Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

US and RAF pilots 'had mid-air row' over Norfolk

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

US and RAF pilots 'had mid-air row' over Norfolk

Old 14th May 2014, 19:54
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,327
higthepig

the Herc was not squawking 0033
Are you sure? Top of Page 3 in the Airprox report it states

The MC130 was squawking 0033 for paradropping activities
and Tornado callsign 2 was squawking 3647
and the 'radar' paints reproduced elsewhere in the report would seem to confirm this.
Wrathmonk is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 19:59
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,201
Originally Posted by Cows getting bigger
the easiest solution is for the manoeuvring traffic to work around the aircraft that is trying to get somewhere
I disagree. That is only the easiest solution for the pilot trying to get from A to B. For the manoeuvring traffic, that solution probably means terminating the exercise they're currently undertaking, finding another suitable location nearby (with suitable weather and clear of other traffic), getting back into a suitable formation from which to re-start the exercise.... etc etc. If air combat training is being done 'properly' then there might only be enough fuel for 3 or 4 exercises per sortie, and re-setting effectively wastes one of those attempts. Equally, if the exercise involves a forward air controller on the ground, there is no option for the manoeuvring aircraft to 'move' their exercise; they would have to wait for the conflicting traffic to pass.

Conversely, all the transiting traffic has to do is alter its heading by 10-15 degrees with about 30 miles to go to the confliction, and all is well. Perhaps it might add a minute or so to your journey. Is that really so difficult?
Easy Street is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 20:17
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: on the edge of a big fall
Posts: 123
Are you sure? Top of Page 3 in the Airprox report it states
Wrathmonk,
My mistake, I was a member of the AIRPROX Board for the event that was mentioned in the HQ Air narrative on page 6, I can only blame my own stupidity, humble pie for supper, sorry.
higthepig is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 20:32
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 165
www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2014059.pdf

As a civilian DZ Chief Instructor I received this a couple of weeks ago from the CAA.

The CAA don't seem to think 0033 was selected.

Floppy
floppyjock is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 20:53
  #45 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 72
Posts: 2,947
Conversely, all the transiting traffic has to do is alter its heading by 10-15 degrees with about 30 miles to go to the confliction, and all is well. Perhaps it might add a minute or so to your journey. Is that really so difficult?
Many, many years ago, we used to run an F27 from Norwich to Humberside, and frequently were given headings to avoid the fast stuff. The classic was one day when the controller said "the only avoiding action I can give you is a three-sixty turn. When you roll out again, there might be a gap",
Herod is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 20:53
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,327
Floppy

The incident that your CAA Information Notice refers to is as a result of Airprox 2013115 (which was the other airprox between MC130 and GR4 referred to throughout this thread) and on page 3 of Airprox Report 2013115 it does indeed state

Figure 2 depicts the incident geometry at this point; SSR 3A 3643 was the Tornado, SSR 3A 7000 was the MC130H (my bold)
However, this thread (and my comment) is about Airprox 2013155 and the information at post #41 is lifted from that Airprox report. The MC130, as far as the Airprox Board are concerned, was squawking 0033.
Wrathmonk is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 20:58
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 165
Ah didnt realize there was two. doh

Floppy
floppyjock is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 22:35
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,481
Many, many years ago, we used to run an F27 from Norwich to Humberside, and frequently were given headings to avoid the fast stuff.
Ah yes, the good old Yukair 'Norwich Flier'. Often intercepted by the Wattisham F-4 wing - but I don't think anyone got close enough to worry the F-27 crew.

Funnily enough, 2 of us once flew back from Edinburgh to Norwich on that aircraft after a JMC debrief. We knew it was going to be interesting when the undercarriage stopped in the Grand Old Duke of York position on departure as the pneumatic system had run out of puff. But after a few minutes it repressurised, up came the wheels and we accelerated noticeably! Then we were supposed to land at Leeds-Bradford, but after a few attempts we diverted to East Midlands. At the stroke of 22:00, the hosties looked very cheerful - when we asked why, they told us that the delay had put them on some minimum overtime pay rate. "Ah, I see. That'll be 2 large gin and tonic, please!", I said to the number one - and bless her, she duly obliged. Then off to Norwich - only to get bounced by one of our own F-4s.... Worst part of the whole trip was the Norwich to Wattisham road journey -2 of us plus MT driver and our kit squeezed into a mini for 90 minutes....
BEagle is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 23:27
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NW FL
Posts: 231
Originally Posted by orgASMic
my point is that it should not be necessary to have 2 ATC freqs on the go (the C2 and DZ freqs are clearly necessary for the task at the time). The 2 controllers might give conflicting instructions if they think they are both providing you with a service. Pick one and let the controller do the necessary liaison with other ATC units.
Basic Service isn't quite control, it's the old FIS. Control would have been provided by London Mil. The MC-130 would've informed Marham that they were in contact with London Mil, but contacting Marham as courtesy AND for situational awareness. Why wait for Marham to contact London to contact the MC-130 to advise them of traffic or deconfliction? With pink bodies hanging under silk, I'd rather have immediate notification of any potential conflict directly from the source (ie - Marham).

