-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
EP-3 in China Discussion
- Thread starter bunk22
- Start date
- Status
Like I said in my earlier post, I was retired by the time this happened and got my information second hand. I guess it's a different mindset now. When I was flying what used to be termed "parpro" missions in straight P-3s back in the mid to late 1980s, we would have ditched. Our rules for flying off N. Korea, China and N.Viet Nam made it quite clear we would not land there under any circumstance. It was not that they were afraid for the crew, they were afraid of the compromise of information, technology and crypto. That is probably why the O-4/5 types you talked to felt they should have ditched. Times change.Flash said:
Thanks Zab for the addtional comments, I am happy to know that I still remember a few things from my days flying a Sky Pig.
Probably the only point I'd disagree with......The M&M radome would either rip off and possibly create a hole in the fuselage or dig into a swell and create a violent pitch-down. Or maybe nothing would happen, but my money would be on something catostrophic (as if a ditch isn't that already).
I remember this distinctly from Ready Room/O'Club discussions with the pilots (yes, those actually serve a good purpose, and it is a great time to brush up on your foosball game). This particuar point came up several times and most guys were not too concerned about it, they thought the impact would shatter/disintegrate it. They were worried about the antenna but you are screwed anyways if you are ditching. BTW, did all the Aussies make it out? Another good ditching story is the Nimrod that went down on its acceptance flight from depot, it was a green SIGINT bird. All made it out.
Like I said in my earlier post, I was retired by the time this happened and got my information second hand. I guess it's a different mindset now. When I was flying what used to be termed "parpro" missions in straight P-3s back in the mid to late 1980s, we would have ditched. Our rules for flying off N. Korea, China and N.Viet Nam made it quite clear we would not land there under any circumstance. It was not that they were afraid for the crew, they were afraid of the compromise of information, technology and crypto. That is probably why the O-4/5 types you talked to felt they should have ditched. Times change.
I agree, times do change. There were no hard and fast rules about where to land. Osborne did not violate orders by landing in China, there were no orders like that. We knew the risk of each country that we flew off of and knew the dangers associated with each, and I would have landed at all bu tone if faced with that or a certain death. The N Koreans are nuts and I would have taken the chance of ditching over landing there, a fast vs a slow death. I disagree that there was too much risk of a compromise of info. Procedures for handling that kind of situation have improved since the USS Liberty and the military as a whole knew what to do to mitigate the risk. Not a whole lot of chance of reading someones mail of they changed addresses :icon_wink . And who is to say the PRC actually got the stuff in the first place?
BTW, only a few O-4/5's disagreed with the crews decision, only two that I can think of off the top of my head. Also, the JO's flew 90% of the missions in my squadron without an O-4/5 on the crew. We deployed as individual crews and the O-4/5's would stay at home and do all the paperwork. Only one of my six crews had an O-4 MC and he was a Super JO when he showed up to my squadron and was not a DH. I would go with the most experienced.
Do the VP/VQ folks have rafts ? Do they get tossed out as part of the bailout drill? Self deploying?
P-3/EP-3's have more than enough rafts for everyone in addtion to the SV-2's, but you have to deploy them manually. And there is no guaranty the rafts will work. The P-3 that went down off of Oman one of the two rafts would not inflate, they all got cozy in the other one. And none of the crew took what they were suppose to when they got out, they just got the hell out (someone brings a water bottle, another a parachute, and the Nav is suppose to bring his charts.....which I always wondered about, what is he going to do? Navigate the crew across the Pacific to safety like Captain Bligh?)
The whole flight station DIDN'T get AMs??? And the tube rats did??? Are you f-ing kidding me?
I am sorry for not making myself clearer. Everyone on the crew got a meritorious Air Medal but Shane Osborne, who got a DFC instead. The rub was, and the point I was trying to make, was that 3 pilots flew the plane during the emergency and only one got a DFC, the other pilots got what everyone else got. Fair? In my opinion no. Shane and the senior enlisted guy on board, an FE, aslo got an MSM as well. I think it was for 'exceptional leadership' or something along those lines. A bit much but I was not the one deciding that.
Any other questions, other than exactly what secrets they were carrying?
