TU-95 Intercept

[sandozer]

Rare Russian video of Typhoons "escorting" TU-95.


???????? ???? ??????? ?? ??????? - ????????? «??????» (http://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/201502181902-tr6s.htm)

1 Squadron and 11 Squadron aircraft from what I can see.


Getting a load of ????? on url link, but it works.

[MightyGem]

A change to see it from the other side. Don't those props go round slow.

[Tankertrashnav]

That rear crew station looks oddly familiar! Also the guy in the back looks pleased they are about to land after a doubtless long flight. Some things cross all borders!

My Russian is a bit rusty but I'm sure the bloke doing the commentary describes them as German Eurofighters. Obviously his NATO aircraft recognition isn't as good as sandover's ;)

[dat581]

The props don't turn that slow, it's just an optical illusion from the camera and the real rpm of the props.

[Danny42C]

Probably a silly question, but the Russian pilot(s ?) seem to be hand-flying the thing. Why wouldn't they be on autopilot ?

D.

[WhatsaLizad?]

"Probably a silly question, but the Russian pilot(s ?) seem to be hand-flying the thing. Why wouldn't they be on autopilot ?

D. "


I think times got tough in the late 1990's and the Russians sold every TU-95 autopilot on the line and in stock to Boeing to outfit the "Next Generation" 737 autopilot system.


Only thing I could come up with to explain that POS A/P. The little kids seem to enjoy they zero G capture and the funny clacker noise coming from the clacker as it ignores the programmed speed.

[West Coast]

I think times got tough in the late 1990's and the Russians sold every TU-95 autopilot on the line and in stock to Boeing to outfit the "Next Generation" 737 autopilot system.


And the overhead panel, don't forget the overhead panel.

[stilton]

I love the ceiling fan..

[Whenurhappy]

I presume there has been some editing...the RH pilot does move the yoke around a bit...but hopefully not in proximity to our aircraft.

[jetslut]

Correct TTN, the guy does ID them as German.
At a guess I'd say that it's just ramping-up the rhetoric as most Russians don't really know that much about UK, but everyone there knows of the Germans.

[OK4Wire]

Dat581:

I admit I'm not the sharpest sandwich in the toolbox, but even I got that one!

[Background Noise]

Correct TTN, the guy does ID them as German.
At a guess I'd say that it's just ramping-up the rhetoric as most Russians don't really know that much about UK, but everyone there knows of the Germans.
Or it's a sufficiently long sortie that they were shadowed by a number of nations and the editing doesn't match?

[salad-dodger]

The props don't turn that slow, it's just an optical illusion from the camera and the real rpm of the props.
Thanks for clearing that one up dat581 :ugh:

S-D

[Tankertrashnav]

Thanks jetslut, and yes, background noise, the commentary also refers to F16s earlier on.

salad dodger - when I was a kid I used to think the wagon wheels in old westerns on TV used to turn backwards - could never work that one out! Same phenomenon.

[Kilonovember52]

Breaking BBC News: 19 February 2015 Last updated at 09:53

RAF jets scrambled after two Russian military aircraft seen off Cornwall coast, Ministry of Defence says

BBC News - RAF jets scrambled after Russian aircraft seen off Cornwall (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840)

[Tankertrashnav]

Mrs TTN rushed in to tell me that. Checked it on News 24 and apparently it was yesterday - and in international airspace (as always).

Dont the Russians know our FJ blokes are restricted on flying hours. Can we ask them to wait till next month before coming again? ;)

[robin]

Is there still enough money in this year's budget for all these scrambles.....?

[Capt Scribble]

Another waste of AVTUR; our Government trying to show that we have some planes left.

[diginagain]

... our Government trying to show that we have some planes left. How kind of President Putin to put a couple of airframes on for the stunt.

[zetec2]

Still wearing leather helmets and gloves, does any other air arm wear same ?

[dat581]

Can the UK send Putin the fuel bill?! :E

[uksatcomuk]

Coincidentally , there was another mission yesterday , down the west coast of Ireland then back again involving QRA a/c with tanker support . No trip up the channel this time though !

[MightyGem]

Thanks for clearing that one up dat581
Yes, thanks for that.:rolleyes: :)

[Golf-Mike-Mike]

On the previous flight, reportedly down the Channel, wouldn't they have run out of "International Airspace" (ie not sovereign-owned) over the Straits of Dover (or anywhere else within 12nm of the coastline) and therefore entered UK or French airspace ?

[Tankertrashnav]

Re leather helmets and gloves, zetec - they go nicely with 55 year old airframes. In this country we p**s our defence budget away scrapping perfectly good kit and spending a fortune replacing it with something newer and not necessarily better. My old Mk1a helmet with a cloth inner was much more comfy than any of the later one-piece jobs from Mk II onwards, although it probably didnt look quite as "cool".

Re the Bear, I can think of a dozen or more types we introduced after the Soviets brought in the Tu95 which are now nothing but a distant memory, but the Russians are still getting sterling service out of them. There's a certain irony in scrambling Typhoons to deal with something that looks like it has come from a vintage air display - I bet the Russian crews love it!

[downsizer]

How airworthy would those Bears be though?

[TEEEJ]

Tankertrashnav, Downsizer,

Those Tu-95MS Bear H are new-build based on the Tu-142M. Production run from the 1980s to the early 1990s. All the old Russian Air Force Tu-95 variants have long since been retired.

Meanwhile the USAF are pulling 1961 registration B-52s out of the boneyard.

From Boneyard to Barksdale, a mothballed B-52 Stratofortress flies again. (http://www.warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/fun-facts/return-ghost-rider.html)

[downsizer]

Teej,

Mate I was cracking a joke....

[Just a spotter]

From RTÉ, 19th Feb 2015

The Irish Aviation Authority has confirmed that two Russian military aircraft flew within Irish-controlled airspace yesterday. In a statement the IAA said the aircraft operated within 25 nautical miles of the Irish coast.


Russian aircraft flew within Irish airspace - RTÉ News (http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0219/681373-russian-aircraft-raf-escort/)


JAS

[Danny42C]

Perhaps they are logging the airframe numbers of the Tornados/Typhoons, to see how many servicable ones we've got on inventory !

Whatsalizad,

Thanks ! So the poor devils have to fly 12-hr plus by hand - and the thing doesn't seem to be all that stable, judging by the way they were having to juggle the yoke !

jetslut,

Probably to ramp-up anti-German sentiment at home. They don't like the Germans * very much (with good reason !)

Note *: I believe they called them немцы "nyemtsi" - "the dumb ones" (because they couldn't speak Russian).

D.

[sonas]

How come they were so far South before been detected or had they been detected and tracked?

[MPN11]

Of course, with all the AD assets [air and ground] deployed down the East coast, what better way to annoy UK than flying down the West coast?

The ripple effect could be deployment of mobile ADGE assets to the south-west [where we used to have them, once] and establishing a permanent AD presence/QRA at one of our western operational airfields ... at which point one gives up

Strategy, anyone? :cool:

[mr fish]

vid looks for all intents to be a STEAMPUNK (look it up!!) B29 flightdeck.....or may I venture a tupelev tu4 deck.


maybe its just me but I find the bears to curiously good looking....in a PHANTOM sort of way.




FISH.

[sandozer]

All your questions answered here , , ,

Eurofighter Typhoon | Advantages of the most advanced fighter aircraft (http://www.eurofighter.com/advantages)

Scroll to the bottom, download the pdf technical guide.

[Doors to Automatic]

On the previous flight, reportedly down the Channel, wouldn't they have run out of "International Airspace" (ie not sovereign-owned) over the Straits of Dover (or anywhere else within 12nm of the coastline) and therefore entered UK or French airspace ?


They came over the top of Scotland, down the Atlantic and along the Channel as far as a point South of Bournemouth, then did a 180 and went back the same way.

[chiglet]

Well we used to have the Aird Uig [sp] MRS situated in the Hebrides.....

