Research question: how to stop GA non-lethally?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I would assume that only if you broke the rules - say the 500' rule - could they even think about shooting you down (unless you are flying an Airbus from Iran of course.....
). I have regularly flown over navy ships off the south coast of the UK (no Notams saying I can't) and didn't get shot down.
). I have regularly flown over navy ships off the south coast of the UK (no Notams saying I can't) and didn't get shot down.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CCZ's are de-activated for ships entering port or, as in the case of the IOW, anchoring as the harbour is not deep enough to accept the vessel (US Carriers not our little flat deck canoes). The only time that they may be active is when flying operations are taking place whilst 'alongside'. As this requires diplomatic clearance, manning issues, performance issues (no wind over/down the deck) etc. etc. etc. it is rarely done.
Hence, when a ship/carrier is in port or anchored you will not see a NOTAM as the zone doesn't exist. They may get pi$$y if you fly too close but as you are not hampering their operations they don't have alot of choice.
Most military vessels will have lower ROE (Rules of Engagement) whilst transiting 'friendly' waters. They will give far greater latitude than when in a 'hot zone' where the ROE is considerably tighter. But then you wouldn't want to be buzzing around in your little C-150 there anyway.
Hence, when a ship/carrier is in port or anchored you will not see a NOTAM as the zone doesn't exist. They may get pi$$y if you fly too close but as you are not hampering their operations they don't have alot of choice.
Most military vessels will have lower ROE (Rules of Engagement) whilst transiting 'friendly' waters. They will give far greater latitude than when in a 'hot zone' where the ROE is considerably tighter. But then you wouldn't want to be buzzing around in your little C-150 there anyway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: somwhere over the rainbow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe a good idea to add that the ship in question is not in friendly waters, but neutral at best.
Think of places like off the coast of Iran, Somalia and so on. Not threatening, but it may take one man that is allowed, while the government looks the other way, if you know what I mean.
Think of places like off the coast of Iran, Somalia and so on. Not threatening, but it may take one man that is allowed, while the government looks the other way, if you know what I mean.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normally you don't get too many private type or small GA ops in those parts of the world, and those that are there, probably stay well clear of navy ships for good reason. Even I'd be suspicious of a C172 flying less than 500' from a Navy ship in those areas! And I think the "non lethal" thing is irrelevant in that instance.
Not that it'd make much difference in the case of the UK. We allowed our sailors to be taken hostage by some gun boats in international waters off Iran despite a Lynx helicopter and a warship being quite capable of defending them.......
Not that it'd make much difference in the case of the UK. We allowed our sailors to be taken hostage by some gun boats in international waters off Iran despite a Lynx helicopter and a warship being quite capable of defending them.......
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,584
Received 442 Likes
on
234 Posts
If the local police chief has an unidentified vessel on his patch, I'd argue that he has every right to go and take a look at it - he could do worse than transmit his intentions on guard since presumably the ship will be monitoring that, although that itself may be problematic since (a) he may not have a formal police callsign, and (b) even if he does the ship may not recognise it.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardhatter, I see you work at TNO. I don't know if you're a pilot of small aircraft, but if you're not and if you want to see up close and personal how small aircraft work, fly and operate, send me a PM. I'm based at Rotterdam so I'm sure we can arrange something.
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crazy idea I know
Well, if reality is not an issue then theoretically you could create infinitely dense matter, similar to that found in a black hole. With very little you could warp time and space around the protected area.
Any incoming aircraft would then simply carry straight on in their view of space, and would pass straight through the very heart of the protected area. Whilst in reality they are flying through time and space curved by the dark matter thus moving around the protected zone.
Any incoming aircraft would then simply carry straight on in their view of space, and would pass straight through the very heart of the protected area. Whilst in reality they are flying through time and space curved by the dark matter thus moving around the protected zone.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Right here
Age: 50
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, if reality is not an issue then theoretically you could create infinitely dense matter, similar to that found in a black hole.
I would very much like to see that theory!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: the air please
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you never know, maybe someone has a bright idea?
(they don't say they get it from forums instead of using their own brains)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm waiting until TNO releases another press-release that their very smart people have found a very unique way to solve this or that problem...
So the only way to try to stop such a potential threat has to be sought initially in warning the pilot that he's in no-go territory, with lasers, flares or tracer rounds most likely. And if that doesn't work, then there is no other option left but to deploy traditional lethal means.
