(UK) Military 250kt limit
I am reliably informed by cow, sheep, deer and llama farmers that the one thing that really scares the crap out of livestock is hot air balloons..... shhhhhh, sssshhhhhhh, ssshhhhh and then suddenly a huge WWWWWWUUUUUMMMMMPPPPPHHHH as the burner cuts in.....
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing that does concern me on this thread is the comment that civilian pilots have no business below 1000 ´in non controlled airspace. We already live in the most regulated, centrally planned state in the world. Let´s not overdo the red tape and restrictions. Last time I looked, it was a semi free country. i.e the politicos are supposed to be there for us, not the other way round
I flew a Vulcan at 300 ft and 350 KIAS over a 'feed lot' in Kansas once, 411A - that got a few thousand cows galloping about!
Light ac have no reason not to fly below 1000 ft; it's those which operate below 500 ft who put themselves at significant risk from military low level activity.
However, mil aircraft operators should also accept that the levels between 1500 to 3000 ft a.g.l probably contain the greatest numbers of light GA aircraft - and hence pose the greatest collision risk.
Light ac have no reason not to fly below 1000 ft; it's those which operate below 500 ft who put themselves at significant risk from military low level activity.
However, mil aircraft operators should also accept that the levels between 1500 to 3000 ft a.g.l probably contain the greatest numbers of light GA aircraft - and hence pose the greatest collision risk.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might I further suggest that all military aircraft restrict themselves to flying airways and operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan, regardless of their position.
"Bonzo Dog Doodah 99, contact Baghdad Fire Control Radar on XXX.XX, bye."
"What the ####!!!!"
Would this be the latest 'cuddly' policy from our touchy-feely PM?
"Bonzo Dog Doodah 99, contact Baghdad Fire Control Radar on XXX.XX, bye."
"What the ####!!!!"
Would this be the latest 'cuddly' policy from our touchy-feely PM?
Apart from the usual 'personal freedom' nonsense espoused by the barmy far-right ultra conservative 'hate the state' anti-regulatory brigade, what legitimate reason do light aircraft have to legitimately fly below 1,000 ft?
And would making flight below 500 ft illegal, and between 500 ft and 1,000 ft subject to mandatory reporting, really represent such a savage attack on anyone's liberty?
And would making flight below 500 ft illegal, and between 500 ft and 1,000 ft subject to mandatory reporting, really represent such a savage attack on anyone's liberty?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Awesome thread! Haven't chuckled so much in ages. Too often, the subject is tackled on the premise that 'we don't fight at low level anymore', which, whilst a fair point, is only the tip of the iceberg! Intercepts at low-level has already been mentioned. What about Close Air Support? Whatever a theatre commander has decreed as a hard deck is all very well, however, me thinks this would soon change to something lower if the pongoes were in direct contact and not doing so well, and the weather did not permit medium level support. What about night? Many threats (Older IR-type - of which we all know is the BIGGEST reason for operations at medium level - lots of 'em) become obsolete when flying low at night. Again, the environment, weather and situation on the ground (especially on the ground) will always dictate risk levels and hence hard decks. At the end of Op Allied Force, who did Wes want on stby to provide low-level (if required) CAS support should the troops have been sent in? British assets, no less. In addition, don't forget that low flying (and especially at night) hones the skills to such an extent that medium level ops often becomes a walk in the park.....(certainly for muds)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6-O-T-B
Good stuff, constructive comment is very refreshing.
Of note in the latest Iraq campaign the RAAF Hornets after they were released from their tanker/AWAC escort duties, provided CAS for the Ozzy and coalition "troopers" and certainly were getting in amongst it. The Warthogs are another good example of the need to get down and get dirty and I am sure that any ground element in strife (a good example was Afghanistan when the Aussie SAS directed CAS for the US Forces that were ambushed) will appreciate the low flying skills of helo, transport and fast jet boys when the poop has hit the fan and CAS is paramount.
Imagine if all the above mentioned elements had done all their training at 250 KIAS, on the airway, with an IFR clearance.....not entirely sure we would be getting the results the guys and gals are able to achieve today.
PS And more to the point how will ATC be able to finish the crossword with all that extra IFR traffic on the frequency!!!
Of note in the latest Iraq campaign the RAAF Hornets after they were released from their tanker/AWAC escort duties, provided CAS for the Ozzy and coalition "troopers" and certainly were getting in amongst it. The Warthogs are another good example of the need to get down and get dirty and I am sure that any ground element in strife (a good example was Afghanistan when the Aussie SAS directed CAS for the US Forces that were ambushed) will appreciate the low flying skills of helo, transport and fast jet boys when the poop has hit the fan and CAS is paramount.
Imagine if all the above mentioned elements had done all their training at 250 KIAS, on the airway, with an IFR clearance.....not entirely sure we would be getting the results the guys and gals are able to achieve today.