So, on the surface, I understand your concern, but in actuality, it is a non-issue. Bear in mind that neither were providing actual control and weremerely providing some level of service. In the event of conflicting instructions, the crew would've hopefully had the situational awareness to make a safe decision and advised the agencies involved appropriately.

Originally Posted by party animal
Unless there was a compelling reason for other aircraft to be in that area, that is a very clear NOTAM and by extension, airmanship makes it a very clear avoid.
Concur. Further, it is a very routine (near daily) NOTAM and not something unusual.

Originally Posted by higthepig
A hole in the cheese in this incident was that the Herc was not squawking 0033, this has been addressed for future exercises.
Although addressed that they were, I will state that even had they not, the squawk issue would've been mitigated by talking to both London & Marham, so there would be no question regarding the activity. Does GR4 have TCAS? If not (like many FJ), it would've provided no extra clue other than Marham advising them.
US Herk is offline  
Old 15th May 2014, 13:58
  #50 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,043
Parabellum. Purple airspace is a temporary restriction (IIRC 15 minutes before and 30 minutes after published timings- unless it has changed) - are you saying that on the day and in the area in question there was a Royal Flight in the vicinity - in which case perhaps both parties were in the wrong. Or are you suggesting that Purple Airspace is a permanent fixture - which I do not believe to be the case.

Canadian Break - Sorry, my point was that because due weather and availability of aircraft for jumping there is a constant backlog of people who are either initial or recurrent parachutists, consequently I believe that task should have a high priority when the aircraft is available and the weather is good. I mentioned Purple Airspace to give an indication of how high that priority should be without including the parameters of Purple Airspace, only it's priority.
parabellum is offline  
Old 15th May 2014, 14:00
  #51 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 20
Posts: 6,487
Clearly the Tonka crew had no nautical awareness. In the maritime world steam gives way to sail, and the more maneuverable vessel gives way to the less maneuverable in most situations. I think the pointy jet should have let the meat bomber continue
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 15th May 2014, 22:00
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 381
parabellum

No apologies necessary old chap - all is now clear. CB
Canadian Break is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 10:44
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,086
BEags,

What a/c was your claim to fame coming into land during the shooting scenes with Goose's wife and kid arriving in VR-57's C-9B?

Was it the Mighty Hunter or the Flying Banana out of interest?

Did Paramount have to re shoot the scene in case of your ship being seen in the background?

Cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 11:47
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 63
Posts: 3,851
Back in the 1990s, the bugbear of policing the Balkans No-Fly Zone was whenever a new USN Carrier Battle Group arrived in Theatre. On one occasion, the new CBG decided to have their own exercise in the Adriatic during the day before they officially joined in. The result was many aircraft infringing the operation's tanker tow lines and even an EW serial when they jammed live IFF over the no-fly zone. The fun started when they joined next day - using USN procedures rather than those published in the optasks/opgens etc. (again many busts of sensitive and active airspace).


The last straw was when the ships entered the operational data link net and instantly changed the identity of everything in the recognised air picture which was not USN to Unknown Assumed Hostile - including all of the allied aircraft within the NFZ and those in transit including transports, tankers etc. Repeated requests for them to follow the correct ID procedures and which documents to use fell onto deaf ears until my Data Link manager threw them off the L11 net. ( From memory, when asked why, he told them that we didn't want another Iranian Airliner thank you very much). About 5 minutes later, a much more cultured American voice arrived on the coordination net, apologised, and we had no further trouble after we let them back in (well - the odd hiccup for a couple of days after shift changes).
Wensleydale is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 11:47
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,481
chopper2004, I didn't say that we were at NAS Miramar when the scene with Meg Ryan was being filmed. In fact we were there in a VC10K on 25 Oct 1984, which was at least a year before the Top Gun scenes were filmed at Miramar.

(The purpose of our trip was to support F-4J(UK) aircraft for 74(F) Sqn from NAS North Island to the UK and to get some useful training in US procedures. OP TIGER TRAIL 3 - it was epic fun!)

Last edited by BEagle; 6th Aug 2014 at 13:09. Reason: A date error as pointed out by melmothw
BEagle is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 12:01
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,610
In fact we were there in a VC10K on 25 Oct 2004, which was at least a year before the Top Gun scenes were filmed at Miramar.
Sure it wasn't Back to the Future they were filming....
melmothtw is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 12:39
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,562
Re Post #49

When did the 'Bears' join this scrap?
Thought it was between a GR4 and MC-130 !
EESDL is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2014, 15:27
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,086
My apologies, Beags - sorry misread your statement and thought on average back then it took 2 years to put together any groom movie!

Take it there were very noticeable differences in airspace management! And weather slightly better for sure even in that month?

Cheers
chopper2004 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.