F111 Close Encounters

[Aussie FI 3A]

Does this scenario sound familliar to any GA pilots?

Tracking Coffs Harbour to Casino C182, deliberately flying well clear of Evans Head (which was active), VFR, hemispherical, XPDR 1200, the usual, then from out of no-where some RAAF numnut buzzes me from Port to Starboard and within 100m of my prop. Didn't hear him comming (obvously), but scared the **** out of me, no warnings, no calls on area frequency, nothing, just flying along happily one moment, damn near rolled inverted from his wake the next. Fair enough, he probably thought it was funny as hell and I probably would have laughed too if I was in his seat, but seriously, what if that had been a PPL student off on a solo nav. It seems to me that the RAAF should keep a better eye on these guys who are out stuffing around in a plane that costs damn near a thousand bucks per minuite of our taxes just to run. Am I just being anal or should this issue be taken further? What do you think?

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Did you check your notams for LJR's?

I doubt the crew thought it funny. Never flown in a pige but I reckon You'd probably find at their speed and height they were IFR no com and didn't see you until a few seconds before passing. Probably scared them too.

PAF

[Aussie FI 3A]

Fair point, but I wonder what they would be doing IFR at VFR hemispherical levels which would deffinately put them under IFR LSALT, and further, arent they equiped with TCAS? I know they have no requirement to broadcast calls on area freq, but I have never heard of LJR's proceeding without calls on all applicable frequencies. It simply doesn't make sense. I will admit however that I didn't fully check the notams for the specifics of the LJR's but I was aware of the Evand Head being active. Perhaps you are right, a lesson certainly learn't the hard way though.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Military aircraft regularly plan IFR then go to low level maintaining their own terrain clearance (Terrain Following Radar) or with NVG's and the like and go NOCOM. I don't believe the F-111 has TCAS, given the C130J is the only military transport aircraft with it. His altitude I dare say would have been based on AGL not AMSL.

PAF

[Sheep Guts]

How far away from the Evans Head Restricted area were you? I dont think they have TCAS.

I can imagine though them not having it ,as it would be a hinderence. Imagine a PIG doing a TCAS Climb on a Mission, not to mention spectacular it would send your eyeballs through the back of head.:D :D :D ;)

Regrds
Sheep

[Aussie FI 3A]

I deliberately flew 5 degrees off track by VOR Larvale, Cross checked against IFR GPS so I should have been well clear.

Point taken re. TCAS.

I only wonder because I spoke to another FI in archerfield who told a simmilar story and claimed it was uncommon, but did seem to occur more often in that area than anywhere else near Amberly.

P.S. Never met an active RAAF FJ piot so my oppinions are blind.

[18-Wheeler]

They almost invariably have their air-to-air radar on, so they should have seen even a small plane like a Cessna well before getting that close.
They were probably just having a joke.
Are you laughing yet?

[Mainframe]

Ausie F1 3A I had a similar incident in CTA a few years back, port to starboard, passed underneath close enough to see the crew. Scared the hell out of me but coz they flew under me, no wake turbulence. Reported to Tower and submitted incident report.

Answer was aircraft was 20 mins ahead of ETA due making unauthorised cross country detour, NOT +/- 30 secs as promised in LJR info. I was informed that crew had me sighted (visual contact).

This practice was prevalent in UK about the same time, F4 Phantoms would get a lock-on with target aquisition radar on a GA aircraft, usually unsuspecting Ag operator, do a dummy run in on the A/C and then break off engagement.

Unfortunately some did not break off in time and a few Ag operators never knew what hit them and speared in with the Mil aircraft. This practice has ceased in UK due to the high (in excess of 4 kills) success rate.

It was my unsubstantiated opinion that similar target aquisition runs were being conducted here by rogue Pig drivers.

Given the number of ex Pig drivers in CASA we can only assume we will be protected from the truth. At least we haven't had a successful kill here yet, so maybe the practice has been brought under control.

Highly recommend you submit an Air Safety Incident Report with as much accurate and factual detail as you can supply and you may get an explanation or justification for this use of target aquisition radar for practice or fun, or how come they were not complying with the LJR protocol.

[Feather #3]

F1 3A , et al ,

If you look at the Coolangatta VTC around 2930S 15250E you'll find a note in a red box which says "High Speed Low Level Military Jets Operating Random Routes". You may find that they consider this a 'catch-all' exemption on notification, but I'd bet that there was an LJR Notam which at least covered the route.

