Cold War question.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South East England
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cold War question.
I realise this is a bit of a long shot, but here goes.
In the late sixties and early seventies, aircraft of the Soviet Air Force were frequently pictured in the national press, having being intercepted by RAF fighters.
Most, if not all, came around the North Cape and eventually returned whence they came with a Lightning or Phantom in attendance.
However, some were en-route to Soviet bases in Cuba and would have to negotiate the NAT Organised Track System one way or another.
It has always intrigued me as to how exactly they did this, so ladies and gents, did they:
(a) Fly under the OTS at, say F280, and accept the fuel penalty thus incurred?
(b) Fly over the top of same at perhaps F410?
(c) Blunder through, making their own arrangements vis-a-vis separation, perhaps by choosing to fly at an intermediate level?
(d) Do something as decadently western and conventional as request a clearance?
From memory, admittedly a bit rusty, most were Tu20 Bear or M4 Bison long range bombers and I suspect option (b) might have been somewhat ambitious.
It's all long time ago but still a fascinating subject.
Thanks,
N o t a
In the late sixties and early seventies, aircraft of the Soviet Air Force were frequently pictured in the national press, having being intercepted by RAF fighters.
Most, if not all, came around the North Cape and eventually returned whence they came with a Lightning or Phantom in attendance.
However, some were en-route to Soviet bases in Cuba and would have to negotiate the NAT Organised Track System one way or another.
It has always intrigued me as to how exactly they did this, so ladies and gents, did they:
(a) Fly under the OTS at, say F280, and accept the fuel penalty thus incurred?
(b) Fly over the top of same at perhaps F410?
(c) Blunder through, making their own arrangements vis-a-vis separation, perhaps by choosing to fly at an intermediate level?
(d) Do something as decadently western and conventional as request a clearance?
From memory, admittedly a bit rusty, most were Tu20 Bear or M4 Bison long range bombers and I suspect option (b) might have been somewhat ambitious.
It's all long time ago but still a fascinating subject.
Thanks,
N o t a
I think it is fair to say that they caused chaos. A form of option "c" above is probably the best answer, not a million miles away from the USN practice od "due regard" though. Their transit flights were not only to Cuba, there was also a detachment at Conakry in West Africa. The Cuba and Conakry aircraft were normally the Bear D, but the Bear F was a regular visitor to the N. Atlantic as well. The Bear D would also come out to observe NATO exercises and sometimes the Badgers (can't recall the model) but they rarely came south of the "gaps".
I am sure that some of the older Shanwick ATCOs might be able to shed a bit more light on the ATC aspect of your question.
Rgds
YS
I am sure that some of the older Shanwick ATCOs might be able to shed a bit more light on the ATC aspect of your question.
Rgds
YS
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having 'done' a few Bears (?TU95?) in the 70's, I cannot recall the cruise levels but think they were indeed around 280/300, sufficient to give the 'Frightening' some challenging formation flying
I suspect that since they did not 'recognise' Western airspace a flight plan/ NATS route would have been the last thing on their minds, and 'cruise levels' when not 'playing' with their friendly interceptors would probably have been optimum.
Amazing trips, though, up to 4 hrs 'on-station' in the Atlantic with the Russian fleet and then all the way back home, or as YS says, on to Cuba or Conakry. They were pretty heavy when westbound through the Iceland/Faroes gap having just tanked.
I suspect that since they did not 'recognise' Western airspace a flight plan/ NATS route would have been the last thing on their minds, and 'cruise levels' when not 'playing' with their friendly interceptors would probably have been optimum.
Amazing trips, though, up to 4 hrs 'on-station' in the Atlantic with the Russian fleet and then all the way back home, or as YS says, on to Cuba or Conakry. They were pretty heavy when westbound through the Iceland/Faroes gap having just tanked.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South East England
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yellow Sun and BOAC............
Many thanks for your replies, Gentlemen. You've both helped shed some light on the subject.
If either of you (or any or other PPRuNer) could recommend any reading material or website, I'd be grateful to hear from you.
Thanks again, chaps.
N o t a
Many thanks for your replies, Gentlemen. You've both helped shed some light on the subject.
If either of you (or any or other PPRuNer) could recommend any reading material or website, I'd be grateful to hear from you.
Thanks again, chaps.
N o t a
Re: Cold War question.
I have note in an old diary for 14 April 1977 of Shanwick on 127.9 VHF issuing the following general warning:
"Russian Bear aircraft sighted at 61n1350w, time 1100, Flight Level 285, heading south."
"Russian Bear aircraft sighted at 61n1350w, time 1100, Flight Level 285, heading south."
