TAP Portugal jet intercepted over Ems estuary

[olandese_volante]

Apparently this afternoon a TAP Portugal jet en route to Copenhagen has been intercepted by NATO fighters after several attempts at communication failed miserably.

De Volkskrant - Duitse straaljagers onderscheppen vliegtuig (http://www.volkskrant.nl/buitenland/article1304570.ece/Duitse_straaljagers_onderscheppen_vliegtuig)

Following the intercept, the airliner was allowed to proceed to its intended destination.

According to a spokesman at Eurocontrol, it is not clear what caused the 'communications breakdown': "Maybe the pilots had other things to do..."

[TopSwiss 737]

This Dutch aviation news site (http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?ID=32429) reports that German F-16's did the intercept... :confused:

Anyone knows since when zeee German Luftwaffe operate the F-16? :}

Guess Danish F-16's would be more likely considering the destination of the TAP...

[Avman]

Could have been anywhere over Belgium, The Netherlands or Germany. Standard procedure if comms are lost. There are technical reasons which have been covered many times in these forums which can lead to inadvertant loss of comms. Not always a case of pilots sleeping. On the other hand, and I'm NOT saying that this was the case here, if you're flying through busy North European airspace and you hear nowt for more than 5 minutes, you should be asking yourself questions.

I hope the Eurocontrol quote is untrue. Quite pathetic if so.

[Airbus_a321]

fingertrouble could be an issue on the Bus. Welcome in the Club for the TAP pilots:)
Pilots sleeping -NO - IMHO just:mad:, poor idle talk only.
With its RMPs and ACPs, and additionally the not really practical "procedure" in some airlines which forces the CM2 as PNF to work on the RMP "like hell" just to get the SELECT light OFF:ugh: its easy to get "fingertrouble".
I guess this kind of "Fingertrouble" happened or will happen at least once to each Bus pilot, so that the frequency "dissapears" somewhere.
Learned from this, 121.5 is always open (as it should be) !!! And ACARS printer is always free, so you can see asap if any message is coming in. E.g. TAP OPS is sending an ACARS message, printed on the printer, but unfortunately the printer is covered, by something, book, newspaper:cool:, or anything else.
But I saw and still see houndreds of pilots, where 121.5 is just OFF.:ugh::ugh: So in case of the mentioned "fingertrouble" no chance for ATC or anybody else to call the "lost" guys.

[Edgington]

They were F-4's, I saw them overflying my house , just south of Groningen. Found it strange to see a Airliner with 2 fighters close behind it.

What I don't understand why did the Germans intercept and not the Dutch QRA? They were allowed to cross all of Belgium & Holland before being intercepted, what if there was intent to do harm? Yes, I do realize they are small countries...

[foxcharliep2]

This Dutch aviation news site (http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?ID=32429) reports that German F-16's did the intercept... http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif

Anyone knows since when zeee German Luftwaffe operate the F-16? http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/badteeth.gif



Doesn't mention zeee type there, just that they were german, which in that case, as has been mentioned earlier, makes them F-4.

[olandese_volante]

Doesn't mention zeee type there

The Luchtvaartnieuws article has been amended in the meantime. But they don't own up by adding a "last edit date/time" tag, as respectable newssites oughta do.

In fact I thought it amusing, the Volkskrant article and the Luchtvaartnieuws article were word for word identical except the Luchtvaartniews article specified the fighters as F-16's, while it is in fact well known ze Germans do not operate these.

[Misterredmist]

Edgington !


I can only imagine that as the TAP a/c was heading in a E/NE direction, if
he was already near Groningen before EuroControl decided to send interceptors - then they are as near as dammit entering BRD airspace anyway, and the Germans could then probably carry on the escort as far as Luebeck or beyond with DK permission...... a short stint from Groningen by NL fighters would have seen them in BRD airspace rapidly anyway....

Just my theory - no inside knowledge ........

[forget]

Sleeping Receivers?

AGC BN3 - Loss of Communication (http://www.scribd.com/doc/378920/AGC-BN3-Loss-of-Communication)

and .........

