Jet2 flight shadowed by French jet

[rowly6339]

BBC reporting that a Jet2 flight was shadowed by a French airforce fighter for no apparent reason whilst on route to BHX.

[Pinkman]

Brexit fun...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-40987642

[BluSdUp]

Hmmm.
Well,considering all the fine RT that goes on in Europe these days.
PLOC, Prolonged Los Of Contact also called napptime..??
Crew forgot to tell Company, hope they saved the 2 hrs CVR to prove them innocent.

If , on the otherhand the Airforce is up to the old tricks they used pull in the coldwar , I suggest they stop ASAP.
PAX is nervous enough as it is.

[ShotOne]

There was no suggestion of loss of contact in the BBC report and Jet2 are said to be seeking an explanation. FAF have some previous: They did an unannounced and impromptu intercept practice on a U.K. airliner a year or so ago...but forgot to turn off TCAS triggering a climb in their unfortunate victim

[Gertrude the Wombat]

...but forgot to turn off TCAS triggering a climb in their unfortunate victim
If the TCAS is telling you to do one thing and the intercept procedures are telling you to do another, which do you do?


And if it's "follow the TCAS", do the military pilots (of whichever random nation you happen to be flying over) understand that?

[ATC Watcher]

Shot one , FAF jets have no TCAS, you meant Transponder surely.
as I can see this was not an interception but looks like a verification. maybe following a direct too close from , or overflying a sensitive area..or just an exercise/practice.
Air defense can do theses things , they normally do not give reasons.
Do not Forget France is still in a State of emergency following the terrorist attacks..

[ATC Watcher]

Gertrude : If the TCAS is telling you to do one thing and the intercept procedures are telling you to do another, which do you do?

The current intercept procedures are that the Fighter turn off its transponder before escorting the aircraft. If you are being intercepted and have acknowledged the intercept , you follow the fighter you see, period. The other one behind is controlling that you do not do anything else.

[ShotOne]

Verification? ..Really? I'd be delighted to hear a genuine security rationale for this.

[Hotel Tango]

Perhaps they won't want to tell you :}

[Onceapilot]

It is routine, unless the subject aircraft has made some infringement, in which case they might well follow it up.:O

[ShotOne]

It's certainly not routine anywhere other than France. And I stand by the question on the security rationale. If there was information anyone on board posed a threat then why was the flight allowed to depart Malaga an hour earlier? And even if half of IS was on board how would a few minutes impromptu formation flying "verify" it?

[Herod]

It used to be that any practice intercept was controlled by the civilian controller, who would keep you informed. "Five miles astern, has you visual, will be positioning on your port side". Didn't happen often, but was always interesting. Presumably good practice for the fighters as well.

[LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK]

Lost comms for one reason or another I would imagine. I doubt Jet2 wish to tell the BBC what happened just yet. Not the first time it's happened and it won't be the last.

[Basil]

In the days when an ATCO would ask if an RAF FJ could perform a practice interception, my answer was always going to be negative.
They have bang seats, we, and our paying passengers, don't - endof.

[judge11]

'Embellish' - ah, the good old days.:ok:

[hec7or]

The ATCO may pass on the request, but this is a function of the Sector Operation Centre and would be performed by an Intercept Controller who would not have access to VHF.

By the time you reached UK airspace, in all probability, you would have been tracked by air defence missile systems across europe albeit with the firing circuits disarmed, Nike, Hercules, Bloodhound, Hawk, Patriot etc and they wouldn't have bothered asking.

[737]

Brest ATC were calling them for at least 20 mins. Other Jet2 flights tried to contact them. It sounded like the usual PLOC.

[wiggy]

Indeed judge and Basil..I always wondered if the Britannia 737 we did a VID on off Ottringham one night many years ago had pax on board.....TBF we were suitably discrete....

(Usual F4 story ...tanked up to the brim...at which point playmate goes U/S big time and heads off home home......11PM......boss wants the hours............"is there anybody out there?")

