Airprox: Harrier vs. Air Ambulance (again!)
Thread Starter
Mid-Air Collision: Harrier vs. Air Ambulance (again!)
Near-miss incident investigated
An investigation is under way after an RAF Harrier jet narrowly avoided a mid-air collision with an air ambulance helicopter over Gloucestershire.
The incident happened on 9 February near the M5 Strensham Services, north of Tewkesbury.
It is not clear how near the aircraft came to each other, but is said to have been close enough to compromise both.
James Hotson, spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority, said the miss is being assessed by the UK Airprox Board.
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: "Obviously, air safety remains of paramount importance to the RAF, who study the lessons from the "airprox" report and where appropriate will take action to minimise the risk of recurrence."
link to BBC News
An investigation is under way after an RAF Harrier jet narrowly avoided a mid-air collision with an air ambulance helicopter over Gloucestershire.
The incident happened on 9 February near the M5 Strensham Services, north of Tewkesbury.
It is not clear how near the aircraft came to each other, but is said to have been close enough to compromise both.
James Hotson, spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority, said the miss is being assessed by the UK Airprox Board.
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: "Obviously, air safety remains of paramount importance to the RAF, who study the lessons from the "airprox" report and where appropriate will take action to minimise the risk of recurrence."
link to BBC News
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the point of this post? 
We have a sensational tag line saying a collision, but there is no collision just 2 a/c avoiding each other in the open FIR. It may have been close but that is one of the risks everybody who operates low level has to be aware of.
2S
We have a sensational tag line saying a collision, but there is no collision just 2 a/c avoiding each other in the open FIR. It may have been close but that is one of the risks everybody who operates low level has to be aware of.
2S
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Absolutely 2STROPS, even though the air Ambo just happened to be at its operating base, denoted by the purple 'H' on any aviation mappage!! 
A simple heading error, perhaps by both Bomber and of course the Harrier pilot.
A simple heading error, perhaps by both Bomber and of course the Harrier pilot.
Thread Starter
Sorry to disappoint, 2STROPS.
The UK is overdue its next fatal RAF vs. civvy mid-air, so hopefully the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.
You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR.
Just because that's the way it is, doesn't mean that's the way it should be. There are a lot of people who are very unhappy with the status quo - You may be quite happy mixing it, low-level, with an "enemy" against whom you stand no chance and have no recourse, but I am not. (Please don't mention the toothless AIRPROX system - it's wholly understandable why the last helicopter man on the Board quit in frustration)
The UK is overdue its next fatal RAF vs. civvy mid-air, so hopefully the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.
You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR.
Just because that's the way it is, doesn't mean that's the way it should be. There are a lot of people who are very unhappy with the status quo - You may be quite happy mixing it, low-level, with an "enemy" against whom you stand no chance and have no recourse, but I am not. (Please don't mention the toothless AIRPROX system - it's wholly understandable why the last helicopter man on the Board quit in frustration)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: queensland australia
Age: 77
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
bomber,
2strops, or myself, or anyone else clicking on this thread wouldn't expect anything else except what the heading implied. a story of a midair. you got the attention that you wanted with a misleading topic and then deride a poster who has made a correct observation. silsoe's graphic is right on.
2strops, or myself, or anyone else clicking on this thread wouldn't expect anything else except what the heading implied. a story of a midair. you got the attention that you wanted with a misleading topic and then deride a poster who has made a correct observation. silsoe's graphic is right on.
Guest
Posts: n/a
50' to distaster
When I had mine, I didn't see him coming, and I didn't see hiim going. It was all over in a flash ! TX was on, mode C too. No radar coverage for trace i'm afraid. Didn't complete a full airprox and London info were not interested - but wish I did now. High speed in GAville should be banned - it's outrageous - but until it happens to you, you may find it hard to agree !
Last edited by TheFlyingSquirrel; 23rd Feb 2005 at 09:15.
this is a problem for many air ambulance operations across the UK and especially for us in the E. Midlands.
In many areas each sortie will require descent/climbout through the fast jet low level band,(1500ft to 250ft)
Due expense TCAS has not yet featured on any charity funded aircraft. (the Home Office helped fund TCAS on all police helos)
Most difficult is the departure phase when very often both paramedics are "eyes in" with the casualty.
I will be attending an MOD/GA community disscussion forum (SHAIRSPACE) next week, Any workeable suggestions?
In many areas each sortie will require descent/climbout through the fast jet low level band,(1500ft to 250ft)
Due expense TCAS has not yet featured on any charity funded aircraft. (the Home Office helped fund TCAS on all police helos)
Most difficult is the departure phase when very often both paramedics are "eyes in" with the casualty.
