politics

S Korea says Japan showed no definitive proof of radar lock-on

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

@BeerDeliveryGuy

Are you talking about SK’s video with motion graphic titles, dramatic BGM, and comprised of 70% stolen footage?

Both of the original Japanese and the embellished S. Korean YouTube video clips. Those kind of video clips are just for entertainment and propaganda. If the Abe administration believed the video clip can be regarded as a serious evidence provided to any foreign country in diplomacy, then their intelligent level is less than little children.

Yes. The S. Korean version of the video clips were more entertaining, at least to me. Probably most kids will agree with me.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Do you really believe that kind of YouTube video clip emulating a scene of TV drama or sitcom can be regarded as a serious evidence provided officially to any other foreign country in diplomacy?

Are you talking about SK’s video with motion graphic titles, dramatic BGM, and comprised of 70% stolen footage?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

BeerDeliveryGuy

They detected the FCR by the alert system (one of the crew members says “FCR detected! Geez that thing is loud”) then in the same pass they made a visual confirmation of the direction of the antenna array and gun.

Even kids show evidence first before arguing with their classmates in school. The Abe administration argues first even before showing any supporting evidence, and continues arguing even without any future plan of providing evidence. Even most educated children do not behave like the Abe administration.

Do you really believe that kind of YouTube video clip emulating a scene of TV drama or sitcom can be regarded as a serious evidence provided officially to any other foreign country in diplomacy?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

@extanker

You consider Japan's reluctance a smoking gun but South Korea's reluctance to hand over their ship's radar data is no big deal...

Isn't it obvious to you that the one criticizing the other should first show the relevant evidence? The burden of proof lies in the Abe administration, not in S. Korean government or navy. It is amazing that the Abe administration has been able to criticize the S. Korean navy without any supporting evidence and data so far, and it has been worked at least in Japan. Now the Abe administration requests the military data from S. Korea, yet without showing any willingness to provided its own evidence or data. Wow!

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

It is spectacular that so many Japanese laymen bombard the twitter messages of Toshio Tamogami, an expert on aircraft defense and the formal Chief of Staff of Japan's Air Self-Defense Force. Those verbally aggressive Japanese jingoists attack their own player, an ultra-right wing Japanese politician. They remind me of the Red Guards in China during the 1960s. Then, it would not any more surprising that they criticize the S. Korean government and navy, ignoring any fact that may make them suspect their sentimental belief. It is scary that the Abe administration instigates domestic anti-S. Korean sentiment, exactly the same way as Mao Zedong did to the Red Guards.

https://twitter.com/toshio_tamogami/status/1084594819979046912

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

With allies like this who needs enemy's.

Japan remember next time they have a conflict on the mainland to stay out of it! Even Letting America use our land in support of S. Korea should be removed from the table. S. Korea should pay a price for its nastiness towards a country that has supported them for decades!

Apologies given and compensation paid on demand. Has it done any good? They hate us now more than they ever did. This weak response to Korea has to end!

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Regarding Seoul's claim that the Japanese surveillance plane was flying menacingly low toward the South Korean ship, which is another key issue of the incident, Japan seemed to show partial acceptance, Choi said.

It's not key issue, their effort to replace the incident of radar lock-on with the menacingly low-flyby as if it were a fait accompli not working at all.

As expected, several media(Including that Asahi) in Japan already reported Japan MoD strongly protesting and demanding S.K DoD to make correction on it's untrue statements.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

japan's reluctance to hand over the frequency of the supposed radar lock makes it very difficult to believe they were actually locked on to.

You consider Japan's reluctance a smoking gun but South Korea's reluctance to hand over their ship's radar data is no big deal...

4 ( +5 / -1 )

What a deja vu from how Korean academia was like at collaborative efforts for common Asian history textbooks.

Academia?

You're too generous, they are more like spoiled kids who were caught with their hands in the cookie jar but too proud to admit the truth and still denies they have not done wrong and argues that the jar was too close to the ledge and/or not positioned properly so (s)he was moving it so it did not drop.