[Dan Winterland]

They used to come and look at the tanker/fighter trails we flew across France reasonably often. We assumed this was to check we were sticking to tanking in the designated refuelling areas. We gave a M2000 some fuel once.

[Superpilot]

Jet2 have some very old 737s that are probably not as reliable as other aircraft. I have heard others helping with relay even on VHF quite a bit this year.

On Thursday there was one heading oceanic from The Canaries who coud not reach anyone. Others were using the same frequencies without issue. He did the entire route through relay on 121.5. About time they incorporated some sensible HF checks on the ground. Airmanship and all that.

[RVF750]

This was a MLG to BHX flight so it would have been one of the brand new -800s. The -300s that will be left next year are all younger than the oldest -800s out there. It isn't aircraft age that was the problem. The French controllers I had that day had quite thick accents to be fair. my F/O struggled to get the frequencies right...

[Chesty Morgan]

About time they incorporated some sensible HF checks on the ground. Airmanship and all that.

What an awesome idea. It makes you wonder why nobody has thought of that already...

[Odins Raven]

How do we know this was a loss of comms incident? Has this been confirmed?

[uffington sb]

hec7or.
Not Bloodhound missiles I'm afraid. They were done away with in the early 90's.
All we have left are Typhoons.

[BluSdUp]

I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.

Intercept of airliners of any kind for training is not allowed to my knowledge anymore.
Why, ask the US Navy P3 that was intercepted and had to land in Hainan some time ago.

Anyway, it was a PLOC , it looks like?

[Basil]

The ATCO may pass on the request, but this is a function of the Sector Operation Centre and would be performed by an Intercept Controller who would not have access to VHF.

By the time you reached UK airspace, in all probability, you would have been tracked by air defence missile systems across europe albeit with the firing circuits disarmed, Nike, Hercules, Bloodhound, Hawk, Patriot etc and they wouldn't have bothered asking.
Yes, no doubt but, nevertheless, in the UK a request was made to embellish and, mindful of the welfare of my aircraft and passengers, I would refuse.
That decision was entirely at the civil aircraft commander's discretion.

My view was: If you want a target then get a Dominie up! ;)

[2Planks]

Or maybe the J2 ac was on the right frequency and French ATC had forgot to tell them to change and then wonder why they have lost them. Happened before and will happen again, eg when French ATC moved from overnight manning to full daytime manning and one slipped through the net.

[Hotel Tango]

Doubt it. The next sector expecting the aircraft on their frequency would check with the previous to remind them. If no contact they would then try to contact the aircraft on 121.5

[Trim Stab]

I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.


Well that is a fairly extravagant assertion. Three separate Norwegian investigations all concluded it was structural break-up - there was no blame attached to the crew.

The allegations that it was caused by a Harrier intercept also have no evidence.

Moreover, the Harrier pilots who would have been flying on that exercise will now all be happily collecting their pensions so have nothing to lose - do you really believe that they would not come forward and admit it if they had really accidentally killed some fellow aviators of a very friendly allied country like Norway?

[Trim Stab]

Shot one , FAF jets have no TCAS, you meant Transponder surely.
as I can see this was not an interception but looks like a verification. maybe following a direct too close from , or overflying a sensitive area..or just an exercise/practice.
Air defense can do theses things , they normally do not give reasons.
Do not Forget France is still in a State of emergency following the terrorist attacks..

I don't understand though why they made themselves so visible to pax, and apparently not to pilots.

The one time I have been "verified" was over the Med by a Rafale. We only spotted him because we happened to turn on one of our rear-view cameras. We could not see him from normal line of sight from cockpit.

[DaveReidUK]

Well that is a fairly extravagant assertion. Three separate Norwegian investigations all concluded it was structural break-up - there was no blame attached to the crew.

The allegations that it was caused by a Harrier intercept also have no evidence.

