Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LH Near Miss Over Pakistan  
User currently offlineThud From Pakistan, joined Aug 2000, 204 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2017 times:



Passenger plane evades collision over Pakistan

FRANKFURT, Oct 9: A Lufthansa jumbo jet, en route from Bangkok, was forced to dodge two US fighter jets to avoid a collision in airspace south of Pakistan on Sunday, a company spokesman said on Tuesday.

The incident occurred in the evening just around the time the US and Britain were launching their first attacks against Afghanistan, said a spokesman. The Lufthansa jet, carrying 308 passengers from Bangkok to Frankfurt, was cruising at an altitude of 10,000 metres in an international air corridor south of Pakistan when it was approached by two US military jets.

"Our plane had the bad luck to be flying in the zone at the moment when the US-led assault began," the spokesman said. Like all Lufthansa jets, the aircraft was equipped with an automatic alert system which tells the pilot to direct the jet higher when a flying object comes "unusually" close.

"This is what happened," the spokesman said. The US fighter jets established contact with Lufthansa plane to double-check its identity. Once that had been done, "they departed and the jet could carry on its journey as normal", he said.

The incident occurred at night and the US jets would not have been noticed by passengers on board the Lufthansa aircraft. To them, the dodging manoeuvre would have felt like a spot of turbulence. "There was never any danger for the passengers," the spokesman insisted, adding that Lufthansa "had full understanding" for the control measures undertaken by the US air force. -AFP





21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCarmy From Singapore, joined Oct 2001, 627 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1877 times:

well that was a close shave.

but yet another reason to end the military assaule on Afghanistan.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29800 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1841 times:

This doesn't sound like a near miss.

Just two fighters examining an aircraft in their control zone. They would have set the TCAS off but they where no doubt in visual sighting of the LH aircraft and probably where being controled by an E-2 somewhere else.

As Lufthansa says, They understand the situation

Carmy....you need to mellow out. I have seen some of the other stuff that you have posted on the other forums. Things like this happen, it is to be expected and it wasn't a "close shave"



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineA340-500 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1825 times:

That sounds a little scary. Lufthansa should already have rerouted that flight to not fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan.

User currently offlineThud From Pakistan, joined Aug 2000, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

I thought the corridor over Rahimyar Khan was closed to all traffic quite some time back.

User currently offlineB737-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1789 times:


Doesn't sound like a near miss at all.
Still I'm wondering why they fly in this area and why commercial jets don't take routes south or north of Pakistan and Afghanistan.


User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1765 times:

Its very normal for the USAF to be king of the skies and fly however they like. It happened near Hong Kong a few years back. I heard it all on my scanner !!

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Typical journalistic exaguration. All that happened was two fighters went to check out an airplane that was not very far from a combat zone. There never was any danger of collision.

Charles


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29800 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1753 times:

Hkgspotter1....Really, You really need to find a better news source, it was the the PLAF that thought they where king of the skies and their jackass pilot ended up paying the ultimate price for his own incompetence.

And nearly costing a dozen other people their lives.


I am sorry you news is so restriced that you where not aware of what actually happened.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineAirsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1745 times:

>>Lufthansa should already have rerouted that flight to not fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Well, but you must fly SOMEwhere from SE Asia to Europe - and last time I checked, south of Pakistan where they were cruising (not in Pakistani or Afghan airspace) were international waters.

Daniel Smile


User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 378 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1724 times:

L-188- wasnt that plane spying on China and had the nerve to land on a Chinese base after hitting a Chinese plane, be glad they werent balsted out of the sky Smile


.....up there with the best!
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1693 times:

That sounds pretty scary to me.
Remember the Iran Air Airbus incident of 1987? A gung ho US military made a tragic error and shot down a harmless civilian plane killing 290 people. Now, I'm sure that the US press wouldn't give a damn if some mideastern jetliner were accidentally shot down by Sgt. Triggerhappy in his F-16, but if this happened to a European passenger plane, all hell would break loose.
Or maybe not. Our press, sadly enough, is composed of a bunch of nitwits.


User currently offlineAirbus380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1688 times:

Does the military have jurisdiction over commercial airspace?

User currently offlineAtcboy73 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1685 times:

Do LH 747s have tell tail lights. I would think that this would make it easier to identify the A/C in this kind of situation.

How did they identify the aircraft? Did they use guard frequency?


User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1630 times:

aren´t these lights switched off during flight?


If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently offlineXXXX10 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1614 times:

There is a similar post on the tech/ops forum

Military aircraft and civilian atc

I don't understand how the aviation authorities can close this airspace with notams without giving away (to the enemy) vital information about the military activity.

So how do they keep the military traffic from crossing the civil air coridors-perhaps they use different altititudes


User currently offlineHi_flyer From Canada, joined Jul 2001, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1559 times:

According to international law, nobody has jurisidiction over an aircraft in international airspace.

That being said, when the USAF comes around to play, I think that they can pretty much claim jurisdiction over anything they choose.


