Is it illegal to use false call signs?

[Ye Olde Pilot]

Lots of questions in the news story below on the improper use of call signs.

From the Times,London

THE American military have been operating flights across Europe using a call sign assigned to a civilian airline that they have no legal right to use.
Not only is the call sign bogus — according to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) — so, it appears, are some of the aircraft details the Americans have filed with the air traffic control authorities.
In at least one case, a plane identified with the CIA practice of “extraordinary rendition” — transporting terrorist suspects — left a US air base just after the arrival of an aircraft using the bogus call sign.
The call sign Juliet Golf Oscar (JGO) followed by a flight number belongs, says the ICAO, to a now bankrupt Canadian low-cost airline called Jetsgo of Montreal. :=
A USAFE spokesman last week said American aircraft using the JGO call sign were performing “Joint Guard Operations” for the Nato/European peacekeeping mission in the Balkans.
However, inquiries have shown that the military operation called “Joint Guard” ended in 1998. They also show that none of the US aircraft deployed in it match ones using the JGO call sign.
A spokesman for the ICAO said: “Our records indicate that the designator JGO is still assigned to Jetsgo and the ICAO does not assign the same code to two operators.”
Full story here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article732439.ece

[Del Prado]

What about filing as a gulfstream and it actually being a 747? I've read on these boards of air force one doing just that.

[CargoOne]

I believe the most important thing is.... where Eurocontrol should send a bill for air navigation charges?

[andrijander]

Regarding the matter at hand with the CIA flights I think we are all a bit in a pool of the abovementioned $#!1€ as they "sort of" had approval from some goverments around the globe. The question would be: are some people above/outside the law? I think they should NOT be.
Talking as an ATC I see no practical problem with the flights except what cargoone and delprado mention. However morally and legally it's another story.

[Pocketrocket31]

I couldn't agree more.

To me, the question remains: If everything that the government in question does is right, legal and correct, then why do they hide it?

Blue skies!

[Pocketrocket31]

...they're trying to hide it, aren't they, using callsigns other than their usual and correct ones?

[andrijander]

Sorry if my messsage mentions something that isn't there...anymore...it's been edited -true it was a bit pollitical and out of the point but cannot change the rest of the message and will not to give away it has been edited -and it wasn't me.
A.

PD when I say the in the first line I talk about the americans and the $#1 factor goes on about some persons in some governments knowing/authorizing without regards to law.

[Ye Olde Pilot]

I did not start this thread intending to debate the politics of the flights and governments involved.
My question is more basic. Is it acceptable or legal under ICAO agreements for anyone to play this game. Flight plans and call signs are
an essential part of global aviation. If one party starts messing around with the framework how long before others do the same?
If an atco suspects there is something wrong with a call sign or flight plan is there a duty to report it to someone higher up.
I find it hard to believe that questions must not have been asked in quite a few towers as to what was going on. Or are there certain situations that are outside the remit of a basic atco?

I cannot believe that regular commercial flight crews crossing the Atlantic and Europe were not also aware of this call sign from a defunct carrier being used.

[Cathar]

The Chicago Convention does not apply to state aircraft. Therefore the standards relating to the format of call signs contained in Annex 10 to the Convention do not apply to US military flights. They are therefore entitled to give their aircraft whatever call sign they want. It appears from the Times article that the flight plans were being marked up as state flights so there does not appear to have been any attempt to pass these flights off as Jetsgo flights. That would have been especially hard in the case of the flights involving C-130s and MC-130Ps.

