Jet2 flight shadowed by French jet
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
Having read this thread I perceive that many AT pilots think that it is their right to wander around Europe and beyond in a casual manner. I remind them that each country has a right to defend it's own airspace, and to police that airspace.
Having spent over 30 years as an Air Defender I had drummed in the rights and responsibilities of a QRA pilot. Although the procedures have been modified to cater for modern technology, the basic rules and procedures for interception, shadowing, intervention and engagement are unchanged.
Be there no doubt that the French take the sovereignty of their airspace very seriously. It would not be wise to ignore or disrespect the directions from a QRA Mirage.
Over the past 10 years operating both GAT and OAT across Europe I witnessed poor R/T and sometimes arrogance from pilots. I have heard some say, ”I’ll just continue on flight plan route” and make no attempt to contact a controller. In my opinion, not acceptable.
If the French were using civil traffic for squadron pilots training this would not be acceptable. If, however, they are QRA aircraft under qualified GCI Control they are policing their airspace. In other words, exercising their right.
Having spent over 30 years as an Air Defender I had drummed in the rights and responsibilities of a QRA pilot. Although the procedures have been modified to cater for modern technology, the basic rules and procedures for interception, shadowing, intervention and engagement are unchanged.
Be there no doubt that the French take the sovereignty of their airspace very seriously. It would not be wise to ignore or disrespect the directions from a QRA Mirage.
Over the past 10 years operating both GAT and OAT across Europe I witnessed poor R/T and sometimes arrogance from pilots. I have heard some say, ”I’ll just continue on flight plan route” and make no attempt to contact a controller. In my opinion, not acceptable.
If the French were using civil traffic for squadron pilots training this would not be acceptable. If, however, they are QRA aircraft under qualified GCI Control they are policing their airspace. In other words, exercising their right.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have only seen one bill DaveReidUK. It did not have the reason on it.
To be fair the reason was crew stupidity definitely in that case they had missed 2 FIR boundary frequency swaps and had 123.45 dialled into box 2 out of NL over Belgium and were intercepted over France.
I believe the c word was used quite a few times in the post incident debrief. you pair of , you stupid etc etc
both of them were given a photo copy of the bill which was in the region of 30K euro apparently it would have been more but the two FJ's were up in the air already so they only got billed for 30 mins flight time.
To be fair the reason was crew stupidity definitely in that case they had missed 2 FIR boundary frequency swaps and had 123.45 dialled into box 2 out of NL over Belgium and were intercepted over France.
I believe the c word was used quite a few times in the post incident debrief. you pair of , you stupid etc etc
both of them were given a photo copy of the bill which was in the region of 30K euro apparently it would have been more but the two FJ's were up in the air already so they only got billed for 30 mins flight time.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest with the amount of nuclear power stations dotted around France pretty much every direction you can be pointing ends up with you being a threat to one installation or another.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
beardy'
I said
I think that you missed the point? OR, are you one of those who can'nt be bothered to regain contact?
Quote:
”I’ll just continue on flight plan route”
Sounds very much like an established procedure to me. With the proviso of continuing to establish contact.
”I’ll just continue on flight plan route”
Sounds very much like an established procedure to me. With the proviso of continuing to establish contact.
and make no attempt to contact a controller. In my opinion, not acceptable.
Surely more a case of not being aware that contact has been lost? I've never come across a professional pilot who "can't be bothered to regain contact?" when aware that contact had been lost.
Of course there are other issues such as 121.500 MHz etc.
Of course there are other issues such as 121.500 MHz etc.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are lots of potential reasons for a loss of contact, some the fault of pilots some not but "Can't be bothered to maintain contact". Come on! Thats just a stupid comment And yes, the comment on sovereignty is true for every nation but doesn't explain the massive discrepancy in number of interceptions
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
ShotOne,
You seem to have a downer on the FAF, is there a particular reason? As someone mentioned earlier, you only have to go to France to witness the number of armed police out on the strrets protecting their Liberté, égalité and fraternité.
The FAF do the same in the air. Their dispersed operations, number on alert and readiness is an indication of their determination. As I stated, if they choose to spend their money on policing their airspace, that is their right. If you don't like it you can always Flight Plan to fly round France. I'm sure your company would be over joyed.
As for
, if the cap fits wear it. otherwise don't be so precious.
You seem to have a downer on the FAF, is there a particular reason? As someone mentioned earlier, you only have to go to France to witness the number of armed police out on the strrets protecting their Liberté, égalité and fraternité.
The FAF do the same in the air. Their dispersed operations, number on alert and readiness is an indication of their determination. As I stated, if they choose to spend their money on policing their airspace, that is their right. If you don't like it you can always Flight Plan to fly round France. I'm sure your company would be over joyed.
As for
"Can't be bothered to maintain contact"
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many moons ago, I watched events unfold in Jeddah FIR when a Syrian airliner, bound for Jeddah, crossed the boundary from Jordan into Saudi and was late contacting Jeddah. It took only a couple of minutes for the Saudi Air Force scramble a couple of Lightnings from Tabuk and made the airliner land immediately.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Downer on FAF? Au contraire. But practicing intercepts on unbriefed unwitting passenger airliners IMHO constitutes needless risk
..and those ladling criticism and abuse on civil flight crews but not prepared to acknowledge the TCAS nonsense as an error are guilty of a glaring absence of fair-mindedness
..and those ladling criticism and abuse on civil flight crews but not prepared to acknowledge the TCAS nonsense as an error are guilty of a glaring absence of fair-mindedness
Last edited by ShotOne; 22nd Aug 2017 at 20:47.
How is this supposed to work procedurally? Presumably the interception is initiated by civilian ATC calling the air force who then scramble the fighter(s) – or do the air force intercept on their own initiative? Then during the interception, presumably the fighter leader is talking to his military control and/or to civilian ATC to tell them what he sees? Afterwards, do ATC or air force send a report to the interceptee's operator (Jet2 in this case) or national authority?
Would this be an incident that either BEA or AAIB, or both, would take notice of?
Would this be an incident that either BEA or AAIB, or both, would take notice of?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shot One : suggesting tbe FAF to be incompetent in 2017 indicate you lack of knowledge of the military. Ask around .
As to the TCAS incident you refer and DO ( your capitals ) know for a fact , can you give me the details , incl the exact date ? I will check .
The " incompetence " if you want to use that word is more on the civil side at the moment.
As to the TCAS incident you refer and DO ( your capitals ) know for a fact , can you give me the details , incl the exact date ? I will check .
The " incompetence " if you want to use that word is more on the civil side at the moment.
Old Lurker - If I explained it all I would get a visit from the 'grey sedan', there is not much open source stuff to refer you to but a search of the BBCs archives over the last 15 years highlights the basics. Rest assured a lot of people in lots of official organisations in the UK take an interest in the reports.
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't say the crew was at fault for not checking in on the right frequency, because I don't know what happened, but I would say the crew was definitely at fault for not monitoring the 121.500 freq on their no2 VHF box.