[andrewn]

This is all a bit 1985'ish isn't it? Good entertainment, but the consensus seems to be that the world has moved on - just need to tell the Ruskies that!


Otherwise we'll be re-opening Binbrook and (RAF) Wattisham. Maybe bring those Lightning's back from SA to bolster defences.

[barnstormer1968]

When I used to watch these intercept vids on TV I used to worry that the RAF didn't have enough aircraft to man a high quality QRA fleet and that if the Russians sent over something like 20 bears in 10 flights of 2 we would be scuppered.
Luckily David Cameron was on the TV news tonight, and he assured us that these probing flights just go to prove that the RAF have the pilots and aircraft to deal with the Russians and it's no big deal :)

[tonker]

I hope they keep doing it until they screw up their nav or something, and embarrass the party in power to deliver the nation the air defence assets it's deserves.

Keep em coming Ivan

[reynoldsno1]

... and Ivana ...

http://content.adfox.ru/150218/adfox/440651/1221378.jpg

[Tankertrashnav]

TEEEJ - Thanks for that - I had assumed these were updated original airframes, not new ones. However the principle still applies. You can buy a brand new Royal Enfield motorcycle straight off the production line in India, but it's still basically 1950s technology. Same with these, looking at the interior shots they are hardly fly by wire!

Going back to the current wave of flights, I understand they are coming down the West coast of Ireland, which is, of course, a neutral country. During WW2 the Irish created a corridor to allow Coastal Command aircraft to cut off the "top bit" when transiting from N.I. bases to the patrols in the Atlantic, one of the few concessions the de Valera government made to the UK in what was euphemistically called "The Emergency". I cant imagine Ireland would compromise its neutrality to do something similar now, unless things hotted up, so its "the long way around" from Coningsby for the time being.

[skydiver69]

The BBC were displaying an admirable level of amnesia today with a story about the latest TU-95 and treating it as if WW3 was about to start and that these flights had never happened before...well not for at least the last 2 weeks.

[andrewn]

"Luckily David Cameron was on the TV news tonight, and he assured us that these probing flights just go to prove that the RAF have the pilots and aircraft to deal with the Russians and it's no big deal :)"


Yep, that same numpty that told all the Harrier crews they were being replaced in theatre by Typhoon, the one that canned the MPA capability, the one that has just shutdown Leuchars, the one that doesn't know the difference between cat and trap and STOVL, the one that authorized the early retirement of GR4 without any sensible alternative, the one that has ordered a grand total of 7(?) JSFs to date?


Yes, that's the guy - like tonker said, I'd just love to see it all come home to roost!

[Fishtailed]

And whats on the wing tips?Smoketoomuch, have you never seen a Typhoon before, obviously only a pre first flight Corgi:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[stilton]

Shame it's so ugly, so what is on the wingtips ?

[LS-4]

How come they were so far South before been detected or had they been detected and tracked?

I think the Russian news reporter mentioned two Norwegian F-16s at some point. Not sure, but perhaps they were followed by RNoAF QRA jets before being handed off to the RAF.

The news report is tagged "Saratov Oblast." Are these Engels-based Bears?

[sandozer]

"Shame it's so ugly, so what is on the wingtips ?"

Components of the DASS subsystem.

From Aviation Images, Burkhard Domke Homepage (http://www.b-domke.de)

http://www.b-domke.de/AviationImages/Typhoon/Images/EF2000_DASS_10874.jpg

[glad rag]

No Meteor 'till 2018 :uhoh:

[pendrifter]

Ref Post 38.

Must be St Mawgan to come back first for sure!

Or will they send up the Classic Airforce?

Give me something to watch on the blue summer days, if they arrive!

[david parry]

Looks like Ivan, was inland..Russian bomber flew inland over Cornwall, witness claims | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/19/russian-bomber-flew-inland-cornwall-uk-airspace-witness)

[Dee Conflicting]

The Bears are just the annoying ones. Its when the Blackjacks start showing up it gets worrying.

[Snap_Shot]

That'll be the tanker Shirley? Check PlaneFinder's playback facility and a Voyager circles over Cornwall.

[diginagain]

Must be St Mawgan to come back first for sure!
Fine, just as long as they remember to pay a fiver per pilot Airport Development Fee to Cornwall CC each time they launch.

[david parry]

Who would argue with a Bodmin woman:ouch:

[Minnie Burner]

Try to catch this before it expires tonight:
The ex-Defence Minister (so he should know his stuff, what!)
BBC iPlayer - Spotlight - 19/02/2015 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b052g85h/spotlight-19022015)

[strake]

To those who may know, out of interest, do we ie 'The West', play similar games off the coast and borders of Russian territory?

[Willard Whyte]

Given that a '95 could sit somewhere between Iceland and Norway and unleash hell south of the Thames then yes, they probably are 'cocking a snoop'. The rest of it was laced with the usual patronising LD* twaddle.

*one could equally substitute 'patronising CON/LAB twaddle' too.

[tubby linton]

The BBC has produced this handy guide for Cornish residents.
BBC News - How to spot a Russian bomber (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-31537705)

[Heathrow Harry]

that'll teach to support UKIP.................

[diginagain]

that'll teach to support UKIP................. Teach who?

[dikastes]

Despite what Cameron said the TU-95s entered the London FIR, British Controlled Airspace, off the west coast of Cornwall chased by two typhoons. They crossed Civil Upper Air Routes being used by civil airliners. They were in Class C airspace! (Never even asked for a clearance:) Eventually the 'Bears' left British airspace and entered Irish airspace. I really cannot see how this can be acceptable.

[oxenos]

Could have been worse. They could have sent a submarine. Then again, they probably have.

[Herod]

Just out of interest, if the need arose to ramp up the military quickly, what sort of stuff have we in storage that could be reactivated? There must be some tanks etc somewhere, and various aircraft bits being used as ashtrays.

[Brian W May]

Picture this perhaps:

Dave Cameron: Ah, Vlad, yes thanks for taking my call.

Vlad Putin: Dave baby, how can I help?

DC: Spot of bother here old chap. You know you need a bit of foreign currency and an easing of sanctions etc, well how would you like us to help with that?

VP: Yeah, times are a bit hard here too, what can I do?

DC: Since there are no wars currently planned and me and Barak are being pressurised by those global conglomerates that make biggest money from arms etc Any chance of sending a couple of aircraft, ships or submarines to sniff around our EU borders? I'm a bit concerned about our Armed Forces manning and equipment levels, but nobody would listen in our political system. But if you rattle a sabre or two, we might well be able to sort it that way - you know what our media are like.

VP: Da, I can do that, would Bears be sufficient? Ah, how about I stick a couple of submarines into the Baltic and send the odd fighter up acting a bit aggressively too. I appreciate you'll have to talk tough, but if you then back off on the sanctions etc, it would help this end too.

DC: We think we have a bit of influence with Barak, you'll know we both have imminent elections and frankly we need something external to show what kind of statesmen we are. We can't just rely on winding up the Muslim IS outfit as that'll influence our re-armament in the wrong direction for maximum profits.

VP: Anything else?

DC: That'll do for me then. Perhaps we'll share a glass or two when we next meet comrade - my little joke eh? Should sort out that plonker Milibland and keep UKIP on side too.

[Golf-Mike-Mike]

They came over the top of Scotland, down the Atlantic and along the Channel as far as a point South of Bournemouth, then did a 180 and went back the same way.

Thanks for clarifying, amazing what folk will do for an aerial view of winter beach babes :-)

[M609]

They crossed Civil Upper Air Routes being used by civil airliners. They were in Class C airspace! (Never even asked for a clearance Eventually the 'Bears' left British airspace and entered Irish airspace. I really cannot see how this can be acceptable.

You mean they did what NATO does both east of the North Cape and in the Baltic Sea all the time?

