We have lost the plot !

Re 30

Low n’ slow

Thanks to you for the facts. Your fourth para. explains much including the usual level of thoughlessness and incompetance that, more often than not, accompanies these and like matters.

Your fifth para. touches on another and very realistic concern.

It’s worth noting that, as in 9/11 the Americans are not immune from bungling. It seems that F16’s were sent in the wrong direction so that by the time they were corrected, four commercials had impacted.

Because of the element of surprise, I do not think that it is possible to make an effective defence against an airborne terrorist – hi-jacker or not – coming at speed from a relatively short distance.

John Green

Just a few (of that rare breed) facts, to put this incident in perspective.

The pilot of the helicopter in question did not ‘dial up’ an incorrect transponder code. A faulty transponder sent out the spurious message.

The helicopter was at the time in direct radio communication with a nearby airport. (I have spoken to the manager of the facility that was talking to him at the time).

It seems that when the ‘scramble’ was initiated no-one had thought to contact any local airports to see whether they were handling such traffic.

I hope that as well as a discussion on awaking the great British public from their post lunch slumbers, a part of any review might just touch on the safety implications of firing a pair of fast jets, low level and at ten miles a minute, right through the middle of VFR airspace across the heart of the UK, which was no doubt occupied by other aircraft at the time?

I did mention in a much earlier that it was possible that it was used by the authorities to show there were on the ball so to speak…But I’m not so sure they themselves would have had to put any effort into that.

I would think that media hype played a large part.

They were even going on about what sonic booms were and almost making it sound like War Of The Worlds.

I would think the security forces just did their job and the media and the public did the rest.

As ATR says, this sort of heightened scramble went on for years and it was just a part of life.

Nowadays they like to make the biggest thing they can out of nothing to fill the news.

Whether they did or not doesn’t really matter as this only happened because there was a perceived threat and as far as they knew at the time a real threat.

It is useful and perhaps to know that a quick response was forthcoming

As for cost to the taxpayer, if none of this happened and they dismantled the extra high security saving millions, you won’t see any reductions in you tax bill or a refund.

As GarryR has said, I don’t think they really had any other choice in the circumstances. However I’m inclined to think as John G has suggested that they made sure they made the most out of it to get the message out to any would be terrorists.
Having said that was it the authorities that have made a fuss or was it the press themselves that were just having a field day? I don’t seem to recall this sort of interest in scrambles during the cold war. I presume F4’s went supersonic over land when scrambled?

I don’t think it was a demonstration of any sort.

There is a heightened state of alert over and above the present nor due to the forthcoming Olympics

A helicopter sent a hijack code and the authorities reacted to that in the way they have been set up and trained to do

It is a simple as that.

The fact the code was sent by mistake is irrelevant.

As I said above…just what were they supposed to do?

Seems to me that a big bang, creating lots of news, is just what the government needs to demonstrate how well they’re protecting us against the ‘terrorist threat’.

I can only guess at the actual cost of the operation, let’s say £25k per hour for these aeroplanes, so for a minimal investment the government has created a puplicity coup for themselves – bags of publicity showing how we can all sleep safely in the knowledge that they’re on the case…

I said that a repeat of 9/11 is UNLIKELY to be repeated within these SHORES for sound logistical and security reasons.

To be fair, security isn’t exactly water tight.
You only have to look at previous topics on here that related to Urban explorers getting airside at various airfields and didn’t get caught by security. If they can do it I guess others can too.

And while you investigate, the threat turns out to be true but it’s too late, they’ve already flown their craft into their intended target by the time you get any kind of prevention mechanism mobilised.

Yep, bemused sums it up quite nicely with that quote.

Personal attacks are not tolerated as you well know

Moggy
Moderator

Re 21
……
What was required was a proportionate investigation not some Hollywood style posturing via sonic booms !
…..

John Green

And while you investigate, the threat turns out to be true but it’s too late, they’ve already flown their craft into their intended target by the time you get any kind of prevention mechanism mobilised.

Well done John, you just killed 600 people.

You should listen to what you’re proposing. It’s rediculous at best. Totaly insane at worst.

Re 21

You’re imagining that the pilot and hi-jacker are two people. They could be one and the same. In which case he/she won’t advertise their presence.

I said that a repeat of 9/11 is UNLIKELY to be repeated within these SHORES for sound logistical and security reasons.

What was required was a proportionate investigation not some Hollywood style posturing via sonic booms !

What is this contemporary obsession with exaggeration ? It seems that everything has to be more, bigger and louder. Does no one anymore understand that understatement more effectively makes the point?

John Green

No would-be hi-jacker will advertise his/her presence by squawking emergency. That is inviting an unwelcome response.

