Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

SAS diversion accompanied by Typhoon

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

SAS diversion accompanied by Typhoon

Old 29th Apr 2013, 21:56
  #41 (permalink)  
Disappointed
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From our side of things once we'd pressed aforementioned big red button there was no way to un-press it.

All in all it was handled well as per procedure by all concerned, as these things always are.
Ceannairceach is offline  
Old 14th May 2013, 09:32
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down

I'm sure it was handled well, but that doesn't mean the procedures for a simple loss of contact with no other suspicious factors are necessarily proportionate. Or that post cold war budget justification doesn't weigh in the balance.

In particular it is hard to escape the impression that there is a punitive element in demanding a diversion after the bona fides of the aircraft has been established.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 14th May 2013, 20:49
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: arizona
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So if

GOL 1907 had been intercepted...
ohnutsiforgot is offline  
Old 14th May 2013, 22:10
  #44 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From our side of things once we'd pressed aforementioned big red button there was no way to un-press it.
That is for me a real issue today in many places .
When we (ATC) go back to cancel the cavalry,(because contact has been re-established and obviously it was a frequency change problem ) some Military are replying its not your call anymore, and someone has to pay. For me this will defeat the security purpose in the long run , as controllers might be in future be reluctant to press the button ( or make that call) in time, and the real threat, if and when it comes, might be missed.
90% of radio failures are wrong frequency changes.
9,9% are "sloppiness" (turning volume down or set the wrong VHF box.)
Nothing really to justify continuing the cavalry and make people pay for these so called "mistakes" once contact has been re-established.
The one can never missed a 6 digits frequency can throw the first stone.

As Heathrow Director said, going back to previous as FAST as you can after noticing it is always the best answer.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 14th May 2013, 22:22
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
recall

Not too sure you understand the repercussions once the button is pressed. Having worked there, and done that, I can promise you that you would not believe the number of no comms incidents in a 24 hour period. Clearly, there are other factors to consider, so just because you pressed the red button doesn't mean that you "unpressing it is the way forward. believe me, no-one initiates the system for fun.
Canadian Break is offline  
Old 16th May 2013, 12:18
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nobody has remotely suggested the button is ever pressed"for fun" but surely it is a valid question why a few minutes loss of contact should incur such a wholly inflexible response. It seems there is no option to cancel even after it has become clear there is no threat..even sometimes if the interception hasnt taken place. There is a clear impression from some other posts that "someone has to pay". In practice this means the airline, even if the loss of contact wasn't their fault. Are we talking budgets rather than safety?
ShotOne is offline  
Old 16th May 2013, 13:52
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Thumbs up

After the aircraft made an unforeseen turn near Newcastle, two Typhoon fighters were launched to intercept the Canadair
Well, Apart from losing coms with ATC; it would appear the crew concerned also deviated from the Flight Planned route!

That would definitely arouse enough suspicion to make the authorities go through the full procedure. Expense doesn't come into question in these situations, plus it is good practice for the QRA crews!

Last edited by Out Of Trim; 16th May 2013 at 13:55.
Out Of Trim is offline  
Old 16th May 2013, 15:50
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Lancs, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As Canadian Break and a few others have said that once the decision to go to an alert status is confirmed, it has to be followed through to it's pre-arranged conclusion - even if all 'appears' to back to normal.

Who knows what is really happening at the other end of that mic, or what duress is being put on a person(s) on board to either do or say the right things...

If you have or have access to high value assets or are key holders, some domestic alarm monitoring services will still initiate an on site visit to confirm you don't have a gun held to your head - even after confirming the cancellation password if the sequence of alarm triggers indicate possible intruders. With an airliner ....

It makes sense to me.
E_S_P is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 08:59
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
By that reasoning the gun-to-head scenario could apply to ANY crew of ANY flight with or without a loss of contact. There is simply no logical basis for making this assumption based on a brief loss of contact.

Out of trim said "..good practice for QRA crews"....Yes, exactly! Perhaps getting closer to real reason?