[AnglianAV8R]

The media seem to confuse FIR with territorial airspace at times. But let's not have accurate detail and spoil the drama. As has already been pointed out, we sniff around certain areas. People in glass houses etc :ugh:

[KenV]

Despite what Cameron said the TU-95s entered the London FIR, British Controlled Airspace, off the west coast of Cornwall chased by two typhoons. They crossed Civil Upper Air Routes being used by civil airliners. They were in Class C airspace! (Never even asked for a clearance:) Eventually the 'Bears' left British airspace and entered Irish airspace. I really cannot see how this can be acceptable.


Ummm, no. This was NOT "controlled airspace". They were operating in
an FIR.

Definition of FIR:

A flight information region (FIR) is a specified region of airspace (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace) in which a flight information service (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_information_service) and an alerting service (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alerting_service&action=edit&redlink=1) (ALRS) are provided. It is the largest regular division of airspace in use in the world today. FIRs have existed since 1947 at least. Oceanic airspace is divided into Oceanic Information Regions and delegated to a controlling authority bordering that region.

FIRs, particularly Oceanic FIRs are in international airspace and are NOT in territorial airspace. The US military and indeed the militaries of almost every NATO nation routinely operate around Russian airspace the way these Russian aircraft operate around European airspace. Not only is this legal, but it is perfectly "acceptable" and routine. The Soviets did this for decades. When they became Russian again the practice stopped for the simple reason that they did not have the money. When their economy picked up again they started those flights again. But with the ruble recently tanking and their economy struggling again, those flights may (or may not) stop. Nothing sinister here.

[Basil]

Yup, 'The open FIR' as we used to refer to it - territorial or not :)
Anyhoo they were probably checking out nice places to live within a longhaul commute to LHR if they get that job they're going to apply for.

[Just This Once...]

Ummm, no. This was NOT "controlled airspace". They were operating in
an FIR.

Definition of FIR:
…. and delegated to a controlling authority bordering that region.



I was going to correct you Ken, but I see you corrected yourself. These aircraft were operating in the FIR in controlled airspace delegated to the authorities bordering the region.

[Just This Once...]

The US military and indeed the militaries of almost every NATO nation routinely operate around Russian airspace the way these Russian aircraft operate around European airspace. Not only is this legal, but it is perfectly "acceptable" and routine.

Oh and you are incorrect here too.

[CoffmanStarter]

Brian @ #64 :D:D:D:D

[dagowly]

Quite simple, they entered the UK area of interest in class C airspace without their transponder on and not talking to anyone. Q was launched. Plus most of the time the the UK gets a heads up from other countries the aircraft are flying through and not chatting to anyone.

[MightyGem]

How come these aircraft are being intercepted down over the Channel, as opposed to north of Scotland as they used to be?

[Heathrow Harry]

Scotland is expendable - I think Dave feels he could probably form a decent coalition with Mr Putin whereas Mr Salmond et al.................... :uhoh::uhoh:

[VictorNavrad]

My guess is that we no longer have full 24 X7 radar cover looking East.
Would be a good question for Dave at PMQ's

[ZOOKER]

Does anyone have any factual information about the tracks flown and the especially the approximate levels flown by these TU95 flights please?
How did they get to Cornwall/SE of Ireland?
I'm trying to answer a query from a civillian captain. Please PM me if you would prefer.

[vintage ATCO]

Send 'em a Route Charges bill.

[clunckdriver]

Looking at these pictures it seems that we are in a time warp, the airframes are obviously updated but those huge contor- rotating turbo props look just as they did from the front seat of a CF100 in the fifties, I wonder what would have been the result if the public had been able to view the real time quality images we now regard as normal, would the Cold War have heated up given the number of live scrambles which took place back then?

[TrakBall]

OK, it's a slow Saturday and this is a little off topic but here goes.

The next time the Bears come calling, why not do the intercept with a B2 and a specialized camera aircraft to get good photos and video?

Think of the photos, the propaganda value and the headline.
"Remember, we see you coming - and you won't see us."

I know, hat - coat - out the door.

TB

[pkam]

Why not invite them down next Riat time and escort them to the show for a couple of passes.
After all there can't be much screwed onto a Bear that we dont know about and not much on the ramp that they don't. Well worth the Avgas and the entrance fee.:):)
Pkam.

[ZOOKER]

pkam,
That was done several years ago, I believe.

[ShotOne]

If we filled it up with Avgas it really would learn 'em!!

[pkam]

Sorry, drifted back to my motorcycle days at Lindholme RAF, there was allways a spare can around!
pkam:rolleyes:

[ORAC]

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03207/220215-MATT-web_3207848a.jpg

[LS-4]

Does anyone have any factual information about the tracks flown and the especially the approximate levels flown by these TU95 flights please?
How did they get to Cornwall/SE of Ireland?

Don't know much about it, but some NATO sources won't publish all available data on these flights as it concerns sensor capabilities and so on.

Could be wrong, but I think the Bears in question flew out of Engels-2. Perhaps they flew NW across Kola and around the North Cape before pushing SW. Not an unusual route, apparently.

[Cows getting bigger]

Soooooo...........

In the '60s the UK was chasing Bears with the Lightning.
In the '70s the UK was chasing Bears with the F4.
In the '80s the UK was chasing Bears with the F2.
In the '90s the UK was chasing Bears with the F3.
In the '00/10s the UK was/is chasing Bears with the Typhoon.
In the '20s the UK will be chasing Bears with the.........

Makes one wonder how hard the Russians, especially their bean-counters, are chuckling. :hmm:

[163627]

Sitting here on a wet Sunday afternoon reading the broadsheets two questions come to mind:
I seem to recall that as part of our cashing in of the "peace dividend" UK plc closed a number of early warning radar sites up in the North of Scotland and various islands as the USSR and it's threat had disappeared never apparently to return.
I've also read the RAF has been unable to keep its Sentry fleet updated to the latest spec and one of the airframes is no longer airworthy!

Assuming one or both of these statements is correct (from open sources) how secure is UK airspace from Russian visitors should the wheel start to fall off?

[Tankertrashnav]

cows getting bigger

Quite so

And dont forget that in the same period we've gone from Valiant to Victor K1 to Victor K2 to VC10 to Tristar to Voyager to keep the aforementioned in the air!

[skippedonce]

I seem to recall that as part of our cashing in of the "peace dividend" UK plc closed a number of early warning radar sites up in the North of Scotland and various islands as the USSR and it's threat had disappeared never apparently to return.In a wonderful piece of national 'peace dividend' cashing-in, while making a mockery of 'joined-up NATO defence planning', we closed down Saxa Vord on the Shetlands while the Danes removed the radar from the Faroe Islands, well and truly putting the 'gap' back in to the GIUK Gap! Since that far-sighted decision, the RAF has continued to toy with the idea of making further budgetary savings by removing more UK ASACS radars.

But radars don't look sexy at airshows (unless rotating on the top of an E3D, and even that's a minority view).

[MightyGem]

"Scotland is expendable" :D:D

[Herod]

"Scotland is expendable"

That may be, but if a force of "non-Russian-backed separatists" were to land there, the rest of us would look pretty stupid.

[skippedonce]

Why not invite them down next Riat time and escort them to the show for a couple of passes.Yes, as said by others, already been done. Tu-95 'In 1994, TWO Bears visited RAF Fairford - a Russian Navy Tu-142M and an Air
Force Tu-95MS.' (http://www.flankers-site.co.uk/tu-95.html)

[TEEEJ]

David Parry wrote

Looks like Ivan, was inland..

No Tu-95s were inland over Cornwall. The woman just misidentified the RAF Voyager.

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/nv54e7dbf9.jpg

Playback on Flight Radar 24 should be available for the next few days.