I will be attending an MOD/GA community disscussion forum (SHAIRSPACE) next week, Any workeable suggestions?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Morning all,
Obviously there will be very little to prevent this sort of thing happening should the air ambulance be out on a job in the sticks, (TCAS excepted of course!). However as this incident was, as far as I am aware, close to the base of this particular air ambulance, perhaps these 'HLSs of regular use' should be given more 'highlight' on any mappage.
As it stands, the aviation overlays gives as much importance to an HLS in the military HLS directory, used bi-annually if that, to an HLS that is in constant use.
I'm not promoting any formal form of avoidance area, perhaps just a thicker, slightly larger diameter mark up on the planning maps.
The law of averages will soon work this problem out itself, until then, maybe we can lock the stable door while said stable is still occupied.
Why bring this subject up now? Because it has very nearly happened.
Anyway,
that's my tuppence worth.
Obviously there will be very little to prevent this sort of thing happening should the air ambulance be out on a job in the sticks, (TCAS excepted of course!). However as this incident was, as far as I am aware, close to the base of this particular air ambulance, perhaps these 'HLSs of regular use' should be given more 'highlight' on any mappage.
As it stands, the aviation overlays gives as much importance to an HLS in the military HLS directory, used bi-annually if that, to an HLS that is in constant use.
I'm not promoting any formal form of avoidance area, perhaps just a thicker, slightly larger diameter mark up on the planning maps.
The law of averages will soon work this problem out itself, until then, maybe we can lock the stable door while said stable is still occupied.
Why bring this subject up now? Because it has very nearly happened.
Anyway,
that's my tuppence worth.
Surely the object of this post was to make available to all interested parties (all of us who are interested in improvements of safety) the details of an incident which had all the precursers for an accident.
It matters little what the title of the thread is; surely the point is, what needs to be done to prevent this incident leading to the inevitable accident. So far, apart from ACAS - which is an obvious choice of a barrier, providing the military are prepared to take part in such a solution - there has been little or no practical debate.
The mixing of low fast jets and helicopter traffic in the UK FIR has always had the potential for disaster (as the jetranger accident over the lake district showed). The BHAB and operators have had little success in raising the profile of this problem - let's hope that it does not require another accident before an appropriate solution is found.
Jim
It matters little what the title of the thread is; surely the point is, what needs to be done to prevent this incident leading to the inevitable accident. So far, apart from ACAS - which is an obvious choice of a barrier, providing the military are prepared to take part in such a solution - there has been little or no practical debate.
The mixing of low fast jets and helicopter traffic in the UK FIR has always had the potential for disaster (as the jetranger accident over the lake district showed). The BHAB and operators have had little success in raising the profile of this problem - let's hope that it does not require another accident before an appropriate solution is found.
Jim
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was obviously a good day for us in that area.
Conducting a training flight between Glos and Shob I had an encounter with a Hawk which passed from behind, along the port side, rolled to its left, at less than 150'.
Having spoken to "Airprox" they said that our radar returns merged into one and it looked "very scary".
Conducting a training flight between Glos and Shob I had an encounter with a Hawk which passed from behind, along the port side, rolled to its left, at less than 150'.
Having spoken to "Airprox" they said that our radar returns merged into one and it looked "very scary".
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BH Glad you have changed the misleading tag line for this post. You are obviously a sensationalist.
You may or may not be a professional but you should be aware that professional aviators take great interest in all accidents and incidents that occur to other people and hope to benefit from their misfortune. By sensationalizing your post you bring nothing to the debate.
The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace. It is incumbent on all pilots to minimise the risk to themselves. Unless it is essential for their flight then it is not sensible to cruise in the 1000- ground level band. This is even stated on the CAA 500,000 chart.
I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable. Siting an air ambulance base on the edge of a HIRTA (Delford) which is a choke point in the LFS will mean that there will always be a potential conflict with a fast jet avoiding the HIRTA.
When I fly VFR in the UK I always try and be above 1500agl so that I am sky lined and therefore much easier to see by fast moving traffic.
We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training. If we want max protection for our air ambulance sites then base them on airfields with ATZs
2S
You may or may not be a professional but you should be aware that professional aviators take great interest in all accidents and incidents that occur to other people and hope to benefit from their misfortune. By sensationalizing your post you bring nothing to the debate.
The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace. It is incumbent on all pilots to minimise the risk to themselves. Unless it is essential for their flight then it is not sensible to cruise in the 1000- ground level band. This is even stated on the CAA 500,000 chart.
I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable. Siting an air ambulance base on the edge of a HIRTA (Delford) which is a choke point in the LFS will mean that there will always be a potential conflict with a fast jet avoiding the HIRTA.
When I fly VFR in the UK I always try and be above 1500agl so that I am sky lined and therefore much easier to see by fast moving traffic.
