All of these three flights you mentioned will follow the same route from VESMI (a waypoint within Gander-CZQX). I can't post any image yet because I'm new to PPRuNe, but you can see the route they're following here: imgur.com/zgjUphy.png

That means they are flying over Canadian, Danish (Greenland), and Norwegian airspace, entering Russia in the Murmansk region that borders Norway. In the Canadian NOTAM, there was a phone number for the affected aircraft to request an exemption, which I assumed they did successfully, since they all are one-way repatriation flights. From the Danish NOTAM, they seemed to have accepted waiver requests as well till 2300Z (they no longer are). I couldn't find any NOTAMs referring to the airspace ban in Norwegian airspace, i.e. ENOB and ENOR, which are the FIRs they're flying through. Although Norway has said they're banning Russian flights, likely because they are not in the EU, they haven't issued immediate NOTAMs in this regard.
The 1641Z NOTAM did state that they were accommodating exemption requests for the affected aircraft. I thought that was the case here.AFFECTED AIRCRAFT WISHING TO OBTAIN AN AUTHORIZATION OR CLEARANCE
INTO THE ABOVE-MENTIONED AIRSPACE MAY APPLY TO THE MINISTRY OF
TRANSPORT AT 1-877-992-6853 OR 1-613-992-6853. 27 FEB 16:41 2022 UNTIL 25 MAY
16:00 2022 ESTIMATED. CREATED: 27 FEB 16:41 2022

A CBC report on the Aeroflot flight includes the following:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/trans...-ban-1.6366823

IFALPA Safety Bulletin 28 February 2022
 

Referring to "Airspace Closures" IFALPA has issued a Safety Bulletin addressing Interference with.GNSS signals. Text of the SAB refers to military activities and conflict zones.
Link:
https://ifalpa.us13.list-manage.com/...9&e=ec48ca9e7e

22sab06.

Some of the posts here showed a total misunderstanding of what the rules of the air are and what the old Chicago convention stipulates. You can issue sanctions against airlines, not against State flights. Civil ATC is not a police service, any flight entering your airspace with a flight plan will be given service, what happens afterwards is a matter for the authorities after landing. There are more worrying things happening right now than worrying if one Aeroflot aircraft is entering an FIR supposedly not being allowed into .We should be far more worried about the Western aircraft currently taking shortcuts around Ukrainian airspace when hell will break loose.

Quite correct. A flight plan is lodged and ATC only provide the service. What happens at destination is another issue. I remember vividly back in 1982 when KAL007 was shot down, their happened to be a Aeroflot IL-62 on the ground at JFK. It's wheels were chained and trucks parked around it, it wasn't going anywhere.

Qantas is now using the southern route to/from LHR to Darwin:

https://australianaviation.com.au/20...on-flightpath/

ATC Watcher ..... thank you for emphasizing the stuff actually important as comparrd to, single instances not too important to begin with.

I'm not getting out any citation to Convention, Annexes or other sources but - I'm pretty sure that the Convention on International Civil Aviation, known to all concerned as the Chicago Convention of 1944, separates State "aircraft" to which the Convention does not apply, from civil "aircraft" to which it does apply. (Whether it's useful to call it "old"....I'm leaving that for some other thread perhaps.)

It is very simple. The Chicago Convention applies to aircraft which are registered by a Civil Aviation Authority (as defined in the Convention) of a member state. All other aircraft are excluded. It does not matter what activity is said aircraft engaged in, it falls under the Convention. However there are articles pertaining to different activities (commercial, government,SAR, humanitarian relief, etc ).

Not quite correct Andrasz. As you can see from this extract from the Convention, WillowRun was on the right track re differences between "state" aircraft and other civil registered aircraft. Some "state" aircraft are civil registered (i.e. police aircraft) while others are not (i.e. military aircraft) but all have special conditions attached with respect to operating into the sovereign airspace of another country (or "State" using ICAO and UN terminology).

Civil and State aircraft (Art. 3 of the Convention)

a) This Convention shall be applicable only to civil aircraft, and shall not be applicable to state aircraft.

b) Aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be state aircraft.

c) No state aircraft of a contracting State shall fly over the territory of another State or land thereon without authorization by special agreement or otherwise, and in accordance with the terms thereof.

d) The contracting States undertake, when issuing regulations for their state aircraft , that they will have due regard for the safety of navigation of civil aircraft.

Cheers,
Grizz

Reuters: Hundreds of Russia plane leases to be axed after Western sanctions

Nordwind currently have a Moscow to Cancun flight in the air. Flight time of circa 13 hours due to the extended routing. Let’s hope they don’t need to divert en route or there will be problems!

What problems? if he is in emergency he will be given full assistance like any other aircraft in need. Let's stop this witch hunt.

As to the definition of what is a state aircraft , the 1944 definition moved with time into a grey area. Aircraft carrying head of State for instance can be considered State aircraft , even if a non military aircraft is being used..
A definition now widely accepted is the following : ,

.

