Bristow helicopter near miss with Tornado off Aberdeen
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WBS
I think you make a fair point about Class F airspace on the HMRs, in particular it would hinder FJs from free play up the East coast.
However, there is a balance to be had and I know the HRA applies really to the mud movers but this restricted area hinders commercial traffic on a daily basis particularly during the summer months when the heli routes can't be used beyond 1730. This is just an example of how it works both ways.
Yes, the FJs don't want to bump into anyone as much as the next man but there is a distinct feeling of unease in the rotary world about FJs as there has been so many incidents. We only hear about the reported happenings which I think just scratches the surface. There has been plenty of miltary v military incidents (one that I can remember under a military RAS) that never see the light of day. If you have worked commercially as a helo operator you would be very aware of the risk.
There is a balance to be struck and we will never be without risk while we have a reasonable sized military but I do honestly feel that another FJ v helo collision is on the cards. As commercial operators we could all get TCAS but that is just not going to happen and its use to a slow moving helo may be limited. If the FJ fleet were to be fitted then I think it would be a big leap forward. It is based on cost of course but jets started to get GPWS when there were lots of CFIT incidents.
I agree with your point re. "cowboys" and I know that is not the case. There may be some element of being immortal though as to strap a rocket on your back and go up't up-up takes a different kind of person to that who is sat with 500 000 moving parts made by a Euro committee!
I think you make a fair point about Class F airspace on the HMRs, in particular it would hinder FJs from free play up the East coast.
However, there is a balance to be had and I know the HRA applies really to the mud movers but this restricted area hinders commercial traffic on a daily basis particularly during the summer months when the heli routes can't be used beyond 1730. This is just an example of how it works both ways.
Yes, the FJs don't want to bump into anyone as much as the next man but there is a distinct feeling of unease in the rotary world about FJs as there has been so many incidents. We only hear about the reported happenings which I think just scratches the surface. There has been plenty of miltary v military incidents (one that I can remember under a military RAS) that never see the light of day. If you have worked commercially as a helo operator you would be very aware of the risk.
There is a balance to be struck and we will never be without risk while we have a reasonable sized military but I do honestly feel that another FJ v helo collision is on the cards. As commercial operators we could all get TCAS but that is just not going to happen and its use to a slow moving helo may be limited. If the FJ fleet were to be fitted then I think it would be a big leap forward. It is based on cost of course but jets started to get GPWS when there were lots of CFIT incidents.
I agree with your point re. "cowboys" and I know that is not the case. There may be some element of being immortal though as to strap a rocket on your back and go up't up-up takes a different kind of person to that who is sat with 500 000 moving parts made by a Euro committee!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A North Sea pilot tells me the Netherlands CAA has formed a Task Force specifically to deal with the risk of airprox incidents.
The Task Force, which includes representatives from the CAA, ATC, Military, Police, civvy operators, the two pilot unions and Dutch Oil companies, has made a number of proposals suggesting redesignating Dutch NS airspace, and is pushing for Class F and RAS specifically to avoid airproxes.
The oil companies are paying for extended RTF coverage, and are apparently prepared to fund the cost of onshore, and even offshore, radar.
Members of the task force will visit each other's operations in order to improve understanding of each operation's requirements and constraints.
The parties have reached a consensus that whilst they all wish to continue their operations, the danger of a mid-air is such that they each have to compromise and can use the same airspace safely provided there is good situational awareness. They hope that in due course they will be able to cooperate with the UK and all the other NS states.
The Task Force, which includes representatives from the CAA, ATC, Military, Police, civvy operators, the two pilot unions and Dutch Oil companies, has made a number of proposals suggesting redesignating Dutch NS airspace, and is pushing for Class F and RAS specifically to avoid airproxes.
The oil companies are paying for extended RTF coverage, and are apparently prepared to fund the cost of onshore, and even offshore, radar.
Members of the task force will visit each other's operations in order to improve understanding of each operation's requirements and constraints.