Probably the only point I'd disagree with......The M&M radome would either rip off and possibly create a hole in the fuselage or dig into a swell and create a violent pitch-down. Or maybe nothing would happen, but my money would be on something catostrophic (as if a ditch isn't that already).
I remember this distinctly from Ready Room/O'Club discussions with the pilots (yes, those actually serve a good purpose, and it is a great time to brush up on your foosball game). This particuar point came up several times and most guys were not too concerned about it, they thought the impact would shatter/disintegrate it. They were worried about the antenna but you are screwed anyways if you are ditching. BTW, did all the Aussies make it out? Another good ditching story is the Nimrod that went down on its acceptance flight from depot, it was a green SIGINT bird. All made it out.
Like I said in my earlier post, I was retired by the time this happened and got my information second hand. I guess it's a different mindset now. When I was flying what used to be termed "parpro" missions in straight P-3s back in the mid to late 1980s, we would have ditched. Our rules for flying off N. Korea, China and N.Viet Nam made it quite clear we would not land there under any circumstance. It was not that they were afraid for the crew, they were afraid of the compromise of information, technology and crypto. That is probably why the O-4/5 types you talked to felt they should have ditched. Times change.
I agree, times do change. There were no hard and fast rules about where to land. Osborne did not violate orders by landing in China, there were no orders like that. We knew the risk of each country that we flew off of and knew the dangers associated with each, and I would have landed at all bu tone if faced with that or a certain death. The N Koreans are nuts and I would have taken the chance of ditching over landing there, a fast vs a slow death. I disagree that there was too much risk of a compromise of info. Procedures for handling that kind of situation have improved since the USS Liberty and the military as a whole knew what to do to mitigate the risk. Not a whole lot of chance of reading someones mail of they changed addresses :icon_wink . And who is to say the PRC actually got the stuff in the first place?
BTW, only a few O-4/5's disagreed with the crews decision, only two that I can think of off the top of my head. Also, the JO's flew 90% of the missions in my squadron without an O-4/5 on the crew. We deployed as individual crews and the O-4/5's would stay at home and do all the paperwork. Only one of my six crews had an O-4 MC and he was a Super JO when he showed up to my squadron and was not a DH. I would go with the most experienced.
Do the VP/VQ folks have rafts ? Do they get tossed out as part of the bailout drill? Self deploying?
P-3/EP-3's have more than enough rafts for everyone in addtion to the SV-2's, but you have to deploy them manually. And there is no guaranty the rafts will work. The P-3 that went down off of Oman one of the two rafts would not inflate, they all got cozy in the other one. And none of the crew took what they were suppose to when they got out, they just got the hell out (someone brings a water bottle, another a parachute, and the Nav is suppose to bring his charts.....which I always wondered about, what is he going to do? Navigate the crew across the Pacific to safety like Captain Bligh?)
The whole flight station DIDN'T get AMs??? And the tube rats did??? Are you f-ing kidding me?
I am sorry for not making myself clearer. Everyone on the crew got a meritorious Air Medal but Shane Osborne, who got a DFC instead. The rub was, and the point I was trying to make, was that 3 pilots flew the plane during the emergency and only one got a DFC, the other pilots got what everyone else got. Fair? In my opinion no. Shane and the senior enlisted guy on board, an FE, aslo got an MSM as well. I think it was for 'exceptional leadership' or something along those lines. A bit much but I was not the one deciding that.
Any other questions, other than exactly what secrets they were carrying?
To refute some of the specific points bought up...
You don't know of a single P-3 guy that agrees with what he did? Now you know a few
. Set us back ten years? Whoever implied that didn't ahve a clue what they were talking about. And reverse engineering? Who the hell would want to reverse engineer an EP-3? And the equiment on board.....best of luck to them 
.
The ChiComs gained BILLIONS worth of intel --- another friend of mine in the "business" told me some of the costs and compromises involved -- and no, I am not going to PM his name, either. Look around on the internet -- the information you seek is readily available. It sadly compares with the intel coup taken in the Pueblo debacle. Only this one could have been avoided by the final act of flying the other direction and doing one's duty -- there's that opinion stuff again
I don't know who told you that but it ain't true. I have seen the after action report and it isn't all roses, but it didn't stink to high heaven. Did this guy know what they destroyed before the PRC got on board? And billions? Your buddy had one too many before saying that. And compared to the Pueblo, no comparison at all. And I am familiar with what was compromised on the Pueblo too, it is mostly public now.
