A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"China blamed in '01 air collision"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #6  
Old September 15th 03, 12:35 AM
Ogden Johnson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Luca Morandini wrote:

Ogden Johnson III wrote:


"Mike Yared" wrote:


The key part of that report, whether missed by you or the Washington
Times deponent won't even try to guess, was that the crew didn't
manage to destroy all of the classified material and/or equipment
aboard the plane, so some compromise of classified material and/or
equipment to the PRC certainly occurred.

OJ III
[Of course the report didn't identify anything that might have been
compromised; and, as reported in the press, did not blame the crew for
their failure to destroy everything classified, apparently recognizing
that they might have been a tad overtasked by the situation they found
themselves in.]


I know this controversy is old, and, to some extent, irrelevant, but...
was the pilot bound by regulations to ditch the aircraft ?


No. Ditching aircraft, particularly airliner-sized ones, is an
in-extremis, "We're all gonna die anyway", action. However well it
plays in the movies. In this particular situation, no guarantee that
the aircraft - or more correctly, its contents - would be
unrecoverable.

I mean, when he realized all the sensitive material couldn't be
destroyed,


The report, AFAIK, did not go into detail on how much undestroyed
material was involved, or when it became apparent to the aircrew that
some material would not be destroyed.

shouldn't he set the autopilot on and bail out himself (after
allowing for the rest of the crew to bail out safely, of course) ?


Same reason as with the ditching; whatever the aircrew did, there was
no guarantee that the aircraft, wherever it crashed, would be
unrecoverable.

OJ III
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CAAC in China had approved below 116kg aircraft sold in China without airworthiness cetificate Luo Zheng Home Built 0 June 27th 04 03:50 AM
"Boeing sale to China skirts ban on technology transfer" Mike Military Aviation 1 February 6th 04 04:57 AM
China to buy Eurofighters? phil hunt Military Aviation 90 December 29th 03 05:16 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM
"China blamed in '01 air collision" Mike Yared Military Aviation 2 September 14th 03 06:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.