Maybe they meant “post-crash”. Which is pretty obvious.
Yeah, less than mint for sure.
Yes and no. Puerto Rico, anyone? Throughline: Puerto Rico on Apple Podcasts
They do not, however, have the same level of military strategy placement as Taiwan
Well that sure throws a wrench into the equation.
Could it be operator error? Or fuel issues?
Like I said, US does not want Taiwan self sufficient when it comes to national defense. They want us to be dependent on the US so they can continue selling us junk at inflated price as protection money.
Taiwanese military can do a lot of great things but the US holds them back deliberately. Just like the US holds Japan back deliberately…
Source?
Arigatou.
Pushes the needle towards sabotage in my mind.
What you’re saying is true. But the U.S. also let Taiwan sell it anything it wanted until it became a developed country, and let Taiwan keep American goods out.
Taiwan doesn’t have to make nuclear weapons. Just enrich uranium and keep the blueprints like Korea does.
I wouldn’t doubt that’s what they do in secret.
I hope you’re right. All I see is shutting down reactors by 2025.
One thing about American military equipment… they don’t do so well in humid conditions.
Remember that one B-2 stealth bomber that crashed in Guam back in 2008? The thing that brought down a state of the art 737 million dollar bomber was tropical humidity…
Taiwan’s top military uses Line in emergencies?
I thought I read somewhere that it was heading to Yilan for scheduled maintenance, and crashed enroute. Why would they have so many people in it for just maintenance?? Or if it desperately needed maintenance? It all seems so odd.
There definitely is a lot of turbulence over the mountains, especially with the warm air colliding with the cool mountain and valley air, causing updrafts etc.
I’m just glad my mother-in-law didn’t try pinning this on DPP like everything else 
. Seems there is indeed a modicum of respect in this case.
No wonder they lost Vietnam…
I mean you would think military equipment is designed to work in all conditions, but one thing I find about American equipment (no matter what it’s for) is they work great under the condition and parameter it’s designed for, but not outside of that.
Helicopters are more expensive than winged aircraft per flight hour due to needing more maintenance.
Posting this partly to highlight the shocking quality of English. Complete failure to grasp that the Chinese is saying mechanical failure can be ruled out with an 80% degree of confidence.
“Mechanical failure and turbulence could be ruled out for 80 percent” wrote no professional journalist ever.
Military equipment is designed to have a decent chance of surviving a war. It’s not meant to hold together any longer than a typical war lasts. Design tradeoffs.
It’s why James Bond never worries about his liver or STDs. Any day he doesn’t get shot is a good day.
1 Like
We promote the use of the app “what three words” in UK emergency services. Simple to use and downloadable on most smart phones.
1 Like