Jet2 flight shadowed by French jet
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nearer home than before!
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was a MLG to BHX flight so it would have been one of the brand new -800s. The -300s that will be left next year are all younger than the oldest -800s out there. It isn't aircraft age that was the problem. The French controllers I had that day had quite thick accents to be fair. my F/O struggled to get the frequencies right...
Gender Faculty Specialist
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.
Intercept of airliners of any kind for training is not allowed to my knowledge anymore.
Why, ask the US Navy P3 that was intercepted and had to land in Hainan some time ago.
Anyway, it was a PLOC , it looks like?
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.
Intercept of airliners of any kind for training is not allowed to my knowledge anymore.
Why, ask the US Navy P3 that was intercepted and had to land in Hainan some time ago.
Anyway, it was a PLOC , it looks like?
The ATCO may pass on the request, but this is a function of the Sector Operation Centre and would be performed by an Intercept Controller who would not have access to VHF.
By the time you reached UK airspace, in all probability, you would have been tracked by air defence missile systems across europe albeit with the firing circuits disarmed, Nike, Hercules, Bloodhound, Hawk, Patriot etc and they wouldn't have bothered asking.
By the time you reached UK airspace, in all probability, you would have been tracked by air defence missile systems across europe albeit with the firing circuits disarmed, Nike, Hercules, Bloodhound, Hawk, Patriot etc and they wouldn't have bothered asking.
That decision was entirely at the civil aircraft commander's discretion.
My view was: If you want a target then get a Dominie up!
Last edited by Basil; 20th Aug 2017 at 14:06.
Or maybe the J2 ac was on the right frequency and French ATC had forgot to tell them to change and then wonder why they have lost them. Happened before and will happen again, eg when French ATC moved from overnight manning to full daytime manning and one slipped through the net.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doubt it. The next sector expecting the aircraft on their frequency would check with the previous to remind them. If no contact they would then try to contact the aircraft on 121.5
I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
The allegations that it was caused by a Harrier intercept also have no evidence.
Moreover, the Harrier pilots who would have been flying on that exercise will now all be happily collecting their pensions so have nothing to lose - do you really believe that they would not come forward and admit it if they had really accidentally killed some fellow aviators of a very friendly allied country like Norway?
Shot one , FAF jets have no TCAS, you meant Transponder surely.
as I can see this was not an interception but looks like a verification. maybe following a direct too close from , or overflying a sensitive area..or just an exercise/practice.
Air defense can do theses things , they normally do not give reasons.
Do not Forget France is still in a State of emergency following the terrorist attacks..
as I can see this was not an interception but looks like a verification. maybe following a direct too close from , or overflying a sensitive area..or just an exercise/practice.
Air defense can do theses things , they normally do not give reasons.
Do not Forget France is still in a State of emergency following the terrorist attacks..
The one time I have been "verified" was over the Med by a Rafale. We only spotted him because we happened to turn on one of our rear-view cameras. We could not see him from normal line of sight from cockpit.
Well that is a fairly extravagant assertion. Three separate Norwegian investigations all concluded it was structural break-up - there was no blame attached to the crew.
The allegations that it was caused by a Harrier intercept also have no evidence.
Moreover, the Harrier pilots who would have been flying on that exercise will now all be happily collecting their pensions so have nothing to lose - do you really believe that they would not come forward and admit it if they had really accidentally killed some fellow aviators of a very friendly allied country like Norway?
The allegations that it was caused by a Harrier intercept also have no evidence.
Moreover, the Harrier pilots who would have been flying on that exercise will now all be happily collecting their pensions so have nothing to lose - do you really believe that they would not come forward and admit it if they had really accidentally killed some fellow aviators of a very friendly allied country like Norway?
PPRuNe: Possible RAF Harrier MidAir Collision Meham, Norway 1982
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stab trim
You are right.
I am wrong. There is no evidence that a Harrier had anything to do with this.
The first report from 1984 did indicate that it was the captain fault.
The second report stated it likely was mechanical failure in severe turbulence.
AND the Parliamentary Comission in 2006 stated no evidence of any Harrier involved.
My apologies to our fellow British soldiers.
I am wrong. There is no evidence that a Harrier had anything to do with this.
The first report from 1984 did indicate that it was the captain fault.
The second report stated it likely was mechanical failure in severe turbulence.
AND the Parliamentary Comission in 2006 stated no evidence of any Harrier involved.
My apologies to our fellow British soldiers.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is funny. A british airliner get intercepted by a french fighter jet, and it is the fault of either the french air force or the french ATC, but surely not the british crew...
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superpilot don't take it personal. Unfortunately there are a few in Jet2 who suffer small airline syndrome and who struggle to deal with any kind of criticism aimed at jet2. For them the airline is the best thing since sliced bread, they are the product of the continuous North Korean style jet2 management propaganda.
I wholeheartedly agree with you; The T9-T16 procedures within Jet2 are amateurish to say the least.
I wholeheartedly agree with you; The T9-T16 procedures within Jet2 are amateurish to say the least.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2Planks:
HT:
2Planks has probably the closest guess out of all the responses here, it does happen, and enough to be considered regularly.
737 also said that Brest tried calling said aircraft for 20 minutes, further indication they were at least not on the expected frequency (if they were on a frequency), and RVF750 said that there were some accents hard to understand that their FO didn't quite understand. It is possible for the aircraft to have dialled in a wrong frequency, checked in as normal, and for the ATC unit to acknowledge without realising that the aircraft should not be on their frequency. Again, it is something that happens and has caused this situation in the past.
Or maybe the J2 ac was on the right frequency and French ATC had forgot to tell them to change and then wonder why they have lost them.
Doubt it. The next sector expecting the aircraft on their frequency would check with the previous to remind them. If no contact they would then try to contact the aircraft on 121.5
737 also said that Brest tried calling said aircraft for 20 minutes, further indication they were at least not on the expected frequency (if they were on a frequency), and RVF750 said that there were some accents hard to understand that their FO didn't quite understand. It is possible for the aircraft to have dialled in a wrong frequency, checked in as normal, and for the ATC unit to acknowledge without realising that the aircraft should not be on their frequency. Again, it is something that happens and has caused this situation in the past.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you zonoma. As ex ATC (for 45 years) I consider my doubts are just as valid. I note that you exclude the possibility of the aircraft taking the wrong call for a frequency change. That also happens quite frequently. As for your suggestion that
this would indicate that you have no knowledge of what functions an ATCO has to perform upon receiving an initial call on his sector. We are not talking procedural control over certain parts of Africa here!
It is possible for the aircraft to have dialled in a wrong frequency, checked in as normal, and for the ATC unit to acknowledge without realising that the aircraft should not be on their frequency.