Polish "Air Force One" departed from EPZG without permission

[eu01]

Not many English-language sources available, but several press reports in Polish seem to confirm the incident. A month ago, on July 2nd, the plane of Polish president Duda was left stranded at EPZG (Zielona Gora Babimost) Airport. The politicians were late, the airport closed and ATCO went home. Despite no-one gave the permission to do that, the LOT-owned Embraer 175 departed with president on board and finally arrived in Warsaw later the same night. The incident wasn't reported by LOT until one week later, only after first press coverage emerged. Recently it was reported that the pilot flying wasn't even fully licensed to do so. Pretty amazing, as it concerns the EU country governed by "Law and Justice" party. Or maybe "Rulers Above the Law"?

[scr1]

Shades of the one that crashed in Russia that may have been caused my a senior officer telling the crew to try a approach

[Dupre]

My big question is "who's permission did they need?"

If ATC has gone home does the airfield not revert to uncontrolled procedures? I don't know EPZG but I did used to operate every day from aerodromes outside their ATC hours as well as completely uncontrolled aerodromes (IFR and VFR).

I would imagine they either departed VFR and picked up their IFR route clearance on the climb, or got the route clearance on the ground by phone or radio contact with an ATS.

Doesn't sound like anything was wrong to me...

[parkfell]

No fire cover. No alerting service at the airfield.
Normally the airport authority would need to approve operations
when “out of hours”...?

And some question over the pilot’s licence....?

[CargoOne]

This is exactly why giving the "Polish Force One" to civil operator is a mistake. It is very convenient on most of occasions but then from time to time you have a moment when executive decision by Supreme Commander will solve any problem if you are military.

[Go Ahead... Over]

Just curious, but what laws or rules have been broken?
I am curious too.... if the tower was closed, i presume that the airspace was class G and CTAF would have been the go?

[parkfell]

When the boss decides he wants to launch, often they are blind to the implications if anything goes wrong. Serious pressure is exerted on the crew to depart.

The 13 March 2014 fatal accident when a AW139 helicopter crashed on lift off in dense fog at night in Norfolk, UK is a classic case of employer’s pressure.

It was against the better judgement of the crew ( CVR discussion ) prior to engine start, was I suspect ‘pressure’ from the owner who came on board later than planned to return to Northern Ireland.

A very wealthy man, who invariably was use to getting his own way, oblivious to the potential dangers of the conditions.

At the Inquest, the owner’s family put the blame squarely with the crew for going against ‘the rules‘.

Knowing the particular style of the gentleman, it would come as no surprise if he would have sacked the crew on the spot for declining to depart.

The various employment tribunals in Carlisle from ex employees at Corby Castle ( he owned Carlisle Airport at one time ) did indicate a certain
“no nonsense approach” if his wishes weren’t carried out without unquestioning obedience.

[capricorn23]

My father in law, retired captain from the national carrier, became flight ops manager of secret services flight dept. which had some business jets in its fleet. They were used, typically, to transport politicians, spies, top state manager and similar stuff. This Wing followed civil aviation flight rules.
Once, it happened to him to fly the president of the republic, which normally flew with the military planes and used to land under any circumstances, but this time the president had to revert to the "spies" company as no other military plane was available.
This time, as the visibility was below the civil standards for landing, my f.i.l. diverted to a different airport. As a consequence he was removed from his management position. "All the World is just a village".

[DaveReidUK]

The 13 March 2014 fatal accident when a AW139 helicopter crashed on lift off in dense fog at night in Norfolk, UK is a classic case of employer’s pressure.

It was against the better judgement of the crew ( CVR discussion ) prior to engine start, was I suspect ‘pressure’ from the owner who came on board later than planned to return to Northern Ireland.

A very wealthy man, who invariably was use to getting his own way, oblivious to the potential dangers of the conditions

Quite so. The AAIB stated at the inquest that had the helicopter been at a licensed aerodrome, it would not have been allowed to take off in such fog.

[LGW Vulture]

Not really relevant to the Polish Government in so many respects - but hey ho!

The Polish have 2 nearly new G550s, two BBJs and a further B737-800 on the way - why oh why they are still using an Embraer 175 is rather puzzling.

[ATC Watcher]

No fire cover. No alerting service at the airfield.
Normally the airport authority would need to approve operations
when “out of hours”...?