The parties have reached a consensus that whilst they all wish to continue their operations, the danger of a mid-air is such that they each have to compromise and can use the same airspace safely provided there is good situational awareness. They hope that in due course they will be able to cooperate with the UK and all the other NS states.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Berkhamsted
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BristowHelicopters v Fast Jets
It is very good to see so much informed comment from those directly involved in the low level confliction between helicopters and fast jets. One of the problems over the past years has been apathy on the part of those directly in the firing line -eg power line and pipeline inspections, police and emergency services. The attitude amongst some has been," Why should I bother when I know it will come back as Risk C no conflict and by the way you got the miss distance wrong."
The RAF attitude has always been "No paperwork, no problem." In order to convince the fast jet community that this is a potentially serious problem, pilots experiencing near misses must file Airproxes.
As well as the question of airspace designation, there are some measures that the military should consider. Prime amongst these is the equipping of fast jets with collision avoidance kit. This has been promised for several years but has always been shelved as inconvenient. Time to change the priorities perhaps.
Also serious consideration to adherence to the ICAO speed limit of 250 knots below 10,000 feet and in response to those prima donnas who say a Tornado cannot fly at 250 knots I would recommend the increased use of flight simulators for low level combat mission simulation.
To put this particular Airprox into perspective, I had a couple of near misses off Aberdeen as long ago as 1976. Why has no progress been made in nearly 30 years?
Beware back stabbing weasels!
The RAF attitude has always been "No paperwork, no problem." In order to convince the fast jet community that this is a potentially serious problem, pilots experiencing near misses must file Airproxes.
As well as the question of airspace designation, there are some measures that the military should consider. Prime amongst these is the equipping of fast jets with collision avoidance kit. This has been promised for several years but has always been shelved as inconvenient. Time to change the priorities perhaps.
Also serious consideration to adherence to the ICAO speed limit of 250 knots below 10,000 feet and in response to those prima donnas who say a Tornado cannot fly at 250 knots I would recommend the increased use of flight simulators for low level combat mission simulation.
To put this particular Airprox into perspective, I had a couple of near misses off Aberdeen as long ago as 1976. Why has no progress been made in nearly 30 years?
Beware back stabbing weasels!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Vertical at the merge
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
icao speed limit below 10000` is all very well if you are flying in coordinated airspace, or in atz`s etc.
You cant be seriously suggesting that the military train at 250kts at low level can you. Why dont we just shoot ils approaches all day and be done with it.
Train how you fight - fight how you train. Where is the realism of a low level ingress at 250kts or an air-air intercept flown at 250kts well below the performance curve of any jet. Would you want to start with a disadvantage over the guy trying to kill you - I doubt it!
And just out of interest where is the ability to zoom climb from low level if you hit a bird and need to divert or maybe have any number of problems where speed in the bank = surviving.
I agree better sims all round please!! But sims are exactly that, a sim. No sense of realism bundled together with all the associated feelings of actually flying the intercept/mission againt a real opponent.
we didnt get to be the best air force in the world by sitting in the crew room playing combat flight sim 2. Mil fast jets at low level dont deliberately hunt down helos but with the intensity of flying over the north sea these days due to upper air space changes over land(more airways than you can shake a stick at) it is here to stay for the forseeable future. Reality is cramming more aircraft into smaller space means everyone gets closer together.
My suggestion would be to open your eyes and look out, dont rely on RIS/RAS especially 130nm out at 2000ft. It is class g after all. And us "Prima Donas" will keep looking out as we always do, unfortunately I cant eat a sticky bun through the mask.
There seem to be a couple of posters on here that have very narrow minded views about mil flying and alleged cowboy attitudes. Unfortunately this is exactly what is NOT needed in arguments such as this and only alienates both sides to each other. The RAF dont just gaff off incidents because of paperwork any less than a civil operator and I cant believe some people on here think that way. If your not happy flying helos because there is an inherent risk get a crossover and go scooting down airways doing the telegraph crossword. You do a difficult job in crap weather - respect. We live with the risks and get paid less than you guys, but we do go upside down most days too!
You cant be seriously suggesting that the military train at 250kts at low level can you. Why dont we just shoot ils approaches all day and be done with it.
