Mach Loop Typhoon ‘Incident’.

[AshVX220]

So is the 250ft rule straight down the vertical to the ground (in which case I think the pilot is OK)?

Or is it 250ft from the jet in any direction to the nearest piece of planet earth (in which case I think they're in the st)?

[mebe]

I think the latter although you'd need a pilot to answer, also think the rule applies to things like people and buildings.

[frodo_monkey]

MSD (minimum separation distance) = a bubble

AGL (above ground level) = a vertical line from ac to ground

This would/should have been flown to 250ft MSD.

[768]

Tony1963 said:

Let me get this right.

A handful of people here are saying it's ok to:

1. Fly an RAF Typhoon outside clearly defined rules. Rules that have been created so that when minor mistakes are made (pilots are human) newer versions of 1980s me don't have to go indentifying wreckage and pointing out gristle.

My dad reckoned it was fine.

Am I supposed to play top trumps now too?

[AshVX220]

frodo_monkey said:

MSD (minimum separation distance) = a bubble

AGL (above ground level) = a vertical line from ac to ground

This would/should have been flown to 250ft MSD.

Thanks, MSD makes far more sense obviously, in which case the pilot here is probably in the st, even without the multiple roll exit.

However, fecking awesome video, awesome flying and hopefully they'll just get a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again.

Finally, very sad that even in an open environment like Mach Loop, you still have the regular's there who think they're somehow special and should be respected, just for walking up a hill and taking pictures!

[Gary C]

J4CKO said:

Lemming Train said:

There are bus spotters?! WTF!

My dad used to work on the engineering side and said they used to hang about outside.

As hobbies go its pretty harmless I guess.

Happened to mention Midland buses were always red and the Whelk seller doing the rounds in the Pub went into a full spiel on all the buses, types,colours etc of the regional bus services. Couldn't shut him up.

You can tell that was a long time ago, nationalised bus services and whelk sellers !

I feel old

[Gameface]

Tony1963 said:

I'm not aware of anyone here having a notebook and lists and a twitch.

Have a look on the number plate thread.

[jurbie]

I've been to the Mach Loop loads of times and have always and without fail met some pretty decent types up there. I've never seen anyone get sniffy about people being in 'their' spot and the two mentioned earlier arguing about their tripod position were likely also on their first visit as everyone knows a tripod is the last thing you need to track a fast jet through a valley.

Having said that I avoid the Facebook groups as they are a nightmare. The unwritten rule is to not post pictures of afterburners, navigators holding up signs, planes which are too inverted and I'm pretty sure air crew sitting on an open loading ramp. I stand with the sentiment expressed here that this is the most photographed military training area in the world and if the pilots and crews don't realise that then they perhaps shouldn't be doing the job they do.

The best comedy is when something rare comes through, naturally there will be people with privileged information who will share it with a select few friends but this is apparently evidence of the massive clique of veteran loopers keeping information to themselves. Of course if that sort of info was broadcast across social media then they'd be complaining about all the people turning up and parking inconsiderately. They forget about the outrage every summer when the car parks overflow and the police turn up and ticket all the badly parked cars or worse they turn up late and can't find a parking spot themselves.

[eccles]

frodo_monkey said:

MSD (minimum separation distance) = a bubble

AGL (above ground level) = a vertical line from ac to ground

This would/should have been flown to 250ft MSD.

I was lucky enough to get a jolly before I left, and saw less than half that height on the rad alt at one point. Somewhere in the low level area in Wales there was a valley with a bunch of new age types living teepees and this seemed to be a well known spot to the crews to engage in a bit of very low level flying.

[essayer]

Have I got this right

Civvies in VFR have the 500ft rule (which doesn't include the ground) so in a remote area you could fly a 152 at 200ft AGL and not get into trouble.. but Sq Ldr Biggles in his F35 isn't allowed to do that according to RAF rules?

[LimaDelta]

essayer said:

Have I got this right

Civvies in VFR have the 500ft rule (which doesn't include the ground) so in a remote area you could fly a 152 at 200ft AGL and not get into trouble..

Essentially, yes. Lower even. As long as there is nobody around.

Rules of the Air Regulations 2007 said:

SECTION 3 LOW FLYING RULE
Low flying prohibitions 5.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), an aircraft shall comply with the low flying prohibitions in paragraph (3) unless exempted by rule 6. (2) If an aircraft is flying in circumstances such that more than one of the low flying prohibitions apply, it shall fly at the greatest height required by any of the applicable prohibitions. (3) The low flying prohibitions are as follows—

(a) Failure of power unit An aircraft shall not be flown below such height as would enable it to make an emergency landing without causing danger to persons or property on the surface in the event of a power unit failure.

