Red Arrows display at Shuttlewoth interupted by "Intruder"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: LTN
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red Arrows display at Shuttlewoth interupted by "Intruder"
The Red Arrows' first display of the season today at Shuttleworth Old Warden was superb but was interrupted by an "intruder" - which appeared to be helicopter that wandered past, to the east of the airfield. Several minutes of their display were lost; considering all the effort that goes into these shows, not to mention the cost-per-minute of a Red Arrows' display, I wondered what the consequences might be for the pilot of said intruder?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NI
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red Arrows at Old Warden? Heresy! Though I suppose they are fairly elderly airframes nowadays...
Radius of the Arrows' Temporary Restricted Airspace is 6nm which gives an area of 114 square nm, which is a heck of a lot of ground particualry in GA-heavy areas. So they do expect a couple of infringements per year, unfortunately. But bear in mind that they're using the MoD's clout to close that airspace, otherwise they've no more 'right' to it than anyone else ( outside the aerodrome control zone, if any ).
Radius of the Arrows' Temporary Restricted Airspace is 6nm which gives an area of 114 square nm, which is a heck of a lot of ground particualry in GA-heavy areas. So they do expect a couple of infringements per year, unfortunately. But bear in mind that they're using the MoD's clout to close that airspace, otherwise they've no more 'right' to it than anyone else ( outside the aerodrome control zone, if any ).
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tamworth, UK / Nairobi, Kenya
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes the general public feel real good about general aviation, military aviation and flying in general, when everyone in the crowd is saying "don't they talk to each other up their?", "Can't they just tell him to go around?", "Why is our military letting some helicopter tell them what to do?"
Now, being a pilot, I know these are all unfounded, but also, being a pilot, I expect that the helicopter pilot landed with a "Please contact this telephone number". At least I hope so, because what he did is extremely dangerous and irresponsible, there are NOTAMs about restricted airspace for a reason, usually to protect people, like this one. If the Luton controller had not recognised the issue - outside their airspace - or had not notified the Red Arrows, it could have been disastrous.
Now, being a pilot, I know these are all unfounded, but also, being a pilot, I expect that the helicopter pilot landed with a "Please contact this telephone number". At least I hope so, because what he did is extremely dangerous and irresponsible, there are NOTAMs about restricted airspace for a reason, usually to protect people, like this one. If the Luton controller had not recognised the issue - outside their airspace - or had not notified the Red Arrows, it could have been disastrous.
http://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/C...%202010-11.pdf
I'm guessing the Reds would have had a Traffic Service from Luton, which is probably how they were alerted.
If an intruder is spotted by radar, the controller tells the Arrows in terms of bearing and range from their datum and one of the 'singletons' usually breaks off to identify it. Any type of radar service provided is dependent on the radar unit having a 'spare' ie un-used frequency available to provide an 'exclusive' service with no other traffic on the frequency. I did it many times from Farnborough. Even a helicopter air taxying at the airfield where they're displaying will cause them to break off their display
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Bedford
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not good, could have been very serious.
I witnessed and photographed this infringement. As a general member of the public with no formal flight training I quickly became aware of how serious this looked. I became aware of the helicopter (Red Gazelle?) and noticed seven of the Arrows pull into holding away from the display area as it passed through. Has anything been confirmed officially?
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Bedford
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I witnessed and photographed this infringement. As a general member of the public with no formal flight training I quickly became aware of how serious this looked. I became aware of the helicopter (Red Gazelle?) and noticed seven of the Arrows pull into holding away from the display area as it passed through. Has anything been confirmed officially?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one of the 'singletons' usually breaks off to identify it.
NOTAM: In future Red Arrows a/c will be armed with air to air missiles. DO NOT infringe their space."
Surely, if the target helicopter was visible on radar it could have been tracked from one centre to another and therefore identified. I understand the Tower has spare rooms available.
NOTAM: In future Red Arrows a/c will be armed with air to air missiles. DO NOT infringe their space."
Surely, if the target helicopter was visible on radar it could have been tracked from one centre to another and therefore identified. I understand the Tower has spare rooms available.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: LTN
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the comments, we now have an outcome:
A pilot has pleaded guilty to flying his helicopter through a Red Arrows display . . . Mr Kane was fined £2,500 plus £500 CAA prosecution costs . . . Mr Kane's pilot licence has been suspended by the CAA since the incident occurred.
CAA - Pilot guilty of disrupting Red Arrows display
A pilot has pleaded guilty to flying his helicopter through a Red Arrows display . . . Mr Kane was fined £2,500 plus £500 CAA prosecution costs . . . Mr Kane's pilot licence has been suspended by the CAA since the incident occurred.
CAA - Pilot guilty of disrupting Red Arrows display
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NI
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure that the prospect of a fine would be much of a deterrent to that class of intruder; generally these days they don't anticipate being around afterwards to pay the fine. It's more about the CAA demonstrating that certain airspace users are more privileged than others. Could Mr Kane request a three-mile exclusion zone around his helicopter in order to entertain the public? Of course not.
It's more about the CAA demonstrating that certain airspace users are more privileged than others. Could Mr Kane request a three-mile exclusion zone around his helicopter in order to entertain the public? Of course not.
Mr. Kane should have read NOTAMs and obeyed them, as any pilot does. To not be aware or to ignore them is at best poor airmanship, at worst negligence.
It might be added that the Reds are somewhat anal about their precious sanitised airspace in a way that seems rather OTT. Firstly, the area is, as said above, utterly vast and nothing, but NOTHING is allowed to fly in it once it is activated.
Thus if the local plod helo or air ambulance deploys to the display "to be seen" it will not under any circumstances be allowed to launch during the display. Not even on pre-planned low level exit routes that do not affect the Reds' line of flight. The entrance of a Police helo on task into the area will stop the display unless things have changed since I was in that business.
No one else seems to need this huge amount of airspace although many other display aircraft use a larger amount of sky to display than the reds.
It smacks just a little of a Prima Donna attitude, though I'm sure no one has ever accused the Reds of anything like that in the past...
Thus if the local plod helo or air ambulance deploys to the display "to be seen" it will not under any circumstances be allowed to launch during the display. Not even on pre-planned low level exit routes that do not affect the Reds' line of flight. The entrance of a Police helo on task into the area will stop the display unless things have changed since I was in that business.
No one else seems to need this huge amount of airspace although many other display aircraft use a larger amount of sky to display than the reds.
It smacks just a little of a Prima Donna attitude, though I'm sure no one has ever accused the Reds of anything like that in the past...
So you have nine fast (well fast enough close to the ground) displating in close formation or breaking off for wide hi speed formation rejoins or position and running in for singleton passes and they should be expected to have a third eyeball to track random GA movements helis etc in the midst of all that. I would think they ahve more than enough to do without risking any form of conflict avoidance manouver.
Surely thats vastly more complex than a single or dual display in temrs of concentration needed and area of Sky occupied
Surely thats vastly more complex than a single or dual display in temrs of concentration needed and area of Sky occupied
