Airliner intercept for training?
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of fantasy in this thread . the title is also misleading . Interception training is done using other military aircraft or special flights. ( Germany for instance uses a small specialized company using Learjets) No need to intercept civil airliners in civil controlled airspace .
Intercepting Concorde a M2.0 at FL600 ? Good luck with that one .
Most interception of civil airliners (over 90% in Western Europe I would guess) are due to loss of comms, and most of these are just finger trouble, wrong digit tuned or forgot the google switch. Expensive mistakes specially since some States are reported to send the bill to the airlines .involved. But verifying /intercepting radio failures is a standard normal routine procedure in many places right now, Get used to it.
Intercepting Concorde a M2.0 at FL600 ? Good luck with that one .
Most interception of civil airliners (over 90% in Western Europe I would guess) are due to loss of comms, and most of these are just finger trouble, wrong digit tuned or forgot the google switch. Expensive mistakes specially since some States are reported to send the bill to the airlines .involved. But verifying /intercepting radio failures is a standard normal routine procedure in many places right now, Get used to it.
Thread Starter
Lots of fantasy in this thread . the title is also misleading . Interception training is done using other military aircraft or special flights. ( Germany for instance uses a small specialized company using Learjets) No need to intercept civil airliners in civil controlled airspace .
Intercepting Concorde a M2.0 at FL600 ? Good luck with that one .
Most interception of civil airliners (over 90% in Western Europe I would guess) are due to loss of comms, and most of these are just finger trouble, wrong digit tuned or forgot the google switch. Expensive mistakes specially since some States are reported to send the bill to the airlines .involved. But verifying /intercepting radio failures is a standard normal routine procedure in many places right now, Get used to it.
Intercepting Concorde a M2.0 at FL600 ? Good luck with that one .
Most interception of civil airliners (over 90% in Western Europe I would guess) are due to loss of comms, and most of these are just finger trouble, wrong digit tuned or forgot the google switch. Expensive mistakes specially since some States are reported to send the bill to the airlines .involved. But verifying /intercepting radio failures is a standard normal routine procedure in many places right now, Get used to it.
The link in the first post categorically rejects Slovak media reports that the aircraft suffered a loss of communication, but then goes on to say that it "does not rule out a loss of communication and possibly [sic] an intercept".
So that's cleared that up, then.
So that's cleared that up, then.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We used to contract Concorde to fly large supersonic figures of 8 over the north sea and used Lightnings and F4s to fly practice intercepts against Concorde.
Allegedly a Lightning flown by D*** G****** overtook the Concorde and barrel-rolled around it. The Concorde crew were not impressed.
FW
Allegedly a Lightning flown by D*** G****** overtook the Concorde and barrel-rolled around it. The Concorde crew were not impressed.
FW
It was standard practice in the 70's for civil aircraft to be used for Practice Intercepts (as said in an earlier post the civil aircraft could put /EMBELLISH in the RMK/ field of the flight plan to 'volunteer') but usually the intercepts were radar intercepts and the civil aircraft crew and pax would be unaware of being used as a target as the intercept was broken off well before visual range - though sometimes less successfully with head on PIs
. However, the entire attitude then was different to these operations and there was often exchanges of repartee between civil crew and Eastern Radar in particular. Crews both civil and military seemed to actually enjoy what they were doing back then.ATC Watcher
Intercepting Concorde a M2.0 at FL600 ? Good luck with that one .
Last edited by Ian W; 1st Nov 2019 at 11:58. Reason: Added quote about Concorde
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian W :
Many hanks for that link , very good reference , but as far as I know ( I have no F6-Lightning experience but seen dozens of intercepts of more modern types on the Radar ) there is a huge difference in intercepting an aircraft at FL600 doing M.07 on a fixed track ( as a U2 would do ) and one doing Mach2 0 . I would even dare to say impossible , I do not know the exact on site endurance of the Lightning in Hot configuration ( i.e armed with no extra tanks) with reheat to get to his max speed M2.2. up to 65.000ft , but my guess is in single minutes, probably less than 5., and with a speed difference of M.02 not a chance unless you have a bloody good controller on the ground and good luck that the target will not change course while you climb up there.
Intercept at 36.000ft , it is already very limited : from wikipedia :
.
I would say if a Concorde was ever intercepted by a F6 it was subsonic and at less than 30.000 ft.. So basically a non-event.