As to broadcasts, you'll find they only do that in MBZ's, otherwise NoCom unless on an IFR plan in Class E or >.

We visit our daughter in Byron Bay a bit and traverse that territory. A major complaint would be if you were at a reasonable altitude [you didn't specify.] I had a close encounter at A030 [in the old days] with a guy who was supposed to be =/<500'AGL. A letter to the Squadron opened up a response which shocked the ATC/FIS community at the time. Broadly, they can be anywhere from <500'AGL to their planning LSALT along the route. Apparently they keep a good lookout!!

Hope this helps a bit. :rolleyes:

G'day ;)

[Cap'n Bunghole]

Just to clear up a couple of points:

LJRs allow military aircraft to operate IFR NOCOM at all levels below 5000' AGL and within 5mn each side of the promulgated track.

Timing tolerances are +/- 2 mins and any change over this must be notified to ATC.

ATC should ALWAYS make a broadcast on the appropriate area freqs a few minutes before the jet passes into each area and the pilot should usually be monitoring those freqs also - including CTAF/MBZ. Military pilots will not transit an MBZ without making a call.

Having said all of this, it is the responsibility of ALL pilots to see and avoid each other because if a jet hits a cessna it's gonna hurt both parties involved. Similarly it is the responsibility of all operators to check the notams before flying and if you see an LJR in your area - get a map and plot its course because it could save your life one day (and mine!)

[john_tullamarine]

... but that avoids the main concern .. that a substantially camouflaged FJ at low level is next to invisible for all practical purposes ... at the closing rates involved .. by the time visual contact is made (in the serendipitous situation where this might miraculously occur) it is all over bar the editorials .....

Different matter, perhaps, if the FJ is able to acquire all traffic electronically .. but to put the responsibility onto the civilian aircraft is ludicrous .....

[Arm out the window]

Mainframe, with your incident in CTA, why didn't the tower already know about the other aircraft? Are you saying it was operating without a clearance? If the pig had departed from the promulgated LJR timings / route, it would have still needed to be talking to the tower to be operating in a control zone.

Good idea about submitting ASIRs for incidents of this nature, but your comments about rogue pig drivers and implication of CASA cover-ups are a bit over the top.

[Feather #3]

Cap'n B ,

There's no doubt that you don't want to collide. In my case, I had the guy visual over his target at LL due to both LJR Notam and FIS broadcasts. It was when he stopped moving relatively with the nose pointed toward me that I took fright [he was almost below me on the LHS.] How long, I thought do you wait and which way to turn to avoid and not lose sight of him?:confused:

As the thought process proceeded, the relative movement started and I heaved a sigh of relief. If nobody gets anything more out of this, note the bit about manoeuvring UP TO A050!:eek:

Be careful out there!!;)

Thought; maybe it's only C182's they chase?

[gaunty]

john_t and Feather

As ever.

I wonder how our NEW NAS is going to handle this.

The ones I lie awake at night worrying about is Farmer or Pastoralist Jones chuntering along in his C150/172 checking the mills or doing a spot of mustering, usually in the middle of nowhere and almost always unannounced.
Often below the tree line or in a ravine, it's only a matter of time before one pops up in front of a fast mover and he doesn't even have to be hit.

The Pitch Black exercises over here were always revealing and I can still see the dust plume following along behind the fast mover, I think an F111, that was the only evidence of its presence, passing fairly close to a mustering camp where they were having smoko under the wing of the C172 that only moments before had been operating in the area. I am certain neither knew about the other. Maybe our new AWACs will solve the problem and bring about bit of discipline.

No criticism of the RAAF blokes or the musterers just making the observation that the so called "Big Sky" theory in regard to non traffic management is a crock of sh!t even in a sparsely populated country as is Oz.
Be careful out there.

[Time Bomb Ted]

This reminds me of a story an ATC type told me a few years ago. He received a radio call from an Ag Pilot one night who had been doing night crop spraying and it went something like this.

ABC: "AH Brisbane, this is Alpha Bravo Charlie, Ten miles west of Gundawindi below 1000 carrying out crop spraying, Request."

ATC: "ABC Go ahead."

ABC: "Ah Brisbane, are there any military low jet flights in my vicinity tonight?"

ATC: "ABC, affirm. They should have passed you by now however."

ABC: "Yeah I thought so, It just flew under me."

Luckily the ag plane was in the middle of a climbing turn back towards the crop. Now that is what I call low flying.

Ps: Gaunty, NAS has nothing to do with how the military operate the F111. Why bring it up?