We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training. If we want max protection for our air ambulance sites then base them on airfields with ATZs
2S
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
2 Strops;
Unless of course they are at the same height or above you !
The UK Low Flying System (UKLFS)
The UKLFS is designed to allow the efficient and effective management of military low flying while ensuring that the activity is spread as widely as practicable. It covers the whole of the open airspace of the UK and surrounding oversea areas as far as the boundary of the UK Flight Information Region, from surface to 2,000 ft above ground or sea level.
When I fly VFR in the UK I always try and be above 1500agl so that I am sky lined and therefore much easier to see by fast moving traffic.
The UK Low Flying System (UKLFS)
The UKLFS is designed to allow the efficient and effective management of military low flying while ensuring that the activity is spread as widely as practicable. It covers the whole of the open airspace of the UK and surrounding oversea areas as far as the boundary of the UK Flight Information Region, from surface to 2,000 ft above ground or sea level.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS
quote "Unless of course they are at the same height or above you !"
Having used the UKLFS in the past it is very very unusual to be above 500ft. Even the old Vulcan used to low fly at 500ft.
While your definition of the UKLFS is correct it demeans the argument for safe flying within the UKLFS. If you had flown in the system in a FJ you would be aware that the most frequently used band is 100-500ft with the majority at 250ft so flying at 1500ft is a sensible height.
Your quote of the definition bears as much reason to the argument as Gordon Brown saying he hasn't ruined our UK pensions by taking 5 Billion a year from the pension funds
2S
quote "Unless of course they are at the same height or above you !"
Having used the UKLFS in the past it is very very unusual to be above 500ft. Even the old Vulcan used to low fly at 500ft.
While your definition of the UKLFS is correct it demeans the argument for safe flying within the UKLFS. If you had flown in the system in a FJ you would be aware that the most frequently used band is 100-500ft with the majority at 250ft so flying at 1500ft is a sensible height.
Your quote of the definition bears as much reason to the argument as Gordon Brown saying he hasn't ruined our UK pensions by taking 5 Billion a year from the pension funds
2S
Thread Starter
Hello all, a little explanation is in order, I feel.
I subscribe to the Google Alert facility - I automatically get sent information of an air ambulance nature to my e-mail account. On this occasion, I felt that the information received was worthy of further dissemination. I cut and pasted the article, link and even the title (allowing myself journalistic licence only to add the word "again" in parentheses) before buggering off out for the evening.
The very first words in my initial post were "Near-miss" - impossible to misconstrue, thought I. All the post offered was a short piece, a facsimile of the BBC article - I offered no opinion, save for a wee angry red faced icon.
I returned home later that evening to discover that I had commited an appalling deed, an affront to the right thinking people of the world..
I must admit I still cannot understand the venom aimed at myself, the poster, solely based upon the original topic name (I see the topic name has now been altered, so 2STROPS, you have a moderator, not me, to thank.) I am missing something that obviously has infuriated several of you. Once again, I feel as though I must appologise that the aircraft did not collide!!!
Further research today has informed me that, as SilsoeSid alluded to earlier, the helicopter in question was on final approach to a charted HLS. It is all very well flying above 1500' if weather and tasking permit, but at some point one has to return to planet earth. If my intel is even half true, it would appear that the jet passed below the level of the air ambulance during short finals to its base. What flying profile should the helicopter have followed to mitigate this type of risk?? (I have also heard that this is by no means an isolated occurence at this particular HLS)
2STROPS, why are you prepared to just lie back and accept this situation.
One would hope that having a clearly defined HLS depicted on a flying chart would be enough warning for our pointy aviators, but your suggestion that the only way to be safe is for all air ambos move to licenced airfields implies that that is the smallest target the RAF can avoid. Get real! We have one of the finest air forces in the world - they ought to be able to cope with avoiding areas less than 5nm diameter. The air ambulances, police ,etc. have the right to be safe when OUTWITH an ATZ.
If it's realistic training they require, there are vast expanses of Canada, etc. If it's to be relevant, why not go play in the sand pit or Afghanistan. The likelihood of a Cold War style battle scenario in Eastern Europe looks rather low on the list of possibe futures the UK may face.....(Don't start me on European politics!)
I subscribe to the Google Alert facility - I automatically get sent information of an air ambulance nature to my e-mail account. On this occasion, I felt that the information received was worthy of further dissemination. I cut and pasted the article, link and even the title (allowing myself journalistic licence only to add the word "again" in parentheses) before buggering off out for the evening.
The very first words in my initial post were "Near-miss" - impossible to misconstrue, thought I. All the post offered was a short piece, a facsimile of the BBC article - I offered no opinion, save for a wee angry red faced icon.
