The truth is that the pilot did not voluntarily fly the plane into Chinese airpace. A Chinese plane collided with it in international airspace seriously damaging the plane. It took the great physical strength of the pilot, a former Nebraska lineman, just to land the plane. And it was far from being intact. The crew was very lucky to survive.
I was in that squadron. I worked on that very airplane. I know the mission, I know what SOP is. Without going into detail, they violated it. The plane could have and should have incinerated itself on the tarmac. The hardware was available, it needed only the will of the pilot to use it.
If that is true, why wasn't the pilot court martialled? Were you part of the squadron at the time of the incident? Is it conjecture on your part or specific knowledge of that incident?
Here is a Congressional Report on the incident.
From the Report:
"Defense Department spokesmen have stated that the EP-3 crew had about 15 to 20 minutes from the time of the incident until they made an emergency landing on Hainan Island and some 20 minutes more on the ground before they left the aircraft. According to the pilot, Lt. Osborn, the emergency destruction plan was activated “well out, well offshore.” In his April 13th press conference, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld noted that the crew “went through that [destruction] checklist and did an excellent job of doing everything that was, I believe, possible in the period of time they had.” Rumsfeld did not indicate that destruction of classified documents and equipment was complete, noting only that the crew completed “a major portion” of their checklist. Other Pentagon spokesmen have declined to provide additional details of the extent of the destruction completed.
The PRC has investigated the EP-3 that landed on Hainan Island and may have removed some electronic surveillance equipment. Although EP-3 aircraft have been operational for many years, a recent major upgrade known as the Sensor System Improvement added an array of new hardware and software to track, monitor, and process targeted radar and communications signals. The new systems are designed to collect a wider range of signals and to move data faster to sites where more detailed analysis can be undertaken.105 Equipment is designed, according to media accounts, with features by which software can be readily erased or “zeroized” in emergencies.
If the PRC obtained intact surveillance devices, attempts at “reverse engineering” could be made to create replicas for China’s own reconnaissance effort. This would not be an easy or rapid process, however, even though much information about surveillance equipment has been discussed in electronics trade publications. Observers speculate that the chief benefit to the PRC from its inspection of the EP-3 would be to gather information about U.S. targets and degree of success that could enable the PRC to prepare countermeasures, hindering future U.S. surveillance."
I am tired of this debate, I have been in it since the incident occurred.
Regardless of how the incident occurred, his primary responsibility, in that squadron, is to the equipment, NOT THE CREW.
Sorry, its a fact of life. In the military, some THINGS are more important than some PEOPLE.
And this is one such case.
I know this isn’t penetrating peoples logic. It bounces off.
But if people are a commanders FIRST priority, hadn’t we just all surrender now and save all our troops?
Please, think this through a little.
Al gator, I just read the beginning of the thread, and will differ to your military training that I had assumed.
5.56mm
That's a good question and to answer it honestly, I simply do not know. What I believe is this, it was the first real test of 'W' as commander in chief.
In the touchy feely PC world before 9/11, I think he just wanted the plane back, (I don’t know why, closing the barn door after the fact)and the crew home, since the chicoms had already trotted them out for propaganda.
The whole thing was handled wrongly, the only reason I can think is that too many upper brass had gotten too mushy headed after the Clinton admin had them.
But your point is valid and really would like to know the answer too. So would the crews of the other plane who took the opposite approach.