Moreover, the Harrier pilots who would have been flying on that exercise will now all be happily collecting their pensions so have nothing to lose - do you really believe that they would not come forward and admit it if they had really accidentally killed some fellow aviators of a very friendly allied country like Norway?

Never let the truth get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

PPRuNe: Possible RAF Harrier MidAir Collision Meham, Norway 1982 (http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/73083-possible-raf-harrier-midair-collision-meham-norway-1982-a.html)

[G-ARZG]

....meanwhile a KC-135FR
wonders where his trade has got to ?

[BluSdUp]

You are right.
I am wrong. There is no evidence that a Harrier had anything to do with this.

The first report from 1984 did indicate that it was the captain fault.

The second report stated it likely was mechanical failure in severe turbulence.

AND the Parliamentary Comission in 2006 stated no evidence of any Harrier involved.
My apologies to our fellow British soldiers.

[Super VC-10]

I Norway we lost a Widerø Twin Otter in the late 70s or early 80s due to a Harrier.
The problem was it happened way east of the line Norway had drawn for NATO aircraft as a buffer before you hit the Soviet border.
Was all blamed on the Otter crew. Many years later it turned out the Harrier was using it as target and bumped into it.
Same as happened to Gargarin except the Harrier made contact and was damaged.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wider%C3%B8e_Flight_933

[fab777]

This thread is funny. A british airliner get intercepted by a french fighter jet, and it is the fault of either the french air force or the french ATC, but surely not the british crew...

[bluesideoops]

@fab777 british crew at fault! how dare you.....how bloody dare you! :}

[Superpilot]

Council Van, no need to feel molested. A few facts plus a suggestion on improving their operation does not equal an ego.

[Jet2_320]

Superpilot don't take it personal. Unfortunately there are a few in Jet2 who suffer small airline syndrome and who struggle to deal with any kind of criticism aimed at jet2. For them the airline is the best thing since sliced bread, they are the product of the continuous North Korean style jet2 management propaganda.

I wholeheartedly agree with you; The T9-T16 procedures within Jet2 are amateurish to say the least.

[zonoma]

2Planks:
Or maybe the J2 ac was on the right frequency and French ATC had forgot to tell them to change and then wonder why they have lost them.
HT:
Doubt it. The next sector expecting the aircraft on their frequency would check with the previous to remind them. If no contact they would then try to contact the aircraft on 121.5
2Planks has probably the closest guess out of all the responses here, it does happen, and enough to be considered regularly.
737 also said that Brest tried calling said aircraft for 20 minutes, further indication they were at least not on the expected frequency (if they were on a frequency), and RVF750 said that there were some accents hard to understand that their FO didn't quite understand. It is possible for the aircraft to have dialled in a wrong frequency, checked in as normal, and for the ATC unit to acknowledge without realising that the aircraft should not be on their frequency. Again, it is something that happens and has caused this situation in the past.

[Hotel Tango]

Thank you zonoma. As ex ATC (for 45 years) I consider my doubts are just as valid. I note that you exclude the possibility of the aircraft taking the wrong call for a frequency change. That also happens quite frequently. As for your suggestion that It is possible for the aircraft to have dialled in a wrong frequency, checked in as normal, and for the ATC unit to acknowledge without realising that the aircraft should not be on their frequency. this would indicate that you have no knowledge of what functions an ATCO has to perform upon receiving an initial call on his sector. We are not talking procedural control over certain parts of Africa here!

[Chesty Morgan]

Council Van, no need to feel molested. A few facts plus a suggestion on improving their operation does not equal an ego.

Don't worry, once you get some time in, and maybe a few years of command, you'll realise that all of the great ideas that you think you've thought of for the first time have already been thought of.

[2Planks]

HT you will note I said perhaps. My suggestion is based on the experience of a number of jobs I did in this field one of which resulted into a trip to an 'office' not far from Gatwick to offer some expert advice.