Flightradar24.com - Live flight tracker! (http://www.flightradar24.com/2015-02-18/17:38/12x/QZ68/58ecddf)

The two Tu-95MS Bear H were identified as serials RF-94130 (24 Red) and RF-94116 (28 Red)

94130 and 94116 are Engels based Bears.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia---Air/Tupolev-Tu-95MS/2459497/L

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia---Air/Tupolev-Tu-95MS/2270793/L

One Bear was recorded on HF Voice.

https://planesandstuff.wordpress.com/

[dagenham]

I don't think the Russians have Comrade Hatton-caveski iin the motherland consigning old airframes to the knackers yard...

I think the no man no problem dictat comes into play... And tupolev don't have the lobbying power since old man Andrei grew wings and joined the collective in the sky.

[LS-4]

https://planesandstuff.wordpress.com/

In the last few years, Bear missions have increased from practically none a year to two a month, especially recently.

RNoAF QRA statistics:

Økt luftaktivitet i 2014 - Forsvaret.no (http://forsvaret.no/aktuelt/okt-luftaktivitet-i-2014)

[TEEEJ]

Mighty Gem wrote

How come these aircraft are being intercepted down over the Channel, as opposed to north of Scotland as they used to be?

In the case of the 28th January English Channel mission they were. The footage released by the Russians is from the 28th January. FB is one of the QRA Typhoons from RAF Coningsby and noted by aircraft enthusiasts. In the footage you will see also see a 6 Squadron Typhoon from RAF Lossiemouth. These Bears were running down the west coast of Eire route.

XtnWuSauhWk&feature=related

[Tankertrashnav]

Just been having a squint at Engels on google earth (photo dated May 2014) Around 16 or so Bears along the main hardstanding and a sprinkling of Blackjacks and other types elsewhere on the airfield. Interesting, and amazing to think images like this would have been highly classified some years back - the sort of stuff the U2 guys (and others) were taking huge risks to get.

[Danny42C]

TTN,

Interesting thought, suppose (say 12) Bears were launched one morning, all on various trips round the UK, all at the same time, how many would the QRA be able to say "hello" to ?

D.

[Wig Wag]

Two extracts from informed letters in the Daily Telegraph today:

The welcome entry of Lord Prescott into the election campaign - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/11428177/The-welcome-entry-of-Lord-Prescott-into-the-election-campaign.html)

From Air Vice Marshal Dennis Allison:

. . . the Defence Secretary’s recent statements about interception of Russian bombers and “a clear and present danger” to the Baltic states are questionable.

First, why draw attention to the activity of Russian aircraft in international airspace around the United Kingdom (and over the Baltic Sea) when such flights have been going on without incident for over 40 years?

Secondly, the two Baltic States with a significant Russian-speaking population are protected by Nato. President Vladimir Putin will not start the Third World War unless the leaders of these two states follow the example of the Ukrainian president and decide to subdue their Russian-speaking subjects with artillery, tanks and aircraft.

and from Dr Alexander Yakovenko, Ambassador of the Russian Federation:

. . . Russian planes do regularly fly to remote geographical areas and will continue to do so. This is required for personnel training and to verify aircraft capabilities. All flights are carried out in strict accordance with international regulations.

Flights of Russian military aircraft are often accompanied by jets from Nato countries and their partners. This is ordinary practice, and the level of public attention on the latest incidents in the vicinity of British airspace is overblown.

Military activity by Nato aircraft at Russian borders is far more intense, having doubled since early 2014 and reaching 3,000 sorties that year.

By way of comparison, Russian reconnaissance aircraft carried out just over 200 sorties over the Baltic Sea area from March to December 2014, compared to 125 over the same period in 2013.

The growing disparity between the actual situation and the official rhetoric of some Western leaders is not helpful for restoring trust, which is probably the main victim of the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West.

Is the real problem just bad journalism?

[kaitakbowler]

ISTR that Saxa was closed because the NATO funding was withdrawn.

[Hangarshuffle]

You'll never get an answer to that on here Danny. My guess is we would not be able to respond with 12 jets/pilots for very long, or if at all and the situation would deteriorate for the UK (if it came to any sort of rolling operation).
Plainly the Russian Air Force will be under instructions to keep at this with an ever increasing slowish rise in tempo as we approach our General Election and (b) as long as it suits Putin to neutralise PM Cameron's role in any way of influencing the outcome of the on-going hybrid war in eastern Ukraine.
It would suit Putin to embarrass Cameron, something militarily he is easily capable of doing.
I expect the Russians to push into UK airspace soon. And it will come down to the young guys and women in the cockpit and older wiser RAF heads on the ground to de-escalate the situation.

[melmothtw]

the example of the Ukrainian president and decide to subdue their Russian-speaking subjects with artillery, tanks and aircraft.


AVM Allison is confusing cause and effect.

[Tankertrashnav]

Danny - Yes that occurred to me as well. Mind you, we dont know how many of those Bears in the photo are serviceable . It might be a bit like Akrotiri in the 70s when we used to tease the blokes on 9 and 35 about their impressive Vulcan static display, as so many were u/s at any given time!

I expect the Russians to push into UK airspace soon.

I hope you are wrong Hangarshuffle. As they frequently point out they are currently doing nothing that contravenes international law, certainly nothing that we and other NATO countries don't already do ourselves. They have certainly had no compunctions about a de facto invasion of Ukraine, but in their heart of hearts they regard that country as still part of Russia. Invading the UK's (or any other NATO country's) airspace would be a huge step.

[CoffmanStarter]

I noticed in the Sunday Times yesterday that apparently our Defence Secretary has 'ordered' RAF Pilots to 'speak' with the Russian aircrew over the radio during any future interceptions ...

So if I'm correct ... that's a blind transmission on Vhf and Uhf Guard Freqs by our chaps and see if Ivan can be bothered to answer ... :ugh:

[Martin the Martian]

Very timely and interesting article in the latest Air Forces Monthly on Long Range Aviation. It seems to be the one element of the Russian air forces that is getting a lot of money thrown at it at the moment.

[AreOut]

cheap oil is certainly helping their case :)

[glad rag]

Soooooo...........

In the '60s the UK was chasing Bears with the Lightning.
In the '70s the UK was chasing Bears with the F4.
In the '80s the UK was chasing Bears with the F2.
In the '90s the UK was chasing Bears with the F3.
In the '00/10s the UK was/is chasing Bears with the Typhoon.
In the '20s the UK will be chasing Bears with the.........



Now that is an interesting question indeed considering the sheer pace and altitude that they can achieve....

[Brian W May]

Is the real problem just bad journalism?

Our media, surely not?

(Effing pondlife journos who don't give a flying Fox Uniform Charlie Kilo about the effect of their irresponsible output).

[melmothtw]

Where do you get your news from Brian?

[Brian W May]

Where do you get your news from Brian?

Well it rather depends upon what 'news' is defined as.

Soviet aircraft sniffing around EU borders (similar to what NATO did/do around Soviet borders) is not news.

Have you forgotten Bluff Cove et al so soon? Free intelligence to the target planners in Argentina.

How effective would the propaganda campaign waged by ISIS be without 'news' to give them free coverage? Oh yes, that's 'news' and the public have a right to know. Nothing to do with sales and media ratings of course.

The Australian cafe siege . . . photos of the perpetrator with major media microphones stuffed under his nose giving him 'free' publicity.

'News' I suppose includes working against the very organisations that attempt to ensure our security.

Basically, if media accuracy pertaining to aviation applies across the board, then Christ help us - why would anyone believe the claptrap they read?

[Danny42C]

Hangarshuffle (#103) and TTN (#105),

Might be a good ploy of theirs to start with two, then work their way up, using the worst of the others as Christmas Trees, to see if we run out of FJs before they run out of Bears. I wouldn't put money on the outcome, seeing that we've already committed some of ours to do battle with ISIS.

Suppose they put the Blackjacks in as well ? - they seem to be not far short of range compared with the Bear (Wiki). What do we fall back on - Hawks ?

CoffmanStarter (#106),

Nice idea of the "Sunday Times". But I foresee difficulties. How many of our FJ crews are fluent in Russian ? Or theirs in English ? I suppose there is room in a Bear for an interpreter, and there might be a possibility of having one of ours on the ground in UK and setting up a three way conversation that way.. But you couldn't have it on Guard Channel, there would have to be an agreed dedicated frequency.

