A Chinese fighter jet came within 10 feet of a US Air Force B-52 bomber flying over the South China Sea on Tuesday, according to the US military.

The Chinese pilot “flew in an unsafe and unprofessional manner, demonstrated poor airmanship by closing with uncontrolled excessive speed, flying below, in front of, and within 10 feet of the B-52, putting both aircraft in danger of collision,” US Indo-Pacific Command said in a Thursday statement. “We are concerned this pilot was unaware of how close he came to causing a collision.”

News of the latest Chinese intercept comes as President Joe Biden is expected to speak with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi when he visits the White House on Friday, CNN reported on Thursday. It is not clear whether the meeting will be a formal discussion or a more informal meet and greet. Wang is also expected to meet with Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday and national security adviser Jake Sullivan on Friday.

  • rbesfe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Chinese military is severely lacking in accountability and professionalism. The pilots think this kind of flying projects skill, when really it shows their incompetence.

    • bemenaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is completely not true. It does not show incompetence whatsoever. Quite the opposite actually. Dangerous, reckless, unprofessional, yes. But at those speeds, it takes skill to get that close, and not be pulled into the other plane and crash, when the other plane is not actively participating in the stunt. That’s why the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels, and every other stunt team in the world practice for 100’s of hours on this. It is not easy to do in any case. Bernoulli’s principle makes it get more difficult the faster you are moving. That is why a chinese pilot crashed into an E3 years ago, when he tried to pull the same crap.

      • ditty@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        A professional would recognize the slim margin for error and numerous things that could go wrong and just not do this type of crazy stunt at all

        • bemenaker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          As I said it’s unprofessional, but to do it and not crash does take skill. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t stupid as it is.

        • nednobbins@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          You’re saying this as if the pilot was just hotdogging and was totally ignorant of the risks. That’s pretty unlikely.

          The Chinese government has been pretty clear about what they think of “freedom of navigation exercises”. If Chinese bombers were flying around the coast of the US you can be damn sure we’d be scrambling fighters to crawl up their butts too.

          Those pilots got orders and carried them out successfully. You may disagree with the orders but it’s silly to accuse the pilot of lack of professionalism.

    • Zev@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lol… All the dumb downvotes these days… At least reply after a downvote to explain why You downvoted in the first place. Annoying 😞 but funny 😂🤣

      Edit: how’d I get more downvotes then the messages below? 👇 🤣😂

  • Coreidan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    And? They’ve been doing this shit for 20+ years and nothing ever comes of it.

    • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. The Chinese pilot who collided with the Navy EP-3 was honored. He was pretty dead at the time but none the less. The Chinese want their pilots to fly like this.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        China is so reliant on the US economy that the odds of a war with China are exceptionally low.

        Considering US/China relations a cold war and not just dick waving is a massive exaggeration of Chinese capabilities.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do you think that the cold war with the USSR was announced by Congress or something? A cold war doesn’t mean it will go hot; we never waged war with the USSR.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            A cold war is very specifically a situation that could go hot at any time. If that possibility does not exist, you are not in a cold war, you are geopolitical rivals.

            The hint is in the name. Cold war.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    He was just communicating

    Charlie: Well, if you were directly above him, how could you see him? Maverick: Because I was inverted. Iceman: [coughs] Bullshit. Goose: No, he was, man. It was a really great move. He was inverted. Charlie: You were in a 4G inverted dive with a MiG-28? Maverick: Yes, ma’am. Charlie: At what range? Maverick: About two meters? Goose: Well, it’s actually about one and a half, I think. It was one and a half. I’ve got a great Polaroid of it, and he’s right there, must be one and a half. Maverick: Was a nice picture. Goose: Thanks. Charlie: Eh, Lieutenant, what were you doing there? Goose: Communicating. Maverick: Communicating. Keeping up foreign relations. I was, you know, giving him the bird. Goose: You know, the finger

  • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Shouldn’t all bombers be flying with fighter escorts? How did a Chinese fighter plane manage to get so close to it?

      • Destraight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why not? The Chinese fighter jet got too close. Had a fighter been following that B52 that Chinese fighter wouldn’t have been able to get close, because our fighter jet would shoot him down

        • Zron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah yes, let’s potentially start WW3 with a nuclear power because a Chinese pilot got too close, and an American pilot got an itchy trigger finger.

          I’d love for that to be the reason I get flash boiled in a nuclear strike.

          • Destraight@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            So why are we bothering bitching about it then? If we can’t do anything about it then this news report should have never happened and we should just shut the fuck up about it

            • PiousAgnostic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Wow, you get so angry when learning something new. It’s worth reporting about because it’s one small twitch of the finger from an international incident.

        • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not how that works in international airspace, you can’t shoot down any plane that gets to close or looks at you funny.

          This kind of engagement is a delicate dance with serious consequences attached to aggressive actions.

        • bemenaker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because that is an act of war. They are in international waters/air space. They are both allowed to be there. It is dangerous and unprofessional to get that close. The presence being known is all that matters. That jet can engage from 10 miles away or more, depending on the missiles it carries. Shooting it down just for getting close would start a war. And we do the same thing to their planes. We just maintain a safe distance. The US and Russia have done this since the 1940’s to each other.

        • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          If nothing else, the fighter could lock their weapons at the Chinese fighter jet and make them sweat a bit.

          • bemenaker@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Act of war. They don’t do that. That doesn’t happen in real life, that scene from Top Gun was for dramatic effect. They never do that unless they are actively engaged to kill.

