Japan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
F-2 are not old can serves easy again 20 years expensive ! but very good airframe in more soon all the fleet able to A2A BVR combat with AAM-4 and new variant of radar much better as the first right now only 50/90. Get JDAM now also

The F-3 is for replaced the 200 F-15J/DJ delivered on 10 years about 1982/1992 not modernised not able for BVR combat as Chinese Su-27 and J-11 not the A capable.
Except Israel F-15 modified for A2G combat all F-15 don' t talk ofc for E or export variant SG, i etc... are only able to be armed with free fall bombs of 1000 lbs, 2, a limited capacity for strike.

I add F-4EJ modernised " Kai " get ASM-2 AShM also but less capable than F-2 for the mission.
I think you got me wrong.
I was not saying F-2 is old. My words "somewhat failed its requirement", the requirement being "air dominance role" that SB mentioned F-2 was supposed to compliment F-15, and I didn't agree or disagree with that notion of SB either, but use that to further my question of F-3 project's purpose.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Is the highlighted portion legit or just sensationalistic reporting?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The number of scrambles (see below) by Air Self-Defense Force fighters against Chinese aircraft in the April-June quarter this year was up more than 80 from the 114 in the same period last year, SDF Chief of Joint Staff Katsutoshi Kawano said at a press conference on Thursday. Kawano also said there were cases in which Chinese aircraft approached the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture.

The Chinese military has been engaging in provocative activities at sea and in the air since early June, as exemplified by the intrusion of Chinese warships into the contiguous zone off the Senkakus. The government is heightening its alert.

Scrambles against Chinese aircraft in this quarter were level with the about 200 times — a record high for any quarter — in the January-March quarter this year. The number of scrambles has been released on a country-by-country quarterly basis since fiscal 2001.

On a half-year basis, the number of scrambles in January-June this year increased by 50 percent from that of July-December last year.

“We have observed that Chinese military aircraft have flown southward and engaged in activities near the Senkakus,” said Kawano at the press conference.

“Their activities seem to be expanding and we are concerned about Chinese military activities in general, including the movement of naval ships,” he added.

According to government sources, generally Chinese aircraft in the East China Sea tended to stay in a certain area north of the Senkakus. However, in multiple cases recently, they have been advancing southward in the direction of the Senkakus, although they have not attempted to approach Japanese airspace near the islands.

On June 17, an ASDF F-15 fighter jet scrambled against a Chinese fighter jet that flew southward in the direction of the Senkakus. According to government sources, the ASDF fighter approached the Chinese jet and issued a warning. However, the Chinese jet refused to immediately retreat, which resulted in both jets flying at each other several times. To avoid danger, the ASDF fighter launched a flare as a decoy against potential incoming missiles before retreating from the area.

Senior officials of the Defense Ministry said similar incidents have occurred several times in the past. At the press conference, Kawano said: “We would make announcements if there was a dangerous incident. I don’t think it applies in this case, though.”

■ Scramble

When an incursion into Japanese airspace by a foreign aircraft seems imminent, Air Self-Defense Force fighters immediately take off to monitor or warn the aircraft. The operation started in 1958. In fiscal 2015, there were 873 scrambles, including 571 against Chinese aircraft and 288 against Russian aircraft.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
Is the highlighted portion legit or just sensationalistic reporting?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yes although it is an unconfirmed report the former general that leaked the news towards the internet received reports from his former subordinates.
He mentioned that the PLAAF plane showed hostile moves in which the PLAAF fighters made a 90° attack pattern from the side on a JASDF fighter in which the JASDF pilot thought he would be dead.
The Japanese government down played the incident trying to calm things down by stating it was common for planes "closing in" on one another but from what I read it was anything but normal.
If it happens again it will lead to an accident or worse a confrontation.
Does PLAAF really want another "Hainan Island Incident"?
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Yes although it is an unconfirmed report the former general that leaked the news towards the internet received reports from his former subordinates.
He mentioned that the PLAAF plane showed hostile moves in which the PLAAF fighters made a 90° attack pattern from the side on a JASDF fighter in which the JASDF pilot thought he would be dead.
The Japanese government down played the incident trying to calm things down by stating it was common for planes "closing in" on one another but from what I read it was anything but normal.
If it happens again it will lead to an accident or worse a confrontation.
Does PLAAF really want another "Hainan Island Incident"?

I was suspicious at first because this was the only English language source of the incident I could find. Looks it is legit then. In either case I think both sides want to downplay the incident if possible.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Can someone, presumably SmuraiBlue, translate this page from Japanese? Many Chinese web site has quoted this Japanese page as the source of the revelation of the incident.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I have read the Chinese translation in summary. I want to hear from Japanese speaker to verify.

According the Chinese translation, before what SB describe
He mentioned that the PLAAF plane showed hostile moves in which the PLAAF fighters made a 90° attack pattern from the side on a JASDF fighter in which the JASDF pilot thought he would be dead.
The Japanese pilot tried and failed to approach the 6 clock of the PLAAF fighter with the intension of shooting tracer round.

Here is what was described in the Sankei article.

5th paragraph, JASDF tried to go 6 clock and shoot.

スクランブルをかけた空自機は中国機の周囲を大きく回り込み、後方から真横につけるポジショニングを試みた。中国機パイロットの顔が見える位置から信号射撃などを行い、退去を呼びかけるためだ。

Google translation,
(J)ASDF machine scrambled the wraparound large around the Chinese machine, tried to positioning to put from the rear to the right beside. And provide signal fire from the position where the visible face of China pilots, but in order to call to leave.
Note "signal fire" correspondent to "信号射撃" which means "tracer round".

