Airliner intercepts

[Kirkwall]

Just curious to know just how many times airliners have been intercepted in UK airspace over the last year. I am aware of three in the UK(not sure how close they got to actual intecept) and recently have seen a Mirage chasing an Airbus near Paris. The French seem particularly keen on this, but so far, they seem to be mainly going after the Germans.

Anyone want to spill the beans.


BTW

How do the RAF manage to intercept learjets? Do they cancel the F3 and call in a Canberra?
:D

[Kirkwall]

Blimey! That many!

I wonder if they are charging airlines for the "service" yet. It could end up like the government speed (sorry safety) camera revenue generating scam.

I heard second hand that a Swanwick controller had taken great pleasure in announcing to a temporarily out of contact American pilot that Tornadoes had ben scrambled and his company were likely to be billed.

I hope some of this cash at least goes to the squadron beer fund. Until of course the airlines start passing the bill on to pilots. It's bad enough trying to avoid the noise monitoring police.

After digging out the FIS Page 33 to find out what to do next and trying 121.5, can anyone suggest appropriate behaviour / gestures for a French fighter pilot who is taking a close look to see if all is well.

[frodo_monkey]

Can I perhaps suggest a call of 'Beadwindow' before anything sensitive is posted?

Regards all,

Frodo_Monkey :hmm:

[BOAC]

Well, if it is one of those typically French Farces where you are in contact with ATC and they decide to 'practice' on you, I suggest a carefully judged slight turn towards would produce some entertainment:D

Had a TU95 do a bit more than 'slight' towards me at FL280 at 0300 Z once - that WAS entertaining and no, I was not THAT far away.:D

[Morf]

Amen Frodo!
I've been surfing this site as a guest for about a year and this is the thread that has resulted in me registering.
There is no way that any detail of QRA operations should be discussed on an open forum like this! The answer to the question posed by Kirkwall could in no way enrich his life unless he is some reporter looking for a scoop - or a terrorist looking for some Int.

[beardy]

Before you become totally paranoid remember that the action and reaction are publicly available and must be so, otherwise how is the poor civvie supposed to react?. Cries of 'beadwindow' (haven't they changed that code yet?) are rather over the top and may give rise to unnecessary conjecture.

[Kirkwall]

No, not a reporter, just someone curious to know how potentially silly this is all becoming after observing a mirage on the wingtip of an A300 with a controller giving the pilot a very public patronising lecture on the reason why he might have a fighter sitting next to him Considering the RT chaos that sometimes exists in that particular bit of airspace, I suspect that there might have been something in the A300 pilot's protests of innocence (perhaps controllers not responding to calls in short sectors between freq changes?) We too were given a bollocking by same French sector ten minutes later for doing a radio check due to not having been handed over by the north coast. Their claims that we were not listening out and had missed calls were not true. Collegues reported another intercept in the same area only hours later.

Hardly a state secret if all the passengers get to wave to the mirage pilots too.

If the RAF are adopting a more subtle approach, then great, no need to know the detail and numbers perhaps, but if it is happening as frequently as suggested, maybe it is time for more sharing of information between the parties involved. If it is being discussed in FS forums, then maybe a little more info needs to be trickled down to the line. After all, we are the ones who end up with that embarrased oh no I'm in for a bollocking dry mouth feeling whilst trying to explain the obvious to the punters. problem is that in some airspace, chances are that it might not be the crew's fault entirely.

There are problems with sleeping recievers on some types and listening to 121.5 in busy sectors isn't always posible all the time (sadly becuase often it is used for inappropriate chatter). There are a lot of practice pans too which also distract from the rapid fire Lon / Paris ATC exchanges (shame as this is a good thing, but is unfortunately something which caues volume controls to be turned down).

All I am suggesting is that there are more subtle and discrete ways of initially attracting attention and hopefully getting a crew to check in on 121.5 other than flying on the wingtip. After all, re-establishing comms is all that's rquired in the first instance.

TCAS? Selcal?

[Lima Juliet]

Kirkwall

See link http://www.fly-safely.org/story.asp?id=75 for article run in UKFSC's FORUM magazine...

About as informative the RAF can be on this sensitive subject.

Regards

LJ

[Kirkwall]

Excellent, thanks. That's a good starting point.

[safetypee]

From Leon Jabachjabicz link to the ERA article, which states under Is it Safe?:- “The intercepting aircraft will not trigger the TCAS and will take responsibility to avoid the aircraft being intercepted.”

In my experience during test and evaluation of TCAS, an aircraft joining and maintaining formation will trigger the TCAS.
Or do the interceptors turn something off, which then may present another hazard?

However, in the days when I did the intercepting (well before the current troubles), I can confirm the many extensive training and safety procedures followed before civil intercepts were authorized.

[eastern wiseguy]

Safetypee...if the interceptor has his transponder OFF then TCAS is useless. I frequently ask aircraft (helo's for example) to switch the transponder to standby to avoid nuisance TA/RA's against ILS traffic.

I presume the intercept is carried out stealthily by some means known only to the interceptor and Fighter Control.

[raytofclimb]

The number of actual intercepts carried out by UK Air Defence assets is insignificant to the number of times the system is spun up in response to the concern about the intentions of an airliner.

Glad to see no-one in-the-know chatting about it, but the spotters pressing themsevles against the wire at Coningsby and Leuchars can probably give you figures.