Danny.

[CoffmanStarter]

Morning Danny ... Hence my "Head Banging" emoticon above ;)

PS. The use of Guard Freqs is contained within ICAO Interception Procedures.

[Seloco]

The props don't turn that slow, it's just an optical illusion from the camera and the real rpm of the props.

The thing that mystifies me about the parts of that video which show the props going round very slowly is that (a) the blades appear to be in the feathered position, and (b) they are exhibing none of the interlacing effects which one normally gets with fast rotating objects on high scan rate HD video. So I then wondered whether in fact these are slow-motion sections of video; however, given the very high speed of the Bear's engines, it would need to have been slowed down by such an amount as to noticably affect other aspects, such as the speed of the Typhoon's strobes and the pan rate of the camera, both of which appear normal.

Is it out of the question that the Russians did in fact turn off/feather the engines on one side (and then the other) after all; presumably a Bear is perfectly capable of flying on two, albeit on the same side?

I probably need to have my coat ready for a quick exit....

[bcgallacher]

Seloco - at the airspeed the thing is flying at the prop would need to have an extremely coarse pitch,not far short of the feathered position.

[Seloco]

This coarse then BCG? Looks to be 80-85 degrees if you pause at about 0.51" into the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnZMy1WWjZs#t=51

[dikastes]

Hangar shuffle !
I expect the Russians to push into UK airspace soon. And it will come down to the young guys and women in the cockpit and older wiser RAF heads on the ground to de-escalate the situation.
The Russians already have penetrated UK airspace. UK guys (and women) have intercepted these Russian 'Bears'. Clearly you do not understand where UK airspace begins and where it ends and have failed to read this thread - keep up.:ugh:

[Stanwell]

BCG & Seloco,
I can confirm that some Russian TPs do use very coarse pitch in the cruise.
My reference material is elsewhere at the moment but 80-85 deg sounds about right.
In fact, I use an image as wallpaper on my smartphone showing just that.

p.s. I can't post that image on here but I can email it to you if you'd like.

[MightyGem]

And here's another one.
Russian Bomber Ushered Out Of Welsh Airspace By Police Chopper Crew Who Threaten To 'Smack Them In The Chops' - WalesOnCraicWalesOnCraic (http://www.walesoncraic.com/russian-bomber-ushered-out-of-welsh-airspace-by-police-chopper-crew-who-threaten-to-smack-them-in-the-chops/)

:E

[Phil_R]

The thing that mystifies me about the parts of that video which show the props going round very slowly is that (a) the blades appear to be in the feathered position, and (b) they are exhibing none of the interlacing effects which one normally gets with fast rotating objects on high scan rate HD video.

The blades appear to be rotating very slowly because they're rotating something close to a whole number of turns for each video frame.

They're imaged sharply because the shot is illuminated by bright sunlight and the camera is using a very high shutter speed to control exposure.

(source: I work with cameras for a living)

The really strange effects start when you have a rolling-shutter camera, in which the frame is scanned sequentially from top to bottom. Many modern cameras work this way and when you shoot fast-moving objects, strange things can occur.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecV7oo68vAc

P

[MightyGem]

So what causes this effect Phil?
http://th01.deviantart.net/fs46/200H/i/2009/172/4/e/Helicopter_with_a_bent_blade_by_lordfein.jpg

I've had the same effect with some pictures on my iPhone, but not others.

[Phil_R]

Rolling shutter.

Some cameras don't address all the pixels at once, reading them out sequentially, usually top to bottom. This is most clearly visible on things like in webcams, cellphones, stills cameras that also shoot video, and the like, but also some higher end and broadcast cameras to a lesser extent.

This is a particularly lovely diagrammatic demonstration of why it happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17PSgsRlO9Q

Many broadcast and other higher-end cameras don't do it quite as badly as that, but things like cellphones often do, especially at high shutter speeds (where fast moving objects aren't blurred, which can mask the effect). It can cause other problems with brief or fast-moving phenomena, such as "flash banding" caused by muzzle flashes from weapons fire or xenon strobes that are visible for only part of the frame, as here, with photographic flashguns.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/attachments/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/11216d1236545120-rolling-shutter-flash-again-sorry-horizflash2.jpg

Objects moving horizontally can end up looking like this:

http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/Train_2.jpg

P

[MAINJAFAD]

Have you forgotten Bluff Cove et al so soon?

Don't remember the Press causing any thing at Bluff Cove (Argentinian observation post on the mountains spotting 2 LSL's in the bay lead to that attack). News of 2 Para marching on Goose Green being released by the MoD before they actually attacked the place, different story.

[Lonewolf_50]

From Air Vice Marshal Dennis Allison: . . . the Defence Secretary’s recent statements about interception of Russian bombers and “a clear and present danger” to the Baltic states are questionable.
First, why draw attention to the activity of Russian aircraft in international airspace around the United Kingdom (and over the Baltic Sea) when such flights have been going on without incident for over 40 years?
Secondly, the two Baltic States with a significant Russian-speaking population are protected by Nato. President Vladimir Putin will not start the Third World War unless the leaders of these two states follow the example of the Ukrainian president and decide to subdue their Russian-speaking subjects with artillery, tanks and aircraft. and from Dr Alexander Yakovenko, Ambassador of the Russian Federation:
. . . Russian planes do regularly fly to remote geographical areas and will continue to do so. This is required for personnel training and to verify aircraft capabilities. All flights are carried out in strict accordance with international regulations.
Flights of Russian military aircraft are often accompanied by jets from Nato countries and their partners. This is ordinary practice, and the level of public attention on the latest incidents in the vicinity of British airspace is overblown.
Military activity by Nato aircraft at Russian borders is far more intense, having doubled since early 2014 and reaching 3,000 sorties that year.
By way of comparison, Russian reconnaissance aircraft carried out just over 200 sorties over the Baltic Sea area from March to December 2014, compared to 125 over the same period in 2013.
The growing disparity between the actual situation and the official rhetoric of some Western leaders is not helpful for restoring trust, which is probably the main victim of the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West.
Is the real problem just bad journalism?
It might be that some of the flying in and around the UK is a bit of a smokescreen for where Mr Putin's actual interest lies (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/nato-eyes-air-defenses-over-fears-putin-will-target-baltics-n312446).

[LS-4]

Norway to restructure military in response to Russian 'aggression' | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/25/norway-to-restructure-military-in-response-to-russian-aggression?CMP=share_btn_tw)

The Norwegians have also observed that there have been bigger and more diverse groups of Russian planes flying by, including more heavy bombers, like the Tu-95 ‘Bear’, the Tu-160 ‘Blackjack, and the Tu-22 ‘Backfire’. On occasion those bombers have extended their training runs along the western coast of Norway and over then either the Atlantic or the North Sea.

[MightyGem]

Rolling shutter.
Thanks for that.

[ORAC]

LS-4, and......

Lithuania to bring back military conscription to counter Russian threat (http://www.euronews.com/2015/02/25/lithuania-to-bring-back-military-conscription-to-counter-russian-threat/)

[TEEEJ]

The woman in Cornwall that claims she saw a Tu-95 at low level on the 18th February is still not happy! :ugh:

But Sue, 45, of Bodmin, Cornwall, has now expressed her anger at David Cameron's denial that the aircraft ever flew over British soil and is adamant about what she saw. She said: "I am 100 per cent sure of what it was and I would stake my life on it. "I live in Cornwall and we see a lot of military aircraft around. But this was like nothing I had seen before. "It is bizarre to hear the government publicly denying something that I witnessed with my very own eyes. "I know David Cameron is lying. I saw the Russian bombers not only on UK airspace - but flying in-land. "They were flying really low through the St Mawgan valley and around Cornwall. I am angry the government is denying this. I saw the damn things myself.