[speedrestriction]

Surely the most worrying thing about the whole story is the declining standards of BBC journalism. I believe the phrase is "en route" rather than "on route." Whatever next?

[fireflybob]

In the olden days we'd have the charts out and were much more aware of FIR boundaries and changeover points. Also the charts have the sector frequencies on. In my experience some pilots didn't seem to be aware that if you lost contact a call on 121.5 MHz and ATC should be able to sort a frequency for you.

[Superpilot]

Don't worry, once you get some time in, and maybe a few years of command, you'll realise that all of the great ideas that you think you've thought of for the first time have already been thought of.

Where did the suggestion that this was a NEW idea come from? Certainly not me. People read wildly between lines that simply don't exist.

[back to Boeing]

Don't worry, once you get some time in, and maybe a few years of command, you'll realise that all of the great ideas that you think you've thought of for the first time have already been thought of.

That is probably the most arrogant statement I have seen in a very long time. "Don't worry lads. We've seen it all before, it could never happen to us". Glad to see things still haven't changed at Jet2

[cwatters]

I heard the fighter pilot cleared off when he realised there was no way they were going to lower the refueling hose for him.

[Superpilot]

Some people seem to imply that they know it all and do not appear to be very humble.Some people assume the worst because they read way more than is actually written. The internet, generally speaking, isn't the sort of place where you find people restraining themselves. We say what we can't get away with in public. Yes, this much is true. :ok:

[ATC Watcher]

Stab Trim : I don't understand though why they made themselves so visible to pax, and apparently not to pilots.
FAF interceptions are normally done by 2 a/c , one doing the intercept the other behind that will become active in case of non compliance . The pax maybe saw this one , the first one is close to the cockpit and is normally not visible from the back .

I do not think people flying to the sun today realize the State of alert our arm forces are in France regarding terrorism. Have a walk in any French city or airport today , the guys you see in fatigues are real , with real bullets . same in Spain by the way. If you overfly , better reply , " say again frequency " if you are not sure , or go back to previous in the frequency you tune in is silent ...

[zonoma]

HT:
this would indicate that you have no knowledge of what functions an ATCO has to perform upon receiving an initial call on his sector.
I had better hand my ticket back in then.

I stand by all of my post, having had first hand experience of ALL that I have written from the centre in question. Furthermore, common sense says that the sector expecting the traffic will ask for it when late on frequency, however if the sectors are combined there are regular issues where aircraft simply run out of range (daily). You can't transfer a late transfer if they are now out of range of your comms......

As I said, 2Planks has the closest guess from my experience of the normal issues that cause this situation to arise over France.

[Hotel Tango]

You can't transfer a late transfer if they are now out of range of your comms......

So, you are suggesting that there are no other alternatives? 121.5, or relaying through another aircraft on your sector for instance. Remember this was not during a particularly quiet period in the middle of the night.

[Willy Miller]

HT

exactly this has happened to me in busy uk airspace. Freq change, check in, told to stand by, called again after a few minutes and told roger. Called again near FIR boundary and out of range. 121.5 resolved the issue and received an apology from senior controller over the phone (after she had heard the tapes).

Sometimes when its busy (and especially in some countries not far away) controllers do not listen/acknowledge properly.

[Chesty Morgan]

Where did the suggestion that this was a NEW idea come from? Certainly not me. People read wildly between lines that simply don't exist.

Ah so perhaps you think that it's just Jet2 pilots that don't check their radios before they get airborne...

[Chesty Morgan]

That is probably the most arrogant statement I have seen in a very long time. "Don't worry lads. We've seen it all before, it could never happen to us". Glad to see things still haven't changed at Jet2

Not specific to Jet2 though is it. There's plenty of experience from the last 114 years of powered flight that we can all learn from.

I don't quite know how a junior, low hour, pilot and a product of today's industry can have the gall to imply that pilots employed by one specific airline lack airmanship because of a PLOC.

It's not like it only happens to Jet2 is it?