You know the type, who never gives up trying to self justify themselves even though nobody is going to believe it, keeps on telling the same thing until everyone just gives up resulting to (s)he alienating (her)him self alienating from the others forcing (her)himself into further isolation.

Basically cornering (her)himself with no where to escape?

Never changed from 1895 onwards.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Shouting, Spluttering, Pounding on the table. What a deja vu from how Korean academia was like at collaborative efforts for common Asian history textbooks.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

the crew of the aircraft determined the "lock" by looking at the direction of the antenna or sensor array on the ship (exactly what they were looking at is unclear)

They detected the FCR by the alert system (one of the crew members says “FCR detected! Geez that thing is loud”) then in the same pass they made a visual confirmation of the direction of the antenna array and gun.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

If SK will not comply with Japan’s request for the radar data, quid-pro-quo; there is no reason Japan should reveal the detection capabilities of the P-1, or risk angering nations like Italy, Portugal and Spain, who use the same radar system.

this is only an issue to laymen with no understanding of the systems involved.

every single aircraft assigned to missions like this is capable of receiving FCR threats and recording the frequency of the radar. you do not even need a military vehicle to do this, you can go buy equipment that will do this for you on ebay for under 50 USD. people used to have radar detectors in their cars. far simpler maybe, but with additional components built in, it is not at all difficult to identify the frequency of the source radar.

japan's reluctance to hand over the frequency of the supposed radar lock makes it very difficult to believe they were actually locked on to. according to the audio, the crew of the aircraft determined the "lock" by looking at the direction of the antenna or sensor array on the ship (exactly what they were looking at is unclear). this is not a reliable way to determine a radar lock. optical sensors can track aircraft and i'd imagine on a ship like that an optical sensor can be used to slew the radar to it without the radar actually emitting anything.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

As some Japanese criticized the evaluation of Toshio Tamogami,  former Chief of Staff of Japan's Air Self-Defense Force, recently he assured again that he is an ultra-right Japanese chauvinist, and added some further elucidation:

http://tamogami-toshio.jp/news/%E9%9F%93%E5%9B%BD%e3%80%80%E7%81%AB%E5%99%A8%E7%AE%A1%E5%88%B6%E3%83%AC%E3%83%BC%E3%83%80%E3%83%BC%E7%85%A7%E5%B0%84%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6%E3%81%AB%E9%96%A2%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6/

I understand few Japanese experts can overcome political attacks from those jingoists, but his conclusion is still the same:

火器管制レーダー照射自体が危険であるからという理由では、やがて理由にならなくなるかもしれないのだ。

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

The fake news from the Abe administration was immediately refuted by its own former Chief of Staff of Japan's Air Self-Defense Force on December 21, the next day of the incident.

https://twitter.com/toshio_tamogami/status/1076127935558340609 (Japanese)

https://www.reddit.com/r/korea/comments/a8sje0/a_rightwing_history_revisionist_and_former/ (English)

https://ironna.jp/article/11560 (Japanese)

And the fake news continues as usual.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

FCR frequencies, and detection capabilities of FCR are both sensitive information that pertain to national security.

If SK will not comply with Japan’s request for the radar data, quid-pro-quo; there is no reason Japan should reveal the detection capabilities of the P-1, or risk angering nations like Italy, Portugal and Spain, who use the same radar system.

There is also hesitation in the MOD to reveal sensitive information to SK as it may leak to NK or China.

Moon wants reunification at any cost, and Japan is considered a future enemy in SK. What Moon and Kim want is a reunified nuclear armed Korea.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

i'm not sure what samit basu's comments are being downvoted so much, bots maybe?

pretty much everything he's saying is backed up by verifiable fact, all of these radar systems, and radar warning systems have a certain amount of information available freely on the internet. anyone who can be bothered to study them can learn the basics of how they operate.

if japan can't provide the frequency for a fire control radar, it means there never was a radar lock.

warships have a number of radars onboard. some are used for surface navigation, some are used for air search. a low flying aircraft WILL be painted by surface search radar energy, but it is not a fire control lock. there is no real way to avoid this other than to turn off the radar.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Both sides are being rather stubborn and are pointing fingers at each other.

