RAF Escort plane to Stansted (merged)

[Styron]

Bomb alert forces plane to divert

Link to Story Click Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3691856.stm)

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40113000/jpg/_40113502_newplane203.jpg
The plane being searched at Stansted

A Greek passenger plane has landed safely at Stansted Airport after a bomb alert forced it to make a diversion.

Olympic Airlines flight 411 was on route from Athens to New York when a Greek newspaper received anonymous telephone calls saying there was a bomb on board.

RAF jets were scrambled and escorted the airliner to Stansted in Essex.

All 301 passengers and crew have left the plane and a search of the aircraft has so far found nothing suspicious.

Evacuated

A spokesman for Stansted Airport said the plane landed at 1529BST under "full emergency conditions".

The BBC's Athens correspondent Richard Galpin said the incident happened after three anonymous calls were made to the Greek newspaper Ethnos in Athens.

The first was apparently made by an elderly man who told them in broken Greek there was a bomb on board, two and a half hours into the flight.

Further calls - at least one by a person who spoke more fluent Greek - were received within the next hour and a quarter.

The paper contacted the police, who called the airline. No code word is believed to have been used.


Search

A spokesman for the Department for Transport said the aircraft "is on the ground and being searched as part of a standard response".

"It is not believed to be anything out of the ordinary at this stage.

"These are rehearsed procedures which have swung into action.

"Fortunately nothing has exploded, if indeed there was a bomb on board, but we take all threats seriously."

The RAF is not releasing any more details of how many of its planes were involved for security reasons.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40113000/jpg/_40113256_tornado.jpg
It is believed that RAF Tornados escorted the planes

An MoD spokesman said the pilot had contacted air traffic controllers for help.

Officials called the Department of Transport and then the MoD gave the go-ahead to escort the plane.

David Learman from Flight Transport told BBC News 24: "It's very much a routine operation being escorted when there is any suspicion of any kind of interference with a flight."

He added: "It [an escort] is a very good deterrent in case what seems to be a bomb turns out to be a hijack."

An Essex Police spokeswoman "The plane landed safely and the passengers were evacuated.

"They have been taken to a reception centre where they are being cared for. They will then be interviewed.

"At Stansted we are waiting for the police explosive expert teams with dogs to search the plane."

She added there was no idea at this stage how long the search will take and that the airport had well-rehearsed emergency plans.

Leonard Vlamis, chief executive of Olympic Airways, said the captain and authorities in the UK and the US were notified of the threat.

He said: "We were told to land at Stansted which it did safely. The passengers are all okay

"The passengers were calm and they were evacuated properly and safely. There was no problem inside the flight - everything was normal."

He said they had outlined their "strict" security measures to the authorities, which included screening all passengers and baggage and checking the aircraft by police and sniffer dogs.

He added: "The aircraft is expected to depart in three to four hours from now."[

[JessTheDog]

Glad I don't live in Essex!

[Styron]

RAF Jets with Orders to Shoot

By Phil Hazlewood, PA News


Up to four fully-armed RAF fighter planes are likely to have escorted Olympic Airways flight 411 into Stansted today, with orders to shoot it from the skies if it threatened the capital.

Chris Yates, the aviation security editor of Jane’s Transport, told PA News that the Government’s policy on potential terrorist incidents involving passenger planes was similar to that in the US.

“Those fighters, although the Government would never tell you, would have been fully armed. The Prime Minister down in Brighton would have been informed,” he said.

“If there was any credible threat from that flight or any indication that flight was heading for central London, it would have been removed from the skies.”

Jet fighter escorts for passenger planes that could be under threat have been standard procedure since the September 11 terrorist attacks in America.

Passengers on US domestic and international flights have more experience of seeing F-16 fighters on their wingtips.

But they have only been used once before in UK airspace – a New Year’s Eve flight was intercepted as it passed over the Irish Republic on its way to London Heathrow.

On that occasion, as looks increasingly likely at Stansted, it was a false alarm.

But Mr Yates stressed: “The instruction is that if there’s any threat to central London then the only thing that’s going to happen is Sidewinder or other missiles are going to be lofted at the passenger plane.

“That’s the consequence of 9/11. Is it prudent? Yes. Frightening? Yes.”