I returned home later that evening to discover that I had commited an appalling deed, an affront to the right thinking people of the world..
I must admit I still cannot understand the venom aimed at myself, the poster, solely based upon the original topic name (I see the topic name has now been altered, so 2STROPS, you have a moderator, not me, to thank.) I am missing something that obviously has infuriated several of you. Once again, I feel as though I must appologise that the aircraft did not collide!!!
Further research today has informed me that, as SilsoeSid alluded to earlier, the helicopter in question was on final approach to a charted HLS. It is all very well flying above 1500' if weather and tasking permit, but at some point one has to return to planet earth. If my intel is even half true, it would appear that the jet passed below the level of the air ambulance during short finals to its base. What flying profile should the helicopter have followed to mitigate this type of risk?? (I have also heard that this is by no means an isolated occurence at this particular HLS)
The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace
I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable
One would hope that having a clearly defined HLS depicted on a flying chart would be enough warning for our pointy aviators, but your suggestion that the only way to be safe is for all air ambos move to licenced airfields implies that that is the smallest target the RAF can avoid. Get real! We have one of the finest air forces in the world - they ought to be able to cope with avoiding areas less than 5nm diameter. The air ambulances, police ,etc. have the right to be safe when OUTWITH an ATZ.
We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
2STROPS;
OK ...........
Don't see what your point is.
That is not 'my definition,' it is 'the' definition, part of it anyway.
It may be unusual for FJ traffic to be above 500' but the UKLFS 'does' go up to 2000'.
Picture this,
FJ temporarily navigationally embarrassed, (if it ever happens), climbs up to have a better looksee. "I can go up to 2000' because I'm booked into the LFS".
At 1500' FJ can see everything, regains sortie profile but....WHOOSH.....WTFWT?
Of course even if you are above the LFA it doesn't mean you will not encounter FJ traffic.
I don't have the answers, but ideas, such as if you fly outside the UKLFS, ie above 2000', the chances are that even if you are v.unlucky that FJ will only get you on the climb out when he is eyes out, we hope! OR, when you are landing!
When I fly from EGBB to EGBJ, past the previously mentioned air ambulance HLS, which is a common occurence, I most certainly try to go above 2000'.
SS
OK ...........
Don't see what your point is.
That is not 'my definition,' it is 'the' definition, part of it anyway.
It may be unusual for FJ traffic to be above 500' but the UKLFS 'does' go up to 2000'.
Picture this,
FJ temporarily navigationally embarrassed, (if it ever happens), climbs up to have a better looksee. "I can go up to 2000' because I'm booked into the LFS".
At 1500' FJ can see everything, regains sortie profile but....WHOOSH.....WTFWT?
Of course even if you are above the LFA it doesn't mean you will not encounter FJ traffic.
I don't have the answers, but ideas, such as if you fly outside the UKLFS, ie above 2000', the chances are that even if you are v.unlucky that FJ will only get you on the climb out when he is eyes out, we hope! OR, when you are landing!
When I fly from EGBB to EGBJ, past the previously mentioned air ambulance HLS, which is a common occurence, I most certainly try to go above 2000'.
SS
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with some of what you say but you do not help your argument when you use language such as:-
" the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.
You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR."
Expect to be attacked if you can't have a reasoned temperate argument.
2S
" the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.
You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR."
Expect to be attacked if you can't have a reasoned temperate argument.
2S
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
This will be interesting, 2STROPS having 2 conversations at once, and not mentioning who his particular rant is aimed at. 
2strops, my HEMS base is on a military field with ATZ. However......
I fly an average of 9 public transport sectors a day, average 12 minutes long. 3 of those sectors will involve adhoc landing/takeoff in open FIR. ATC doesn't pick up all the LL FJ traffic (too low) (When they do however they offer me as much help as they can)
On takeoff two way r/t with ATC is often not possible due range and height. This is the most critical period...I beleive it will only be a matter of time before our luck runs out. Is it an airprox when I'm sitting on the ground and a FJ goes straight overhead at 250ft?? Happened twice in 2004. Next time I might be be climbing out of that field location ........................................................
How can I make this operation safer?
I fly an average of 9 public transport sectors a day, average 12 minutes long. 3 of those sectors will involve adhoc landing/takeoff in open FIR. ATC doesn't pick up all the LL FJ traffic (too low) (When they do however they offer me as much help as they can)
On takeoff two way r/t with ATC is often not possible due range and height. This is the most critical period...I beleive it will only be a matter of time before our luck runs out. Is it an airprox when I'm sitting on the ground and a FJ goes straight overhead at 250ft?? Happened twice in 2004. Next time I might be be climbing out of that field location ........................................................
How can I make this operation safer?