'Sleeping' Receivers

A series of incidents has been reported where ATC was unable to contact an aircraft that had previously established two-way communication with the ground controller. In almost every case, satisfactory reception was only restored after a transmission from the affected aircraft. In these cases the aircrew have used the phrase, "receiver gone to sleep" or "suspected sleeping receiver" in their reports. The likelihood of a loss of separation and increased risk of collision arising from a prolonged loss of communication (PLOC) was highlighted by the UK Airprox Board in 1999 when two aircraft, on opposing tracks, were both "out of communication" for a period of 5 minutes. The Airprox report (150/99) mentioned that one of the operating companies had experienced several incidents when their aircraft radio was "neither receiving nor transmitting". The CAA is aware of more than 250 incidents of missed calls since 1999. CAA Air Traffic specialists led a team with representatives from NATS, EUROCONTROL, Thales and British Airways to investigate this issue and recommend actions to CAA to address 'sleeping receivers' causing prolonged loss of communication.

The investigation revealed that on a small but critical percentage of occasions, the aircraft communications transceiver failed to return from the transmitting to the receiving state. To mitigate this problem, one transceiver manufacturer has devised and published a non-mandatory service bulletin. The recent incorporation of this service bulletin into the ATC transceivers carried by a major UK airline has proved to be completely successful, but the CAA believes that this problem is very likely to be replicated in other transceivers. The CAA is now investigating whether high power ground transmitters at frequencies close to the civil and military aeronautical frequencies are likely to adversely affect the performance of an airborne receiver and if so, what measures are necessary to improve the immunity from strong signals and third order inter-modulation (IP3).

To progress this work the CAA will lead a team to investigate 'sleeping receivers' causing prolonged loss of communication (PLOC) between pilots and ATC.

[Malaysian28]

Does anyone know what the TAP Jet was involved guessing an A319/A320/A321?

[Airbus_a321]

for that check:

Incident: TAP A320 over Belgium on Oct 18th 2009, intercepted losscomm (http://avherald.com/h?article=4216f52c&opt=0)

[iceman50]

Airbus_a321

Don't know what you are on but can I have some ?:rolleyes:

[BOAC]

Agreed - anybody translate With its RMPs and ACPs, and additionally the not really practical "procedure" in some airlines which forces the CM2 as PNF to work on the RMP "like hell" just to get the SELECT light OFF:ugh: its easy to get "fingertrouble". It all sounds very difficult.

[Edgington]

Misterredmist

A couple of weeks ago we went with school to Dutch Mil ATC, they proudly explaining that they respond extremely quickly to comm failures and intruders. Yet now it seems they did nothing?

Also they routing would take the A320 over or very close to every important Dutch city, so why only respond when they are about to fly over water?

[Cows getting bigger]

I think Avman has it right. A quiet bit (more than a few minutes or so) on the RT over Northern Europe should be ringing alarm bells.

[hetfield]

Common guys...

the top-guns need some practice, the politicians want to save their a****, and the taxpayers are used to be ripped off.

So, no problemo.

Ciao

[olandese_volante]

Edgington:
A couple of weeks ago we went with school to Dutch Mil ATC, they proudly explaining that they respond extremely quickly to comm failures and intruders. Yet now it seems they did nothing?

The military don't move until civilian ATC established there might be something wrong, and tell them. I gather the fighters were dispatched promptly once the airforce command was informed.

Keep in mind that this was only a comms failure. The aircraft apparently didn't deviate from its established course and presumably the transponder continued operating normally as well. Had the aircraft been doing weird things, in all likelihood ATC would have alerted the military much sooner.

[stilton]

'Sleeping receiver' sounds the same as a stuck mike ?

[Herod]

No, a "sleeping receiver" is the First Officer about three hours into the third night Tenerife.

[golfyankeesierra]

'Sleeping receiver' sounds the same as a stuck mike ?
Actually, the opposite. In a stuck mike event, the problem is the transmission, whereas a sleeping receiver goes asleep by lack of transmission. I'm told that to revive it only a short transmission is enough. So when suspecting a sleeping transmitter just click your mike..