Stansted officials said the Greek airliner landed under “full emergency conditions“, with fire engines, ambulance crews and police at the scene.

Bomb disposal teams would also be drafted in, as would counter-intelligence staff to interview passengers, while the SAS may have been put on stand-by.

“The pilot of the plane has the ultimate authority. If he believes there’s a threat to his flight, then he will alert air traffic control,” added Mr Yates.

“Air traffic control would take appropriate measures to alert the authorities.”

Although airport security has increased since September 11, it is not standardised and is still vulnerable, as seen in several breaches by undercover journalists in recent years.

“There is a baseline set of security procedures that are meant to be built on by each individual country given the perceived threat at the time,” said Mr Yates.

“The bottom line to that is that there are countries in the world where lip service is paid to aviation security.

“I wouldn’t suggest that Greece is in that category. Having said that, Greece was on a list by the US government because there were a number of hijacks in the 1970s and 1980s.

“From my own experience in November last year, the security was exceptionally tight, tighter than in some UK airports.”

Greece increased security in its airports and airspace before and during the recent Olympic Games in Athens.

[BigGrecian]

A GR4 'fighter' aircraft escorting a plane into stansted. Well that's a novel use for the GR4. Always thought that was the domain of the F3. (Referring to image in BBC report.)

[rivetjoint]

Well done to the people involved, the first real scramble from a UK base for a while I'm sure.

[HOODED]

Just saw the news on SKY aparently RAF fighters were scrambled from a Lincs airbase, Wonder which one houses fighters these days?:O

[SpotterFC]

Full marks for trying Styron, but if you're expecting any more detail beyond the tabloid's standard speculation on this thread, try again.

Always good to see the BBC doing its homework and using correct graphics (surely the 'spotters' at the base(s?) would have let them know what the ac was). Thought they might have sharpened up their editorial control a bit after Hutton.

[BEagle]

Need to know?

[Scud-U-Like]

Well done to all involved, on the ground and aloft. Must have scared the bejesus out of you.

[Styron]

Thanks Razor61:ok:

[J.A.F.O.]

Well said Beags. :sad:

[arfur-sixpence]

Just wondering what on earth was the point of the fighter escort for the Olympic A340? Or more specifically, what on earth they could have done about anything?

It was a bomb threat - would the aim have been to shoot the bomb out of the aircraft hold or were they planning to infiltrate an assualt crew (like the F117a did in Executive Decision/Action - I forget which)?

[PhoenixDaCat]

But Mr Yates stressed: “The instruction is that if there’s any threat to central London then the only thing that’s going to happen is Sidewinder or other missiles are going to be lofted at the passenger plane.

What about poor little me, living in Manchester. Would they let it proceed unchallenged?

[Wigan Warrior]

WTF??
An Aircraft is suspected to have a bomb on-board so it is diverted to Stanstead!!!!
As you say Jess, glad I don’t live in the area too.
Why put the lives of the people of Essex at risk? Because a high percentage of Essex folk are Chavs (www.chavscum.co.uk) is not a good enough reason in my book.
As the World is deteriorating rapidly towards another terrorist atrocity, I think it’s high time we had a remotely sited Airfield somewhere. A facility that would be maintained for instances such as this, such that the population isn’t put at risk, and the Airlines and Airports don’t suffer the huge impacts of having an operating base closed because a rogue aircraft has landed there.
I’m sure there must be scope for a joint (funded) venture between the Government and Airport Owners / Airlines. A secure facility (away from journos, prying eyes and Joe Public) where rouge Aircraft could be landed, where the necessary forces have been trained and have a good understanding of the location (and suitably hidden trap doors etc for getting onboard quickly if required).
Terrorists would be told – you want to divert to Blighty – you’re going to go to Airfield X – like it or lump it! (probably said slightly differently by a trained negociator)

[tradewind]

What, you mean like RAF Valley?

[JessTheDog]

The Spams diverted the Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam flight to Bangor, Maine - obviously seen as expendable, as Essex is.

Good points about the Chavs from Wigan Warrior - perhaps we should have an airborne sensor that can distinguish the largest concentration of Burberry clothing, for a more discriminatory diversion?