"I am not an imaginative person in that way. I know what I saw - and I saw the Russian bombers flying over UK soil." Sue said she had her driving lesson between 12.30 and 2pm and saw it on several occasions. She said: "They were very distinctive. It was clearly not a commercial aeroplane or any kind of military aircraft we have seen around here before. "But this morning when we saw it on the news both Claire (driving instructor) and myself instantly recognised it. "The valley is a couple of miles inland at least. Considering UK airspace is 20 miles out to sea I have no doubt about what I am saying." Sue's driving instructor Claire Brazil, from St Austell, Cornwall, said: "I am not an expert but they did look out of the ordinary for Cornish airspace. We leant up to have a look, they were definitely inland, not over the coast."

Did Russian bombers fly over the Plymouth area? | Plymouth Herald (http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Did-Russian-bombers-fly-Plymouth-area/story-26054705-detail/story.html)

It gets worse! Have a look at the comments section? Another witness has popped up. This time the Bear was being escorted by two Typhoons south of Newquay Golf Club! :)

Chipgolfer | February 20 2015, 8:11PM
Cameron is lying- the 'bear' definitely flew over Cornwall, not at low level though as reported. Myself and approx 50 others witnessed an incredibly loud aircraft being so closely escorted by two jets that at first we thought it was a refuelling exercise. We were at Newquay Golf Club at approx 10.50am when a thunderous roar started. Not uncommon as fairly close to what was RAF St. Mawgan but on looking up and to the south, we saw the silver jet at quite a height( I'd say around 15000-18000 feet with two typhoons literally within touching distance.

The claims of these people were outside of the actual QRA scramble and intercept. Classic case of people misidentifying the mil traffic in the region and jumping to the wrong conclusions after the Tu-95 news broke.

[dikastes]

The claims of these people were outside of the actual QRA scramble and intercept. Classic case of people misidentifying the mil traffic in the region and jumping to the wrong conclusions after the Tu-95 news broke.

TEEEJ, are you denying that the TU 95s entered British Airspace and flew off the west of Cornwall?:confused:

[Captivep]

DIKASTES - are you suggesting that the Bears were inside the 12 mile limit?

[Tankertrashnav]

Using terms like "British Airspace" is unhelpful.

Have the Bears flown within the UK FIR? Certainly, there is nothing to stop them doing so, and they have been doing that for 40+ years.

Have they penetrated UK Territorial Airspace? Not as far as we know, unless you know something different.

[TEEEJ]

Dikastes,
That would have resulted in a diplomatic incident and the Russian Ambassador would certainly have been summoned.

RAF jets were scrambled to escort Russian bombers spotted off the coast of Cornwall, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has confirmed.

The two Russian bear bombers were flying in international airspace close to the UK on Wednesday afternoon, an MoD spokesman said.

Typhoon jets from RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire escorted the Russian aircraft out of the UK "area of interest". They did not cross into British sovereign airspace ....

"RAF Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon fighter aircraft were launched yesterday after Russian aircraft were identified flying close to UK airspace," an MoD spokesman said.

"The Russian planes were escorted by the RAF until they were out of the UK area of interest. At no time did the Russian military aircraft cross into UK sovereign airspace."

RAF jets scrambled after Russian bombers spotted off coast of Cornwall - Home News - UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/raf-jets-scrambled-after-russian-bombers-spotted-off-coast-of-cornwall-10055838.html)

[TEEEJ]

The following image taken 3rd March 2015 apparently at Engels. Nice new air launched cruise missile racks!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_NJHKNUwAAH2Ol.jpg

Large image at following Russian website link.

? russianplanes.net ? ???? ??????? (http://russianplanes.net/id157289)

From

? russianplanes.net ? ???? ??????? (http://russianplanes.net/)

[AtomKraft]

Must admit, that's one great looking aircraft. :ok:

And the sound, once heard, cannot be easily forgotten! :)

[zetec2]

The cruise missile racks look superimposed on to the photo to me, just a thought, they don't look uniformly spaced either or do I need new glasses ???? PH.

[Danny42C]

zetec2,

Well spotted, you're right - and no, you don't.

Danny.

[Courtney Mil]

Three different levels of JPEG compression in that image. So bits have been added. Clever attempt to hide
it by making it look like a screen shot. Close, but no cigar.

[TEEEJ]

Zetec2,

They do look strange, but is that not due to the light and shape? Racks loaded. Image from a few years ago.

http://i46.tinypic.com/2vlwf49.jpg


http://i59.fastpic.ru/big/2013/1029/6f/139c23d0269ad0309d916e27cdfd8e6f.jpg


http://cdn.topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2012-04/1333510607_0_3f959_5b70210c_orig.jpg

[Whenurhappy]

I'm no expert in this area at all but there a number of countries that claim, unilaterally, that their FIR equates to sovereign airspace. This is based on the proximate International law relating to Continental Shelves and the upwards projection thereof.


Accordingly, the two countries that I am referring to (and anyone in NATO can probably work out which two) frequently have armed stand-offs when military aircraft from their neighbours get airborne and nudge the FIR boundaries. It has led to accidents in the past, especially when the aircraft are supporting surface units exercising their right of innocent passage through particular straits. I foolishly mentioned in discussion with the locals that an FIR boundary wasn't a national boundary; the resultant discussion was rather unpleasant and eventually turned into an anti 'English' rant based on mid 19th century annotations on Admiralty Charts, which have been used to justify each other's national positions.


I walked away, shaking my head and murmuring 'Hmmm, that went well, then...'

[Lonewolf_50]

I worked with those two countries as well, somewhere in NATO's Southern Region. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Tankertrashnav]

Twice in the 70s I have been on a crew tasked to transit Turkish airspace heading for points east, once on a much looked forward to FEAF ranger to Singapore. On those occasions we got no further than Akrotiri because our NATO ally had refused diplomatic clearance to cross their airspace. What with that, and frequent French ATC strikes, I often used to wonder how our Soviet opposite numbers must have chuckled - can you imagine them asking for diplomatic clearance to overfly Poland, for example?

[dikastes]

Using terms like "British Airspace" is unhelpful.

Have the Bears flown within the UK FIR? Certainly, there is nothing to stop them doing so, and they have been doing that for 40+ years.

Have they penetrated UK Territorial Airspace? Not as far as we know, unless you know something different.

-tankertrashnav Clearly you don't know anything about UK airspace and classes of airspace and the ICAO rules for entering such airspace. Neither have you read the UK AiP.

[ORAC]

I recall that Libya tried to press the issue of territorial waters and free right of passage in the Gulf of Sirte on two occasions....

Gulf of Sidra incident (1981) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Sidra_incident_(1981))

qIUpzNMbfY8


Splash two Migs - 1989 (http://fly.historicwings.com/2013/01/splash-two-migs/)

sjQeOER5I_8

[Tankertrashnav]

For purposes of clarity then, Dikastes, perhaps you could explain exactly why my statements are wrong. I'd be most grateful, as I've always thought it's never too late to learn.

Anybody else who can be bothered is welcome to pitch in!

[Just This Once...]

TTN,

My guess is that he is referring to the ICAO regulations (of which Russia is a signatory) that expressly forbids aircraft flying in this class of controlled airspace without a clearance, RT contact or a squawk.

Russia is quite at liberty to fly in international airspace if it files a flight plan and flies in accordance with the AIP, even if it annoys the heck out of the controlling FIR or the host government. It is not entitled to carry out unsafe acts against the international agreements that it has agreed to. Russian military can also fly with 'due regard' but this still carries a responsibility and cannot lead to unsafe acts such as this.

:ok:

[ORAC]

Nothing illegal taking place. Many times in the 70s and 80s the Bears crossed civilian airways in the MRSA at FL350-360, if they looked like getting close to a civil flight I'd call ScaTTC/LATTC and point that there was a non squawking pair xx miles in front of my fighters at the same level as their flight XX. "But who's controlling them!" The indignant reply would come. not sure, think it's Moscow Central", I'd reply.