[ShotOne]

Particularly since we don't even know if it was a PLOC, or even if it was, whose fault it was. But we DO know that the French Air Force have on multiple occasions used unwitting airliners for interception practice. Sometimes incompetently, like the time they caused a TCAS climb. This is unacceptable and should be stopped before it causes an accident.

[ATC Watcher]

Shot One : suggesting tbe FAF to be incompetent in 2017 indicate you lack of knowledge of the military. Ask around .
As to the TCAS incident you refer and DO ( your capitals ) know for a fact , can you give me the details , incl the exact date ? I will check .
The " incompetence " if you want to use that word is more on the civil side at the moment.

[DaveReidUK]

But not always.

"EUROCONTROL has learnt of incidences where flight safety has been compromised and unnecessary TCAS Resolution Advisories (RAs) triggered during interceptions of civil aircraft because of misunderstanding regarding the operation of aircraft transponders and the properties of ACAS II. "

Safety Reminder Message (https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/publication/files/safety-reminder-message-interceptions-of-civil-aircraft-operation-of-ssr-and-acas-20111222.pdf)

[tescoapp]

In the olden days we'd have the charts out and were much more aware of FIR boundaries and changeover points.

Jeppenson EFB enroute product is very good for all that. Boundary's marked if you want and you can one finger a boundary waypoint and you can see the relevant frequency's from both sides.

Apart from it sucking battery like a swine it works very well, allows you to ask for sensible directs to the edges of FIR's which in my experience increases the likely hood of getting the instant reply of "approved"

[ShotOne]

That FAF used airliners for unannounced interception practice on multiple occasions is a matter of record, ATCwatcher. To the concern of many, including Eurocontrol. Does your legalistic demand for dates imply you dispute this?

It's also worth asking why such a very high number of intercepts are conducted in French airspace compared with adjacent FIR's. Do the worlds airlines somehow become that much more incompetent in France?

[Less Hair]

It's their airspace after all.

[tescoapp]

As they bill the airline for every intercept a few of my ex French mil colleagues reckon its a very tasty way of getting free flying hours by the FJ guys.

[DaveReidUK]

If that's the case then presumably the bill will specify a reason for the interception other than simply "Practice".

[Dominator2]

Having read this thread I perceive that many AT pilots think that it is their right to wander around Europe and beyond in a casual manner. I remind them that each country has a right to defend it's own airspace, and to police that airspace.

Having spent over 30 years as an Air Defender I had drummed in the rights and responsibilities of a QRA pilot. Although the procedures have been modified to cater for modern technology, the basic rules and procedures for interception, shadowing, intervention and engagement are unchanged.

Be there no doubt that the French take the sovereignty of their airspace very seriously. It would not be wise to ignore or disrespect the directions from a QRA Mirage.
Over the past 10 years operating both GAT and OAT across Europe I witnessed poor R/T and sometimes arrogance from pilots. I have heard some say, ”I’ll just continue on flight plan route” and make no attempt to contact a controller. In my opinion, not acceptable.

If the French were using civil traffic for squadron pilots training this would not be acceptable. If, however, they are QRA aircraft under qualified GCI Control they are policing their airspace. In other words, exercising their right.

[beardy]

”I’ll just continue on flight plan route”

Sounds very much like an established procedure to me. With the proviso of continuing to establish contact.

[tescoapp]

I have only seen one bill DaveReidUK. It did not have the reason on it.

To be fair the reason was crew stupidity definitely in that case they had missed 2 FIR boundary frequency swaps and had 123.45 dialled into box 2 out of NL over Belgium and were intercepted over France.

I believe the c word was used quite a few times in the post incident debrief. you pair of , you stupid etc etc

both of them were given a photo copy of the bill which was in the region of 30K euro apparently it would have been more but the two FJ's were up in the air already so they only got billed for 30 mins flight time.