[BOAC]

I´d like to echo ´Scud´s ' post - from the limited info I have here in KEF (Sky News, help!!) it seems like a job well done by all, air and land. Re-assuring to us all, I hope?

PS Not Valley, please, my brother is living near the field - let´s keep it at STN:D

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

<<
I think it’s high time we had a remotely sited Airfield somewhere. A facility that would be maintained for instances such as this, such that the population isn’t put at risk, and the Airlines and Airports don’t suffer the huge impacts of having an operating base closed because a rogue aircraft has landed there.
>>

That is, of course, exactly why Stansted was chosen in the first place many years ago as the UK's diversion airport for hijacks and related incidents, long before the recent growth from the low costs was even thought of. This became a problem when the Afghan 727 arrived out of the blue 4 years ago, but previous incidents (Sudan, Air Tanzania) had not caused material disruption. I guess the ATC, police and fire people at STN have more training than elsewhere, but maybe there is a need for an alternative site now, eg. a decommissioned military field.

[Wigan Warrior]

No, otherwise I would have said e.g. RAF Valley (or Machrihanish or Stornoway). Why inconvenience the RAF and disrupt their training activities? I suggested a joint venture facility. Probably a new build, at a strategically well thought out location.

[DeepC]

How about RAe Bedford as was. Very long Runway. (Unless it has since been dug up), fairly out in the sticks yet close to the South East of England.

Seems perfect.

DeepC

[Jackonicko]

Lyneham, perhaps? At worst, you'd put Swindon in danger......
St Mawgan?
Kinloss?

[whowhenwhy]

Honington? Still usable, plenty of rocks to provide security and close to Stansted. Are Bentwaters or Woodbridge still available?

[Razor61]

I think Bentwaters has been dug up, but Woodbridge is still 'there'.

I know that Stansted is the airport of choice in the UK for diversions relating to Bombs/Hijacks. But when did this come into effect and what airport was on the menu before Stansted?

[Pontius Navigator]

Let's just say that Stansted is near London and jet intending to terminate there might not have the fuel to find the Mull of Kintyre.

On a different tack, when did the AD guys adopt Maritime missions? The DT said their mission was detect, deter, destroy. OK, nice and snappy but there wasn't much need for detection.

Now intercept, identify an dif hostile! now that has a nice round ring to it. I wonder why they didn't think of that.

[Wigan Warrior]

Pontious, I was under the impression that the flight was routing route from Athens to New York, so why would it not have had enough fuel to go to the Mull of Kintyre?

That aside, I am not advocating something that already exists.
I am talking about a remote airfield that is secure. Not open to the public. Far from any populous areas.
As has been pointed out, the occurrences for which it would be used are rare.
The nature of the facility would be for bomb laden airliners (the origin of this thread) coming to land or explode on approach over the sea, or, for ‘terrorist controlled aircraft’ to land and stay on the apron until they released the hostages or faced the consequences.
It would not necessarily need 24/ 7 ATC, fire cover, medical cover etc.
It would be need minimal accommodation and associated facilities.
Considering the expense of losing a major UK airport and the disruption it would cause to the Airlines (apart from vaporising a large part of Essex – the case in point!).
I think (risk mitigation) such a facility would make a great deal of sense and need not be too expensive to build and maintain.

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

<<
I know that Stansted is the airport of choice in the UK for diversions relating to Bombs/Hijacks. But when did this come into effect and what airport was on the menu before Stansted?
>>

I guess since at least the 1970s, certainly since the British Airways One-Eleven ended up there in 1975 when it was hijacked ex- MAN, I think, for LHR. This was the only domestic hijack in Britain and the hijackers were said to have been told that they were landing in Paris (which is where they wanted to go) when it was really STN - so to my knowledge STN has had this function for at least that long.

[Self Loading Freight]

I'dve thought that the most important thing for the fighters to do would be to make absolutely sure that the civil aircraft got nowhere near a nuclear power station (something that might be more tricky if you ask it to divert to some distant rural location).

I've seen some apparently reasonable hazard analyses of 767 strikes on the Sellafield reprocessing waste containment vessels that have fatalities over time in the millions. Even if you disagree strongly with any particular analysis, this has to be the worst case scenario - anything is preferable, and at almost any cost.