(b) The 500 feet rule Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.

(c) The 1,000 feet rule Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft flying over a congested area of a city town or settlement shall not fly below a height of 1,000 feet above the highest fixed obstacle within a horizontal radius of 600 metres of the aircraft.

(d) The land clear rule An aircraft flying over a congested area of a city, town or settlement shall not fly below such height as would permit the aircraft to land clear of the congested area in the event of a power unit failure.

(e) Flying over open air assemblies Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft shall not fly over an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons below the higher of the following heights— (i) 1,000 feet; or (ii) such height as would permit the aircraft to land clear of the assembly in the event of a power unit failure. (f) Landing and taking off near open air assemblies An aircraft shall not land or take-off within 1,000 metres of an organised, open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons except— (i) at an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA; or (ii) at a landing site which is not an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA and with the written permission of the organiser of the assembly.

[Wobbegong]

essayer said:

Have I got this right

Civvies in VFR have the 500ft rule (which doesn't include the ground) so in a remote area you could fly a 152 at 200ft AGL and not get into trouble.. but Sq Ldr Biggles in his F35 isn't allowed to do that according to RAF rules?

We can water ski as well

[FiF]

At the risk of causing a diversionary rift and poking a wasp nest I'll just mention Sqn Ldr Dickie Millward in the hanger gap at RAF Holme-on-Spalding-Moor.

[aeropilot]

FiF said:

At the risk of causing a diversionary rift and poking a wasp nest I'll just mention Sqn Ldr Dickie Millward in the hanger gap at RAF Holme-on-Spalding-Moor.

Or in more recent years (but still nearly 30 years ago!) the infamous low level reheat pass between the hangers at St Athan........

[magpie215]

aeropilot said:

Or in more recent years (but still nearly 30 years ago!) the infamous low level reheat pass between the hangers at St Athan........

[ben5575]

AshVX220 said:

So is the 250ft rule straight down the vertical to the ground (in which case I think the pilot is OK)?

Or is it 250ft from the jet in any direction to the nearest piece of planet earth (in which case I think they're in the st)?

500ft is when you can see the legs on cows. 250ft is when you can see the legs on sheep. So as long as there are cows and sheep around, you'll be reet.

This being Wales, there shouldn't really be any excuse...

[Yertis]

FiF said:

At the risk of causing a diversionary rift and poking a wasp nest I'll just mention Sqn Ldr Dickie Millward in the hanger gap at RAF Holme-on-Spalding-Moor.

I used to have an ex "Meatbox" pilot on my staff. Remember when that US aircraft collided with a cable car's cables in the '90s? I asked why a pilot would even try to fly under the cables. He replied that that's how fighter pilots think – "I wonder if I can get between those two trees?". Apparently the preferred way to fly low was to fly so low and so fast that the annoyed public couldn't read their serial numbers.

[aeropilot]

Yertis said:

I used to have an ex "Meatbox" pilot on my staff. Remember when that US aircraft collided with a cable car's cables in the '90s? I asked why a pilot would even try to fly under the cables. He replied that that's how fighter pilots think – "I wonder if I can get between those two trees?". Apparently the preferred way to fly low was to fly so low and so fast that the annoyed public couldn't read their serial numbers.

By the late 1950's, the Meteor's and then Swifts were then in the FR role and tree top height was the only way they could operate and survive if things went 'hot'. It was as a Meatbox FR pilot (and then Swift) in Germany that a certain Ray Hanna honed his low flying skills in the late 50's.

[Tony1963]

Yertis said:

I used to have an ex "Meatbox" pilot on my staff. Remember when that US aircraft collided with a cable car's cables in the '90s? I asked why a pilot would even try to fly under the cables. He replied that that's how fighter pilots think – "I wonder if I can get between those two trees?". Apparently the preferred way to fly low was to fly so low and so fast that the annoyed public couldn't read their serial numbers.

Not a nice incident. I hope he burns in hell, from Wikipedia:

“The Cavalese cable car disaster of 1998, also called the Strage del Cermis ("Massacre at Cermis") occurred on 3 February 1998, near the Italian town of Cavalese, a ski resort in the Dolomites some 40 km (25 mi) northeast of Trento. Twenty people died when a United States Marine Corps EA-6B Prowler aircraft, while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to "have fun" and "take videos of the scenery", cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway. Joseph Schweitzer, one of the two American pilots, confessed in 2012 that he had burned the tape containing incriminating evidence upon returning to the American base.”

[Penguinracer]

...early '80's - Exercise Cope Thunder in the Philippines - it was standard RNZAF tactics to operate the A4K in 8-ship formations at 2 km spacing between a/c at 50 AGL!

Never intercepted by the USAF:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmHj9Jfqy3A