[tescoapp]

To be honest with the amount of nuclear power stations dotted around France pretty much every direction you can be pointing ends up with you being a threat to one installation or another.

[Dominator2]

beardy'
Quote:
”I’ll just continue on flight plan route”

Sounds very much like an established procedure to me. With the proviso of continuing to establish contact.

I said and make no attempt to contact a controller. In my opinion, not acceptable.

I think that you missed the point? OR, are you one of those who can'nt be bothered to regain contact?

[fireflybob]

Surely more a case of not being aware that contact has been lost? I've never come across a professional pilot who "can't be bothered to regain contact?" when aware that contact had been lost.

Of course there are other issues such as 121.500 MHz etc.

[ShotOne]

There are lots of potential reasons for a loss of contact, some the fault of pilots some not but "Can't be bothered to maintain contact". Come on! Thats just a stupid comment And yes, the comment on sovereignty is true for every nation but doesn't explain the massive discrepancy in number of interceptions

[Dominator2]

ShotOne,

You seem to have a downer on the FAF, is there a particular reason? As someone mentioned earlier, you only have to go to France to witness the number of armed police out on the strrets protecting their Liberté, égalité and fraternité.

The FAF do the same in the air. Their dispersed operations, number on alert and readiness is an indication of their determination. As I stated, if they choose to spend their money on policing their airspace, that is their right. If you don't like it you can always Flight Plan to fly round France. I'm sure your company would be over joyed.

As for "Can't be bothered to maintain contact", if the cap fits wear it. otherwise don't be so precious.

[KelvinD]

Many moons ago, I watched events unfold in Jeddah FIR when a Syrian airliner, bound for Jeddah, crossed the boundary from Jordan into Saudi and was late contacting Jeddah. It took only a couple of minutes for the Saudi Air Force scramble a couple of Lightnings from Tabuk and made the airliner land immediately.

[ShotOne]

Downer on FAF? Au contraire. But practicing intercepts on unbriefed unwitting passenger airliners IMHO constitutes needless risk

..and those ladling criticism and abuse on civil flight crews but not prepared to acknowledge the TCAS nonsense as an error are guilty of a glaring absence of fair-mindedness

[OldLurker]

How is this supposed to work procedurally? Presumably the interception is initiated by civilian ATC calling the air force who then scramble the fighter(s) – or do the air force intercept on their own initiative? Then during the interception, presumably the fighter leader is talking to his military control and/or to civilian ATC to tell them what he sees? Afterwards, do ATC or air force send a report to the interceptee's operator (Jet2 in this case) or national authority?

Would this be an incident that either BEA or AAIB, or both, would take notice of?

[eal401]

Shot One : suggesting tbe FAF to be incompetent in 2017 indicate you lack of knowledge of the military. Ask around .
As to the TCAS incident you refer and DO ( your capitals ) know for a fact , can you give me the details , incl the exact date ? I will check .
The " incompetence " if you want to use that word is more on the civil side at the moment.

So *you* have proof that the Jet2 crew are at fault? As you are demanding evidence from others for their opinions, let's have yours too. :mad:

[2Planks]

Old Lurker - If I explained it all I would get a visit from the 'grey sedan', there is not much open source stuff to refer you to but a search of the BBCs archives over the last 15 years highlights the basics. Rest assured a lot of people in lots of official organisations in the UK take an interest in the reports.

[A320ECAM]

They were being tailed because it was such an old aircraft, the French believed it had been stolen from a museum! Apparently...

[Jet2_320]

So *you* have proof that the Jet2 crew are at fault? As you are demanding evidence from others for their opinions, let's have yours too. :mad:

They were being called on the guard frequency for between 15 and 20 minutes. By the time they got intercepted we were to far out to hear the conversation. I do think it's poor practice from their PR department to not own up to their mistake but instead create confusion and try to point the blame at the French Airforce.

I wouldn't say the crew was at fault for not checking in on the right frequency, because I don't know what happened, but I would say the crew was definitely at fault for not monitoring the 121.500 freq on their no2 VHF box.

