PPRuNe Forums - ACT overland UK

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)

- - ACT overland UK (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/615432-act-overland-uk.html)

Could a current fast jet Mate please tell me what the minimum height is for ACT overland in the UK? Does this apply to NATO forces operating in the U.K.? Are there rules about doing it over populated areas? All info supplied will be staff-in-confidence but used to make the point to a certain officer who may not be fully informed of what is or is not allowed! Private messages would be good if the information is felt to be sensitive!

The minimum height is whatever the Duty Holder tells you it is.

RA 2327 - Air Combat and Evasion Training

I suspect that you would have to try an FOI for that because, the details are probably in a Restricted document like GASO's or training orders? Cheers

OAP

Regardless of the rules regarding ACM, the UK low fly system prohibits low flying over built up areas below 1000' for RW. 2000' for fw over 5700kg rings a bell.

Quote:

Originally Posted by switch_on_lofty (Post 10312294)

Regardless of the rules regarding ACM, the UK low fly system prohibits low flying over built up areas below 1000' for RW. 2000' for fw over 5700kg rings a bell.

I seem to remember going to approx 500' at Spadeadam for Chinook DACT against a Hawk.

LLOLPIs were always fun in the F-4 - but we rarely got much of a chance to practise as the Viet Taff moaned about the sound of freedom. As for built-up areas, pedal to the metal and transonic jump at low level chasing a bunch of Jaguars on an exercise springs to mind... But that was somewhere up North where there weren't as many built-up areas anyway.

Not quite the same as ACT though - that had MUCH higher base levels.

Chinook vs Hawk is not classed as DACT. It is fighter affil’ Training. Different rules regarding manoeuvre limits. For the jet certainly.

BV

TR - think you’ve added at extra 0 - for the Helo anyway. For the FJ it was the LL limit, plus the 1500’ bubble till tally, and then down to the agreed seperation minima as laid down and included in the 4/84 affil brief.

BV - when I last instructed it, it was called Evasion Training (Helo vs Fighter). We also instructed ET (Helo vs Helo) with another set of limits.....

Happy days running into the merge and having to climb at the guns break to go over the GR7s......oops...

True it was 2002 so hazy memory! I never flew a FJ so it was all alien to me. It was Spadeadam so 50’ sounds right. We went to 10’ for the subsequent HV underwire crossing!

To answer the original question, the normal base height for ACT/DACT is 5000ft agl.

ACT/DACT is classed as all participants are free to unrestricted manoeuvre. All participants are aggressors. The fight would continue until Training Objectives were reached, (for example a valid kill of one player) in which case "Knock It Off" x 3. Anything dangerous the fight stopped by "STOP" X 3.

Below 5000ft Offensive/Defensive Training is termed Evasion Training. The base height for such will vary depending on air force, type, role pilot experience and more. Fast Jet minimum for Evasion Training is normally 250ft MSD. Helo vs Fighters the minimum for helos is 100ft MSD.
During any Evasion Training there must be specified roles of Offensive and Defensive. The Defensive side would be limited to a certain limited number of manoeuvres on turn, speed and height.

In the UK, Training Instruction 4/84 Issue XXX was the set of rules used by RAF, RN, Army and civilian contractors (FRA). Within NATO the Fighting Edge agreement is the definitive document.

Whenever conducting any ACT or Evasion Training one should avoid overflight of built up areas. However, a 2v2 DACT F15 Typhoon may be 5 miles away from a town and still appear to be "overhead" from the ground!!

Some more enlightened supervisors would authorise experience aircrew to perform both ACT and Evasion Training during a single engagement and use the appropriate set of rules dependant on height. This was generally frowned upon by the USAF but willingly embraced by many others to provide more realistic training

Want watch ACT? Come to sunny Downham Market. Eagles and Tiffs engaging in the sport of kings most weekdays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dominator2 (Post 10314629)

Mostly there, but “Terminate” for trg objectives reached, “KIO” x3 for safety.

frodo monkey.

My memory must have gone back to the 80s when we still resisted the American influence. I would be interested to know if nations such as Poland, Hungary or Rumania have adopted Western Training Rules or have demanded changes?

Dominator, thank you for confirming what I remembered. Some years ago I watched a pair of F15 manoeuvering over Coningsby. One dropped a boom. It was heard over a large area but no one, at least in the local paper, guessed what it was. QED I guess.