And there's probably a footnote that a light aircraft has never imposed a significant threat to any warship or other military target (except for the publicity value - Mathias Rust comes to mind). The load capacity is simply not large enough and then there's the matter of detonation.
They'll wrap it all up in a nice report and present it to the authorities along with a nice invoice.
Nevertheless, there are some good things said on this thread. I have seen the documentary about the USS Vincennes (I think it was) who shot down the Iranian passenger plane. I don't know if procedures have changed, but one of the reasons for the confusion about whether the plane was civvy or not, was a lack of understanding how the civvy aviation world used its frequencies, transponders etc. For one thing, I think they used UHF guard instead of VHF guard to warn the aircraft. And they did not mention the squawk the aircraft was using.
From this thread, I hope that the military learns that GA aircraft, particularly the small ones, do not automatically monitor VHF guard all the time due to lack of radio equipment, brain capacity or whatever. So in addition to guard they should also broadcast on other likely frequencies.
I don't know if it is technically possible, or desirable, but would radio equipment that simply broadcasts on all 600+ aeronautical VHF frequencies simultaneously, be a partial solution? "Light aircraft at 3000 feet, heading 090, 20 miles east of Harwich, squawking 7000, approaching US warship Vincennes, contact Vincennes on 121.5 immediately. I repeat..."
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Warboys
Age: 55
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done this exercise to prevent news helicopters getting photos of an IRA Bombsite, it was just a case of keeping our big green helicopter between the site and their little Jetrangers, I am not sure that they were so used to having big green helicopters in that close a proximity.....especially with some idiot crewman in the door making rude gestures at them 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if it is technically possible, or desirable, but would radio equipment that simply broadcasts on all 600+ aeronautical VHF frequencies simultaneously, be a partial solution?
The communist era Radio Free Europe jammers were pretty big things
In my childhood, I used to go for walks with the grandparents under the one in Prague. And they didn't need to jam so many frequencies.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about some powerful green lasers, which effectively make a transparent 'wall' in the path of the aircraft. It wouldn't stop them if they were intent on being there, but it would show the pilot that there was something going on, and that they were somewhere that they shouldn't be.
Not sure if green lasers can be made powerful enough yet to be daylight visible? Person operating them would need to be sure that there was nothing higher up either....wouldn't want to blind the airline crew that's up higher!
Not sure if green lasers can be made powerful enough yet to be daylight visible? Person operating them would need to be sure that there was nothing higher up either....wouldn't want to blind the airline crew that's up higher!
Green laser is intended for daylight use and is much more visible to the human eye.
Intrude in the Washington DC ADIZ and plan on getting flashed as a warning, prior to getting intercepted...and failing to respond to that...shot down.
The police chief who elected to visit a warship in his 152 to satisfy his curiosity...deserved to get shot down.
For those who ask if a light airplane represents a threat...the unsinkable Bismarck wasn't threatened by light airplanes either...until it was stopped dead in the water by one. The USS Cole wasn't in danger from a light water craft...until it had a gaping hole blown in it's hull by one. How much of a threat it represents is really irrelevant. If it's not supposed to be there, then that's all that is relevant. One doesn't stand at an armed checkpoint and ignore an approaching vehicle simply because "it's just a little car." One doesn't ignore a light airplane just because it's "just a little airplane." A threat is a threat until proven otherwise, and should be treated accordingly.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: somwhere over the rainbow
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@SNS3Guppy: thanks for your response, I did not know about the Washington DC ADIZ lasers. Sounds good, I am looking into it now.
Keep it up!
Keep it up!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How very stupid of the police chief.
So far as the Washington ADIZ (it was mentioned earlier in the thread in a previous post), visit the folllowing:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ia/vws512k.wmv
It's hard to miss.
Visual Warning System for The Washington Air Defense Identification Zone
Even government aircraft, emergency medical operations, and law enforcement traffic isn't exempt. If one supposes that the local police chief in his private Cessna 150 is immune, or that holding him equally accountable makes on a "North Korean," then think again.
The ADIZ is an example of a multi-tiered secrity system which includes ample notice, warning, and a threat of use of force...backed up by the willingness to use it.
So far as the Washington ADIZ (it was mentioned earlier in the thread in a previous post), visit the folllowing:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ia/vws512k.wmv
It's hard to miss.