[olandese_volante]

a sleeping receiver goes asleep by lack of transmission

Not exactly.
In comms transceivers, the receiver is disabled when the transmitter is active. This is to prevent the delicate receiver front-end getting fried by the output of the transmitter operating mere inches away.

In older equipment, this was done electro-mechanically, with a relay, while in most contemporary gear this is achieved with solid state circuitry.

It appears that either:

In some instances said circuitry "hangs" and the receiver does not get re-enabled after transmission ends, or
The circuitry captures sufficiently strong interference from somewhere, mistakenly thinks the transmitter is operating, and duly disables the receiver.


From European Action Plan for Air Ground Communications Safety (http://www.scribd.com/doc/378920/AGC-BN3-Loss-of-Communication):
The sleeping receiver phenomenon has been the subject of much research in recent years.Possible causes under investigation include interference sources from inside or outside the aircraft from various spectrum bands (e.g.from mobile telephones or paging systems),receiver design,receiver software,etc.To date,these investigations have been inconclusive.

Briefly activating the transmitter by keying the mike usually resolves the problem by "jarring" the circuitry out of its faulty state, in a manner roughly analogous to the "impact repair technique" that was often successful in "fixing" misbehaving TV sets and the like.

[Lon More]

Avman I hope the Eurocontrol quote is untrue. Quite pathetic if so
It probably lost something in the translation; think "collaborators":ugh:

Not the first time it's happened, won't be the last. Not a big story anyway. Various checks, taking several minutes, would be done by Maastricht before Dutch Mil./Air Defense is advised after the aircraft had entered Dutch Airspace (even on airways the flying time HELEN to BEDUM is not much more than 20 minutes) so Dutch fighters, unless from Leeuwarden would always be playing catch up. More sense to scramble from ahead of the target to be intercepted

[Surferboy]

Choice was Volkel or Wittmund, last one makes more sense given the direction and position of the 'TOI' .

[Brix]

I'm sure a lot more people would be listening to 121.5 if it wouldn't be abused so much.

More than once I was close to tell them STFU.

A degree in aeronautical engineering should be a prerequisite for an airline pilots position.

Have a nice day.

[BOAC]

Ah! The joys of the '180 x 6':)

As Lon says, many attempts will have been made to contact the a/c using other systems. Plus, we are dealing with a 'known' transponder code on a known flight plan - not exactly like a TU95 'popping up' from low level in foreign airspace - not exactly a major drama.

For avman - I think the Eurocontrol quote was someone trying to be kind - and a little 'TIC'?

[PJ2]

BOAC;

Agreed - anybody translate Quote:
With its RMPs and ACPs, and additionally the not really practical "procedure" in some airlines which forces the CM2 as PNF to work on the RMP "like hell" just to get the SELECT light OFF:ugh: its easy to get "fingertrouble".
It all sounds very difficult.

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk76/batcave777/RMP_2009-03-10_103156.png

The above image is a typical layout and arrangement of the Airbus 320 series RMP - Radio Management Panel, (top panel), and ACP - Audio Control Panel, (lower panel). When accustomed to it, it is as easy and straightforward to use as any radio communications system I've used.

The ACP is not that different from other types found on the Boeing. The pushbuttons select the transceiver to use and the small push-in/push-out knobs are audio on/off & volume selectors.

There are three RMPs and ACPs in the A320/A330/A340 series cockpits - two on the pedestal and one on the aft, right-hand overhead typically reserved for ACARS or sometimes company communications, (usually on the A330/A340, done by the Augment or Relief Pilot).

The #1 RMP is normally used by the left seat, the #2 by the right seat and the #3 either by the right seat, (reachable controls) or the Auggie/RP on long-haul 330/340 flying.

Each RMP manages frequency selection and changing, and selection of transceiver used/managed by that RMP. The #1 RMP is associated with and manages the #1 VHF and #1 HF, and the #2 RMP manages the #2 radios, the #3 the #3 radios etc, which is the normal communications configuration. (The right-hand window is the frequency selection window and the left window is the "frequency in-use" window - the push-button/arrow in the middles transfers the frequency from the right to the left window on each RMP).

