|
View the H-Asia Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-Asia's April 2001 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in H-Asia's April 2001 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the H-Asia home page.
H-ASIA
*****************************************************************
From: David Cowhig <dcowhig@public3.bta.net.cn>
Subject: H-ASIA: PRC Web Forum -- Recon Plane Scratch Mark Follies
http://talkshow.163.com/index.php?keyword=%D7%B2%BA%DB&search_by=subject
Interesting analyses of the collision continue to appear on the web. The
pattern of censorship is interesting too. An April 19 article on
http://talkshow.163.com disappeared to be
replaced by the milder version
and more politically correct version at the URL above that still makes
the same point. Not only are the scratch marks consistent with the U.S.
plane making a wide turn but they are also consistent with the Chinese
plane pulling in front of the U.S. plane and being hit since even though
it the Chinese plane is faster, if it flies at an angle to the U.S.
plane it may be slower in the direction of the U.S. plane's motion than
the U.S. plane. So the scratch marks do not show which plane was
responsible.
The original version of April 19 was entitled
"Can the Scratch Marks Determine Responsibility? Try to Analyze it Using
Physics"
"What can the scratch marks on the surveillance plane prove? Can they be
used to determine responsibility? I think the Chinese side should be
careful on this issue. The remarks made by the Chinese side that "the
antenna is bent backward, and there is paint of our J8II on the front of
the propeller and other parts of the surveillance plane" seem
convincing. However, is is reliable to use the marks to determine that
the surveillance plane changed direction and rammed into our plane? In
fact, the marks can only prove that at the instant of the collision the
left front side of the surveillance plane is on the front side of our
plane, and that the surveillance plane indeed the side that is applying
force and our plane is on the reaction side. It is true that the U.S.
surveillance plane bumped into our plane but this cannot determine who
is making the turn. From the kinematical point of view, the interaction
between two moving objects at a certain time can only be used as
reference objects, and have nothhing to do with the direction of
movement prior to that moment. If a small fast vehicle goes past a
large slow vehicle and makes a quick turn toward the large car, its
speed in the direction of the large vehicle may be slower than that the
latter even though its speed is higher. Marks made from the collision
between the two vehicles will be the same as the two planes. If the
American devil side points out this fact, we won't have anything to say
in response. I hope our side will not just focus on the collision marks
but try to find more evidence to prove who made the turn and therefore
should shoulder the responsibility. I believe the truth will eventually
be revealed to the world."
One sceptic noted, how does a big plane make a wide turn and hit a
nimble little plane 400 meters away?
http://talkshow.163.com/comments.php3?COMMENTS[commentID]=987744384&category=news&articleID=news_39&topmax=0
=================================================================
To post to H-ASIA simply send your message to:
<H-ASIA@h-net.msu.edu>
For holidays or short absences send post to:
<listserv@h-net.msu.edu> with message:
SET H-ASIA NOMAIL
Upon return, send post with message SET H-ASIA MAIL
H-ASIA WEB HOMEPAGE URL: http://h-net.msu.edu/~asia/
 Humanities & Social Sciences Online 
|