More generally I am not aware of anything in UK legislation which specifically addresses the use of inappropriate call signs.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Don’t get too wound up about the “legal” bit, or “state” aircraft, a callsign is words/numbers on a flightplan. Think generic.
As for “type”, years back now, but several “well known” operators with G- rego., operated “BAC111” and “DC-9” with some remarkable performance, 189 seats, 10h endurance at M 0.81, did wonders for the overflight charges.
I would wager it still happens around Africa.
I’ve changed callsigns in flight, on G-,N- , P2 and VH aircraft, for all sorts of different reason, some honourable, some just a little dodgy but practical. And none of them had a MTOW under 150T.
For years, ANSETT ferried aircraft on a QANTAS flight number, as did some smaller Australian operators, made life easy for everybody, nice and familiar, and as ARINC didn’t charge shareholder per flight, it just showed up as QF special, no comms. charges. The smallest QF XXX to cross the Pacific, to my knowledge, was a Piper Comanche 260B, owned by a bunch of QF staff.
Probably 10 years ago now, but a QF10Y, (Yankee as in yesterday, the usual QF callsign for a delayed service) was forced to land in Karachi, due the Pakistani’s not believing it really was yesterday’s, running 26 hours late, 2 h behind that day’s aircraft.
Don’t take it all so seriously, remember all the legit. airlines CIA used to "own”, the CIA proprietary’s, probably one or two still around ----- Any guesses in Florida. In Yarpiestan ?
As for “state” aircraft, do you always really know what “Ascot” is ?? Do you know it is only one aircraft ??
Tootle pip!!

[AirRabbit]

What about filing as a gulfstream and it actually being a 747? I've read on these boards of air force one doing just that.

"AirForceOne" is a call sign designated for any US AirForce Aircraft having the US President aboard at that time. "MarineOne" or "ArmyOne" would be the call sign for any Marine or Army aircraft with the same occupant. Therefore, it is quite likely that more than one US AirForce Aircraft (including B747s, B757s, Gulfstreams, and others) has had, at one time or another, been designated as "AirForceOne."

[rudekid]

Can categorically tell you that Joint Guardian sorties are still being flown. It didn't stop in 98. The callsign issue is complete media garbage. Very poor analysis and investigation.

Still, no surprises there then!

[MACR]

JG* callsigns are nothing unusual for ATC within Europe. It all goes back to KOSOVA. Countries operating mil aircraft under NATO/SFOR control in and out of that part of Central Europe are assigned callsigns beginning "JG"; the third character is an indication of a particular country, eg N is UK.
Nothing sinister for thems that need to know.....

[Check 6]

More conspiracy theory rubbish! If you read this merde in a British "newspaper" it must be the truth. :yuk:

[apaddyinuk]

I cannot remember the precise details now as I was only a kid when it was happening but I seem to remember my dad telling me that during the first gulf war US Military aircraft were transiting through europe using the "shamrock" EI callsign! Maybe someone else can provide precise details on this one!

[Fried_Chicken]

"Shamrock" is the callsign used by F16's from the 56FW of the USAF

However, any flightplans filed for these obviously don't use the ICAO code for Aer Lingus (EIN), just happens that the spoken callsign is the same.

You'll probably find alot of Military callsigns are the same as some Airline callsigns, for example, FAA Sea Harriers use(d) the callsign "Batman" which is also used by a Swiss bizjet company.

"Silver" & "Snoopy" are another two callsigns that are both used by the Military & by Civil companys that are unconnected

FC

[Don Esson]

For years, ANSETT ferried aircraft on a QANTAS flight number, as did some smaller Australian operators, made life easy for everybody, nice and familiar, and as ARINC didn’t charge shareholder per flight, it just showed up as QF special, no comms. charges

Care to share some of the details with us?

Probably 10 years ago now, but a QF10Y, (Yankee as in yesterday, the usual QF callsign for a delayed service) was forced to land in Karachi, due the Pakistani’s not believing it really was yesterday’s, running 26 hours late, 2 h behind that day’s aircraft.

Is this true? I recall having read somwehere that Qantas delayed flights operating a day late had a suffix of "D" to differnentiate the flight scheduled for that day.

[KeMac]

Re the "Shamrock" callsign - there was a report in the Sunday Times many years ago about the visit by Oliver North to Tehran during the hostage crisis in the Lebanon when Ronald Reagan was president. The aircraft they used was either a B720 or B707 in Aer Lingus colours and using an Aer Lingus call sign.

[KeMac]

I recall some contraversy years back during the Cold War when a Nimrod flew out of the West coast of Scotland at the same height and routing as a commercial airliner and using a commercial airliner callsign before rapidly diving down towards a Soviet warship to take photographs. The aim I believe was to take pictures of missiles with the hatches uncovered and I remember seeing a picture of a Soviet crewman running along a deck by a missile launcher.