Tu-160's visit Venezuela

[Fareastdriver]

I was at the first Zuhai Air Show and a couple of Russian fighters were doing a display. After they had finished they refuelled and punched off to Russia.

Airways? Controlled airspace? What's that?

[dead_pan]

I would imagine that the orbit mid Atlantic on the way out was because the bottle of vodka had rolled into a distant corner of the cockpit.

"Keep banking Yuri!! I can almost reach it!!"

[MPN11]

Originally Posted by M609

Unless they have changed suddenly in the last few weeks......no coordination what so ever. I' ve never heard of ANY Russian MIL aircraft coming around the North Cape for the Atlantic that is ever coordinated with ATC.

Separation achieved by flying in Metres instead of Flight Levels ... simples!

[ORAC]

I can remember calling a LATCC civil controller to tell him that there was a non-squawking pair of Bears, co-alt and on a collision course with one of his airways traffic, and that it might be wise to get it to climb or descend a couple of thousand feet.

“Certainly not!”, responded the controller. “It’s in controlled airspace”. “Who is controlling them?”

”Not sure”, says I, “but I think it might be Moscow”.

[safetypee]

I wonder if that was the same pair of Bears which were ‘seen’ by an Air India aircraft, who reported this to Shanwick, and thence Buchan. Leuchars Q was launched ‘on speck’, or more likely with additional int info.
Saxa Vord, in days past, as a NATO facility were not supposed to help U.K. air defence ops without permission etc, but they gave very good collision avoidance info, ‘crossing left right at 140 nm’.

[ORAC]

Saxa Vord, in days past, as a NATO facility were not supposed to help U.K. air defence ops without permission etc, but they gave very good collision avoidance info, ‘crossing left right at 140 nm’.

CRP Saxa Vord was a UK Air Defence radar site, manned by fighter controllers, one of primary roles being to control the QRA and was under the control of SOC/CRC Buchan.

I personally supervised Saxa intercepting Bears at least a couple of hundred times as the MC at Buchan.

[BEagle]

I guess he means Pole Star on the Faroes?

Have the spotters' websites shown the levels flown by the Tu-160s over the Atlantic?

[Onceapilot]

Thanks ORAC, MPN11 and M609. I also presume that these aircraft probably just transit at some +500' level. However, I think our pollies are seriously missing the point here. This kind of action is really open warfare on International agreements. Russian access to commercial airspace should be curtailed when this occurs in such flagrant ways. Who is going to account for this when they take out 350 innocent people on a Jumbo?

OAP

[Treble one]

Would these aircraft not be flying well above Civil Transatlantic traffic? 40000 ft plus?

[ORAC]

They used to cruise at about 36K.

[wiggy]

Originally Posted by Treble one

Would these aircraft not be flying well above Civil Transatlantic traffic? 40000 ft plus?

FWIW FL400 plus for civil traffic on (or operating above) the published Organised Track system and elsewhere over the Atlantic is not at all uncommon these days.

The big twins such as the 777, 787 and others may be up at those levels, either for the whole cruise or late on if they are lightweight having burnt fuel towards the end of the Oceanic sector (e.g. heading for Western Europe from the States) and the biz jets are often at FL 400 from the get go and will be dizzyingly higher later in the cruise.

[Onceapilot]

I expect that these Tu160 on such a long flight, also step or cruise-climb for best ANm/Kg. So, we have non-coordinated crossing / climbing / descending traffic over vast areas of the OTS. FGS, NATO Forces cannot even fly fully compliant AAR routing in OTS airspace, Yes, even fully compliant. I think there are two points here: Someone out to get a grip on this and publicise the facts, instead of hiding and trying not to admit the Russians are pushing the West around. Also, the West should achieve some far better civil / military integration for Trails and other Operational flights in the OTS and other Nato airspace. If Russian aircraft can be ignored blundering about endangering life at will, how can the coordination of some compliant NATO Trail traffic be such an issue.

OAP

[ORAC]

International airspace, they are entitled to do what they want. What do you think is going on around a carrier in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific during an exercise?

[vascodegama]

OAP

Formations are not RVSM compliant.

[Onceapilot]

Originally Posted by ORAC

International airspace, they are entitled to do what they want. What do you think is going on around a carrier in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific during an exercise?

Hi ORAC,
Nope, I do not think International airspace is a viable concept for "doing what you want". So, do you want to tell everyone here what does "go on around a carrier in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific during an exercise?"? Thanks

OAP

[Onceapilot]

Originally Posted by vascodegama

OAP

Formations are not RVSM compliant.

Hi Vasco! This is true but, the level of non compliance is infinitesimally small compared to just blundering about with no co-ordination whatsoever! Additionally, Trails would be unable, in truth, to meet all the requirements of the OTS as laid down. However, I use this comparison to highlight the gross insult to standing International protocols that the Russian "Blunderflights" represent and, the mismatch of political power that is used to obscure the actual level of injury that these transgressions represent. Beyond that, the routine operations of NATO are given no ability WHATSOEVER to infringe OTS airspace but, the Russians are purposely ignored and, unpunished!

OAP

[vascodegama]

OAP

The main problem that a trail would face would be the emergency situation and having to cross several tracks. The ALTRV would negate a lot of the other OTS requirements. I am just a bit surprised that say F280B300 would not be an option since that is a not so popular level. Of course GR4 trails would not be feasible at those levels but the other types should have no problems. I did read somewhere recently that RVSM airspace is likely to be lowered idc, not sure where the leaves military activity.

[Onceapilot]

Originally Posted by vascodegama

OAP

The main problem that a trail would face would be the emergency situation and having to cross several tracks. The ALTRV would negate a lot of the other OTS requirements. I am just a bit surprised that say F280B300 would not be an option since that is a not so popular level. Of course GR4 trails would not be feasible at those levels but the other types should have no problems. I did read somewhere recently that RVSM airspace is likely to be lowered idc, not sure where the leaves military activity.

Hi Vasco, Yes, however these OTS issues are minor compared to the " Blunderflights". IMO, there is no comparison of risk. Beyond that, Trail divert proceedures can be devised to mitigate the risk if the political will was there.

OAP

[Una Due Tfc]

As someone who has had Bears in my sector more than once, I don’t give a stuff. They maintain their own separation and likely have IFF on anyway. They normally fly at something like FL275/285 and stay well out of everyone’s way.

As for convoys not being RVSM compliant, that’s true, which is why they tend to fly below RVSM airspace, although I have on occasion been told “MARSA” by the USAF when they’re not getting what they want, which means they’re no longer my responsibility and they can do whatever they want.

They’re in international airspace flying under due regard just like many other countries’ air forces do, and to be honest the Russians have caused me way less hassle than B52s in particular over the years.

[A_Van]

I wonder whether US B-2 planes are coordinating their routes with various ATCs during their real combat missions to bomb Afghanistan, Iraq and others? They are definitely crossing the Atlantic and, even more, are using some other countries' aerospace (w/o notice or permission?) to reach target areas.