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1548 times:

Jaysit said "Remember the Iran Air Airbus incident of 1987? A gung ho US military made a tragic error and shot down a harmless civilian plane killing 290 people."

Whoa there, ace..

A regretable incident to be sure, and yes there was adreneline involved. But who gets the blame there?

-The USS Vincennes was under attack by seaborne Iranian forces. The Iran Air flight was flying right into a battle zone, unwarned by their own country.

-Another little tidbit that seemed to escape history for the sole purposes of stoking anti -Americanism....the Iranian Air Force ROUTINELY at the time used commercial radar idents for their F-14s, to try to fool US forces. Thus, even though the Airbus was squawking a commercial marker, those aboard the ship had no idea what it was...because of IAF idiocy.

Perhaps there's more of your hate America agenda to be challenged with the truth, but clearly Civil Av. is not the forum.


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1510 times:

Heavy Metal:

If the truth - a gungho US military shoots down an unarmed Civilian Airbus - counts as Hate America agenda to you, then perhaps, you need another forum where you can swaddle yourself in your own Red-white & blue McCarthy-esque jingoism. May I suggest Rushlimbaugh.com. Plus, your reaction is reminscent of the Soviets when they rather cravenly blew Korean Airlines 007 out of the sky - "Ooops, the US and their friends, South Korea, routinely send 747s packed with kids cruising over our airspace, so lets tell Captain Boris to blow them to bits."

And you just showed the depths of your own BS by stating that the Iranian Airbus was indeed squawking a commercial marker. Plus, any idiot could have determined the difference between a lumbering A300 climbing at 10,000 feet and a fighter jet. Come on. It was a massive screwup, and our by-now braindead ex-Prez didn't even have the decency to acknowledge the accident and apologize for weeks thereafter. We may be good, but we're not perfect. So you can take your flagpole and spin on it.



User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1493 times:

And may I add that the USS Vincennes had itself strayed into Iranian waters at the time, the idiot in charge of radar knew that the Airbus's transponder had replied to an IFF query with a Mode 3, we had our own F-14s in the area who could have made a visual interception at the time, the Airbus was CLIMBING at 10,000 or so feet and we were aware of normal flight schedules of commercial airliners at the time. We screwed up. The petty officers on the Vincennes at the time even acknowledged so much, but it took cowards like Admiral Crowe and that lousy Hollywood version of a Commander in Chief to formally lie for the rest of America. Its tragic when one of our own mess up; its even more so when our leaders blatantly lie.

So, once again shove that flag pole where the sun don't shine and spin on it.


User currently offlineRyu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 493 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1451 times:

Military/civilian ATC coordination in tactical situtaions is something like this: The Pakistan ATC, if it's anything like how we do things in the US, should have, in conjunction with the US military, declared specific military corridors and altitudes for the military aircraft (wide and varied enough as to not divulge specific flight routes or entry/exit points) -- these would be considered MOA, and communicated via NOTAM. These should have been apart from civilian airways. The entire Pakistan-Afgahnistan frontier would be considered a big MOA (Military Operations Area) as far as civilian air traffic is concerned, and strictly off limits. Within the military corridors, the military planes would be completely controlled by FACs/AWACS/etc and the only duty of civilian ATC would be to keep civilian AC away.

So IF it was in Pakistanti-controlled airspace, someone screwed up if LH infringed on military corridors -- or LH just came too close to comfort for the US jets, even though it technically didn't violate any military airspace boundaries.

In international airspace, no one controls the airspace -- the military will just try to avoid commercial air routes or flight levels when possible, when flying their aircraft. In this case, LH probably just came too close to comfort to where the US planes were operating.


User currently offlineRyu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 493 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (12 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1443 times:

BTW, the military aircraft do have flight plans, but they are (obviously) known only to the military controllers. When flying within the designated military operations areas, they are completely under military control.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Near-miss Over Colombia (AV F100, SAM F50) posted Fri Mar 24 2006 21:57:43 by Luisde8cd
QF And NZ B744s Involved In Near Miss Over AKL posted Mon Apr 11 2005 12:48:37 by 777ER
Near Miss In Pakistan posted Wed Dec 22 2004 21:06:34 by KBOS
Near -miss Over Wales posted Fri Jul 5 2002 20:15:33 by Captjetblast
Two Aircraft In Near Miss Over TRD posted Fri Aug 3 2001 10:21:07 by Heisan67
Near Miss Over Western Canada posted Sun Jun 17 2001 17:46:45 by ACA330
Near Miss Over Tokyo posted Thu Feb 1 2001 15:10:22 by Airmale
JAL Near Miss Over Japan posted Wed Jan 31 2001 17:00:22 by Singapore_Air
Near Miss Over Finland posted Thu Jan 11 2001 21:47:41 by Brissie_lions
Virgin Atlantic And United Near Miss Over London posted Tue Sep 5 2000 02:14:35 by GUNDU