f it was a Lightning intercept it would have to be in the close to the UK coast due to their limited range. Concorde was not allowed to accelerate to supersonic until clear of land so a Lightning would have no problem 'keeping up'. From very early in the Lightning existence back in the 1960's it was used for PIs up to 65,000ft with PIs against U2's
Intercept at 36.000ft , it is already very limited : from wikipedia :
An F.6 equipped with Red Top missiles can climb to 36,000 ft, accelerate to Mach 1.8, and intercept a target at 135 nm only 10.7 min after brake release. A 2g level turn allows a rear-quarter re-attack 1.6 min later. Following a best-range cruise and descent, the Lightning enters the landing pattern with 800 lb of fuel remaining with a total mission time of 35 min
I would say if a Concorde was ever intercepted by a F6 it was subsonic and at less than 30.000 ft.. So basically a non-event.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian W :
Many hanks for that link , very good reference , but as far as I know ( I have no F6-Lightning experience but seen dozens of intercepts of more modern types on the Radar ) there is a huge difference in intercepting an aircraft at FL600 doing M.07 on a fixed track ( as a U2 would do ) and one doing Mach2 0 . I would even dare to say impossible , I do not know the exact on site endurance of the Lightning in Hot configuration ( i.e armed with no extra tanks) with reheat to get to his max speed M2.2. up to 65.000ft , but my guess is in single minutes, probably less than 5., and with a speed difference of M.02 not a chance unless you have a bloody good controller on the ground and good luck that the target will not change course while you climb up there.
Intercept at 36.000ft , it is already very limited : from wikipedia :
.
I would say if a Concorde was ever intercepted by a F6 it was subsonic and at less than 30.000 ft.. So basically a non-event.
Many hanks for that link , very good reference , but as far as I know ( I have no F6-Lightning experience but seen dozens of intercepts of more modern types on the Radar ) there is a huge difference in intercepting an aircraft at FL600 doing M.07 on a fixed track ( as a U2 would do ) and one doing Mach2 0 . I would even dare to say impossible , I do not know the exact on site endurance of the Lightning in Hot configuration ( i.e armed with no extra tanks) with reheat to get to his max speed M2.2. up to 65.000ft , but my guess is in single minutes, probably less than 5., and with a speed difference of M.02 not a chance unless you have a bloody good controller on the ground and good luck that the target will not change course while you climb up there.
Intercept at 36.000ft , it is already very limited : from wikipedia :
.
I would say if a Concorde was ever intercepted by a F6 it was subsonic and at less than 30.000 ft.. So basically a non-event.
Apologies for the thread drift
Quite apart from a lot of what is appearing here sounding more than a little fanciful, I would imagine that if anyone barrel rolled around any intercept target, let alone a civil airliner, let alone Concorde, it would be the last flight in a military aircraft they ever made...
Quite apart from a lot of what is appearing here sounding more than a little fanciful, I would imagine that if anyone barrel rolled around any intercept target, let alone a civil airliner, let alone Concorde, it would be the last flight in a military aircraft they ever made...
He was flying a Fokker Triplane replica in uncontrolled airspace south of Stansted and had the Stansted frequency tuned, so he heard an aircraft descending below controlled airspace near him.
He spotted it, pulled up and barrel rolled round it.
Then he heard 'Stansted, I've just been beaten up from below by a Fokker Triplane'!
I was flying Air France between Paris and Madrid some 15 years ago, when I just happened to look out of the window and a bright orange aircraft (Alphajet?) flew within 50 feet, left to right and over the top of us. A blink and you miss it event.
I did speak to the Captain, who was totally unaware.
I did speak to the Captain, who was totally unaware.
The Libyan MiG-23 Flogger that crashed in Italy may simply have been an accident. See following with input from a colleague of the MiG-23 pilot.
The Final Flight of Ezzedin Khalil - A 1980 MiG crash wasn't as mysterious as some people believe
https://warisboring.com/the-final-fl...zzedin-khalil/
The Final Flight of Ezzedin Khalil - A 1980 MiG crash wasn't as mysterious as some people believe
https://warisboring.com/the-final-fl...zzedin-khalil/
Concorde / Lightning pretty unlikely given their dates I think. First Concorde commercial service 1976, Lightning out of service 78 ? I think the intercept training involving Concorde was against F3
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite apart from a lot of what is appearing here sounding more than a little fanciful, I would imagine that if anyone barrel rolled around any intercept target, let alone a civil airliner, let alone Concorde, it would be the last flight in a military aircraft they ever made...
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
First the rules - in the list of types of types of aircraft forbidden to be used for a target in practice intercepts was a clear line item - “passenger carrying aircraft”. I used to get calls from ex-military captains saying they had put embellished in their flight plans but having to refuse unless they were freight only.
However, it was a rule prolifically broken. Back in the 1970s Air Anglia in and out of Norwich we’re outraged if they weren't intercepted - it was one reason many flew with them. The QRA when scrambled to north of Saxa awaiting Bears which went elsewhere would intercept transatlantic traffic to pass the time - the ****, as they say, hitting the fan when one crew sent in their MISREP claiming an intercept on a Korean 747 just a few months after the Russian shooting down of Korean Flight 007. The British sense of humour not going down well at SHAPE.
We would also scramble and intercept the charity BA flights with orphans at Xmas at their request. “And if you look out the left hand windows kiddies you’ll see a live armed RAF F-4!”