[Chesty Morgan]

Or perhaps they were using box 2 for something else...

[DaveReidUK]

Something not involving using it to communicate with anyone, you mean ?

[Chesty Morgan]

Obviously.

[Flying Wild]

They were being tailed because it was such an old aircraft, the French believed it had been stolen from a museum! Apparently...

What, you mean less than a year old = museum piece?

[Flying Wild]

Or perhaps they were using box 2 for something else...

Good thing there's a box three on 121.5 then. Or perhaps that had been turned down due to the usual animal noises or practise pan calls which you can still hear half way across the Bay of Biscay.

Only two people know what really happened and I'm sure the details have been explained to those who need to know.

[ATC Watcher]

Here we go again :hmm:
DaveReidUK : the Eurocontrol reminder refers to some incidents that did occur , but not in France. and it was just a reminder of ICAO "advice" issues post 9/11, where indeed it started to become a problem But the " C" in ICAO means we cannot regulate military ops, and , among others a large State East of Europe does not apply them and is in its rights.For the record the FAF does follows the ICAO " advice"

Shot one : You are not Related to Donald Trump are you ?
Here , some answers your 4 questions, but like your mentor , it probably won't make a difference in the end ...

That FAF used airliners for unannounced interception practice on multiple occasions is a matter of record, ATCwatcher. To the concern of many, including Eurocontrol. Does your legalistic demand for dates imply you dispute this?

Mater of record ? then it easy for you to give me dates and locations . I have access to the records I can tell you if they are genuine. No , Eurocontrol has no concerns about the FAF interceptions ..and Yes I dispute this because it is journalistic fiction . For info, by definition an interception whether for verification or real are not pre announced..and the FAF , like most air forces does not need do practices them on civil aircraft , they can do this everyday when they air refuel ..

It's also worth asking why such a very high number of intercepts are conducted in French airspace compared with adjacent FIR's. Do the worlds airlines somehow become that much more incompetent in France?

Again an empty statement . Very high number ? Give us the figures please ,just between comparable air forces will do , like UK, France, Italy since you have the details and the source of the figures please, no the Daily mail will not do :E

[Chesty Morgan]

Good thing there's a box three on 121.5 then.

Not on all of them.

[ShotOne]

"Answers to your 4 questions.." You haven't answered a single thing atcwatcher. Why would you ask for statistics that you claim to already have? And why, after screeds of abuse of jet2 pilots on the basis, at the time, of no evidence whatever, do you suddenly become Inspector Maigret of the Surete demanding dates and evidence the moment someone dares question Air Force policy? Finally, the published picture showed a Mirage below and behind the airliner wing. Why would it take station in such a position? It is out of view from the flight deck yet unable to carry out a shoot-down.

[Hotel Tango]

Finally, the published picture showed a Mirage below and behind the airliner wing. Why would it take station in such a position?

Hmm, that has been explained numerous times already. This proves to me that, unlike ATC Watcher, you know absolutely nothing about which you are talking about. Time to bow out quietly instead of digging yourself in deeper.

[DaveReidUK]

I must have missed the part where that was explained, too. :O

It doesn't seem to correspond with what we're told (by ATC Watcher, in fact) is SOP for an interception: one aircraft abeam the cockpit to make visual contact with the pilots and the other astern of the airliner ready to do the necessary.

[Hotel Tango]

So, was the FAF aircraft in that exact position for the entire 15 minutes or just when the photo was taken? Anyway, I didn't really want to get involved except that I happen to know ATC Watcher's credentials and aviation experience are of a high order. I'll leave the French bashers to their fun!

[MATELO]

Finally, the published picture showed a Mirage below and behind the airliner wing. Why would it take station in such a position? It is out of view from the flight deck yet unable to carry out a shoot-down.

Wouldn't any still shot look like it was taking up station, are there any videos around??