China establishes 'air-defence zone' over East China Sea

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,032
Likes
883
Country flag
Scrambling an interceptor with a full A2A load-out with tanker and AE&C support isn't "emergency defensive measures" to you?



That's exactly what the Japanese have been doing for (as you astutely pointed out) 50 years, the ECS ADIZ wont be any different.

WRT fuel, its a win win really. Scrambling aircraft x hundred times a year is some of the best operational training any air force can ask for. As I said before. The Japanese, or Americans for that matter, not complying with the ADIZ rules will be playing into the Chinese govt's hands in more ways than one.

Win-win either way.
the so called ADIZ was first invented by Americans and then introduced to Japan during the cold war to contain the communist world.

how do they even have the nerve to point fingers at us as if America is the only one entitled to have ADIZ?

i say establishing ADIZ in east China sea is certainly a good move, one thing for sure, it has exposed America's hypocrisy.

China should set up more ADIZ, i enjoy watching Americans jumping up and down when China defends herself with weapons invented by Americans.

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Absolutely wonderful news.

US flew a pair of B-52s into the ADIZ WITHOUT informing China. Good luck shooting the next time.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Absolutely wonderful news.

US flew a pair of B-52s into the ADIZ WITHOUT informing China. Good luck shooting the next time.
Now that could create a nasty situation.

Luckily the Chinese know which side of the bread is buttered!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
J20!;819019 WRT fuel said:
I don't think so that it is great for exercising and training the Chinese AF.

It is waste of precious fuel and depleting the necessary strategic reserve.

The nation, the world's second-biggest crude consumer, will add 245 million barrels of capacity in the second phase of its emergency stockpile plan, the Paris-based IEA said in its Medium-Term Oil Market Report released today. That's up 45 percent from the IEA's original estimate of 169 million barrels. Completion may be delayed to 2015, according to the agency, which originally forecast the project would be finished by the end of this year.
China, which buys about half its crude from overseas, is building emergency oil reserves equivalent to 100 days of net imports before 2020 in three phases to lessen the risk of supply disruptions, China Petrochemical Corp., the nation's top oil refiner, said in September 2009, citing a plan approved by the State Council. While high crude costs and construction delays have slowed purchases so far, many regional administrations have expressed interest in holding supplies, the IEA said.

China Seen Boosting Emergency Oil-Storage Capacity, IEA Says - Bloomberg
That is a report datelined May 14, 2013 1:30 PM GMT
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Japanese Airlines Defy China Demand for Data in Air Zone

ANA Holdings Inc. (9202) and Japan Airlines Co. (9201), the country's two biggest carriers, said they would stop reporting flight plans for planes traveling through a new Chinese air-defense zone that Japan rejects.
Japan's government told airlines to stop providing that information, citing China's "false" impositions, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said yesterday in Tokyo. Hours later, ANA and JAL said they wouldn't comply with China's demands, reversing their decision to supply that data.

Japanese Airlines Defy China Demand for Data in Air Zone - Bloomberg
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
@comperson
You are smart to get a response from me knowing I will illuminate and explain what I have said (that is not Pro-PRC . I am not a sock puppet of the Chinese DFI members.
Whether you are or not, it is amusing to me that t_co feels it necessary to give you a pat on the back for agreeing with Chinese.

But then, he is the self-appointed authority on techniques of debate. :-D

I hold the rhetorical high ground!
-t_co

ROFL!
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Absolutely wonderful news.

US flew a pair of B-52s into the ADIZ WITHOUT informing China. Good luck shooting the next time.
The expression "talking to a brick wall" would be quite fiting here.

Please give us an MOD quote were they even hint at foreign aircraft being "shot" at in the ECS AIDZ?

Why would the PLAAF shoot down bombers not in China's airsapace? An ADIZ is an interception zone. Its were incoming military aircraft are tracked, observed and escorted away from a countries AIRSPACE.

Chinese military aircraft have flown through Japan's ADIZ over 500 times in 2013. F15's and F4's are scrambled yes, but all they do is escort them out of the ADIZ.

I can't explain ADIZ's any further than I already have. Please google what an ADIZ's purpose is before repeating claims that bombers will be shot down.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
To expand on Compersion's points:

First, the NYT article confuses an Air Defense Zone and an Air Defense Identification Zone. An ADZ implies control of the territory or sea underneath it, and comes with shoot-down rights if the counterparty does not comply. An ADIZ is does not obligate other parties to do anything - it simply obligates the originating party (here, the Chinese Air Force) to patrol the zone, track flying objects, and identify them by communicative, electronic, or visual means.