No Fire cover : how do you know? .They are permanently based and avail on PPR 24/7. I doubt very much they wee not warned of the aircraft departure.
On the" departed without ATC authorization" , different States have different rules on that , maybe it is the case in Poland not sure , , but in may other parts of the world if ATC is not avail , as indicated before it is A/A and a class G departure. VFR. Perfectly OK.
Done everywhere all the time . I would say it t only made the news here because it is President on board in a very politically divided country ...

[Dupre]

This airport indicates on it's website (according to Google translate):

"Air traffic control service

Mon, Tue, Thu, Fri: 07:00 - 10:00; 12:00 - 17:00; 19:00 - 22:00
Wed: 07:00 - 10:00; 12:00 - 14:30
Sun: 14:30 - 17:00; 19:00 - 22:00

Planned take-offs and landings outside the airport's operating hours should be reported to the operator 72 hours before the flight operation."

good info, thanks I don't have the charts.

However, "should" is the key word here. It does not imply a compulsory action in the way "must" does. Sorry to sound like a lawyer, but these distinctions often matter in aviation.

Also a "planned" takeoff needs further definition too... there is a lot of grey area here.

of course this all depends on the quality of the translation...

[ATC Watcher]

the" planned movements " are there for commercial flights that need more infrastructure like customs, , baggage, security, stairs, fuel etc...
This was I guess ( did not see the PLN) most likely a Sate flight., Sate flight means flights of military, police, customs, etc...., other rules apply.if it was designated as such.

[EDLB]

With 4 flights per day on average in 2019 in the US they would not even think of building a tower. CTAF works very well. Even in LAS if necessary as proven. In Europe there is a historical habit to have a tower on every meadow, and close the field as soon as that guy is off duty.

[avionimc]

Exactly. There is no issue here.
In the US there are 5092 public airports, but only 518 of them have a control tower. Most of the non-controlled airports have airline service and are open 24 hours with pilot controlled runway lights. And, there are 14530 private airports. (Source: FAA Air Traffic by the numbers - June 2019)

[aeromech3]

When in VIP service, our PIC had a bung for such eventualities, but didn't work in France for curfew hour. I think the question that needs answering is how ATC were allowed to go home when a presidential flight was waiting to leave?

[BDAttitude]

I'd be careful with a lot of these blanket statements in this thread. Don't know about polish law, but in this western european country any airfield outside it's operating hours - be it controlled or uncontrolled - has same legal status as a barley field or the Autobahn with respect to airlaw. Departing or landing is not a misdemeanor but a criminal offence although the facilities may be perfectly suitable to do so.
GA wise many pilots especially from the island don't know and are so courteous to drop a fiver and slip with their registration and landing/departure time in the letter box. Very bad idea. At least don't get caught.
​​​​​​

[pilotnik86]

- The airport working hours were extended by NOTAM. Follow, Duty Officer etc. ATC tower however is NOT part of the airport.
- ATC couldn’t have been extended. ATCO was out of duty time.
- The ATCO finished his shift and informed the crew that as of nów it is a class G airspace. He then stayed in the postion to provide the minimum asistance (eg. reading wind condition).
- LOTs SOP forbids flying in class G airspace and that’s what all the fuss is about.

[parkfell]

So Nelson’s eye technique employed.......

[Banana4321]

aeromech3

Indeed. Beggars belief.

[ralphos]

This is exactly why giving the "Polish Force One" to civil operator is a mistake.

The situation is exactly opposite: using military services is risky. It led to a crash killing the former president of Poland 10 years ago. The military crew had broken all possible regulations, ignored all safety rules and crashed in the fog killing the president and many notable passengers (96 people died). >>> LINK <<< (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smolensk_air_disaster)

Two years before that (in 2008) a military CASA C-295 M crashed at night killing many high ranking air force officers. >>> LINK <<< (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Polish_Air_Force_C-295_Miros%C5%82awiec_crash)

Flying with the military seems like a recipe to crash.

Anyway, flying with the the current Polish government is very risky, the don't care about any rules, they openly ignore the law (including Polish constitution).

[Del Prado]

question that needs answering is how ATC were allowed to go home when a presidential flight was waiting to leave?

sounds like they were out of hours. Would you raise that question of a pilot that wouldn’t work beyond their legal limits?