The #1 VHF is always used for ATC and the #2 for company or 121.5 or air-to-air, etc. If the Captain is flying, the F/O normally reaches across the pedestal to change frequencies on the #1 RMP.

If a pilot's RMP has been selected to another RMPs tranceivers for tactical reasons, (ie, #2 VHF selected on #1 RMP to talk to company using the #1 RMP), the crew is made aware of the 'non-normal' configuration of one (or more) RMP by the white "SEL", (Selected) light, which lights up on all 3 RMPs. This capability provides flexibility in terms of managing the radios.

One becomes very quickly aware of the SEL light and cautious with RMP use and normally doesn't configure the radios this way, because this could lead to a situation where the pilot doing communications, using his/her associated RMP, would be transmitting on another RMPs selected frequency.

If the crew is unaware of this configuration however, a communications "loss" may occur because, while the transmission is being made successfully, it may be on the wrong frequency.

Not saying this happened of course - I have no idea what happened, but this is how the RMPs, ACPs and the SEL light work.

PJ2

[Airbus_a321]

everything so far well explained, well done, but If the Captain is flying, the F/O normally reaches across the pedestal to change frequencies on the #1 RMP. , this is only one way of handling the radios. One way to be honest, I never saw before by any airline.
And I would not call it the NORMAL way. If CM2 is PNF I always saw them operating the radios on the right side. As far as I remember this is also Airbus philosophie, and not to reach across the pedestal for freq change.

[PJ2]

Thanks, Airbus a321. I figured there might be different philosophies.

However:
If CM2 is PNF I always saw them operating the radios on the right side.
If CM2 is working the #1 VHF from the #2RMP then #1VHF will be selected on #2 RMP and the SEL light will be ON. AFAIK, this is a non-standard configuration. One does what one is taught and what one practises at one's company so this may or may not be a possible source of the com fail. If one is in the habit of using the above configuration, then no problems should be expected. It is when non-standard configurations are done on an ad-hoc basis that problems could (obviously) arise.

If CM2 is PNF and using the #2VHF for ATC, that is also non-standard, as only #1VHF is available in the Emer. Electrical Config.

I am not aware of any SOPs from Airbus which configure the radios in the way you state however, (as described above). The SOPs we used were from AI and are as follows for the setting up of the radios, (my bolding):

RMP and ACP selections may be made to suit individual needs. Ensure that the Radio Com Selection Key and the NAV pushbutton switch are positioned so as not to interfere with selections made by the other crew member.

Pedestal
Radio Management Panels (2)

To be completed by individual crew member.
– ON/OFF switch.......................................... ON
– FREQUENCY Displays Set............................ AS REQUIRED
– SEL Indicator (White Light) ...................... EXTINGUISHED
– NAV pushbutton........................................ LIGHT OUT & GUARDED
– HF (if required for flight) ............................ CHECK

From another carrier:

This Topic is relevant to the whole fleet
- RMP ............................................................ .ON BOTH
- Green NAV light .................. ......................CHECK OFF BOTH
- SEL light ............................. ........................CHECK OFF BOTH

- COM FREQUENCIES................................TUNE BOTHUse VHF1 for ATC (only VHF1 is available in emergency electrical configuration), VHF 2 for ATIS and company frequencies. VHF 3 is normally devoted to ACARS.

[BOAC]

Thanks PJ - my full-time Airbus Advisory Training Consultant (AATC) had already translated for me. Now I have the TLAs sorted I can look forward to the FLAs.:)

By the way, the 'RMP' procedures you cite are 'standard' in my book too.

[His dudeness]

A degree in aeronautical engineering should be a prerequisite for an airline pilots position.

And why ? Would you care to explain?

[Capt Turbo]

Unfortunately the FCOM states in a small note that the "yellow light" should be off, and the airlines who read the FCOM as a Bible will stick to this with all the fingertrouble that it creates. Some airlines who have burned the fingers (or have a less sofisticated background) will stick with the previous generation MoO and "reach over". In those airlines where the Airbus SOP in general has been modified (normally large flag carriers) you will also find that the right pilot -when PNF- keeps the VHF 1 freq visible onside and the problem is solved.

