Air miss at Lossiemouth
BBC News has reported an air miss at Lossiemouth
Anyway, I bet the BBC called it a "near miss" - they always do. I always thought "near hit" was more accurate!
It's not just pedantry but essential imo. If you don't differentiate the type of take-off/departure, how will the joining traffic be able to construct a mental air picture of where they should be so avoidance may be planned? A pairs take-off will take far less time to clear the circuit than a 30 second stream, and it's unlikely that the trailing wingman will be squawking so apart from being a lot closer to the visual circuit than might otherwise be expected, they wont show on TAS/TCAS.
And I would imagine a Typhoon pilot might want to know it's a Tornado on for departure since the aircraft performance immediately after take-off (speed/angle and rate of climb) are markedly different from the Typhoon.
And I would imagine a Typhoon pilot might want to know it's a Tornado on for departure since the aircraft performance immediately after take-off (speed/angle and rate of climb) are markedly different from the Typhoon.
Regarding airmanship (and to add to my expressed view that there was little more either the No4 Typhoon or Tornado could have done) the report makes little mention of the Typhoon leader.
Sitting at the front with the best view/capacity in the formation, a quick leading question to ATC such as "request intentions of the one on?" may have been just enough to clue-in those formatting on him that there was another aircraft to add to their mental picture before the break.
Sometime it is just the little things that can ease your day.
I thought that military aircraft had to be cleared to enter a MATZ?
Whatever the precise wording should have been, I find it absolutely astonishing that the Typhoon formation wasn't made aware of the Tornados' departure intentions...
Whatever the precise wording should have been, I find it absolutely astonishing that the Typhoon formation wasn't made aware of the Tornados' departure intentions...
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Alternative perspective, in a deliberately light-hearted and contentious mood|
"Tower, Typhoon x 4 Initials for Run and Break,"
"Typhoon, MATZ penetration not approved, 2 Tornados on for take-off. Maintain above 3,000 feet, QFE nnnn, and stand by."
"WTF? Don't you trust us to fly in VMC in the MATZ?"
"No."
Where and how far do we go with this stuff? Do you want 'interventionist' Local Control, as I used to do (see upthread)?
"Tower, Typhoon x 4 Initials for Run and Break,"
"Typhoon, MATZ penetration not approved, 2 Tornados on for take-off. Maintain above 3,000 feet, QFE nnnn, and stand by."
"WTF? Don't you trust us to fly in VMC in the MATZ?"
"No."
Where and how far do we go with this stuff? Do you want 'interventionist' Local Control, as I used to do (see upthread)?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
BTW, I described this scenario to my BIL today. He's an ex-Vulcan driver and subsequent ATCO (sqn ldr Retd), who is recovering (slowly) from treatment for a brain tumour.
He immediately went 'eeek' about the lack of information on the departing stream of Tornados (3 & 4). If he, in his sadly somewhat diminished state can see the developing situation instantly, what do we say about the ATCO, or the procedures/phraseology or indeed training, nowadays imposed on him?
He immediately went 'eeek' about the lack of information on the departing stream of Tornados (3 & 4). If he, in his sadly somewhat diminished state can see the developing situation instantly, what do we say about the ATCO, or the procedures/phraseology or indeed training, nowadays imposed on him?
Last edited by MPN11; 29th Jan 2017 at 18:15. Reason: typong
Well at least you mentioned the 2 Tornados on for take-off, so probably an improvement.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
...and I am probably too kind to controllers.
Perhaps "[callsign], initials runway xx, QFE xxxx, confirm competent controllers in the VCR?"
"Afirm, clear join, [passes relevant traffic, information but not war and peace with disclaimers about poor radar coverage, MSAs and alike].
"Roger, [callsign] for the break."
Perhaps "[callsign], initials runway xx, QFE xxxx, confirm competent controllers in the VCR?"
"Afirm, clear join, [passes relevant traffic, information but not war and peace with disclaimers about poor radar coverage, MSAs and alike].
"Roger, [callsign] for the break."
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
"... and your Invoice for competent ATC service is in the post.... 28 day settlement, please. Glad to be of service, please call again!" 
Sorry, slipped into BA penny-pinching mode there, which does NOT belong in this sub-Forum!
Sorry, slipped into BA penny-pinching mode there, which does NOT belong in this sub-Forum!