[andrasz]

The military crew had broken all possible regulations, ignored all safety rules and crashed in the fog killing the president...
I think if you read the full accident report you will come to the conclusion that the crew was in fact ordered to break all possible regulations by said commander in chief. It was the ultimate case of politicians meddling with aviation. A civilian crew in such situation is in a tad better position to say no...

[old,not bold]

aeromech3

Indeed. Beggars belief.
Not really; the Polish side of my family informs me that there are plenty of people in Poland who would do all they can to inconvenience the much hated and despised President; having a legitimate reason for shutting down an airport he wanted to fly from later would be too good an opportunity to miss.

[nicolai]

It certainly would stir up Polish politics if the president won a bitterly contested election by a razor-thin margin and then died in a late-night aircraft crash on a small airfield. Maybe more excitement than Poland needs right now.

Do Polish politicos have some sort of congenital death wish in aircraft?

[andrasz]

Do Polish politicos have some sort of congenital death wish in aircraft?
Not in particular, just aviation has a lower tolerance threshold for arrogance combined with ignorance and incompetence.

[kontrolor]

I was not once rescuing military pilot, who had to take-off on a mission when the met conditions were lower than prescribed minima. Even military pilots are still pilots and should adhere to safety margins when operating in peacetime.

[Skeleton]

Why does it "beggar belief" that ATC were "allowed" to close? Whose permission do they need to? The airfield I assume has published Operating Hours, unless ATC were informed the President was running late and a request made to remain open I see no issue with sticking to them.

[Longtimer]

Here you go:
https://acukwik.com/Airport-Info/EPZG2020-06-06 · Airport Hours. M-F 0500-2000L, Su 1200-2000L. Control Tower Hours. See NOTAM. Variation. 04E. Distance from City. 34 KM NE OF TOWN. AFS/AFTN. INTERNATIONAL. SITA. INTERNATIONAL. ... TAF EPZG 232030Z 2321/2406 28004KT CAVOK BECMG 2321/2323 34010KT FC *** NO MESSAGES FOUND *** Last Update: 23 Jun 2020 20:00 ...

[TOGA Tap]

This is exactly why giving the "Polish Force One" to civil operator is a mistake. It is very convenient on most of occasions but then from time to time you have a moment when executive decision by Supreme Commander will solve any problem if you are military.
According to ICAO aircraft is considered as state aircraft when it is flying a state mission. Actual registration, operator ... etc does nor really matter. Maybe they broke some internal LOT Ops Manual rules but no EASA rules because they were not applicable.

[TOGA Tap]

Which types of aircraft or activities are excluded from EASA's competence?Pursuant to Article 2(3) of Regulation 2018/1139 (https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/regulations/regulation-eu-20181139) (The Basic Regulation), that regulation shall NOT apply to:

a) aircraft, and their engines, propellers, parts, non-installed equipment and equipment to control aircraft remotely, while carrying out military, customs, police, search and rescue, firefighting, border control, coastguard or similar activities or services under the control and responsibility of a Member State, undertaken in the public interest by or on behalf of a body vested with the powers of a public authority, and the personnel and organisations involved in the activities and services performed by those aircraft;

[jmmoric]

I'd go along with the ones asking, what rule did they break?

I've flown in and out of closed airports quite a lot... we just needed a permission by the management, which we had for all the airports nearby, the agreement was for a year at a time (except one where the authority required a manned ATS unit open when using the airport).

There could be some regulatory requirements with regards to fire and rescue or ATC availability for the particular flight... besides that....

Even filing a flight plan, giving the centre a phonecall for a clearance, or departing up into uncontrolled and the pick up an ATC clearance in air is also an option.

I once had an ACTO stating that I needed lights on the runway when arriving after sunset (in twillight), which is correct, but not a requirement if ATC was not established.

[atakacs]

I'd go along with the ones asking, what rule did they break?

Not being of the "correct" political alignment...

[ATC Watcher]

I once had an ACTO stating that I needed lights on the runway when arriving after sunset (in twillight), which is correct, but not a requirement if ATC was not established.
Depends on your definition of twilight :E. The ICAO standard is clear ; You need runway light at night . Night is defined as Sunset + 30 minutes in the Northern hemisphere . so , no , in theory you do not need lights between Sunset and 30 min after