a burn
pile, put the tapes on top and screw the environmental laws. Indians
are coming over the ridge, some things just aren't important. Rest was
take out your frustrations on pay, management, whatever. Get an axe
and have at it. Run stuff without cooling fans.

On Oct 29, 6:20*pm, Tankfixer > wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 29/10/10 00:05, Tankfixer wrote:
> > > In >,
> > > says...
>
> > >> In >, Dave Kearton
> > >> > *writes
> > >>> IMHO Lt Osborn made all the right decisions under very trying
> > >>> circumstances. He kept the plane aloft, long enough for all the
> > >>> sensitive gear to be destroyed, he KEPT HIS CREW ALIVE and what was
> > >>> left of the plane was flown back to the US after the Chinese were done
> > >>> with it.
>
> > >> If you think worst-case, ditching or baling out offers the Chinese a
> > >> nasty option. "We picked up nine of the crew, here they are. Mission
> > >> Supervisor Snuffy, who knows all about what the aircraft can do and what
> > >> its mission was? No, haven't found a trace of him, but we're still
> > >> searching..." And who's to know different? Once the crew lose sight of
> > >> each other, there's no way to know whether Supervisor Snuffy died during
> > >> the bailout, drowned in the ocean, is on a slow fishing boat with no
> > >> comms on his way to port, or is being forcibly persuaded to be detailed
> > >> and explicit about EP-3 capabilities in a Beijing basement.
>
> > >> Once the hard discs, memory cards, crypto modules, whatever have been
> > >> dealt with, the EP-3 is an elderly turboprop with a lot of radio
> > >> receivers feeding to dead systems. Not a lot of genuine intel value
> > >> there: it's an ELINT platform, gee whiz, who knew?
>
> > >> The crew are the real prize which could compromise the capability:
> > >> keeping them together, alive, and getting them all home protects the
> > >> most important asset.
>
> > >>> Who cares what the Chinese would see on the plane, they would get that
> > >>> hardware via other means anyway.
>
> > >> A cynical part of me wonders how much of the hardware is "Made in China"
> > >> anyway. Radio receivers aren't exactly new or secret, it's what they
> > >> feed, what you can achieve with them and what you were sent to get that
> > >> matter.
>
> > > I always wondered why once they had landed and all that a rather nasty
> > > fire didn't break out onboard...
>
> > I read somewhere that the Chinese were unable to gain access for almost
> > an hour after the aircraft landed.
>
> That's what I understand..
> Seems like plenty of time to do some mischief...
>
>
>
> > Oner is forced to assume that everything too big to dump out of the
> > aircraft was comprehensibly smashed before they opened the doors...

Remember the history books where Japanese were having burn parties in
the back yard before Pearl? Of course part of the problem is learning
how to burn huge amounts of crap (where the lesson is, don't keep a
lot of crap in the safe). You end up with the huge pile of paper
smothers stuff on bottom and does not burn.

Or you have poor procedures to destruct like Iran embassy did when it
was overrun, Iranian rug merchants put the shredding back into
documents and they were published.

Gordon wrote:
> Ultimately, the pilot has responsibility for the safety of his crew --
> but when it involves spyplanes or other strategic assets that would
> obviously help the enemy, crews should understand that every effort
> must be made to keep those aircraft out of the hands of the enemy. I
> was appalled by the EP-3 pilots decision to land in China..

Gordon, I have to agree.

I try not to get too critical re: a pilot's actions when I don't
know the full meal deal on the situation, but this seemed fairly
egregious.

Orions do have a poor record in ditching AND in bailouts, IIRC,
but in my humble opinion that is part of what you sign up for.
That may take me (once again) outside the run-of-mill opinion....



Jeff
--
YOU KNOW YOU'RE A REDNECK IF...
Your dog can't watch you eat without gagging.

guy wrote:
> Fascinating Gordon, thank you, However it leads to another question,
> how easy is it to bale out of a P-3, especially the last man out?

Too lazy to look it up, but ISTR reading that the Orion's door
position relative to the empennage is not well suited to bailing
out. The bird has a poor record both in ditching and in bailouts.
As for the last man, it depends--is the autopilot capable of
holding the plane stable enough, in its damaged condition, for the
pilot to climb out of his seat, attach his chute (they do carry
them), and attempt an exit?


Jeff
--
The enemy diversion you are ignoring will turn out to be the main
attack.
Murphy's Laws of Combat

"frank" > wrote in message...
- Tankfixer > wrote:
> > Oner is forced to assume that everything too big to dump out of the
> > aircraft was comprehensibly smashed before they opened the doors...
-Remember the history books where Japanese were having burn parties in
-the back yard before Pearl? Of course part of the problem is learning
-how to burn huge amounts of crap (where the lesson is, don't keep a
-lot of crap in the safe). You end up with the huge pile of paper
-smothers stuff on bottom and does not burn.
-
-Or you have poor procedures to destruct like Iran embassy
-did when it was overrun, Iranian rug merchants put the shredding
-back into documents and they were published.

Yes, sad. The new rulers found that many of the
generals had been willing to talk to the Americans.
Of the 80 Iranian top generals, later, more than 70
were tortured and executed.
Certainly not a good thing to have others read the
records kept in the embassy.

I mean the navlights.They look like navlights but maybe those are antennas housing of ECM/SIGINT/RWR systems...or maybe not.
This is my question.

I have read several times Yefim Gordons book on the Foxbat but coulndt find anything on this point....