Visual Warning System for The Washington Air Defense Identification Zone
Special Notice
A new warning signal for communicating with aircraft is being deployed within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area Air Defense Identification Zone (DC ADIZ,) including the Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ.) The anticipated operational date is May 21, 2005. The signal consists of highly focused red and green colored lights in an alternating red/ red/green signal pattern. This signal may be directed at specific aircraft suspected of making unauthorized entry into the ADIZ/FRZ and are on a heading or flight path that may be interpreted as a threat or that operate contrary to the operating rules for the ADIZ/FRZ.
The beam is not injurious to the eyes of pilots/aircrews or passengers, regardless of altitude or distance from the source. If you are in communication with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and this signal is directed at your aircraft, we advise you to immediately communicate with ATC that you are being illuminated by a visual warning signal. If this signal is directed at you and you are not communicating with ATC, we advise you to turn to a heading away from the center of the FRZ/ADIZ as soon as possible and immediately contact ATC on an appropriate frequency, or if unsure of the frequency, contact ATC on VHF guard 121.5 or UHF guard 243.0.
Be advised that failure to follow the recommended procedures outlined above may result in interception by military aircraft and/or the use of force. This notice applies to all aircraft operating within the ADIZ, including Department of Defense, law enforcement, and aeromedical operations. This notice does not change procedures established for reporting unauthorized laser illumination as published in advisory circular 70-2.
A new warning signal for communicating with aircraft is being deployed within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area Air Defense Identification Zone (DC ADIZ,) including the Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ.) The anticipated operational date is May 21, 2005. The signal consists of highly focused red and green colored lights in an alternating red/ red/green signal pattern. This signal may be directed at specific aircraft suspected of making unauthorized entry into the ADIZ/FRZ and are on a heading or flight path that may be interpreted as a threat or that operate contrary to the operating rules for the ADIZ/FRZ.
The beam is not injurious to the eyes of pilots/aircrews or passengers, regardless of altitude or distance from the source. If you are in communication with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and this signal is directed at your aircraft, we advise you to immediately communicate with ATC that you are being illuminated by a visual warning signal. If this signal is directed at you and you are not communicating with ATC, we advise you to turn to a heading away from the center of the FRZ/ADIZ as soon as possible and immediately contact ATC on an appropriate frequency, or if unsure of the frequency, contact ATC on VHF guard 121.5 or UHF guard 243.0.
Be advised that failure to follow the recommended procedures outlined above may result in interception by military aircraft and/or the use of force. This notice applies to all aircraft operating within the ADIZ, including Department of Defense, law enforcement, and aeromedical operations. This notice does not change procedures established for reporting unauthorized laser illumination as published in advisory circular 70-2.
The ADIZ is an example of a multi-tiered secrity system which includes ample notice, warning, and a threat of use of force...backed up by the willingness to use it.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS3, there is no suggestion that the frigate concerned was in the ADIZ or in fact anywhere near. All hardhatter wrote was:
Now I don't know the exact location of the ADIZ but I don't think the ADIZ is anywhere near where a human-aid transport ship would need an escort from a warship. That would be more appropriate for places like Iraq or Somalia, not Washington DC.
Hardhatter did not even suggest that the police chief was US, nor that he was or was not in reception of any kind of ATC service, nor whether the harbour was his area of jurisdiction and whether he was on duty or not. All it was was a possible scenario they're thinking about in a research institute.
The only reason the ADIZ came up is that they've got a nice way of warning pilots that they're doing something stupid/illegal, and that that same method might be applicable to the scenario mentioned.
It's been a while since I've been in the US, but at this side of the pond anything that's not specifically forbidden is still allowed. So as long as there's no published TFR/RA(T)/TRA/SRZ/ADIZ/FRZ or otherwise prohibited area around a warship, regardless of whether it's in port or not, I'm entitled to circle it to go sightseeing as long as I abide by the normal rules of the air. Regardless of whether I'm a private citizen, a police officer on duty or someone else, and regardless of the nationality of the warship. If that makes the commander nervous, he can ask me to leave and if he does so politely, I will.
Let me know if this is any different in the "land of the free" though.
The frigate was lying in green water, escorting a human-aid transport ship.
Hardhatter did not even suggest that the police chief was US, nor that he was or was not in reception of any kind of ATC service, nor whether the harbour was his area of jurisdiction and whether he was on duty or not. All it was was a possible scenario they're thinking about in a research institute.
The only reason the ADIZ came up is that they've got a nice way of warning pilots that they're doing something stupid/illegal, and that that same method might be applicable to the scenario mentioned.
If one supposes that the local police chief in his private Cessna 150 is immune, or that holding him equally accountable makes on a "North Korean," then think again.
Let me know if this is any different in the "land of the free" though.