Second, the US response is actually a non-response. Any country can send whatever it wants into an ADIZ. What China can then do is track and intercept said objects - if it so chooses to do so. A friend of mine who used to be stationed at Kadena has told me that on any given day, 80-100% of the air traffic (e.g. radar signatures) in what is now China's ADIZ is civilian traffic.

To make everyone's lives easier, China has asked civilian airliners to submit flight plans through the ADIZ in advance, so that 777s full of tourists and businesspeople don't get welcomed by J-11s sporting a full complement of A2A missiles - or, in what is a more likely maneuver, get shut out of Chinese airports. The real 'battle' here is at this civilian level, and it's one in which China has already mostly won. Other than Japan, every other nation's airlines are notifying China of their flight plans in advance. This means that China's job of sifting through air-defense radar returns just got cut by 4/5ths - which means China has already gotten what it wants.

Now, the US could certainly try to arm-twist South Korea, Singapore, Australia, and Taiwan into removing their airlines off the list, but that would be a legitimately unfriendly act towards China since China has already put its own airlines on the ADIZ lists of all those countries, and China could legitimately retaliate while successfully arguing any retaliation at the WTO.

The final piece of this puzzle is that China has built 280 airports in the past 10 years. China is the fastest growing civil aviation market on Earth. If any Asian carrier doesn't play ball on the ADIZ, it can expect to lose out on the market, since the profitability of an airline is notoriously sensitive to government regulation - even extremely 'soft'/'invisible'/'reasonable' regulations governing noise levels and flight patterns. Given that most of these Asian carriers need that growth to stay alive (due to rising fuel costs), China has essentially leveraged its internal strengths to hand the US and Japan a Hobbesian choice - force your allies to impose economic losses on their own airlines or let China get air control parity in the East China Sea (remember, Japan has held the advantage there for a long time since it was the only state with a huge ADIZ).

TLDR: China's move is something that leverages China's internal strengths well, most of the media (Chinese or Western) doesn't know shit, and the US is trying to chest-thump its way past a difficult choice while leaving said hard decisions to its East Asian allies (much as it has done in the MIddle East).
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
@comperson


Whether you are or not, it is amusing to me that t_co feels it necessary to give you a pat on the back for agreeing with Chinese.

But then, he is the self-appointed authority on techniques of debate. :-D

-t_co

ROFL!
"Agreeing with the Chinese"? Come on Ewald! When did you become so nationalistic?

When did factual narratives ever have to do with race or nationality? So an Indian, or a friggin Icelander for that matter, has to agree with you over me just because you're American and I'm Chinese? On the ground realities and INTERNATIONAL LAW have nothing to do with nationality or race.

What China has just implemented hasn't violated any international law in any way. Just as the much larger Japanese or American ADIZ's violate no International laws or norms.

Compersion agreeing with that doesn't make him a sock puppet. It makes him logical and impartial. Two things I'm starting to doubt you on.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
The expression "talking to a brick wall" would be quite fiting here.

Please give us an MOD quote were they even hint at foreign aircraft being "shot" at in the ECS AIDZ?

Why would the PLAAF shoot down bombers not in China's airsapace? An ADIZ is an interception zone. Its were incoming military aircraft are tracked, observed and escorted away from a countries AIRSPACE.

Chinese military aircraft have flown through Japan's ADIZ over 500 times in 2013. F15's and F4's are scrambled yes, but all they do is escort them out of the ADIZ.

I can't explain ADIZ's any further than I already have. Please google what an ADIZ's purpose is before repeating claims that bombers will be shot down.
What the MOD said was this:

In its statement, the Chinese Defence Ministry said aircraft must report a flight plan, "maintain two-way radio communications", and "respond in a timely and accurate manner" to identification inquiries.

"China's armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not co-operate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions," said the statement.
The emphasized words certainly due not rule out anything. China's action is clearly belligerent. As I said earlier, China's behavior pattern on the world stage is to either be a bully or to complain that it is being bullied. That pattern (similar to that of North Korea) has existed for 60 years. In the era of the internet, such actions by China are followed by sending out swarms of Chinese to argue for whatever it has done. We have seen that on DFI over and over and over again. China and its system of government remain a constant threat to free people.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
What the MOD said was this:



The emphasized words certainly due not rule out anything. China's action is clearly belligerent. As I said earlier, China's behavior pattern on the world stage is to either be a bully or to complain that it is being bullied. That pattern (similar to that of North Korea) has existed for 60 years. In the era of the internet, such actions by China are followed by sending out swarms of Chinese to argue for whatever it has done. We have seen that on DFI over and over and over again. China and its system of government remain a constant threat to free people.
Ewald, please define 'belligerent' in the context of language describing the enforcement measures in a country's ADIZ.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Ewald, please define 'belligerent' in the context of language describing the enforcement measures in a country's ADIZ.
"hostile, aggressive, threatening, antagonistic, warlike, warmongering, hawkish, pugnacious, bellicose, truculent, confrontational, contentious, militant, combative"


Define "defensive emergency measures" as used in MoD statement.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
What the MOD said was this:



The emphasized words certainly due not rule out anything. China's action is clearly belligerent. As I said earlier, China's behavior pattern on the world stage is to either be a bully or to complain that it is being bullied. That pattern (similar to that of North Korea) has existed for 60 years. In the era of the internet, such actions by China are followed by sending out swarms of Chinese to argue for whatever it has done. We have seen that on DFI over and over and over again. China and its system of government remain a constant threat to free people.
What's more, just because China did not say it would not shoot down UFOs does not mean that China said it would. Absence of a denial is not an affirmation or even a hint of one. That's Logic 101.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
What the MOD said was this:



The emphasized words certainly due not rule out anything. China's action is clearly belligerent. As I said earlier, China's behavior pattern on the world stage is to either be a bully or to complain that it is being bullied. That pattern (similar to that of North Korea) has existed for 60 years. In the era of the internet, such actions by China are followed by sending out swarms of Chinese to argue for whatever it has done. We have seen that on DFI over and over and over again. China and its system of government remain a constant threat to free people.
I'm sorry, what?!

That is the most RIDICULOUS post I've seen from you yet. t_co was right. What I and any rational spectator can see here is a clear American double-standard.

I would have thought Americans had tired of fighting unnecessary wars to "protect freedom" and "spread democracy". There are no good guys and bad guys in geopolitics Ewald, just different shades grey and individual interests.

When millitary flights from China transit through Japan's ADIZ, (which encompasses huge swathes of our and South Korea's EEZ, and comes as close as 130km to our country), CNN will produce a report on Japanese and American politicians decrying Chinese "agression", "expansionism", and at times even "hegemonism" that makes us all out to be monsters trying to destroy Japanese "freedom".

The next day we have (well-meaning) Americans armed with their patriotism, misinformation, (at times blatant ignorance) and their all important high horses to tell us all how horrible China is.

When China establishes the very same ADIZ as Japan or even your own US of A, lo and behold, China has "beligerent intentions" towards the "free world" and the Japanese and Americans are white doves with no ill intentions towards China at all.

China didn't enforce an ADIZ 50 years ago because it simply did not have the personnel or equipment to do so. The zone being implemented is a carbon copy of Japan's zone, yet China's habours "beligerent intentions?

I've told you too many times already about the perils of your "free"/brainwashing media. At least we know what CCTV and Xinhua are, government narative. You still believe that claptrap CNN and the BBC give you on the affairs of peoples living thousands of miles away from the US is the god given truth and it being basically a XEROX of US govt spin on world affairs is just a coincedence.

Please, please, please just do a little research that doesn't include mainstream media.
 
Last edited:

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
I would have thought Americans had tired of fighting unnecessary wars to "protect freedom" and "spread democracy". There are no good guys and bad guys in geopolitics Ewald, just different shades grey and individual interests.
The most warlike behavior related to this thread has been that of China. You can believe in your world of grey shades. How many people want to come and live in China and share it with you?

I've made my case. You are doomed to quibble endlessly to defend a totalitarian state. I'll leave you to talk to yourself.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
What's more, just because China did not say it would not shoot down UFOs does not mean that China said it would. Absence of a denial is not an affirmation or even a hint of one. That's Logic 101.
Yep, you are the logic expert.:rolleyes:
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,454
To expand on Compersion's points:

First, the NYT article confuses an Air Defense Zone and an Air Defense Identification Zone. An ADZ implies control of the territory or sea underneath it, and comes with shoot-down rights if the counterparty does not comply. An ADIZ is does not obligate other parties to do anything - it simply obligates the originating party (here, the Chinese Air Force) to patrol the zone, track flying objects, and identify them by communicative, electronic, or visual means.
Common !! you can do better !!!

Who has defined between ADZ and ADIZ ?? Is there even legality for these terms ??? Your incapacity to take any action is making you come up with BS excuses and even more shittier responses !!!

:lol:
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top