Train how you fight - fight how you train. Where is the realism of a low level ingress at 250kts or an air-air intercept flown at 250kts well below the performance curve of any jet. Would you want to start with a disadvantage over the guy trying to kill you - I doubt it!
And just out of interest where is the ability to zoom climb from low level if you hit a bird and need to divert or maybe have any number of problems where speed in the bank = surviving.
I agree better sims all round please!! But sims are exactly that, a sim. No sense of realism bundled together with all the associated feelings of actually flying the intercept/mission againt a real opponent.
we didnt get to be the best air force in the world by sitting in the crew room playing combat flight sim 2. Mil fast jets at low level dont deliberately hunt down helos but with the intensity of flying over the north sea these days due to upper air space changes over land(more airways than you can shake a stick at) it is here to stay for the forseeable future. Reality is cramming more aircraft into smaller space means everyone gets closer together.
My suggestion would be to open your eyes and look out, dont rely on RIS/RAS especially 130nm out at 2000ft. It is class g after all. And us "Prima Donas" will keep looking out as we always do, unfortunately I cant eat a sticky bun through the mask.
There seem to be a couple of posters on here that have very narrow minded views about mil flying and alleged cowboy attitudes. Unfortunately this is exactly what is NOT needed in arguments such as this and only alienates both sides to each other. The RAF dont just gaff off incidents because of paperwork any less than a civil operator and I cant believe some people on here think that way. If your not happy flying helos because there is an inherent risk get a crossover and go scooting down airways doing the telegraph crossword. You do a difficult job in crap weather - respect. We live with the risks and get paid less than you guys, but we do go upside down most days too!
Fox_4:
I don't know what you're doing behind the scenes with other airspace users, and to some extent I agree with the "train hard, fight easy" way of thinking but I'm not a believer in thinking that discussion on an Internet bulletin board can change things on its own.
Any chance ALL the agencies involved could do something along the lines of the Cloggies, as detailed above ? And perhaps if the military took the initiative they may win some brownie points (not what it's all about in the end, but useful none the less).
I don't know what you're doing behind the scenes with other airspace users, and to some extent I agree with the "train hard, fight easy" way of thinking but I'm not a believer in thinking that discussion on an Internet bulletin board can change things on its own.
Any chance ALL the agencies involved could do something along the lines of the Cloggies, as detailed above ? And perhaps if the military took the initiative they may win some brownie points (not what it's all about in the end, but useful none the less).
Last edited by The Nr Fairy; 15th Feb 2004 at 15:34.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Berkhamsted
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bristow helidopters v fast jets
Fox 4`s gung-ho attitude is exactly what is standing in the way of progress in seeking deconfliction at low level. He should be aware that this is not a matter of Us and Them in terms of helicopters versus fast jets because there is an innocent unsuspecting third party involved, namely the travelling public. Those workers travelling to their employment on offshore installations are expecting similar safety standards to Fox 4 on his annual package holiday to Ibiza.
By the same token, those involved in powerline and pipe line inspections are carrying out tasks mandated by the Health and Safety Executive. Military low flying is TRAINING when all is said and done. I believe the military should be looking at ways of removing their training areas from those likely to conflict and equipping their aircraft with collision avoidance sets to minimise the prospect of unexpected encounters. So far, all initiatives for deconfliction have fallen on the civil operator.
By the same token, those involved in powerline and pipe line inspections are carrying out tasks mandated by the Health and Safety Executive. Military low flying is TRAINING when all is said and done. I believe the military should be looking at ways of removing their training areas from those likely to conflict and equipping their aircraft with collision avoidance sets to minimise the prospect of unexpected encounters. So far, all initiatives for deconfliction have fallen on the civil operator.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 48 Deg South
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weasel - Couple of important points. First off the area in question was actually being used by military aircraft before the oil rigs ended up there (from what i was told), so why should the military have to move. Its like people moving next to an airport and then trying to shut it down because of the noise. It should be a compromise, plain and simple.
Secondly would you really want someone to go to war to protect your country if they didnt have the adequate training. I could just imagine your comments back in the WWII days, basically means if the fighter pilots of those days couldnt train then everyone in the UK would be speaking German (no offence intended to anyone). Training is a very important part of any service or company. Same as HUET training if you have to ditch. My two cents worth they can train as much as they want, it just means everyone needs to work on putting a plan into place where everyone comes home at the end of the day.