It amazes me how often the civil community fails to either:

a. Follow the Flight Plan
b. Answer the radio
or c. Ask the Hostie to stop it, and carry out a and b

Any case results in me having to fold the horizontal leg rest of my Lazee-Boy down, hit pause on the DVD and run to the jet in an immersion suit. Worse still, do it all at 3am (TV on static only then). Thanks, another 70,000 heart beats wasted.

And, No, we don't get an apology, an explanation or a Beer fund (which would be the most welcome). And the RAF is too soft to write out a bill for it.

Ray.

[PPRuNe Radar]

It amazes me how often the civil community fails to: a. Follow the Flight Plan

I don't see that happening very often at all. Certainly not inside Controlled Airspace ... and traffic outside Controlled Airspace is entitled to operate on a free reign surely ?? It's one of the freedoms you defend on our behalf.

It amazes me how often the civil community fails to: b. Answer the radio

Absolutely. The majority we see here in the UK are US carriers, whom you would think would have heightened awareness of what might happen if they are out of contact. However it is not exclusively those carriers, it happens with operators from all over the globe, including UK national carriers :ugh: And it is far too regular an occurrence, happening on average once a day in UK airspace (that's loss of comms - NOT scrambles of course !!).

Whilst some are technical problems, and some are the result of genuine mistakes or poor RT (on both sides of the mic), I still can't fathom those pilots who go to the wrong frequency, call up and get no answer (from the ground or other aircraft) and yet sit on it anyway, blissfully ignorant of the sleeping giant they have just woken up downstairs, and seem not to have the intelligence to revert to the previous frequency. :hmm: Now they do deserve to pick up the costs ;)

[BlueEagle]

This is an interesting intercept (http://www.zap16.com/Intercept%20f16%20B767%20Delta.htm) , listen for the 'Switches Safe" remark at the end, makes you think.

[SirToppamHat]

Blue Eagle: - What does it make you think exactly? That the aircraft are live-armed?

It is perfectly normal for controllers to ask crews to confirm Weapons Safe / Switches Safe / Armament Safety Checks Complete (depending on the current flavour of the month!) at several stages of an intercept and, on completion of one intercept task prior to a further tasking.

Interesting R/T anyway, thanks for posting.

Coming back to the original thread, it is not permitted for Mil ac in the UK to carry out intercepts on civilian aircraft unless it is part of a pre-briefed exercise (eg with FR Aviation) or there is an operational requirement.

I don't know what the French rules are.

I would just echo the comments of one of the earlier posters, as I have said before on this forum:

MONITOR VHF GUARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

STH

[raytofclimb]

PPRUNE RADAR:

"And it is far too regular an occurrence, happening on average once a day in UK airspace (that's loss of comms - NOT scrambles of course !!)"

.... valid points, but if we (QRA) get called to Cockpit Ready (not yet a full scramble) for a no comms aircraft you don't know if you are about to engage an airliner full of holiday makers. Given that a suicide hijacker is not likely to waggle his wings, follow you to Stanstead and say "fair cop guv" any no comms aircraft is not to be lightly dismissed.

And isn't.

Ray.

[ehwatezedoing]

Sometime an interception can be useful.

After blowing a tire on take off an AF 737 asked being so for a visual inspection.

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/sites/air/base/breves/assistance_en_vol_dun_boeing_737500/
Sorry, link in French only.

[gadgetbent]

I can only reiterate SirToppamHat's comments.

So many of these incidents would be avoided if the airliner involved was monitoring VHF Guard.

Surely that is not too much to ask? And if you don't listen to VHF guard, then do not be suprised to see a Tornado appearing next to you!! :ok:

Gadgetbent

[ftrplt]

then do not be suprised to see a Tornado appearing next to you!!

or 10 000ft below you!!!:O

[The Rocket]

Or pumping 4 Skyflash into your soft white underbelly.

You may well mock it, but rest assured, the Tornado is perfectly capable of responding to all QRA requests, including Learjets at FL500.

Especially in my capable hands:p :p :ok:

[Jackonicko]

Still not AMRAAM, then, Rocket?

[The Rocket]

AMRAAM for a good while now Jacko, as I'm sure you're more than aware

Flash for Q however;)

[Jackonicko]

Yeah but why?

Having spent so much money on CSP, then more on AOP, and more on FSP, I'd bloody well hope that AMRAAM was perfect on F3........

[ftrplt]

come on Jacko, think about it. There is a perfectly valid reason(s) you would use a semi-active over an active.

See if you can work it out.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Monitoring 121.5 is a positive flight safety hazard during much of the day in the UK.

GA needs to get off Guard and be given a practice frequency. Everyone knows it.

Cheers

WWW

ps Do we have *four* serviceable missiles all on one squadron!

[Kirkwall]

The rocket,

Please be absolutely sure you don't miss when you pop off your four skyflashes. We have a very experienced solicitor and a barrister flying out of my base.

I wouldn't give you much of a chance against that pair in courtroom combat even with the whole RAF leagal branch behind you. ;)

Good luck!

[STANDTO]

have you seen that transponder based 'virtual radar' thing on the back of the latest Transair catalogue. 500 quid and you can track to your hearts content (allegedly)

I would have thought this sort of thing would be extremely useful for planning ground based attacks on airliners.