Cool things seen on FlightRadar

[Ash_]

There's an Osprey approaching the West coast of the Isle of Wight at the moment, appears to have come from Portland, which also apparently is where HMS QE is at anchor currently, wondering if it's landed on the ship for trails. Very rarely see them down south, hoping it turns left and comes close to work, so I can get a view.

[Dr Jekyll]

yellowjack said:

I recall teaching aircraft recognition, and wondering why the juddering fk we had to teach the "NATO reporting names" of all 'their' aircraft. How hard is it to say "Mig-21", ffs? Why is it any easier to say "Fishbed"?

I also recall the regular 'Threat' magazine we used to get issued in units to keep us updated with developments in Soviet Bloc equipment. And how it morphed into 'Thriend' magazine when we were warned off for the 1991 Gulf War. Silhouettes of friendly forces and enemy forces kit were suddenly largely identical, which made life interesting out in the desert.

I saw the point of it with the 'Foxbat' though. Brand new Soviet fighter, known to be a MIG, previous MIG as 21 so presumably this was MIG-23, but NATO called it Foxbat. When it turned out it was the MIG-25 and the 23 was totally different there was some confusion, but if everyone called it Foxbat and kept calling it Foxbat we all knew what we meant.
Not that either were a real issue for our Air Training Corps squadron in Essex.

[srob]

tonyvid said:

Unusual to get a track out of Lakenheath

You used to be able to see them on there all the time. I live locally to there and used to love being able to have notice to go in the garden with my camera if something good was coming in!

[ducktail_2.7]

Ash_ said:

There's an Osprey approaching the West coast of the Isle of Wight at the moment, appears to have come from Portland, which also apparently is where HMS QE is at anchor currently, wondering if it's landed on the ship for trails. Very rarely see them down south, hoping it turns left and comes close to work, so I can get a view.

Landed at the HeliOps base, sat around for a few hours before heading back east along the coast.

[LHB]

This 787 was flying not far off it’s quoted ceiling height unless it was some sort of radar glitch.

[Rod200SX]

My dad sent these through. Couple RAF ones doing their thing but I can't find any info on Snake57, anyone got deets of type of plane etc?


|https://thumbsnap.com/Tj7cxUq4[/url]

Edited by Rod200SX on Thursday 4th March 11:34

[LHB]

Rod200SX said:

My dad sent these through. Couple RAF ones doing their thing but I can't find any info on Snake57, anyone got deets of type of plane etc?

A snake callsign around there and with that flightplan looks like it will be Shadow R1s

[anonymous-user]

LHB said:

This 787 was flying not far off it’s quoted ceiling height unless it was some sort of radar glitch.

43100 Is the maximum certified altitude but the 787 regularly operates at 43000 in normal flights.

If it says something like 42975 on FR24 then the aircraft is actually cruising at 43000ft. Then the 15ft difference might be something to do with the data sent or received to FR24 or maybe a momentary divergence from that altitude. I think you often see aircraft on fr24 not exactly at the cruising levels they’re aiming for tbh.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 4th March 07:24

[Scaleybrat]

LHB said:

Rod200SX said:

My dad sent these through. Couple RAF ones doing their thing but I can't find any info on Snake57, anyone got deets of type of plane etc?

A snake callsign around there and with that flightplan looks like it will be Shadow R1s

Correct, Snake is a 14 Squadron call sign based on a former member, Sqn Ldr Eric Aldrovandi, who now lives in Scotland.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/squadrons-longe...

[s2kjock]

Scaleybrat said:

LHB said:

Rod200SX said:

My dad sent these through. Couple RAF ones doing their thing but I can't find any info on Snake57, anyone got deets of type of plane etc?

A snake callsign around there and with that flightplan looks like it will be Shadow R1s

Correct, Snake is a 14 Squadron call sign based on a former member, Sqn Ldr Eric Aldrovandi, who now lives in Scotland.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/squadrons-longe...

I'd seen this doing something similar around a couple of sections of the Cairngorms at the weekend.

Are they just training by looking at "stuff" already in these areas, or will they be looking for targets (people) deliberately trying not to be found in conjunction with the exercise?

[Krikkit]

Dr Jekyll said:

I saw the point of it with the 'Foxbat' though. Brand new Soviet fighter, known to be a MIG, previous MIG as 21 so presumably this was MIG-23, but NATO called it Foxbat. When it turned out it was the MIG-25 and the 23 was totally different there was some confusion, but if everyone called it Foxbat and kept calling it Foxbat we all knew what we meant.
Not that either were a real issue for our Air Training Corps squadron in Essex.

Isn't it also for radio durability? Easy to lose a simple numeric digit over a radio crackle

[LotusOmega375D]

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

[Total loss]

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

[tonyvid]

Total loss said:

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

I try not to think about that every time they fly directly over my house! (I'm to the east of Bury St Eds so under their circuit)

[MarkwG]

tonyvid said:

Total loss said:

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

I try not to think about that every time they fly directly over my house! (I'm to the east of Bury St Eds so under their circuit)

Triggers broom, though - not much of 1957 left, I suspect.

[Total loss]

tonyvid said:

Total loss said:

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

I try not to think about that every time they fly directly over my house! (I'm to the east of Bury St Eds so under their circuit)

Just to add, 57-1419 first flew on 25th May 1958 & was in service in June 58, currently with the Arizona ANG, so not likely to be flying over you.

[RichardAP]

Had these two make a racket the other evening, taking off one after the other, and flying in convoy to Plymouth before coming back to Bournemouth, Amber1 and Amber2




And this one clearly decided to take the scenic route

[Total loss]

MarkwG said:

tonyvid said:

Total loss said:

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

I try not to think about that every time they fly directly over my house! (I'm to the east of Bury St Eds so under their circuit)

Triggers broom, though - not much of 1957 left, I suspect.

I did wonder that, but the main airframe & most skins would still be original I'd think?

[Dr Jekyll]

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

..and less than 57 years after the Wight brothers first flight.

[MarkwG]

Total loss said:

MarkwG said:

tonyvid said:

Total loss said:

LotusOmega375D said:

I know this has been mentioned before, but the age of these active USAF KC135s is incredible. Take this one for example: it first flew 62 years ago in January 1959, which is well over a year BEFORE Vulcan XH558’s first flight.

I had read before that a KC-135 was the oldest aircraft currently in USAF service, looking it up, it isn't this one! there's older, only just though. 57-1419 being the oldest.

I try not to think about that every time they fly directly over my house! (I'm to the east of Bury St Eds so under their circuit)

Triggers broom, though - not much of 1957 left, I suspect.

I did wonder that, but the main airframe & most skins would still be original I'd think?

Yes, possibly so, depends on what the checks reveal - apologies for the link but explains better than I ever could - https://simpleflying.com/aircraft-maintenance-chec...