R

[Squadgy]

Heard a while back that Manchester was to become the designated airfield. Dual runway ops with the subject ac landing on 24L and being parked in the loop at the end. In the middle of the Cheshire countryside, with a fire station close by.
Also the advantage that the airfield can continue to operate on single rwy ops if 24L did get blocked.

IIRC a PIA 747 with a suspect device did just this a year or two ago.

[Pontius Navigator]

Mike Jennvy and Wigan Warrier, you both missed the point. I was not suggesting that THIS aircraft could not reach Machrihanish. If I recall correctly, the question was which airfield should be used in the FUTURE instead of Stansted.

Most of the other names muted for the Olympic aircraft were probably shut - Woodbridge, Honington etc.

My point is that Stansted is the PLANNED destination for any forced divert and the counter question was should this be so.

I was therefore suggesting that its proximity to LHR was significant for any diversion. Certainly a diversion to Machrihanish for a short or medium range passenger jet is probably too far. Remember the odd charter jets with barely enough fuel for planned, let alone diversion, airfield.

Mike, see yr PM.

[BEagle]

Manston? Or London(Manston) or whatever it's called nowadays?

[Wigan Warrior]

As nuclear power stations are dotted all over our island it would be best to keep rogue Aircraft well away from our shores in the first place (Stanstead is less than 60 miles from Sizewell).
My sentiment is to send rogue aircraft to somewhere where the risk to people and property (especially nuclear power stations) is minimised. If, because of fuel constraints, the rogue jet couldn’t make it there, then so be it.
I think it is a tad silly to send a jet with bags of fuel and a (supposed) bomb onboard into Stanstead. However, I appreciate that, as Stanstead was nominated for such duty that’s where it had to go.
I live nowhere near Essex and couldn’t give a toss for the local Chavs, in fact, I take back all I have said – lets keep the danger down South…..the nearer London the better.

[Beeayeate]

My sentiment is to send rogue aircraft to somewhere where the risk to people and property (especially nuclear power stations) is minimised.

Machrihanish?



:rolleyes:

[NineLima]

A few photos of the QRA landing back at Coningsby,

http://www.pbase.com/stevieb/image/34336975.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/stevieb/image/34336912.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/stevieb/image/34336966.jpg

Great job guys, Well done to all involved!
Regards, Steve

[SIKWIZZO]

Nice one boys! Its a shame NineLima couldnt get his pics to the BBC so they didnt post pictures of us GR4 boys 'doing Q' - perish the thought. A job well done to the F3 force - glad you got to keep your death dart on the rails though!

Top work :ok:

Strength and Honour

SW

[Navaleye]

I see they are still lugging Skyflash around. I thought AMRAAM was standard fit these days?

Well done chaps btw.

[Cat5 in the Hat]

Manston? Or London(Manston) or whatever it's called nowadays?

Transport links are awful to that part of the world. It would take SF days to get there by road - obv. they'd fly in though.

And if you send them that close to france, you might as well hand the plane over to the froggies and let them deal with it!

The runway is bloody long though. I'd have loved to have towed the VGS kit onto the runway for a launch!

[Moondance]

With an A340 probably cruising at M0.83 (ish), maybe FL340-360 coming west out of Athens, would the F3s with external tanks stand any chance of getting up there or even be fast enough to 'escort', or would they have to wait until the 340 descended before the 'escort' could commence?

[soddim]

I doubt if the tanks would interfere too much with the task - they are drop tanks even if it does cause a lot of questions when one drops them.

[Archimedes]

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1153385,00.html

Another Greek airliner with a bomb threat attached is currently on its way to Shannon, according to the above...

[Av18tor]

Should we really be talking about the operational capabilities of our a/c in an open forum? If they dont know the facts why help them by passing the details out on here!

Maybe its time for Mr Mod to come in and either close or restrict the info posted.

[The Gorilla]

And just what operational capabilities does the Tornado F3 possess??

Go out and look in the public domain Bozo!! This particular frame is over 25 years old in design and all its problems are well highlighted.

Wouldn't be unfortunate enough to actually be an F3 pilot would you?