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Quick question along the same lines. Why is the the old Macchi's used to promulgate Mil LJR's but a PC-9 going around the same speed or a C-130 going up to 300 knots <500AGL doesn't? :confused:

[gaunty]

Time Bomb Ted

True, but it has everything to do with knowing who may or may not be about at any given time.
NAS seems to be sold by the head dabbler on the basis of less talk, which in the areas of which I made mention, simply provides the excuse to downgrade from very little to absolutely none.

I am not being patronising when I say that, not because they are real cowboys but because of their naturally laconic nature and discomfort with "city" ways when they are flying over "their" property.

Neither was it meant to be a criticism of the RAAF or F111 drivers, they were always in the habit of spending some time prior, personally briefing the local owners of their activities and other heads up stuff.

But mixing Formula 1 traffic with C150 in their backyard is just naturally fraught. The locals do take notice but I'm not sure they really understand.
As the F1 commentator was explaining about people trying to cross the track on foot during a race, "by the time you see the car, it is already too late........ for both":eek:

[Double Asymmetric]

"Numnut"?
"It seems to me that the RAAF should keep a better eye on these guys who are out stuffing around in a plane..."
Sorry but you lose credibilty from the outset by (a)resorting to name calling of aviators you have never met, and (b) insinuating that they somehow would have got a great laugh out of this incident.
There are guys far more qualified (Booger? Swingwing? Are you out there?) than me to comment, but F1 3A you can be assured that if this incident occured in the vicinity of Evans Head than the crew were either ingressing or egressing from a simulated strike...to put it mildly they would be extremely busy running checks and trying to get their ducks in a row, all whilst travelling (probably) at around 9nm/min.
Your emotion/exasperation over a frightening incident is perfectly understandable, but to question the professionalism of the crew and fire off ill-informed assumptions that they were stuffing around or perhaps having a great old laugh at your expense is not called for. It would be a safe assumption that if the crew saw you at the same time they would have received the same shock you did. A collision is going to hurt everyone involved.
Pass-a-frozo - simple...a PC-9 or a C-130 is not a low jet!:D

[Pass-A-Frozo]

DA:

Understand that much I was just alluding to the fact that the Macchi notified low moves yet aircraft in similar situations do not. Granted a PC/9A or C130 don't travel at 9nm/min though. Thankfully, might spill the coffee :D

[Captain Sand Dune]

Here we go again...............civvy pilot sees an airborne military aircraft when, therefore it's a major drama. Probably had you acquired 10nm back anyway, and in any case what's wrong with VFR in VMC? Just be thankful it had a kangaroo painted on the side of it - numbnuts!!!!

[Chimbu chuckles]

Remember many (17) years ago, while doing some 'Mutual' during my Instructor Rating in the BK training area, ATC gave an all stations warning about an F111 tracking from overhead Camden to Richmond. Figured the likelyhood of spotting him was remote but the next thing you know we see him between us and a Cherokee a mile or two in front of us...big steep turn around us follows and he heads off back to Camden...where he held for a little while, according to FS anyway, when we and 2 or 3 others queried what the hell was going on!! We spotted him some 5 minutes later as he crossed the training area again. All this happened at 3000 odd feet by they way.

You'd have to question the good sense of 1/. the crew involved 2/. ATC and 3/. the RAAF for 1/. doing it and 2/. & 3/. allowing such an aircraft to transit one of the busiest pieces of sky in Oz??

They get pretty hacked off if GA/Civvy aircraft wander into their fenced off playgrounds, how about a bit of reciprocity!!

Some year or so later while IFR in a C310 BK-Cooly I got a call from FS about crossing FJ traffic...where ,when, how high ellicited only a "dunno" answer...then while VMC between layers @ A090 I spoted, purely by fluke, a small winged spot descend VERY steeply between the overcast and the undercast, perhaps a mile or two at 10 oclock.

Guys I envy you your toys and it looks like a hoot of a good time but please, there's plenty of empty fenced off places for you to play in...stay there.

Chuck.

[Arm out the window]

Well Chuckles, if an Australian military aircraft can't fly in Aussie airspace while following the appropriate rules of the air, there's something bloody well wrong, wouldn't you agree?
Perhaps you'd rather have them never venture beyond the 50 nm bungee cord from a RAAF base, what outstanding training that would be.
One incident 17 yrs ago, eh; fairly strong stuff. Perhaps having been cleared by the route you mentioned, having encountered a couple of aircraft they manoeuvered to avoid you. Crikey!
Agreed with Gaunty, the big sky theory is a crock. I think the biggest problem with the LJR system is that a heap of lat/longs and positions reference places is no real help to anyone in real time. Are the routes promulgated on the net as pictures, does anyone know?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Nurries AOTW...I'll go charging around Evans Head to my heart content and see how far that gets me...after all fair is fair :D

I'm not saying RAAF Knucks (or trashies/fishheads/whatever) can't fly between Camden & Richmond...but I would suggest that 3000' through the BK Training Area might be a tad innappropriate...would you not agree? As for training value?? If the baddys get that close to Sydney I would suggest it would have long been 'all hands to the pump' so just give the young instructors a quicky endorsement on something which has antisocial possibilities and let them go at it..they already know the place like the back of their hands:D

This is a vast continent with vast open spaces and you've got some flash sims with really cool graphics (I've had a fly of em:D)...you have plenty of ways to minimise conflict with civvies...note I didn't say completely negate...you have lots of 'no go areas'...we should have a few too.

BTW I've seen F111s crossing Archerfields training area low and fast lots of times...and I'm talking in the last few weeks...a little bit of common sense...and a few thousand feet of altitude would seem to negate a rather nasty possible outcome...don't you think?

Chuck.

[Sheep Guts]

Ok this may sound a little lame, but I have some experince, exRaaf techo for ten years.

So F1 3A were you broadcasting your position? If you were that close, I would think it would come under good airmanship to do so. I know the PIG was running no coms, but the Range Controller(Evans Head) would of had the area frequency dialled up, and should have been monitoring. The range controller can speak to the PIG Pilot so maybe that may have been problem.

No ones pointing a finger, we just need some reasonable discussion on this, as it does comes up form time to time. One day a collision may just happen, to think that it wont happen is a mindset we need to deal with.....

Capt Bunghole:
To know that the LJR has a 5 mile buffer for usage is interesting , maybe a 10 mile buffer for avoidance needs to be implemented or adhered to. Also the broadcasting by ATC services of the position and location , is generally OK but sometimes they are behind the horses so too speak. ie, a post comentary after the show has ended.

Just an opinion guys:D

Regards
Sheep

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Two points:

1> Perhaps the pig guys can use a planning system that can convert there lat longs to navaid radial/range for the purpose of the flight plan. I know the system used on C130's can do that. That would make it more likely that people would plot it on a map or at least give them some SA on where the aircraft is.

2> As for don't go through the area civvy aircraft fly through. Military are told to flight plan efficiently as well. Every military aircraft you see isn't out "Stuffing around". I'm sure you don't want to pay another $100 a year tax a year to pay for military aircraft fuel etc. to avoid every place civil aircraft are in high proximity.

[Arm out the window]

Fair enough, Chuckles, I'd certainly hope and expect that military pilots would take a lot of care in flight planning to avoid charging through areas where conflicts with other traffic are likely; p155ing off other airspace users is definitely a bad thing, not to mention the spoiling of everyone's day if someone does get hit!
As you say, there's lots of open space around for the more unpredictable kinds of high speed flying with 'abrupt vertical manoeuvring', as the saying goes.
ATC do make an effort to release military airspace back to civil users as much as they can; I guess the awkward positioning of some of that airspace is more to do with having had RAAF bases positioned where they are many years ago and then having the enormous changes in air traffic patterns since then.

Pass-a-Frozo, I'm pretty sure a lot of LJRs are already NOTAMed with turning points as radial/range reference navaids or sizeable towns, but a picture would still be worth the proverbial thousand words for orientation.

[gaunty]

Arm out the window

I think the biggest problem with the LJR system is that a heap of lat/longs and positions reference places is no real help to anyone in real time. Are the routes promulgated on the net as pictures, does anyone know? I'm pretty sure a lot of LJRs are already NOTAMed with turning points as radial/range reference navaids or sizeable towns, but a picture would still be worth the proverbial thousand words for orientation.

As usual you put your finger right on it.:D

The LJRs were/are always honoured in the breach by the civvies.

Transfer several pages of lat/longs to chart, calculate possible conflicts on route and destinations on ETD and ETIs, adjust for ATD ooops flight plan change en route, new calcs blah, blah, blah ........yeah right.........too hard.......... we'll just wing it and play it as it comes. :eek:

[tax pred]

Darling, delicate touch needed I feel.

Those boys spent the better half of a day planning and executing such a nav. Going through the paper war required to stay Sharp, justifying the dollars invested by the tax payers. Doing the correct civvie things i.e LJR notification 24hrs prior and then Flight plan at least 1 hour prior. The authorisation process would have been lengthy, taking into account experience level of crew and workup of the squadron.

These lads then go and execute, trying to tap the most training value as possible out of the limited hours allocated. They stay within 5 nm of track and as per FIHA IFR rules plus/minus 2 minutes. BUT I would be surprised if they were out by ten seconds. Everthing comes together just prior to the range, both working HARD (not thumb up bum with a 20 degree lookout either side of nose), Driver getting the million dollar hardware there and the Nav getting everything done to get the bombs off FIRST TIME.

There is no screwing around, no time to find you and then "play" with you. The radar is doing other things at that stage, aiding the training value that you civvies demand from your dollars. Oh, did I mention that they pride themselves on the profession of arms and the way they conduct themselves.

Read your NOTAMS, dont just carry them. Plot them on your map, cause sure as hell those boys plotted every notam before they went and be thankful that IT was a flying F-111 "wasting" in your words tax payers dollars. BTW Cruising levels are advisory only below 5000 feet, be thankful that our system hasnt gone the way of the UK LOFA's.

Oh, and leave all the old anecdotes out, if I was to waltz into a respectable flying club and tarnish it with stories 17 years past I would be laughed out. Times change gentlemen.

[Ultralights]

TCAS only works when Both aircraft have it fitted, they transmit Altitude, speed and heading data out to a short range, any other TCAS unit in that area will recieve this info and the computer will decide appropiate action.

[Cougar]

Interesting thread. I think tax pred has hit it on the head.

Spoke to a Pig crew in June 2001 and they were telling me about that mornings trip from Amberley. Had a LJR promulgated, went NOCOM from 100Nms or so south of AMB, hand flown (not TFR) at 'weeds' height (prob 150' MSD??) with a designated target in Northern NSW. Doing 9 Nms/min or so. Specifically said that Centre was broadcasting on Area about their route and timings etc.

Over the Ingress Point before the target, Nav with eyes out, pilot also head out 90% of the time. On timing +/- 15 secs. Next thing they know Nav spots a small speck, calls for a break turn, pilot executes, and small lighty passes under left wing within 200' he reckons. Apparently called it prob 2 miles out and still scared the **** out of both of them. Trust me, these guys do not 'play' with lighties, they do not waste 'taxpayers' money and they certainly don't spend the precious time that they have in the jet showboating with lighties to try and make a name for themselves. People saying such things simply shows the lack of respect that you have for the professionalism of all FJ drivers in the air force. Certainly raise your concerns, but remember that it will hurt them just as much if they hit you. Aviation safety is a team game, don't try to turn this into an 'us vs them' scenario.

NOTAMs are not just there to look at if you have time.

[XV666]

The most consistent, and worrying, point in this thread is the apparent belief that radio calls are the be all and end all. Whatever happened to the good old look out? IMHO, it's not the job of Airservices to tell all and sundry where there may be a confliction, nor the non stop job of a jet jock (or his looker) to be calling on every area frequency in case there's someone in the way.

We all have a responsibilty to see and avoid. Just because the other guy is faster, bigger, and more readily identifiable (as in knowing who he was after the event) doesn't mean that he should be shouldered with the responsibilty of finding and avoiding GA aircraft. It's your responsibility, too.

And yes, I was a Mil. pilot in a previous life. And yes, I have had my fair share of watching F-111's whiz by in my current life, non of which particularly stressed me, since I saw them. Most of them, I think :cool:

[john_tullamarine]

Heli,

"Most of them, I think" sums up the main problem.

I have no doubt that you are more than familiar with the practical problems of visually acquiring a target without prior knowledge of the target's existence and nominal location.

Surely the difficulty associated with the small angles subtended by the target until QUITE CLOSE, allied with high closure rates, means that fortuitous visual acquisition and, more importantly, successful evasion, by Pilot Bloggs in his bugsmasher is not a good system ... certainly there is more than enough in the literature to support this contention.

The basic concern is to seek an improvement in the systems' approach to collision avoidance .. and there are various things which can help.... but leaving it to an ancient regulation, penned when everything moved at a far more sedate pace and when a visual scanning technique was a reasonable solution to the problem ... is to avoid the current disaster-waiting-to-happen by burying one's head in the sand.

As to responsibility, that is a legal matter. From a practical viewpoint, if the LJR op is not associated with a restricted area, then I think it not unreasonable to foist a higher proportion of the responsibility onto the principle source of the hazard ... the FJ operation.

Years ago it wasn't the same degree of hazard due to navigation inaccuracy on the part of the typical GA aircraft (if one harks back to airline days without GPS/Omega/INS, the chances of two opposite direction aircraft coming within several miles of each other was not high). With the present capability of very accurate tracking offered to GA by inexpensive GPS equipment, it is a whole new ballgame and the risk exposure has increased dramatically (I am presuming here that the operational FJs have more accurate tracking capabilities than possessed by the bulkstore handheld GPS or better in the typical bugsmasher).

Me ... I prefer to take the LJR notam to indicate that I should go fly somewhere else ... if I have the luxury of such a choice.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

That's not correct Ultralights.
TCAS does not need bothaircraft to have Mode S to work.

TCAS will work as long as the other aircraft has mode C (Altitude reporting). It will calculate a resolution based on the data it has and give that to the crew. If the aircraft does not altitude report it will at least give a "Traffic, Traffic" special alert.
At least that's for the TCAS fitted to my aircraft.
That's why I like light aircraft squawking even in remote areas. Get to see where they are and avoid meeting in the same piece of space at the same time. :)


PAF

[Sheep Guts]

I concurr with JT that it is an ancient rule that may need some, changes, now that there are more aeroplanes in the sky. As I mentioned in a previous thread, if there is a 5 mile tolerance for usage of the LJR as Capt. Bunghole mentioned, then a 10 mile buffer for avoidance may need to be implemented.

I know some of us have growned about the contsant change in CASA and Airserices rules, maybe this one needs some attention.

Merry Xmas to all
SHEEP

P.S. Was a tech now at the Pointy End:D :D :D

[Feather #3]

Just a quick addendum to P-A-F 's words.

TCAS will provide a resolution advisory [ie. give you a solution to avoid] if the other a/c has Mode C/Alt Rptg operable.

However, [and this is where AsA et al have pulled the wool over a few eyes] an ordinary old transponder, SWITCHED ON! , will provide a target on the TCAS screen which will help in pilot AWARENESS of traffic and give the recipient an area in which to look. :eek:

Thus, if you don't have Mode C/Alt Rptg on your set, please, please, still switch it on to Squawk 1200; we can still see you and/or know where to look! :D

Our altitude encoder is currently u/s in one of the G/A a/c I fly, and since we dont' fly it in other than GAAP or Class G, it's not a drama. We still Squawk 1200!!

G'day and Merry Xmas to all! :)

[fastbacon1]

A first post but I couldn't hold back after some of the previous posts.

A few points

Pass-A-Frozo
- LJR's are required to my understanding for any operations in excess of 250kts the allowable civil limit. PC-9s do not normally exceed this as most lo nav is 210kts, the Macchi regularly exceeded this on 240 or 300kt low navs. If Hercs intend on exceeding 250kts an argument could be made for them to file LJRs. However a Herc even at 300kts is far easier to see and avoid than a macchi at 240kts.

Chimbu chuckles
- I won't even bother about an event 17 years ago.
- Our "Fenced off playgrounds" are fenced off for serious safety and operational reasons. Where possible we hand our airspace back when not in use and it is not uncommon for our training to be seriously compromised by limitations on Restricted airspace times and size. Airspace will always be a compromise from all sides, all I ask is that you don't take cheap shots without knowing squat about our requirements.
- "I've seen F111s crossing Archerfields training area low and fast lots of times...and I'm talking in the last few weeks". Unless your training area extends 2Nm off the coast below 500ft this has to be pure bollocks. As a rule we avoid civil training areas like the plague for obvious safety reasons, to operate in one would require lots of liason and a bloody good reason before it would be authorised.

Aussie FI 3A
- Military fast jets are not equiped with TCAS.
- Sorry to hear about the near miss however I think I can safely say that the actions of the crew were not deliberate. We are required to remain well clear of all civil aircraft (600m, 2000ft) and are well aware of the wake turbulence of the F111. If the crew was so unprofessional as to deliberately disregarded the rules of the air they deserve to be charged. So I have to ask why were you not aware. For the LJR system to work all civil traffic should be aware of Low jet activity. The best way to get this information is by being aware of the notam and getting the broadcast information once airborne. As an aside the British system is entirely see and avoid. Unsurprisingly they have the occasional midair and blame the crews of all aircraft for poor lookout. The LJR system aint perfect but it is an aid to see and avoid.

To conclude I don't mean to be too harsh here but if you don't understand someone else's operations don't wade in with both feet before asking what happened.

Cheers.