But if you came out to the eastern Mediterranean and the Nicosia FIR you'd find U2s, RC135s, Nimrods, US 6th fleet, Israel F-15s etc all happily doing their own thing. Nearest to a collision was the U-2 that got severely bent flying through Concorde's wake.

The Israeli ATC got snidey for a while and starting telling Nicosia about the US/UK flights, so we started telling them about the IAF flights - soon stopped and an agreeable silence fell; tell Nicosia got primary radar and just about had a heart attack. Soon got used to it though and just passed traffic advisories.

Nothing new under the sun - and nothing to get shocked at the Russians about.

[AreOut]

"Nearest to a collision was the U-2 that got severely bent flying through Concorde's wake."

lol I've just imagined that, do you have any more info about that incident?

[ORAC]

Mid 70s, Concorde westbound from Bahrain crossing overhead Lebanon around FL600, U2 northbound along coast about FL580. At the time we weren't allowed to call the U2, only monitor for their calls (that changed). Concorde passed Within a couple of miles*. With very small stall margin the U2 departed and severely over stressed recovering. Airframe had to be flown home in a C5 for repair and a replacement flown in.

Comment from the pilot in discussion. "Didn't mind the b*****d was bigger than me, didn't mind he was faster than me - but what pissed me off was the b*****d was above me!"... - but he thought it was a real cool white bird in the black sky.

* Memory going, 40 years ago. Can't now remember if it was the shock wave ahead or wake behind.

[Just This Once...]

Nothing new under the sun - and nothing to get shocked at the Russians about.

Times have changed. Primary radar is not the prime means for civilian air traffic deconfliction, the volume of traffic has increased and we simply cannot tolerate the mid-air collision risk with some petulant idiot flying through crowded skies not talking or squawking.

We live in a time where flying without TCAS is considered unusual; this is verging on madness. Civilian ATC cannot provide a safe service against an aircraft that they may not be able to see.

:ok:

[Cows getting bigger]

"petulant idiot" ....... best you copy the Americans (and, in my personal experience, the Indians, the Pakistanis, the French etc) into your complaint.

ICAO - smoke screen - International Civil Aviation Organisation. Last time I looked, a TU-95 with a Red Star on the side wasn't a civil aircraft. Nor was the F15 that chose to take a close look at me the other day and, shock horror, failed to comply with the ICAO Standards and Recommended Practises. A quick look at the UK legal framework will tell you that the UK military doesn't have to comply with ICAO SARPS.

Some of you guys need to wake up and have a quick look at international law and not a gentlemen's agreement signed at Chicago a few decades back. Sure, its not very clever driving through Class A/B/C without coordination but that is one of the very reasons that the UK and NATO maintain a surveillance infrastructure such that they can identify Pesky Ivan and safely escort him through the skies.

Purleeeease don't join the Daily Mail bandwagon and tell professional aviators (especially those who have spent their lifetime dealing with such activities) that this is outrageous, unsafe, frivolous etc.

[dikastes]

Russia is quite at liberty to fly in international airspace if it files a flight plan and flies in accordance with the AIP, even if it annoys the heck out of the controlling FIR or the host government. It is not entitled to carry out unsafe acts against the international agreements that it has agreed to. Russian military can also fly with 'due regard' but this still carries a responsibility and cannot lead to unsafe acts such as this.

So can you explain what International Airspace is? Does London FIR/UIR incorporate International Airspace?

As far as I can see, the position of the TU 95s, when intercepted by the Typhoons, was in the London FIR, in class C airspace. The UK AIP (Incorporating standards and recommended practices of ICAO), states that when wishing to fly in the London FIR/UIR in class C airspace, then a flight plan is required and communication with ATC & in receipt of an ATC clearance is also required. (See copy of UK AIP below)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/16736908@N05/16114523683/in/photostream/

The TU 95 were tracked in the UK FIR/UIR. I have indicated below on a map of the London FIR/UIR, where the Tu 95s and Typhoons were seen. As you can see the track of these TU 95s was well inside the London FIR and in class C airspace (Crossing busy Upper Air Routes used by civil and military aircraft flying over the Atlantic).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/16736908@N05/16546927468/in/photostream/

:ok:

[ORAC]

Outside the 12nm territorial limit no international organisation, such as ICAO, or national government, is entitled to prevent free passage by sea, or air, except in so far as they wish to do so by force of arms. FIRs are only applicable to assenting parties.

[Tankertrashnav]

Times have changed. Primary radar is not the prime means for civilian air traffic deconfliction, the volume of traffic has increased and we simply cannot tolerate the mid-air collision risk with some petulant idiot flying through crowded skies not talking or squawking.


True, but then if said aircraft are accompanied by a couple of Typhoons (or whatever) which are themselves squawking, as I assume would be the case, then the mid-air collision risk is greatly reduced. The FJs are effectively saying
"there is a big aircraft here, stay clear"!

[Cows getting bigger]

Correct. The UK FIRs (London and Scottish) do not indicate or imply any sovereignty over such airspace, at least that outside territorial waters. ICAO signatories agree to provide alerting and flight information services within such airspace and nothing more. Have a look at the FIR boundary between Northern and Southern Ireland; it doesn't follow an international border so who is responsible for what if you're inside the Scottish FIR but over Ireland? Who's going to shoot you down? The answer is that there are numerous bi-lateral agreements such that cross-border civil aviation continues with safety.

Airspace designation - no country has the RIGHT to impose any form of airspace control or restriction outside of international waters. It is common practise to recognise conditions that countries have applied in airspace outside of territorial limits but no one is obliged to comply with such conditions. Someone mentioned "due regard" a little earlier and that is absolutely correct.

Get over it - this was not unsafe, there are all sorts of protocols in place to protect the commercial traveller and the only effect is inconvenience.

Now, a far more interesting subject is the political intent and implication of such irritable activity.

[dikastes]

Outside the 12nm territorial limit no international organisation, such as ICAO, or national government, is entitled to prevent free passage by sea, or air, except in so far as they wish to do so by force of arms. FIRs are only applicable to assenting parties.

An FIR is established in order to provide a flight information and alerting service. FIRs can and do extend into international airspace. However, within each countries FIR there are rules and regulations for flying your aircraft, whether it's a private or commercial flight, a civil or military irrespective of international airspace.

Each FIR is subdivided into classes of airspace. These classes of airspace have specific rules. A lot of this airspace requires the pilot to communicate with ATC and follow ATC instruction. If you don't do this then there are penalties for non compliance. One of these is finding a Typhoon, fully armed, sitting on your wing!

Most countries allow free passage of their FIRs/airspace under the Chicago Convention providing you follow the rules. Them TU 95s did not follow the rules.

[dikastes]

Get over it - this was not unsafe, there are all sorts of protocols in place to protect the commercial traveller and the only effect is inconvenience.

:eek:

What protocols do you refer? TCAS? ATC conflict alert - Just like Überlingen then?

If you read carefully what I have written above and understand ATC and airspace, as I do, :8 then it is not safe. :=

[ORAC]

An FIR is established in order to provide a flight information and alerting service. FIRs can and do extend into international airspace. However, within each countries FIR there are rules and regulations for flying your aircraft, whether it's a private or commercial flight, a civil or military irrespective of international airspace.

Incorrect, see article 3 of the ICAO Convention (http://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/7300_9ed.pdf). Though some would like it changed, see below, but don't hold your breath, EU parliament resolutions are non-binding, non-legislative crowd pleasers.......

Article 3

Civil and state aircraft

a) This Convention shall be applicable only to civil aircraft, and shall not be applicable to state aircraft.

b) Aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be state aircraft........