Just my two cents worth.
Autorotate.
Secondly would you really want someone to go to war to protect your country if they didnt have the adequate training. I could just imagine your comments back in the WWII days, basically means if the fighter pilots of those days couldnt train then everyone in the UK would be speaking German (no offence intended to anyone). Training is a very important part of any service or company. Same as HUET training if you have to ditch. My two cents worth they can train as much as they want, it just means everyone needs to work on putting a plan into place where everyone comes home at the end of the day.
Just my two cents worth.
Autorotate.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutual Respect
Perhaps it is just me but there does seem to be a lacking of mutual respect in some of the posts on this thread. All of the aircrew involved were professionals doing what they were told by their respective employers. None of them wanted to have an accident or indeed a near miss. Slagging off the fast jet crew does not further a case for the helos. The FJ guys job is difficult as indeed can the job of the helo crews be. There should be an effort to learn from mishaps, that is good for everyone. It will not be served by puerile attacks on any of the participants from either side.
Glad to see this chestnut resurrected>
Interestingly, we at this Unit did a 3 year project for BHAB regarding aerial conflict between GAT and FJ. This was some 2 years ago now and made for interesting reading. The bias was towards emergency services helos and mil FW to be honest, though some puddle jumper flying did creep in.
Result: We were then (2 years ago) overdue a fatal collision by 1 year, currently that stands at overdue by 3 years
The mil needs to find the money to equip its a/c with TCAS, plain and simple. An earlier report form another force in discussion with the then minister for defence (Mr Portillo) stated the same. On both ocassions, money was allocated for TCAS but has/had been siphoned off for Gulf War I and II.
There is perhaps a misunderstanding between the mil and civvy mindset. In the civvy world we do not have the word 'attrition' in our vocabulary. I am certain a mil pilot doesn't want to die either, but it comes with the territory when you join. It doesn't outside
My wife and kids don't want to hear that their dad was wiped out by a low flying tornado because he has to 'hone' his low flying skills ready for war????? What sort of sense is this?
Times are a changing and the mil, as ever is on average about 5-10yrs behind the civvy way of thinking. Mass training in readiness for mass aerial combat might now be considered redundant, atleast on the scale seen by history. If there is a pressing need to 'do it for real' then go visit another country that hasn't caught the 'nanny' bug yet.
In May of this year, our helo took avoiding action to 'miss' a jaguar. Our TCAS picked it up at 3 miles conflicting. It then dissappeared only to re-appear at 400 yards at same height. The pilot rolled the cab on its back and dived - the jag flew right thru the airspace previously occupied by the helo.
All of this was monitored by the Great Dunn Fell radar which shows echoes corresponding to the helo pilots' statement.
The AIRPROX board commented thus:
(a) There were in fact 2 x jaguars
(b) Neither Jag ever saw the helo
(c ) Radar returns from Dunn Fell show the helo taking avoiding action and the Jag passing
the same occupied space as the helo, seconds later.
(d) The jag was flying at 480kts (550mph), at 760' in 4-5Km viz.
(e) In summary the mil FW "probably" passed within 200' of the helos position.
The AIRPROX board therefore classified this incident as CAT C -
NO RISK OF COLLISION
This is the third time we have reported to AIRPROX. And every time we have been told: No collision Risk.
What do you think we feel about this toothless authority?????
We now fly NOE to atleast secure us some defence against these reckless few who think N Wales is a playground for derelict professional behaviour.
Interestingly, we at this Unit did a 3 year project for BHAB regarding aerial conflict between GAT and FJ. This was some 2 years ago now and made for interesting reading. The bias was towards emergency services helos and mil FW to be honest, though some puddle jumper flying did creep in.
Result: We were then (2 years ago) overdue a fatal collision by 1 year, currently that stands at overdue by 3 years
The mil needs to find the money to equip its a/c with TCAS, plain and simple. An earlier report form another force in discussion with the then minister for defence (Mr Portillo) stated the same. On both ocassions, money was allocated for TCAS but has/had been siphoned off for Gulf War I and II.
