Russia WRECKING Civilian Traffic Airspace

[Nictoshek]

Russian warplanes risking safety of European airliners, says Nato chief

Jens Stoltenberg, the new secretary general of Nato, tells the Telegraph that more Russian military jets are flying over Europe without contacting air traffic control, raising the risk of mid-air collisions

By David Blair, Brussels

15 Nov 2014

Russia is placing civilian flights at risk by dispatching jet fighters and bombers into European airspace without following safety procedures, according to Nato’s secretary general.

Jens Stoltenberg told the Telegraph that Nato fighters had intercepted Russian military aircraft over 100 times so far this year, compared with 30 such incidents in 2013.

Russia’s long-range bombers and spy planes usually stay in international airspace, but they deliberately ignore safeguards designed to reduce the risk of collision with civilian flights. In particular, they switch off the “transponders” that allow aircraft to detect one another.

“They have increased their military air activity along Nato’s borders,” said Mr Stoltenberg. “We have done what we are supposed to do: we have intercepted them, partly because of increased air policing.”

He added: “The problem is that many of the Russian pilots don’t turn on their transponders, they don’t file their flight plans and they don’t communicate with civilian air traffic control. This poses a risk to civilian air traffic and therefore this is a problem, especially when the Russian activity increases – because they have more Russian military planes in the air.”

In March, a Boeing 737 from Scandinavian Airlines came within a split second of colliding with a Russian spy plane. The airliner, carrying 132 passengers, had just taken off from Copenhagen on a routine flight to Rome when it passed within 300 feet of a Russian IL-20 surveillance aircraft.

The intruder had switched off its transponders and failed to contact air traffic control. Only the quick reaction of the Scandinavian Airlines pilot – and the fact that the incident occurred in daylight and in good visibility – prevented a near miss from becoming a disaster.

Mr Stoltenberg urged Russia to obey the “norms” of flying in crowded airspace. “It’s not illegal to fly military planes in international airspace,” he said. “But it’s not in accordance with good norms to do it without communicating with civilian air traffic control.”

“They are posing a risk and that’s the reason why we would like them to turn on their transponders, to file their flight plans and to communicate with civilian air traffic control, especially since the number of Russian planes has increased.”

Almost every week, formations of Russian bombers probe the borders of European countries, testing the reaction times of their potential adversaries and, on occasion, carrying out mock attacks.

Britain is responsible for policing thousands of square miles of airspace over the Atlantic and the North Sea. The most recent known incident occurred on Oct 29 when RAF Typhoon fighters intercepted two Russian TU-95 Bear bombers approaching over the North Sea. Both turned back before reaching British airspace.

[karl]

Nictoe

It is as indicated by the presentation a case of various violations air safety between Russian military heavy and fighter aircraft to heavy turbine powered civilian public transport aircraft. This being both irresponsible and reckless endangerment with needless risk to other civilian airtraffic.

There are minimum separation requirements that are well known internationally and it is not a mystery to these Russian pilots. For the reason by separation minima that is not to airtraffic controlers to regulate, but to the responsibility of each respective pilot to use whilst in international air space. It is air separation between of various lines of travel exampled by: vertical separation and horizontal separation. In this manner is for safety reasons for prevention of air accidents resulting in collusions and wake conditions created by both airframe disturbance to ambient air and turbine engine exhaust.

With military heavy and fighter aircraft approaching a foreign airspace restriction, is fairly common practice to most industrial states. It is a testing of new air defense electronic detection systems another state will have. These frequencies are then recorded by the opposites for deciphering, retention and for retransmitting to defeat the defending radar detection equipment.

It is interesting the Russians are still using the old school Tu-95 turbo prop bombers. Those things seem to test the time and never die. Although the airframes have been modified over time and all electronics, hydrolics/power systems updated, the old girls are still flying.

The Russian engineers were in the first with this machine, to design into the double counter rotating airscrews {propellers}. The manner of defeating propeller damage caused by tip travel speed exceeding the speed of sound with resulting sonic viberation, that normally will destruct the blades resulting in very heavy damage to both the airframe and power plant.

The use of such turboprop power systems has many advantageous in both fuel economy and usable payload. For it allows over a pure gas turbine, for longer range, longer time in air. Disadvantages are: Crew must wear protection against hearing damage from emitted high sonic air viberation.

Karl

[Nictoshek]

It is interesting the Russians are still using the old school Tu-95 turbo prop bombers.

Those were something else again Karl.

[karl]

Nictoe

It was good of you with your gift of Youtube video of both the history of Russian aviation and spotlighting of the TU-95.

Russian engineering although noting wrong with it, is different. For as notice of the close ups of the enterer of the Tu-95, quality is placed where needed. As with this Russian machine as very excellent for the work it is designed to do.

The American Boeing B-52 is equally as excellent. It is most different on the enterer then to emagine from the exterior observation, not much room for crew movement. Although being of a very old design, with the timely upgrades to both the airframe/power plants/aviation instruments and weapon systems, it has stood the test of time very well.

Two different machines for the similar purpose. As well as two different societies but with the similar purpose, a people, a land, but with similar purpose,, to maintain and protect their way of life.

Karl