European Parliament: Motion for a European Parliament resolution on military planes which fly in European air space with their communication systems and transponders switched off and threaten passenger planes (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B8-2014-0361&format=XML&language=EN)

[Cows getting bigger]

Oh how I laugh. I've been involved in airspace for over 30 years. I've worked in the CAA (DAP) holding responsibility for the coordination of non-standard and unusual aerial activity within the UK FIRs, sat in Europe helping formulate SES, FUA, FABs etc, held numerous operating endorsements as a controller, instructor and examiner and, in my spare time, hold an ATPL plying my wares across Europe and the Middle East.

I'm fully au-fait with ICAO airspace classifications and the international law surrounding the various rules of the air. I'm also well up-to-speed with regards to safety management and how to mitigate activities such as erroneous and un-coordinated activity within CAS.

For the last time ICAO only applies to civil aircraft.

Now, please accept that you are wrong, wipe away the tears and move on.

[dikastes]

Oh how I laugh. I've been involved in airspace for over 30 years. I've worked in the CAA (DAP) holding responsibility for the coordination of non-standard and unusual aerial activity within the UK FIRs, sat in Europe helping formulate SES, FUA, FABs etc, held numerous operating endorsements as a controller, instructor and examiner and, in my spare time, hold an ATPL plying my wares across Europe and the Middle East.

I'm fully au-fait with ICAO airspace classifications and the international law surrounding the various rules of the air. I'm also well up-to-speed with regards to safety management and how to mitigate activities such as erroneous and un-coordinated activity within CAS.

For the last time ICAO only applies to civil aircraft.

Now, please accept that you are wrong, wipe away the tears and move on.

This is not about whether ICAO applies to the military or not. This is about safety. Picture this, with you ATPL, hat on. Your flying your B777 or whatever it is. You contact ATC for an ATC Control service. There you are at FL330 and suddenly, from no where, at big fat effing Bear plows across your nose causing you to take avoiding action. With you heart beating faster than the turbanfan is rotating you speak to the air traffic controller and declare that you have just had a raging airmiss with a nuclear equipped Tu 95 over Lands End.

The TCAS on the aeroplane did not work because the Tu 95 was primary only. ATC did not see the bear on their radar because it was primary only.

The Americans, the Germans, the French, the Turkish, the Spanish etc etc, fly their mil aircraft through our airspace and comply with the rules, whether it is talking to a civil or a military controller.

So, NO, I cannot accept that I am wrong when it comes to safety, those Russians and you are taking the моча!!

Finally, it was very brave of you to admit that you once worked for the CAA (DAP). The way the CAA are dealing with the new Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) is utterly shambolic!:D

PS how do the CAA (You) mitigate activities such as erroneous and un-coordinated activity within CAS? Please let us all know! It would make very interesting reading.:D

[ORAC]

One of the major problems in the world is how few people can recognise and deal with reality. The subsequent problem is how to move forward before they acknowledge how to deal with the real issues rather than their idealistic, unobtainable, solutions. Still, probably makes them feel happier in bed at night....

[dikastes]

Aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be state aircraft........

I'd like to see you fly your state aircraft through UK airspace without following the rules of the air. Can you imagine the consequences.

How do you think the RAF conducts it's activities in the London FIR? How does a Typhoon fly all the way from Coningsby to the South West of England, to Wales, to the Lake district, into Scotland. They talk to military ATC.

An American KC135 heading for Mildenhall or even Ramstein in SW Germany, Do they just fly through the London FIR without following any rules what so ever? Do they not talk to Civil ATC and military ATC for an ATC service to keep them separated from other aircraft?

The concept of Air Traffic Control is complex and airspace is busy. Without ATC, without rules, without ICAO SARPS and rules of the Air, there would be utter chaos.:*

So, come on tell us, what's your experience and knowledge of UK airspace and Rules of the Air?

[Pontius Navigator]

Disastes, suffice to say you are incorrect.

The phrase used is "due regard" meaning that military accepts due regard for safety of flight.

We would try and observe VFR but frequently that would not be possible.

On one occasion tha

[ORAC]

I'd like to see you fly your state aircraft through UK airspace without following the rules of the air. Can you imagine the consequences. Dear god, are you incapable of following a link, or deliberately ignorant....

Come back when you read and understand the agreed regulations......


Article 3

Civil and state aircraft...........

c) No state aircraft of a contracting State shall fly over the territory of another State or land thereon without authorization by special agreement or otherwise, and in accordance with the terms thereof.

[Cows getting bigger]

I give up. Muppetry wins, once again. :ugh:

[ORAC]

ORAC....

So, come on tell us, what's your experience and knowledge of UK airspace and Rules of the Air?

Hmmm. Joined the RAF as an air defence controller in 1975 and served in air defence for the next 25 years. Qualified in all AD roles from IDRO to MC. Served several tours as an FA and MC intercepting Russian aircraft on a day to day basis. As an MC ran the air defences of the UK on a routine daily basis. My log book shows several hundred QRA intercepts of Bears. Left in 1999 after tours in SOC UK and the UKCAOC.

Could I ask your equivalent experience? :hmm::hmm:

[dikastes]

ORAC....

So, come on tell us, what's your experience and knowledge of UK airspace and Rules of the Air?

Hmmm. Joined the RAF as an air defence controller in 1975 and served in air defence for the next 25 years. Qualified in all AD roles from IDRO to MC. Served several tours as an FA and MC intercepting Russian aircraft on a day to day basis. As an MC ran the air defences of the UK on a routine daily basis. My log book shows several hundred QRA intercepts of Bears. Left in 1999 after tours in SOC UK and the UKCAOC.

Could I ask your equivalent experience?

35 years in civil Air Traffic working for a world leader in ATC. Having to answer phone calls to ADNC asking about unidentified aircraft that they failed to identify. Having to explain to civil aircraft why they had just had an air miss with a foreign aircraft over the North Sea because the mil pilot knew nothing about controlled airspace and the military controller thought taking five through some of the worlds busiest airspace was adequate. Having to vector civil aircraft around QRA who flew into controlled airspace whilst enroute to intercepting a PLOC aircraft causing a loss of separation between civil airliners, not once but twice in the space of minutes. Even the RAF can cause havoc in the London FIR because the pilots think they are Topgun and the mil controller hasn't a sodding clue when it comes to controlling aeroplanes. So yes, I have a little experience.:D

[Cows getting bigger]

Pity you haven't got a clue about the legal framework.

[Pure Pursuit]

There is nothing wrong with taking 5k on civil traffic over the North sea, doing so removes the need to continuously call a busy Tyne/Humber sector chap and allows the WC to concentrate on providing a service to the AD a/c and the ATC chap to do his job. ATC will almost always call us and advise us of an a/c that is due to start a decent etc, that's when coordination/planning come into play. We don't play in Class D and only cross A as per SOPs. Now, taking 5 miles.... I'd agree that it's not the best idea in the world!

During QRA launches, the info flow between the mil and civil sectors is continuous and if the Typhoons need to cross the spine, it is well managed, follows a practices set of procedures and is always safe. Let's not forget the urgency of a Q launch and the need to intercept aircraft as expeditiously as possible.

IMHO, there are too many folk at NATS who do not understand the QRA mission and as a result, think that pilots are playing 'Topgun' in the FIR. How do I know this? I've sat next to plenty of NATS controllers during visits to Swanwick and spoken to them about day to day ASACS work and QRA.

[pr00ne]

dikastes,

I think this...

"and the mil controller hasn't a sodding clue when it comes to controlling aeroplanes."


...tells us all we need to know.

Bit of a chip on the old shoulder?

[Pontius Navigator]

Dim, what does the phrase

"Air Defence priority flight" mean to you?

What if the intruder was hostile? What price a few spilled martinis cf a terrorist act?

[Pontius Navigator]

Accordingly, the two countries that I am referring to (and anyone in NATO can probably work out which two) frequently have armed stand-offs when military aircraft from their neighbours get airborne and nudge the FIR boundaries.

Agreed, they would either reject our flight plan if no dipclear or make a diplomatic protest.

Mind you two other countries also got twitchy if we were carrying bombs. Oh the joys of a bomb bay :)