PS And more to the point how will ATC be able to finish the crossword with all that extra IFR traffic on the frequency!!!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: somewhere in a 12x12
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sod 'em all
Why don't we go RNZAF and just stop flying aircraft. Then if there is a war, all we do is challenge people to go head to head in a sim somewhere, with the losers running away with their tails between their legs and thinking how to do it better next time. Playstation rules everyone!
Or why don't we just keep on doing what we do best and fly the ac.
I've been night flying recently, and it is a damn sight better in the real ac than in the sim. Yes, the sim is good at certain aspects of aviation training, but real hours are worth more than sim hours.
And as for noise complainants, well thats another story.
Shock revelation for a bloke who owns a mansion near a UK SH base- helicopters fly low level day AND night.
Sorry for going off at a tangent, but does defence of the realm and protection of all that is British mean nothing nowadays?
Or why don't we just keep on doing what we do best and fly the ac.
I've been night flying recently, and it is a damn sight better in the real ac than in the sim. Yes, the sim is good at certain aspects of aviation training, but real hours are worth more than sim hours.
And as for noise complainants, well thats another story.
Shock revelation for a bloke who owns a mansion near a UK SH base- helicopters fly low level day AND night.
Sorry for going off at a tangent, but does defence of the realm and protection of all that is British mean nothing nowadays?
"Shock revelation for a bloke who owns a mansion near a UK SH base- helicopters fly low level day AND night."
Very true, but equally, in peacetime, and in a democracy, it's common sense for the armed forces to minimise the nuisance it creates, and to reduce its impact upon its civilian neighbours. Scheduling the bulk of your night flying training for the shortest, hottest nights of the year may therefore be counter-productive, and trying to achieve more of it when it's dark at 7.00 PM (with a cut-off time of 1.00 am or midnight) and when people don't have to have their windows open might be seen as being a sensible step.
And if OC Puma OCF is reading this, I hope the b*gger takes heed! Otherwise I'll have to get Crumpington out in the grounds with an SA-13......
Very true, but equally, in peacetime, and in a democracy, it's common sense for the armed forces to minimise the nuisance it creates, and to reduce its impact upon its civilian neighbours. Scheduling the bulk of your night flying training for the shortest, hottest nights of the year may therefore be counter-productive, and trying to achieve more of it when it's dark at 7.00 PM (with a cut-off time of 1.00 am or midnight) and when people don't have to have their windows open might be seen as being a sensible step.
And if OC Puma OCF is reading this, I hope the b*gger takes heed! Otherwise I'll have to get Crumpington out in the grounds with an SA-13......
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: N51:37:39 W1:19:16 Feel free to use as a waypoint.
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko
For reference there have been Pumas AND Merlins up playing over the last few weeks. I for one have had no compaints and I live on a direct track between Benson and Abingdon. I can literally see the whites of their eyes.
Keep up the good work chaps.
For reference there have been Pumas AND Merlins up playing over the last few weeks. I for one have had no compaints and I live on a direct track between Benson and Abingdon. I can literally see the whites of their eyes.
Keep up the good work chaps.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone has mentioned earlier, flying above 250K while below 10000 contravenes ICAO. In the US you CANNOT fly a jet below 10000 greater than 250K UNLESS you are on a recognised IR or VR route. The point here is that the rule may come in someday [read - be enforced], but there are ways to manage the issue - I'm not suggesting that we go to the US low flying system, we will manage the rules by legislation.
Aside from that, there is some real cr^p being thrown around this thread - but then it has made me laugh at some of the ignorance!
.
Aside from that, there is some real cr^p being thrown around this thread - but then it has made me laugh at some of the ignorance!
.
Yeah but 28's Merlins are much quieter in the hover, and seem to pi$$ off much more quickly to go and annoy you lot out in the bundu, while the Pumas seem to spend hours hovering at 10 or 12 ft at Benson..... driving me MAD!!!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: N51:37:39 W1:19:16 Feel free to use as a waypoint.
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko
They obviously know where you live and do it on purpose.
(See I resisted the tempation to ask if there was an airfield there when you moved in
)
They obviously know where you live and do it on purpose.
(See I resisted the tempation to ask if there was an airfield there when you moved in
)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK, when I'm not taking people on their holidays
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJR
I think you'll find most US mil fast jets float around at 300 kts below 10k. You don't have to fly around at a slow speed if its unsafe for your airframe just cos the rules say so, there are specific exemptions for that with ICAO. If the UK starts going down this road then I agree though some intelligent management should minimise impact and ensure safety. Probably just need to ensure that theres a differentiation between tactical flying and transit flying and apply the limit only to transit flying. I don't have a problem with that.