:ok:

[Razor61]

Another NY bound Olympic jet diverted due to bomb alert.
This time to Shannon, Eire.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3698266.stm

Razor

[Flatus Veteranus]

Is there a runway still useable at Carnaby (near Bridlington)? It was built in WW2 for the same purpose as Manston - emergency recovery of damaged bombers. Like Manston, it had FIDO fog-dispersal burners an d was about 5000 yds long, I think. We used it as a RLG when I did the Driffield course in '51, and I had reason to bless its length and width on my first solo atempt at asymmetric roller landings in a Meteor IV. :O :O

[Flypuppy]

Flatus Veteranus,

Carnaby was turned into an industrial estate in the 1970's, the main road through the middle of it used to be the main runway. There are very few clues as to its former use as airfield.

Seen it from the air a number of times and unless you were told it was a former airfield you would never know it.

The image below shows how Carnaby airfield looks today (well sort of). The red circled section is, what was the old main runway.

http://www.fototime.com/{13431EA2-C57C-4905-AAFB-43C1021C06B7}/picture.JPG

[Radar Muppet]

Guerilla

You wouldn't be unfortunate enough to fly (sorry, engineer) rubber you-know-what to HK, would you?

[Fox_4]

Nice of Gorilla to show us all his massive ignorance. Are you actually a QFI?!

F3 with AMRAAM and ASRAAM plus all associated avionics, has more capability than you can shake a big stick at. Dont need to be a turning fighter when you can ram a missile down their throat before they merge with you. I agree it has taken the full time span to get there but it is here now!!

Nice pics Ninelima

[Navaleye]

But they weren't carrying AMRAAM, they were carrying Skyflash. The RN has been carrying AMRAAM for 10 yrs, why is the RAF still carrying obsolete semi-active weapons on its front line fighter?

[fidae]

Navaleye

Good to see you on such fine fighting form, reiterating your belief that the Sea Harrier is the saviour of UK armed force and dropping a dig at the F3. There some very good reasons for using Sky Flash on QRA well beyond scope of this forum. Some of the many could run along lines of threat, task, mission and cost!!! Do you really think the SHAR is viable for current UK, NATO, South Atlantic QRA? I accept SHAR is better than a lot of options for protecting boats.

On the point of obsolete weapons, last time I saw an F-15C on operations he carried a mixture of Aim-120 and Aim-7. Again for some very good reasons beyond scope of forum. F3, like most AD platforms will retain capability to use both active and semi-active missiles.

Shall look forward to a reasoned response.

Meanwhile on planet earth....jolly well done to those QRA chaps in the air and in the bunker for completing a daring intercept and shadowing a co-operative target.

Tongue out of cheek.

[Navaleye]

Fidae,

The Shar is still arguably our most flexible multi-role asset.

I read in a paper that policy would be not to fire on a hijacked airliner until it was in a nose down attitude. Isn't that a bit late? Presumably it is nose down because its near its target, most likely in a city.

[fidae]

I'm not sure you'll ever be dissuaded from the fact the SHAR is our most flexible asset....seems that 41 pages of Sea-jet thread are testament to that. However, I still wouldn't describe the SHAR as the best in any role, anyway I unreasonably digress from the thread topic for a cheap shot....so apologies.

Was a newspaper you read or a proper policy paper on ROE against civilian aircraft? There may be subtantive differences between the two!

There are several valid arguements to consider. Paul Wilkinson is his collection of essays on Aviation Terrorism, published before 9/11 considered the risks to avaition security being greater from countries shooting down aircraft than aircraft being used as suicidal cruise missles. This hypothesis has been proved true in the number of incidents if not the number of casualties. USS Vincennes with the Iranian airbus, Ukrainians with the Israeli airliner, The Israelis shooting down an airliner in the 1970s....sorry I don't have the exact date of incident and there are more. Paul Wilkinson believes that western governments do now have robust enough ROE to deal with such issues.

[Navaleye]

Where flexibility = It can shoot bad guys down in both BVR and WVR. It can drop bombs on said bad guys when they are on the ground and shoot em' with Adens when they run away. Nothing else HMG has can do that, so I would say it is flexible. However this is not the thread for such banter. Happy to continue here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1542633#post1542633)

[Razor61]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3704262.stm

Razor