John Green

They wouldn’t…the pilot would without the knowledge of the hijackers hopefully.

That’s the idea of squawking a code rather that spouting it across the airwaves on radio

The media and public over reacted, given the code squawked the emergency security response was the correct thing to do.

The very fact that it is perceived that an attack like 911 is not likely to happen possibly makes it more likely to happen simply because it stands a better chance of success if folks think it would never happen so don’t pay too much attention.

To be effective security has to be in place for any event anywhere.

Not nice and certainly not what I wish to see…or pay for, but sadly a necessity of reality nowadays.

The bottom line is…a helicopter squawked “Hijack”…what else were they supposed to do?

The Eurofighters were an exercise in futility and un-necessary expense. No would-be hi-jacker will advertise his/her presence by squawking emergency. That is inviting an unwelcome response.

But the pilot might put the code in if hijacked, what happens between the hijacker and the pilot then will only reveal itself over the course of the flight. The Typhoons would have checked them out to see what the possible situation is likely to turn out as and make a decision on what to do.

As for targets, as moggy mentioned GCHQ and other potential targets in the area.

A more likely scenario, is a lightish a’c on a remote farm strip loaded with a ton of explosive which takes a selected route towards a likely target at 500 hundred feet or less. If anyone sees it coming, I’ll be more than amazed.

The helicopter, if I recall correctly was from Aintree. Helicopters can and do land in some pretty unusual places that planes can’t. Why use a farm strip when you can use a chopper in the middle of nowhere out of sight?

As for low flying, theres lots of NIMBY’s that are pretty much ready to call up the local airport or police station to report anything flying over their house at any altitude. Flying around at 500ft might catch the attention of alot of people, not just NIMBY’s, though.

If it had been the worst outcome and the chopper was hijacked and crashed into something

For example GCHQ?

This could well be the key to the extreme sensitivity in this case

Moggy

Re 15 and 17

This subject is about over reaction, panic, overkill and stupidity.

The Eurofighters were an exercise in futility and un-necessary expense. No would-be hi-jacker will advertise his/her presence by squawking emergency. That is inviting an unwelcome response.

A repeat of 9/11 originating from within these shores is for logistical and security reasons – unlikely.

A more likely scenario, is a lightish a’c on a remote farm strip loaded with a ton of explosive which takes a selected route towards a likely target at 500 hundred feet or less. If anyone sees it coming, I’ll be more than amazed.

John Green

EGTC that is an excellent summing up of the situation faced by those who decide to scramble the QRA. Offshore intercepts in peacetime do not have the same urgency, hence no max rate rush and range has to be taken into account.

If can imagine a scenario where a hi jacked helicopter packed with explosive and a suicide bomber is heading overland within range of several targets then I am sure others with ill intent have had thr same idea.

This intercept demonstrates an alert attitude to threats and I say well done.

Why would QRA aircraft be instructed to produce a sonic boom overland? The hijackers wouldn’t be able to hear it…

What was wrong with another helicopter? Or, a Tucano? Or, anything with a sufficient turn of speed that is equipped with military and civilian radios operating on their respective frequencies?

Because squawking 7500 alerts ATC to a potential danger to national security and the typhoons, part of QRA, are the most capable planes to get to the aircraft quickly to check it out and deal with an aircraft that may not have the most innocent intentions.

If it had been the worst outcome and the chopper was hijacked and crashed into something the public would be asking why there was no response from anyone until after the accident.

It’s just a case of a damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Could be worse though, on another forum some people seem very very obsessed with the idea that they went to intercept a UFO. :rolleyes: :p

Was it entirely necessary to scramble not one but two hugely expensive bits of kit and then to indulge in the un-necessary histrionics of sonic booms?

AFAIK, the alert jets ALWAYS scramble in pairs, a lead and a wingman.
This situation was no different to any other scramble in that respect.

I suppose you think it’s a waste of money sending out soldiers on combat patrol in troops rather than on their own, right?
To say nothing about daring to spend your tax money on arming said troops with 4 full magazines rather than just 2.

Autostick

The cost of these shenanigans is a point; it is not THE point.

John Green

I Agree ..instead of these highly professional pilots doing the job , that I the Tax payer , pay them to do . I would much prefer to see them lounging around in stale crew rooms , drinking instant coffee , reading dubious magazines & popping out for the occassional ciggy. Start time 9am , go home at 5pm. The nice expensive aircraft can be drained of oil & fuel & be stored in damp sheds & good 20 minute walk away , down the bottom of the airfield . Now that we have Community support Officers taking over most of the UK security, perhaps we can do away with the whole of the UK Armed forces . ( In the great scheme of UK Defence spending , I would imagine that sending 2 Typhoons up & going supersonic , would cost mere pennies )