F15/18s over London.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speed of Sound:
A 777, with landing flap and gear down, will be flying over the western part of London at 1500 ft decreasing, and at any stage could lose an engine (or two). Do you want to stop that as well? That would of course be possible, but only with the slight inconvenience of moving the busiest international airport in the world to somewhere where aircraft on the approach do not have to fly over a built up area. I can see that getting planning approval fairly rapidly!
With regard to the F18/F15s, don't forget that they have two engines, and probably the only reason you noticed them was because they make a racket and are unusual. As has been said, traffic reporting aircraft and police helicopters regularly float about over the capital at 1500' (or less in the case of the helis) and nobody gives them a second glance because they are commonplace. Most people glance up, however, when Concorde goes over because it is uncommon and makes a racket.
If, as HD says, you could have a look at a radar screen and see how many aircraft are above London at any one time (from surface to 40000 ft plus), many of them on crossing or reciprocal tracks and separated by only 1000 ft vertically whilst closing at up to 1200mph then you would probably decide to work somewhere else!! Trouble is, there are very few places in the UK or your native Ireland which are not regularly overflown by mechanical contraptions which just might decide to stop working at any time.
A non-event, really, in the grand scheme of things
A 777, with landing flap and gear down, will be flying over the western part of London at 1500 ft decreasing, and at any stage could lose an engine (or two). Do you want to stop that as well? That would of course be possible, but only with the slight inconvenience of moving the busiest international airport in the world to somewhere where aircraft on the approach do not have to fly over a built up area. I can see that getting planning approval fairly rapidly!
With regard to the F18/F15s, don't forget that they have two engines, and probably the only reason you noticed them was because they make a racket and are unusual. As has been said, traffic reporting aircraft and police helicopters regularly float about over the capital at 1500' (or less in the case of the helis) and nobody gives them a second glance because they are commonplace. Most people glance up, however, when Concorde goes over because it is uncommon and makes a racket.
If, as HD says, you could have a look at a radar screen and see how many aircraft are above London at any one time (from surface to 40000 ft plus), many of them on crossing or reciprocal tracks and separated by only 1000 ft vertically whilst closing at up to 1200mph then you would probably decide to work somewhere else!! Trouble is, there are very few places in the UK or your native Ireland which are not regularly overflown by mechanical contraptions which just might decide to stop working at any time.
A non-event, really, in the grand scheme of things
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who cares if it was legal - it's not the point.
Post 9-11, a 777 [which looks damn like a 767 or 757 to someone who only saw the CNN pix] would cause a nervous moment for a few folk.
However, there is no mistaking military jets *unannounced* in case you missed the flypast point the first time. Everyone thinks - oh sh!t, what's wrong - especially in the vicinity of the tallest building in London.
My point, which I know is not what other posters was, i.e. the safety angle, but that it puts the wind up punters to see fighters at low-ish level in an urban area. To compare F-18s to an R-22 is pretty laughable in that context.
One more thing - I'd love to have F-18s or even creaky old F.3s
fly over my gaff, considering the Irish Air Corps is down to one jet aircraft now [Gulfstream IV] but I know a lot of my neighbours mightn't.
However, there is no mistaking military jets *unannounced* in case you missed the flypast point the first time. Everyone thinks - oh sh!t, what's wrong - especially in the vicinity of the tallest building in London.
My point, which I know is not what other posters was, i.e. the safety angle, but that it puts the wind up punters to see fighters at low-ish level in an urban area. To compare F-18s to an R-22 is pretty laughable in that context.
One more thing - I'd love to have F-18s or even creaky old F.3s
fly over my gaff, considering the Irish Air Corps is down to one jet aircraft now [Gulfstream IV] but I know a lot of my neighbours mightn't.
Last edited by MarkD; 19th Jul 2002 at 22:33.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not so long ago (ie post Sep 11) a RAAF Hawk conducted a photo shoot with an USAF E-3 or similar (EW aircraft, B707 origins no radome painted two-tone white and grey, exact type escapes me right now) over central Sydney, Oz at about 2-3000 AMSL. The only problem was the RAAF neglected to issue a press release and scared the $#&* out of all the punters. Talk-back radio went crazy suggesting a RAAF fighter was 'engaging' a large passenger jet just above the roof tops of the Sydney CBD, and it made the first story of every evening news in the country.
Like most folks here, I've no problem with jets zapping around the place, however if you try and distance yourself from the aviation industry, you can imagine the level of paranoia this sort of incident would cause.
Needless to say, the RAAF was very apologetic.
Like most folks here, I've no problem with jets zapping around the place, however if you try and distance yourself from the aviation industry, you can imagine the level of paranoia this sort of incident would cause.
Needless to say, the RAAF was very apologetic.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USAF EW without a radome?
Green on
er... sure it wasn't a KC-135? or even one of those J-STARS thingys... don't think they have a radome, E-8 I think.
er... sure it wasn't a KC-135? or even one of those J-STARS thingys... don't think they have a radome, E-8 I think.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark D
I suspect you're right. Certainly not an E-3 Sentry (AEW&C) as there was no radome. It probably was a C-135 variant, not a KC-135 (Air-to-Air refueller), but an EC-135 perhaps? Anyway lots of electronics and crap hanging off it, but to the punters it looked like a civil airliner.
I suspect you're right. Certainly not an E-3 Sentry (AEW&C) as there was no radome. It probably was a C-135 variant, not a KC-135 (Air-to-Air refueller), but an EC-135 perhaps? Anyway lots of electronics and crap hanging off it, but to the punters it looked like a civil airliner.