Despite the note in the FCOM, Airbus has not taken a firm stand on do´s and dont`s in this matter, and any old FCP can amend the procedure, but why should he be smart when he can cover himself under the FCOM note.

It is the one area where imho the technology and the users manual do not match. I have seen quite many students fumbling around with the radios, but non in airlines where the right pilot can use the onside radio as his own - and keep the light on. And btw, the "reach over" method is not safe, either. Left pilot will normally be "helpfull" and do the switching until he becomes too busy flying, and PNF has lost the freq right there!

Sorry for the "lights out" note, but the frogs are reluctant to remove it:confused:.

[PJ2]

Capt Turbo;

The procedure you suggest works, (ATC freq selected on the #1 and #2 RMP, SEL lights out) unless/until you need to monitor 121.5 or talk to company.

The reason that Airbus states that the #1 RMP is to be used for ATC and that the SEL lights should be out is to cover off the contingency of electrical abnormalities, (failure of DC1 and/or DC2), as the #2 and #3 RMPs are not powered and are inoperative in the Emergency Electrical Configuration.

I agree that "any old FCP" can make up procedures that "work", and sometimes does just that, until they get their fingers burnt one way or another. My view of an operator's willingness to vacate the manufacturer's SOPs is off-topic however.

BOAC;
my full-time Airbus Advisory Training Consultant (AATC)LOL!


Do we know any more about what was on the flight recorders and why comm was lost?

[Lon More]

This is getting a bit complicated for this (ex) controller despite having held a CPL.
09-11 notwithstanding maybe it is time for airlines to press for changes in the rules and allow controllers back into the cockpit on Fam Fights. We would then have a bit more understanding of the problems facing today's pilots.
e.g. I can remember having to change frequency by changing the crystal in the Coms stack and when Fan Markers were still used on airways. Have things moved on since then?

[BeT]

Reims UAC lost the TAP somewhere south of Vekin and advised us pretty much at the UIR boundary. The Belgian airspace at this point is only about 8 mins flying time south-north, so although GLONS were advised theres really nothing much for them to do.

The aircraft was 'handed off' to the DeCo sector where it was intercepted by military jets somewhere near EHGG. Total known time of comms loss somewhere about 30 minutes. Multiple attempts were made on 121.5 and closeby TAP aircraft were asked to raise them too - to no avail.

On the sector it was pretty much a non-event but I have to wonder what kind of airmanship is being displayed if they didnt think it was strange that ATC hadnt spoken to them for 1/2hr! :=

[Airbus_a321]

Capt Turbo,
agree one hundred percent.
I still havent any practical idea why the frogs insist on the SEL light to be off. :confused: All this switchings required to get the light OFF is an avoidable increase in workload, which is in fact not really AIRBUS pilosophy, Because usually they do everything to make Bus flying very easy.

At lot of reputable airlines do not follow this S(tupid) O(perating) P(rocedure) and accept to have the SEL light on. So making radio work easy to the flight deck (for CM2).
Knowing well that their pilots know how to handle the radios under this "condition".
Yes, and you are right with the "helpful" pilot on the left :ok: selecting the frequencies for CM2 as PNF. And immediately with the helpful one they are one step closer to create a confusion :ugh:
I am NOT a "helpful" pilot (see above) and so sometimes I earn a disapproving glance from the other side. - Well, I have to live with it :cool:

[CONF iture]

Same here, don’t pay too much attention to the SEL light status … nothing in our Customized SOP on the subject.
Each pilot manages its own RMP/ACP and therefore stays on its own side.

Considering these radios are on the same line than the thrust levers, reaching across the pedestal to change frequencies is not really an option when PF is in manual thrust.

http://i85.servimg.com/u/f85/11/75/17/84/af447_14.gif (http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.php?i=37&u=11751784)

[Avman]

BOAC, believe me, Eurocontrol don't do TIC ;)

[BerendBotje]

klik TAP500L and TAP504 on 134.705 and 121.500 (http://atcarchive.dyndns.org/_files/Eurocontrol_20091018_TAP504.mp3) klik