Last edited by ShotOne; 17th May 2013 at 09:19. Reason: New information
ShotOne is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 09:18
  #50 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ESP and others; You see too many James Bond movies.
The purpose of an interception of a loss of comm of an airliner , in Europe at least , is to VEFIFY , not to shoot it down.
My point is that once you have re-established comms and it is obviously a frequency change problem, and everything is as before :,guys on correct freqs, on correct track, why not call off the interception? What is an interception going to achieve more ?
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 10:11
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well it gives the airforce something to do

and it gets them into the news as "defending our country"

and most of the cost is getting the interceptor off the ground so he might as well use the time

and it flags up an error somewhere in the system that otherwise would be brushed over
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 13:02
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,787
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Out of trim said "..good practice for QRA crews"....Yes, exactly! Perhaps getting closer to real reason?
He also said

Apart from losing comms with ATC, it would appear the crew concerned also deviated from the Flight Planned route
That sounds like ample justification for an intercept, and I would expect that the priority after that was the need to have a comprehensive debrief of the pilots concerned once on the ground, even if at the cost of a diversion.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 13:03
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If I'm not mistaken, there was a military exerecise going on at the time?
Those figherpilots were probably very happy to get a "real" situation to deal with.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 13:20
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
The point was; not only was there loss of coms, they also were not on track, having made an unforeseen turn near Newcastle.

In this case the only way to verify all was still OK was to force the CRJ to land at an airfield of our choice. Once on the ground, the Police will verify by physically going on-board.

Some here appear a little naive after 9/11. These fighter aircraft are fully armed for a reason. The unfortunate and ultimate result could possibly lead to a shoot down if the aircraft had been hijacked and failed to comply with the interception.
Out Of Trim is offline  
Old 17th May 2013, 15:09
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
ATC Watcher

Without wishing to be at all disrespectful your post re the mission of QRA in Europe would suggest to me that you do not really understand the "big picture". In a similar vein, I would not want to give the idea that these "lost comms" are few and far between. In my experience, there are several per day, ranging from a couple of minutes to several hundred miles (sorry to mix my measurements here - but you get the picture). Clearly, no one is going to get too excited if the only issue is as aircraft out of comms for a few (very) minutes but there are a number of other factors - all of which contribute to the "big picture" - and most of which ATC will not be aware of.
Canadian Break is offline  
Old 18th May 2013, 07:06
  #56 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some here appear a little naive after 9/11. These fighter aircraft are fully armed for a reason. The unfortunate and ultimate result could possibly lead to a shoot down if the aircraft had been hijacked and failed to comply with the interception.
In Europe ? Allow me to

Canadian Break : if you mean the big picture at the level of a State strategy policies , indeed I am not in those , but I know enough to see where the "war or terrorism " is being used to justify the use of big expensive military toys that became totally obsolete since the Soviets are concentrating on making money . In times of ever shrinking defence budgets , but to be honest, if I was in the military shoes I would probably do the same .
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 18th May 2013, 17:31
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
ATC Watcher

Without saying too much - there are about another 15 (at least) inputs that go into every scramble/don't scramble decision. Your loss of comms is only the very tip of the iceberg and may have no relevance whatsoever.
Canadian Break is offline  
Old 19th May 2013, 16:33
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In turn, without pressing for detail into your decision making protocol, Canadian, I can reel off a list of tragedies which had man "inputs" all of which were applied to an initial false presumption of hostile intent; KAL 007 "ignored" over 100 warning shots which it probablly never saw then a planned flight level change was interpreted as an evasive action. USS Vincennes downed an innocent Iran Air flight because ( as well as a string of other Navy blunders)it "ignored" UHF radio calls which it could never have received, whole inputs which demonstrated its innocence, such as its increasing altitude were discarded.

I appreciate there are differences here but we certainly see the same presumption of hostility which is not removed even by complete resumption of comms and normal operations

Last edited by ShotOne; 19th May 2013 at 17:16. Reason: More info
ShotOne is offline  
Old 19th May 2013, 17:09
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
ShotOne

Not saying who is right or wrong here - simply trying to dispel what seems to be a gathering momentum that "we" get the Typhoons airborne on a whim and at the slightest excuse. This is simply not the case.
Canadian Break is offline  
Old 19th May 2013, 23:14
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And yet, this was just a simple lost comms situation. Nothing else. And you say at least 15 levels saw it differently? Why bother to listen to the captain when he explains the situation?
This was just a good opportunity to let the fighters do some "real" training.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.