There is perhaps a misunderstanding between the mil and civvy mindset. In the civvy world we do not have the word 'attrition' in our vocabulary. I am certain a mil pilot doesn't want to die either, but it comes with the territory when you join. It doesn't outside
My wife and kids don't want to hear that their dad was wiped out by a low flying tornado because he has to 'hone' his low flying skills ready for war????? What sort of sense is this?
Times are a changing and the mil, as ever is on average about 5-10yrs behind the civvy way of thinking. Mass training in readiness for mass aerial combat might now be considered redundant, atleast on the scale seen by history. If there is a pressing need to 'do it for real' then go visit another country that hasn't caught the 'nanny' bug yet.
In May of this year, our helo took avoiding action to 'miss' a jaguar. Our TCAS picked it up at 3 miles conflicting. It then dissappeared only to re-appear at 400 yards at same height. The pilot rolled the cab on its back and dived - the jag flew right thru the airspace previously occupied by the helo.
All of this was monitored by the Great Dunn Fell radar which shows echoes corresponding to the helo pilots' statement.
The AIRPROX board commented thus:
(a) There were in fact 2 x jaguars
(b) Neither Jag ever saw the helo
(c ) Radar returns from Dunn Fell show the helo taking avoiding action and the Jag passing
within
(d) The jag was flying at 480kts (550mph), at 760' in 4-5Km viz.
(e) In summary the mil FW "probably" passed within 200' of the helos position.
The AIRPROX board therefore classified this incident as CAT C -
NO RISK OF COLLISION
This is the third time we have reported to AIRPROX. And every time we have been told: No collision Risk.
What do you think we feel about this toothless authority?????
We now fly NOE to atleast secure us some defence against these reckless few who think N Wales is a playground for derelict professional behaviour.
First, can anyone answer fidae 's question, which was the reason for resurrecting the topic? I'd like to know the result, too.
Second, this business of TCAS. Surely that can't give you a solution against constantly manoeuvring traffic, which the FJs mostly are. I gather that TCAS 2 is being seriously considered for North Sea helos, but I can't see how it would help.
Second, this business of TCAS. Surely that can't give you a solution against constantly manoeuvring traffic, which the FJs mostly are. I gather that TCAS 2 is being seriously considered for North Sea helos, but I can't see how it would help.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Berkhamsted
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low level confliction
Fidae - Call the UK Airprox Board 0n 44 (0)1895 815125, they will be able to say whether the report has been closed.
Autorotate - On that basis you are in favour of motorways ( or highways) being built around cows in open fields. It should be re-emphasised that the military are TRAINING, ie practising. It is quite ridiculous to encourage confliction with aircraft undertaking essential tasks such as oil installation support or powerline/pipeline inspection.
Thomas Coupling - a number of points neatly phrased. The composition of the UK Airprox Board has historically always resulted in a less than balanced view of any helicopter/fast jet event at low level. The heli pilot`s account is invariably regarded as inaccurate or distorted.
The first step towards a saner approach to the problem must be the equiping of fast jets with some form of TCAS. This has been promised for at least the last 8 years but somehow has never materialised. The fault lies not with those unfortunates who regularly confront each other at low level on a daily basis but with the operating authorities who turn a blind eye to the potential hazards.
Autorotate - On that basis you are in favour of motorways ( or highways) being built around cows in open fields. It should be re-emphasised that the military are TRAINING, ie practising. It is quite ridiculous to encourage confliction with aircraft undertaking essential tasks such as oil installation support or powerline/pipeline inspection.
Thomas Coupling - a number of points neatly phrased. The composition of the UK Airprox Board has historically always resulted in a less than balanced view of any helicopter/fast jet event at low level. The heli pilot`s account is invariably regarded as inaccurate or distorted.
The first step towards a saner approach to the problem must be the equiping of fast jets with some form of TCAS. This has been promised for at least the last 8 years but somehow has never materialised. The fault lies not with those unfortunates who regularly confront each other at low level on a daily basis but with the operating authorities who turn a blind eye to the potential hazards.