There were also numerous intercepts during exercises when real targets were in short supply. The order “target xxx range xxx, intercept with caution” being the indication that it was civil flight and to intercept accordingly. The tacit rules being that 1000ft separation would be kept so that it could explained as merely being in the same area rather than an intercept. Though comments from pilots such as “Identified, SAS DC-9, and there’s a woman in a red dress four windows from the back waving at me”, did tend to indicated the rules weren’t being observed. (The Lightning didn’t have Mode-C)
Reference the Concorde. I controlled a few of these intercepts in the short window in which they took place. Concorde flew a figure of eight in the North Sea at a constant M2.0 with the height varying around FL560-580 to hold a constant speed. The intercepts were mainly done by the CY and LU F-4s from nominated CAP points for a frontal shot, with obviously no stern conversion! The BK Lightnings also had a CAP point. The approved profile was also frontal with no stern conversion - accelerate at the tropopause for a 150 intercept, pull for a lead Redtop solution on the port missile, roll through 180 to reveal and fire the starboard missile and pull through to descend.
There was an occasion when a Lightning had a radio failure on reaching the CAP and did not abort. The pilot committed at the planned the time and did 180 stern intercept and claimed a kill. This obviously involved penetrating the MRSA whilst not under radar control. What height he achieved in the stern (Mx having a substantial height window) and whether it would have managed to reach the target is moot.
For interest the standard Lightning high flying supersonic stern target profile was, IIRC, the U3A. Target at M1.8 at FL560* for a 180 x 26 intercept converting to a 90 x 8 with the fighter accelerating to M2.0 in the crossing leg for a 1nm roll out.
*The legal Lightning ceiling was FL560 for flying clothing/oxygen mask reasons. Though it was routinely broken, with aircraft, especially in the last few months, exceeding 60K by up to 20K.
The French also used to send their Mirage IVs up as targets during exercises. We would be tipped of by LATCC as they headed north up the North Sea on their tanker and scramble a Lightning F-6 to do a frontal intercept as they headed south at M2.0. On one occasion Wattisham messed up and scrambled an F-3 with Firestreak. He was given a 180 intercept and rolled out at 3nm, closing to 1nm for the kill before, from M2+ and 60K heading south just north of B1, diverting into Coltishall because he had insufficient fuel to make Wattisham. Memory grows dim but I believe the pilot was S**** M******.
However, it was a rule prolifically broken. Back in the 1970s Air Anglia in and out of Norwich we’re outraged if they weren't intercepted - it was one reason many flew with them. The QRA when scrambled to north of Saxa awaiting Bears which went elsewhere would intercept transatlantic traffic to pass the time - the ****, as they say, hitting the fan when one crew sent in their MISREP claiming an intercept on a Korean 747 just a few months after the Russian shooting down of Korean Flight 007. The British sense of humour not going down well at SHAPE.
We would also scramble and intercept the charity BA flights with orphans at Xmas at their request. “And if you look out the left hand windows kiddies you’ll see a live armed RAF F-4!”
There were also numerous intercepts during exercises when real targets were in short supply. The order “target xxx range xxx, intercept with caution” being the indication that it was civil flight and to intercept accordingly. The tacit rules being that 1000ft separation would be kept so that it could explained as merely being in the same area rather than an intercept. Though comments from pilots such as “Identified, SAS DC-9, and there’s a woman in a red dress four windows from the back waving at me”, did tend to indicated the rules weren’t being observed. (The Lightning didn’t have Mode-C)
Reference the Concorde. I controlled a few of these intercepts in the short window in which they took place. Concorde flew a figure of eight in the North Sea at a constant M2.0 with the height varying around FL560-580 to hold a constant speed. The intercepts were mainly done by the CY and LU F-4s from nominated CAP points for a frontal shot, with obviously no stern conversion! The BK Lightnings also had a CAP point. The approved profile was also frontal with no stern conversion - accelerate at the tropopause for a 150 intercept, pull for a lead Redtop solution on the port missile, roll through 180 to reveal and fire the starboard missile and pull through to descend.
There was an occasion when a Lightning had a radio failure on reaching the CAP and did not abort. The pilot committed at the planned the time and did 180 stern intercept and claimed a kill. This obviously involved penetrating the MRSA whilst not under radar control. What height he achieved in the stern (Mx having a substantial height window) and whether it would have managed to reach the target is moot.
For interest the standard Lightning high flying supersonic stern target profile was, IIRC, the U3A. Target at M1.8 at FL560* for a 180 x 26 intercept converting to a 90 x 8 with the fighter accelerating to M2.0 in the crossing leg for a 1nm roll out.
*The legal Lightning ceiling was FL560 for flying clothing/oxygen mask reasons. Though it was routinely broken, with aircraft, especially in the last few months, exceeding 60K by up to 20K.
The French also used to send their Mirage IVs up as targets during exercises. We would be tipped of by LATCC as they headed north up the North Sea on their tanker and scramble a Lightning F-6 to do a frontal intercept as they headed south at M2.0. On one occasion Wattisham messed up and scrambled an F-3 with Firestreak. He was given a 180 intercept and rolled out at 3nm, closing to 1nm for the kill before, from M2+ and 60K heading south just north of B1, diverting into Coltishall because he had insufficient fuel to make Wattisham. Memory grows dim but I believe the pilot was S**** M******.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could