They deserve each other, and both are guilty.

Move on, nothing to see here.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Speaking at a news briefing, ministry spokeswoman Choi Hyun Soo also said that in Monday's talks, Japan demanded all the radar data of the destroyer as a condition for disclosing some information of its own in connection with the incident last month. She criticized the request as "extremely rude."

"(In the meeting,) Japan did not disclose the radar frequency data that it has about our warship, which is a smoking gun, and instead only asked for information from South Korea. Such a demand is extremely rude and unacceptable," Choi said.

Is S.K willing to disclose any data in the 1st place in exchange for Japan's data? It is just requesting Japan's data, isn't it.

>

9 ( +9 / -0 )

I'm not sure but I've ever heard that the US military has a list/record of what frequencies of all Korean Warships targeting radar signals that can discern from enemy or ally. If Japan gives the evidence data to the US military, it will clearly know the evidence is right or wrong. However it seems the US military doesn't want to stick its nose into such a matter. If S Korean warship really did not emit signals, then Japan better show the evidence data to the world just like that surveillance video showed on you tube. Japan better tell S Korea before Japan does it. I guess nothing would get SK upset if the evidence is fake.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If a plane flies so low over a warship then it is pure luck that it isn’t fired upon.

The Japanese side needs more commonsense and to be thankful for that small mercy...,

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Japan surveillance planes always can receive and record all kinda frequencies (and special targeting radar signals) up in the sky. Whenever the surveillance plane gets close to any ships and planes, it starts to film and record frequencies up there, so it seems Japan has an evidence of targeting radar signals as data. Japan just wants to compare and examine the evidence data with the data of signals that that warship emitted.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Glad that SK didn't call Japan a liar, very good diplomatic opportunity for the continued talk. As for the attitude of Japan, that can be changed over time, no other ways. Of course, SK didn't convince Japan either, so a little bit attitude at this moment is probably OK. My suggestion is to keep Abe out of the talk, he will blow anything he can.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Elections looming, olympics failing, Russia say no, economy failing, corruption everywhere,...Abe needs something to get votes.

-11 ( +5 / -16 )

'Japan demanded all the radar data of the destroyer as a condition for disclosing some information of its own in connection with the incident last month. She criticized the request as "extremely rude."'

Japan wanted basically the same information that was being asked of them and that was "extremely rude"? Are you kidding me, South Korea? It sounds like South Korea is the one not interested in settling this.

17 ( +17 / -0 )

@Yubaru

If you are looking for a ship in the water, why is your radar pointing to the sky?

1.MW-08 is an integrated air-surface search radar.

2.The P-1 was flying so low(150 m) that it would have made the contact with a surface search radar beam anyway.

@kazetsukai

would not have made such a claim without substantiating evidence.

Substantiating evidence would require deep analysis for days. Japan announced the lock-on claim in less than 24 hours after the incident and had no time to analyze ESM data and to this day Japan does not know exactly what radar hit the P-1 that day, and was asking the US to compare their recorded radar signature with the US military's vast radar signature collection library.

-13 ( +5 / -18 )

There is no more room for substantiated and provable "excuse" on the part of S Korea, either.

But, it is a fact that Japan, "believing" S Korea to be an "ally" would not have "expected" a lock on and would not have made such a claim without substantiating evidence. It is too sensitive a subject to announce internationally without such evidence and witnesses. And the "risk" would have been too great for Japan's very sensitive "face" and "reputation" not to have had such proof.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

Still don't understand the SK explanation. If you are looking for a ship in the water, why is your radar pointing to the sky?

21 ( +22 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites