"Deeply Disturbing"
 

Has this near-miss been discussed here? Looks like it was a "squeeker".

For those of us who don't know, how are military aircraft handled in the U.K.? Two seperate ATC systems, right?

Only a matter of time.
Those hawk trainers are a menace and should not be allowed anywhere near civil airspace.
I used to work at a unit where they came to practice approaches.
The clearance after the missed approach was nearly always to FL90. They nearly always called passing FL150 on the way up asking to QSY. It became something we expected to happen.
I got the impression some of those guys were strapped to a rocket and were just along for the ride.
Are these flights always conducted with an instructor or are they solo?

I heard that the Hawks saw the aircraft - problem over in my book!

remember that one man's airprox is another man's sighting and vice versa

so why did the Hawk pilots report it and the RAF call it "deeply disturbing" then?

What I'm wondering is why the RAF say it would have been avoided if the Hawks had been squawking. At those heights their primary would have easily showed up on Scottish's radar so how come the controller didn't vector the FlyBe round them - or give tfc info if on a RIS?

NS

atcea.com

it's not a case of two systems per se... what you must remember is that it sounds like the incident happened in unregulated (Class G presumably) airspace. The incidence of manoeuvring military aircraft encountering scheduled GAT in Class G is a fact of life in the UK... but both aircraft have a right to be there, the military enjoying freedom to manoeuvre... the civil the economic benefit of fuel savings. Users of this airspace (should) know the risks and their responsibilities... and if they're not prepared to accept in retreat to within established regulated airspace.

Surely, if this is a case of late sighting (as it sounds) both crews must be responsible?

If the a/c were above FL100 then doesn't the ANO state the operation of a transponder is mandatory? I'm guessing that a Dash 8-400 off EGNT would be above FL100 in Scottish A/s enroute Belfast. If the transponders on both were working with Mode C then TCAS would have highlighted the problem and probably solved the conflict.

NorthSouth, if there was clutter on the radar or other tracks in the vicinity then maybe the primary track wasn't picked up.

The report clearly states:-
Again from the report:-
Are you suggesting that student pilots should not be permitted to fly solo? On this occassion it was the students that spotted the Dash 8 first, and warned their instructor.



I suggest this is a reference to TCAS fitted to the Dash 8, which, had the Hawk's transponder been functioning, could have triggered a TA, giving the Dash Pilots earlier warning, and an RA, if required, to help them avoid.



The ANO does not apply to Military Aircraft. However, the report suggests that the Hawk's transponder was either inadvertently switched off, or became unserviceable.

Does the Dash have TCAS? The turboprop I used to fly didn't. The Hawk certainly hasn't got it. In fact they have absloutely terrible nav kit. The guys who fly them do a good job generally given what they have, ie no radar, no proper nav kit and only a pair of eyes and a stopwatch. I think the RAF should provide them with some better nav kit and stuff like TCAS as it would make the sky safer. You can always turn it off when you don't want the student playing with it - in the right circumstances of course.

Yes, the FlyBe Dash 8 - 400's do have TCAS. Doesn't European Regulations now state that all pax flights operating above FL100 HAVE to carry TCAS? I know the French have REFUSED entry due to inoperative TCAS. Someone with better knowledge will no doubt answer that soon.

It all depends what Air Traffic Service the ac were receiving. It is quite possible the mil ac were on on a FIS - but even then the mil controller has a responsibility for calling conflicting traffic if he feels there is a definite risk of collision! What was the controller at SCATCC doing with the Flybe ac? There is not enough info in the press report to make an informed judgement. Ultimately, civil ac flying off route outside controlled airspace will always run the risk of 'seeing' other ac, mil or civil, as the whole point of that airspace is to allow the aviation fraternity freedom of manoeuvre! Civil airlines electing to fly off route have to accept these risks. I used to control the Brymans Heathrow to Newquay with a RAS, we endeavoured to maintain standard seperation and the captain inevitably would call 'Happy to continue' after half a dozen avoiding actions - spills the passengers drinks don't you know!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it's only a matter of time.

I just hope to God that it's a matter of an awful lot of time.

Too many unknowns to judge from the press report, as you say Airdrop C, so I look forward to seeing the primary source. My big questions are:
1) Hawks apparently getting a service from Swanwick Mil; why did controller not ask Hawks to squawk? if no squawk, had they been identified? And if so, how come mil controller didnt see the confliction with the Dash 8?
2) If Scottish controller didnt see the Hawks due toshouldn't he have limited the service? That might have prompted the Dash 8 crew to focus more on lookout.

This one's sure to have a direct bearing on the current review of ATSOCAS and on the CAA's much-criticised policy of saying that the risks to public transport flights are just "different" outside CAS, rather than greater.

NS (with terrible sense of deja vu)

Am I missing somthing here or is it too early in the morning!! So the Military choose to use controllers at the other end of the country? Hmm What frequencies do they use I wonder? IS there not a nearer controlling centre where they could get a better picture on what is going on? Or maybe talk to Civil controllers...

I know its Class G airspace but if two hawks are flying so close togehter there needs to be someone else watching out for them. It is a training mission and they will be concentrating on flying close together and i guess looking out to the side more so than ahead....:confused: Scarey at 7 miles per minute!

Just a few thoughts...Feel free to correct me or shoot me down!:uhoh:

Cheers

3Legs :ok:

Yes I think it is too early in the morning!

Funny as it may seem, we don't actually need to look out of the window to control the traffic! The wonders of modern science such as datalink mean we can look at a radar picture anywhere we like. So the fact that the controllers were sitting in Hampshire has no bearing on their ability to control traffic in north England.

I think the post from Flowman is bang out of order.

These Hawk Pilots are the future of our air defense. They are pilots who have been selected by the RAF and are considered the absolute best potential pilots in the RAF. The reason they are flying Hawks out of RAF Valley is that they have been chosen to be trained to fly the most advanced aircraft in the RAF, such as Tornados, Harriers, Typhoons and such like.

The RAF flying training programmes are surely to be considered among the most advanced and thorough training programmes in aviation, with instructors being exceptionally skilled and diligent in thier training methods.

To simply refer to them as being a 'menace', is a disrespectful and ill-founded opinion.

It seems that both parties should share the blame here, neither appeared to have been paying enough attention to the uncontrolled airspace.

What would have been your view Flowman if both aircraft had been civilian? Who would have been a menace in that situation?

It was uncontrolled airspace, where military aircraft are free to transit amd manouvre. If the civilian aircraft don't want to be 'menaced' by them, stay in controlled airspace. Their decision to fly in uncontrolled airspace is purley driven by money...... which says everything.

atcea.com

There are not two seperate systems, Mil & Civil, at Swanwick. Its one room and one system. Civil/military integration is due to get even closer in the UK over the next few years as we go from 4 Area Control Centres to 2.


Flowman

Hawks are not a menace, military aircraft are not a menace. If you fly outside of CAS then its see and be seen. If you don't want to look out then file a route inside of CAS, otherwise keep your eyes open.

BD

Gee,

I'm surprised some Yank pilots haven't already observed that if the British would only use US style procedures, MOAs, and learn to drive on the right side of the road, these things would never happen.....

[/sarcasm] :yuk:

Daveandferdy you might think "the post from flowman is bang out of order", but it was based on personal experience . I was not referring specifically to the incident mentioned by the thread starter.
I have 14 years of TWR/APC and Radar experience of working at a unit combining civil and military traffic. I am very well aware of operational differences. I have the utmost respect for military pilots. I am also well aware of the selection processes involved, also that a large proportion of trainees don't make it to the end.
It seems the powers that be in the military agreed with my view, after a series of similar clearance violations and subsequent complaints the aerodrome concerned was no longer used by Hawks for training.
It continued to be used by operational military pilots with no such problems, although all confessed that it was a strange environment for them to fly in that required a large degree of adaptation.
My comment was certainly not "ill founded".
Yours, on the other hand appears to come from someone who has just been watching a Blue Peter special on the RAF

Flowman,

Perhaps if you had managed to express your opinion more clearly in the first instance, instead of making a sweeping and inane comment about Hawk trainers being a menace, then the need for you to defend your original post would not have arisen.........

As for the Blue Peter reference........ very constructive, well done.