6th paragraph, then PLAF out maneuver JASDF into a position of locking on (not necessarily doing so).
This is essentially what SB described.
 しかし、中国機は想定外の行動に出る。大きく回り込もうとする空自機に対し機首を向け、正面から向き合う体勢をとったのだ。織田氏は「これはいつでもミサイルを撃てる戦闘態勢で、事実上の攻撃動作といえる」と指摘する。

Google translation,
However, China machine comes into unexpected action. Towards the nose to the ASDF machine to be Mawarikomo big, it took the posture to face from the front. Oda clan is pointed out that "This is at any time Uteru the missile combat readiness, it can be said that the de facto attack operation"

The sequence of events in the incident is apparent to me.

My question to SB is then, why did you omit this part before the part you translated? Shouldn't you tell us the whole truth?
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
My question to SB is then, why did you omit this part before the part you translated? Shouldn't you tell us the whole truth?
Are you implying something?
For your information for all it's worth, I wrote my post off memory from a news clip I read over a week ago.

As for you question here are the paragraphs that you questioned.

空自と中国空軍の間には「北緯××度」という暗黙の了解がある。従来、中国機はそのラインまで来るときびすを返すように北上し、空自機と遭遇することはなかった。しかし今回、中国機はその一線を初めて越えてきた。

 政府関係者は「珍しい事例」としか説明しないが、実際は現場空域でかつてない緊迫した攻防が繰り広げられていた。

スクランブルをかけた空自機は中国機の周囲を大きく回り込み、後方から真横につけるポジショニングを試みた。中国機パイロットの顔が見える位置から信号射撃などを行い、退去を呼びかけるためだ。

 しかし、中国機は想定外の行動に出る。大きく回り込もうとする空自機に対し機首を向け、正面から向き合う体勢をとったのだ。織田氏は「これはいつでもミサイルを撃てる戦闘態勢で、事実上の攻撃動作といえる」と指摘する。

  中国機の挑発的行動はなおも続いた。空自機は不測の事態を避けるため同空域からの離脱を図ったが、中国機はこれを追尾。空自機は敵機のレーダー誘導ミサイ ルなどを撹(かく)乱(らん)する装置を噴射しながら危機を脱した。織田氏によると、こうした事案は6月に入って複数回発生しているという。

The JASDF spot the PLAAF plane and scrambled to intercept the incoming plane.
Normally PLAAF would head back at XX°north longitude but this was not the case so the JASDF pilot tried to line up with the incoming PLAAF fighter maneuvering his plane in a large circle so not to be taken as an aggressive move and once lined up and able to make visual contact with the PLAAF pilot fire tracers but this did not happen since as the JASDF pilot was maneuvering his fighter the PLAAF pilot turned his fighter directly towards the JASDF fighter and placed his fighter into attack position.
The JASDF pilot not wanting to aggravate the situation launched flares and punched out from the direct location to avoid possible conflict.
The retired general goes on further stating that this kind of incident happened several time in June this year.

So no I did not leave out anything that actually happened only some parts that the JASDF pilot was intending to do subscribed within manual.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Yes although it is an unconfirmed report the former general that leaked the news towards the internet received reports from his former subordinates.
He mentioned that the PLAAF plane showed hostile moves in which the PLAAF fighters made a 90° attack pattern from the side on a JASDF fighter in which the JASDF pilot thought he would be dead.
The Japanese government down played the incident trying to calm things down by stating it was common for planes "closing in" on one another but from what I read it was anything but normal.
If it happens again it will lead to an accident or worse a confrontation.
Does PLAAF really want another "Hainan Island Incident"?

well, thats from Japanese side ... it does taste very salty :eek::p
 

AlyxMS

Junior Member
Registered Member
Calm, let's not get personal and political shall we?

This is yet another piece of news with conflicting info from both sides.

国防部新闻局答:日方有关言论纯属颠倒黑白、混淆视听。6月17日,中国军队两架苏—30战斗机在东海防空识别区例行性巡航。日两架F—15战机高速逼近挑衅,甚至开启火控雷达对我照射。我军机果断应对,采取战术机动等措施,日机投放红外干扰弹后逃逸。日机的挑衅性行动极易引发空中意外事件,危害双方人员安全,破坏地区和平稳定。

The highlighted part:
June 17th, two Chinese Su-30 which was patrolling in East China Sea ADIZ when two Japanese F-15 approached at high speed and even switched on the fire control radar. Chinese fighters countered with tactical maneuver and the Japanese fighter left after dumping flares.

Seems like both sides are trying to play the victim here.
I think we need more information before coming up with any conclusion.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
The highlighted part:
June 17th, two Chinese Su-30 which was patrolling in East China Sea ADIZ when two Japanese F-15 approached at high speed and even switched on the fire control radar. Chinese fighters countered with tactical maneuver and the Japanese fighter left after dumping flares.

Seems like both sides are trying to play the victim here.
I think we need more information before coming up with any conclusion.

Interesting, if JASDF had turned on the fire control radar as described then PLAAF should have it on flight recorder.
Wonder when why they haven't released it to the public yet.
 

AlyxMS

Junior Member
Registered Member
Interesting, if JASDF had turned on the fire control radar as described then PLAAF should have it on flight recorder.
Wonder when why they haven't released it to the public yet.

I don't think PLA ever released flight recorder recordings, ever. :confused:

Maybe we'll never know about what actually happened.
Maybe it will just end up like the PLAN-JMSDF fire control radar incident.

Time will tell I guess.
 
Top