Thanks, as that tendency (witch hunting) interferes with gleaning useful information as regards planes that may or may not get back off the ground in the near term.

President Biden just closed US airspace to Russian aircraft in his state of the union address.

What witch hunt?? I never said they would be denied assistance but once they’re on the ground that’s when the problems start. I think it’s a bad idea to be flying a route where all your diversion airfields are in countries in which your banned from their airspace.

Are these airspace closures viable in the long term ? What is the end game for the West with respect to denial of airspace if Putin doesn’t get out of Ukraine, which is the most likely scenario ?

Transport Canada is taking action with respect to Canada's airspace being closed to Russian aircraft:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north...nife-1.6370725

..
Hmm, any images of the large all-terrain utility vehicle?

The count for Russian intrusions into Canadian airspace stands at what now?

Well, there must be simple explanations, because

Edit: FR24 currently shows 15 aircraft on the ground for YZF. My limited access only displays two, both domestic [Canadian North B733 (C-FKCN) and Air Tindi DH6C (C-FOPN)]

IJM's Dassault Falcon 900EX (VP-CVS) from GVA arrived YZF Mar 1 11:59.

I'm confused.

So was or wasn't this a Russian aircraft ?

IJM (International Jet Management GmbH) is, of course, an Austrian company.

This has all the makings of a non-story.

Unless chartered by Russians? "...Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) prohibiting Russian aircraft (owned, chartered, or certified)..."

Perhaps it is a story.

Probably these vehicles:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5691fc5e12.png

Diary of expedition MLAE-2022

There is probably more to this than meets the eye. These vehicles have been driving around on the polar ice since 2013. Affirming sovereignty in the Canadian Arctic has been an ongoing issue for the Canadian Government. It's probably a hot-button issue now.

Maybe.

My understanding is that Transport Canada has yet to rule on whether the NOTAM has been violated by the arrival of Russian passengers on an Austrian-owned/operated, Caymans-registered aircraft.

Time will tell.

I expect the key issue will be "Who was the charterer?".

I have emailed the Bermudan CAA to see if they are going to withdraw all Russian VB/VP/VQ- registered aircraft,as Bermuda is a British Overseas Territory. So far ,no reply....

Volga Depnr AN 124 in CYYZ
 

Saw one parked in the penalty box as we taxied by today. It will be interesting to see whether it will ever be released.

You'll need to send a few more emails - the VP/VQ prefixes are used by Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Montserrat and Turks & Caicos as well as Bermuda.

You will want to check with M- and T7- as well as the number of N- aircraft registered through the Bank of Utah Trustee etc... which is a large number of US aircraft beneficially owned by foreigners through a trust.

This aircraft is owned by a russian whichever way he tries to hide it. Flown by russian pilots. I have had dealings with these people. The owner plans to drive around the earth, via the Poles. That will probably get delayed for a while. A UK company has been assisting them in the polar preparations.

Repatriation flight for Russian nationals trapped in Hungary. Similar flight going to Larnaca.

More flights planned for the weekend, to Munich, Geneva and Amsterdam.

Regarding IJM's Dassault Falcon 900EX (VP-CVS) from GVA arrived YZF Mar 1 11:59.
..
and
..
A) Fines seem inconsequential.
B) What of the passenger prevented from leaving with the aircraft ...

Edit: Flight History: VP-CVS. From YZF (ATD 2022.03.04 13:24) To GVA (STA 06:00)

Evidently neither of these assertions appears to be correct.

Exactly what evidence appears to contradict the assertions... ?

Au contraire. There is nothing in the canadian news that contradicts what I wrote. Dunard Engineering of Switzerland has unclear ownership (exactly what expat Russians do). It was in the Panama papers. https://panama.data2www.com/e/10144695

As for the pilots, I am sure they have more than two. But I am looking at the business cards of the two I met. Russians.

In this present day world context, yes. However, in Canada, maximum fines for offenses are prescribed by regulation, and those sound like maximums for the offense which could be applied to the situation. If the government had the authority to apply an immense fine which in this context, many of us would consider appropriate, there would otherwise be a chorus of complaint about unrestrained bureaucrats going rogue. What has been done sends a signal, which remaining socially acceptable in a normal life context in Canada.

And yet certain UK and German 747 freight operators are still happily operating in the UK/EU/US.

See the link in Eddy's post.

Transport Canada explicitly stated that the aircraft is not Russian-owned, and identified only the passengers as being Russian nationals.

Expensive russian charter
 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...ntering-canada

Though I suppose if you can afford a vacation in the high arctic the fine is small change.

DaveReidUK I am with oceancrosser on this...

In related news, Aeroflot just announced the suspension of all international operations as of 8 March...
(Some news sites suggesting to avoid aircraft being repossessed by lessors)