I think you'll find most US mil fast jets float around at 300 kts below 10k. You don't have to fly around at a slow speed if its unsafe for your airframe just cos the rules say so, there are specific exemptions for that with ICAO. If the UK starts going down this road then I agree though some intelligent management should minimise impact and ensure safety. Probably just need to ensure that theres a differentiation between tactical flying and transit flying and apply the limit only to transit flying. I don't have a problem with that.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICAO Exemptions
Don't start me on exemptions, the US have their very own policy for operating military aircraft around the world (Article 3 of the ICAO Convention of 1944).....where, when and how they please! Known as "Due Regard" it has caused no end of grief and continues to do so for us on a daily basis, and trust me we are talking serious risk to many civil airliners on a regular basis....don't challenge me on this as you will definately get an earfull.
So all very well them having some noddy policy back "home" in the States, but its certainly not the case for them in everyone elses backyard!
So all very well them having some noddy policy back "home" in the States, but its certainly not the case for them in everyone elses backyard!
Last edited by Fox3snapshot; 28th Aug 2003 at 14:17.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's with all the hostlity to people like me being below 1000' doing aerial work? It's a multi crew op - I fly, he works. We get good info on the location of the FJ boys, and as he lost a colleague in a mid-air in Wales some years ago, he's rather keen to stay out of the way as far as poss.
I can understand the concern about meeting the kind of drooling moron who can't read a NOTAM about air displays, or even the aerial guys working single crew, but some of us do what we can to stay out of everybody else's way and operate within the law.
Oh, and if you are around Northumberland in your pointy jets and you see a little red & white cesspit with checkerboard markings, please pass down the starboard side so I can drool over your machine.
Fox3
If you need to ask if I'm joking, I hope you don't get too near anything that goes bang.
I can understand the concern about meeting the kind of drooling moron who can't read a NOTAM about air displays, or even the aerial guys working single crew, but some of us do what we can to stay out of everybody else's way and operate within the law.
Oh, and if you are around Northumberland in your pointy jets and you see a little red & white cesspit with checkerboard markings, please pass down the starboard side so I can drool over your machine.
Fox3
If you need to ask if I'm joking, I hope you don't get too near anything that goes bang.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk(occasionally)
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Witchdoctor
I don't think anyone here has a problem with people being at any height if they have a good reason to be there (PFL, aerial photo, pipeline inspections etc) its those that tool around at 300-400 feet for no good reason then seem suprised when they get min sepped by a 4 ship of Jags doing 420 kts.
My own view is people can do whatever, wherever they like - just don't start whining about the consequences. I accept that what I'm doing has a certain risk and I accept that - sometimes **** happens. At least I've got a black and yellow handle!
ps promise to try and miss you if I see you!
I don't think anyone here has a problem with people being at any height if they have a good reason to be there (PFL, aerial photo, pipeline inspections etc) its those that tool around at 300-400 feet for no good reason then seem suprised when they get min sepped by a 4 ship of Jags doing 420 kts.
My own view is people can do whatever, wherever they like - just don't start whining about the consequences. I accept that what I'm doing has a certain risk and I accept that - sometimes **** happens. At least I've got a black and yellow handle!
ps promise to try and miss you if I see you!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Doha, Qatar
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAF need the capability to practice at low level and at the high speeds involved.
Simulators are not a viable solution yet as not only are they restricted in terms of G forces but they are not up to a standard where the flight simulation and weapon delivery can be packaged in to one. I accept that they are fantastic for commercial training but the military is a completely different area.
Currently, I believe, the RAF is the only force worldwide that regularly participates in low flying training to an operational level and therefore are world leaders in the field. It is a required skill and this has been proved. Americans may have good medium level armorment but how many times has this gone wrong in comparison to the traditional shoot what you can see ? The americans come away from conflicts having lost more men to friendly fire that the enemy mainly due to technical faults with their high-tech weaponry.
The traditional low-flying must be kept and to limit it to 250kts is ridiculous, the manoeuvring speeds of these aircraft are too high, 250kts, although flyable, would not provide the required training.
Simulators are not a viable solution yet as not only are they restricted in terms of G forces but they are not up to a standard where the flight simulation and weapon delivery can be packaged in to one. I accept that they are fantastic for commercial training but the military is a completely different area.
Currently, I believe, the RAF is the only force worldwide that regularly participates in low flying training to an operational level and therefore are world leaders in the field. It is a required skill and this has been proved. Americans may have good medium level armorment but how many times has this gone wrong in comparison to the traditional shoot what you can see ? The americans come away from conflicts having lost more men to friendly fire that the enemy mainly due to technical faults with their high-tech weaponry.
The traditional low-flying must be kept and to limit it to 250kts is ridiculous, the manoeuvring speeds of these aircraft are too high, 250kts, although flyable, would not provide the required training.