I think that's kind of implied.
You are wrong, it never was explicit/implied/suggested etc.
I also feel that they could have done a lot more to keep the Chinese off the plane after they landed. They could have just not opened the door. The aircraft was sovereign U.S. territory and every Mission Commander board I ever set on discussed this type of scenario in depth. They did not even try and keep the Chinese off. I doubt the Chinese would have forced their way on with guns blazing. If nothing else, there would have been more time to destroy crypto and equipment. From what I've heard and read, there was no real effort made to keep the Chinese off.
Who says they didn't keep them off for the plane for a bit? They did what they could, and did a decent job of it.
The crew did a great job flying the damaged plane, they failed in other areas.
How do you know they failed in other areas? You said yourself you don't know the full story.
Patmack18 said:
You don't know of a single P-3 guy that agrees with what he did? Now you know a few
. Set us back ten years? Whoever implied that didn't ahve a clue what they were talking about. And reverse engineering? Who the hell would want to reverse engineer an EP-3? And the equiment on board.....best of luck to them .The ChiComs gained BILLIONS worth of intel --- another friend of mine in the "business" told me some of the costs and compromises involved -- and no, I am not going to PM his name, either. Look around on the internet -- the information you seek is readily available. It sadly compares with the intel coup taken in the Pueblo debacle. Only this one could have been avoided by the final act of flying the other direction and doing one's duty -- there's that opinion stuff again
I don't know who told you that but it ain't true. I have seen the after action report and it isn't all roses, but it didn't stink to high heaven. Did this guy know what they destroyed before the PRC got on board? And billions? Your buddy had one too many before saying that. And compared to the Pueblo, no comparison at all. And I am familiar with what was compromised on the Pueblo too, it is mostly public now.
I think that's kind of implied.
You are wrong, it never was explicit/implied/suggested etc.
I also feel that they could have done a lot more to keep the Chinese off the plane after they landed. They could have just not opened the door. The aircraft was sovereign U.S. territory and every Mission Commander board I ever set on discussed this type of scenario in depth. They did not even try and keep the Chinese off. I doubt the Chinese would have forced their way on with guns blazing. If nothing else, there would have been more time to destroy crypto and equipment. From what I've heard and read, there was no real effort made to keep the Chinese off.
Who says they didn't keep them off for the plane for a bit? They did what they could, and did a decent job of it.
The crew did a great job flying the damaged plane, they failed in other areas.
How do you know they failed in other areas? You said yourself you don't know the full story.
vegita1220
User
So just what's with Soviet fighters and their inexplicable desire to mate with the P-3?
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_287.shtml
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_287.shtml
Tripp
You think you hate it now...
Good GOD that's close!
Obviously, the P-3 crew had poor knowledges...the Flanker pilot must've used those mysterious parabolas we've heard so much about.
On a serious note, this has been a really interesting thread for this non-big bird pilot...keep it coming. :thumbup_1
Flash said:
(referring to the Australian P-3 crash on Christmas Island years ago)
All I know is that according to P-3 urban legend (someone needs to compile all these into a book...), the 3P was sitting in the galley, at the crew table, facing aft, inboard (don't have a NATOPS handy, can't reference the actual name of the position). Supposedly at water impact, the head water breaker (big-ass plastic container of water in the restroom) actually went through the bulkhead and decapitated said 3P, which is why that seat is no longer available for setting 5 (takeoff, landing, etc).
Twelve years...that's gotta be a thread revival record.
I clicked on it for you the other day when I saw it. Definitely NSFW.
A thread resurrection to rule them all... and just in time for Easter, no less!
No kidding - don't click that link on a gov computer.
Not sure how many times this has happened since 2001... I can only think of the Riverine boats in recent memory.
I don't care if I'm called a Monday morning quarterback - it's a bad call to surrender TS material to certain countries, period. Anyone that doesn't think so is a rube. Happy to meet those rubes on a classified network to justify my point.
- Status