            • nednobbins@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I think the US government considers active radar jamming to be an act of war but I’m not aware of any statements or treaties that would make targeting itself an act of war. As I understand it the US and China do it to each other fairly regularly.

          • nednobbins@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            As I understand it, a “weapons lock” is mostly about deliberately pointing your detectors at a target. The target may notice a spike in radar sweeps but they don’t actually know what the other vessel is doing with that radar information.

            It’s kind of like when someone starts staring at you really hard. You get a feeling that they’re probably up to something but you don’t actually know if they’re coming to take a swing at you or if it’s just RBF.

            From what I’ve read it’s something that happens fairly regularly. If you want to warn an other military vehicle without escalating to warning shots you flash some targeting sensors at them.

            My guess is that the fighter and bomber were targeting each other and that a bunch of land based radars on the Chinese coast joined the party too.

            edit: looks like I was wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_lock-on It seems that “lock on” as we know it from movies and video games isn’t a thing with modern military equipment. I suspect the signal intelligence folks still have some thing that tells a pilot, “data suggests that someone may be planning to shoot you”.

    • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are only fighter escorts if there is a specific threat with hostile intent that requires them. Most non-fighter Air Force aircraft don’t fly with escorts routinely.

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most likely the bomber was flying there to establish our right to do. By not being a fighter it helps avoid an engagement. I have no specific knowledge of this incident, but in general we don’t want an engagement as that can escalate quicky. We just want to say that we don’t recognize the borders they claim.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, we don’t really do that any more. It’s not really necessary.

      We put the fighters where they need to be when they need to be there. This bomber is just flying its patrol route, they don’t need to be protected along their path to the target, they don’t need to be anywhere near their targets, they’re loaded with cruise missiles and they strike from dozens or hundreds of miles away.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      China can just forcibly move people whenever they want so this isn’t really a concern for them.

  • SuperJetShoes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Presumably the pilot would have been ordered to do this. To what end? Why?

    Yes China, we know you want Taiwan back. Either commit to solid action or don’t. This bizarre behaviour just risks lives and expensive aircraft.

    Seriously, what’s the point?

    • nednobbins@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      They explain why in the article.

      From China’s point of view, the US regularly sends planes thousands of miles from its coast to go to harass China. They view it as the equivalent of when an other kid starts waving their hands in your face and saying, “I’m not touching you. I’m not touching you.” They feinting back.

      Both the freedom of navigation exercise and the response are messages. The US is saying, “We can project force all the way to your front door. If push comes to shove, we can start blowing up your shit.” China is essentially responding with, “You got yours and I got mine. You wanna fuck around and find out?”

      That’s what it boils down to. It’s an extremely angry conversation between superpowers.

    • kick_out_the_jams@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      aircraft within 10ft of each other is not safe.

      if it’s that normal it’s a simple matter of time until an accident.

      • ours@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        71
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah but it has “China” in its name so it should all belong to China! Taps forehead

        Checks map

        Oof, Taiwan, the Philippines, and parts of Japan amongst others are not going to be happy to learn this.

        • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          US ships and aircraft follow international law and don’t endanger others with illegal maneuvers. You’re allowed to be there, you’re not allowed to try to almost hit (and in multiple cases actually hit) someone else that is allowed to be there.

        • Stuka@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well for one we aren’t flying those aircraft carriers within an unsafe distance from other…vessels

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        51
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, the Chinese are forbidden to fly planes there but Americans may of course do so, great logic my friend /s

    • Just_Pizza_Crust@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For some context, the South China Sea is a giant sea between China, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, and a few others. Currently, China is pushing for what it calls the “Nine-Dash Line” policy which would in effect forcibly blockade all other ASEAN nations from trading.

      Imagine if Italy claimed the entire Mediterranean Sea including the coastline of other nations, then prevented others from trading under the threat of military invasion. That’s basically what China is trying to do here.

    • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s flying, and the there’s flying like a moron. No matter where you are, in your own air space or someone else’s, flying like a moron is a terrible idea.

      • 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Traveling within 10 feet of another vehicle where the speeds are measured as a percentage of the speed of sound (Mach) is definitely flying like a moron.

        • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not always, I fly 10 feet away from another plane all the time. The difference is we planned it from the beginning and are both actively participating.

          • 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, but that is well planned, both pilots probably meet before the flight, I think, and actually discuss the whole routine including the distance, because unexpected turbulence and a dozen other factors can throw the plan off, whereas fighter jet meets B-52 without any plan or possibly even contact, at 400+ knots is a bad idea.

            • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Absolutely, intercepts have prescribed international standards that must be observed to ensure safety of flight. I was just commenting that it’s not always a bad idea if done correctly.

    • nicetriangle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This happened in international airspace. Doesn’t matter what the body of water is called. The entirety of the gulf of Mexico doesn’t belong to Mexico either. Nor does the Indian ocean belong to India.

      Also the China Sea was originally named by the Portuguese.

      • hddsx
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, no, his logic is sound. The Atlantic Ocean will hereby be renamed the East American Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean will hereby be renamed the West American Ocean. The South China Sea will hereby be renamed the West West American Ocean. The Indian Ocean will hereby be renamed the South West American Ocean.

        Checkmate, China

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You checking your China ‘this is totally all mine’ new map in your notes? The 9 dash line is hand drawn and totally arbitrary, and is basically saying ‘this is mine now.’

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also known as the Vietnamese East Sea, Malaysian Champa Sea, Indonesian North Natuna Sea, and Philippines Luzon Sea.