sfuk
Topic Author
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 9:30 pm

KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:17 am

 
Hagic
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:19 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:23 am

What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this? It just reminds me of Sgt. Tackleberry from Police Academy.

[Edited 2012-04-10 18:24:40]
There's only one freedom of the press: That of the survivors - (G. Arciniegas)
 
Air77
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:39 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:28 am

Quoting Hagic (Reply 1):
What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this? It just reminds me of Sgt. Tackleberry from Police Academy.

Because scrambling the CF-18 out of Cold Lake would likely take too long. I believe up to the mid 80's CFB Comox had a squadron of CF-101 before they were retired.
 
AirCanada787
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:56 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:34 am

You beat me to starting this topic by 1 minute. I will have to request that my thread be removed.

When I googled the incident it actually said it was CF-18's that were escorting the plane. Hopefully someone can offer some clarification.
The mind, like a parachute, functions only when open.
 
sasd209
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:32 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:36 am

Quoting Hagic (Reply 1):

What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this?

Perhaps because NORAD requested the closest fighters, and it was the ones based at PDX?

Also: 149 people on board? A typo or a typical load for this flight?
 
aviationbuff08
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:54 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:51 am

Quoting Hagic (Reply 1):
What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this?



That is a really good question that I am interested in. The Flight departed YVR en-route ICN and returned to a Canadian Military air field. However we know the media over states stuff with aviation too.

My guess is just to make sure it doesn't become a hijacking with YVR extremely close to US airspace. Not to mention that a 777 with fuel for a TPAC flight would have the range for any city on the Western Coast of the US. I doubt the US fighters ever got near the Korean Air plane but were airborne off the coast of Washington State as a precaution. Unless of course the Canadian authorities requested the US to have fighter jets escort the airplane but I would think they would have their own fighters capable of doing such a task.

[Edited 2012-04-10 18:54:22]
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2261
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:44 am

Quoting Air77 (Reply 2):
Because scrambling the CF-18 out of Cold Lake would likely take too long

Are there no Hornet's at YQQ these days? Just a SAR base with Buff's & Coromorant's?
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
HorizonGirl
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:59 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:54 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 7):
Are there no Hornet's at YQQ these days? Just a SAR base with Buff's & Coromorant's?

I don't believe any are based there at this time, they just have the SAR base, as well as the Auroras. I do see them there frequently, though.

That aside, I can't image what a sight that would be to see, a KE 777 in Comox? I am glad to hear that they were able to land without incident.


Devon
Flying high on the Wings of the Great Northwest!
 
stuyyz
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 6:09 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:01 am

I heard on the radio that the bomb threat was called in to KE's Los Angeles (maybe Sanfran's) office. Maybe that's why the US got involved.
 
Air77
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:39 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:40 am

[quote=HorizonGirl,reply=8]I don't believe any are based there at this time, they just have the SAR base, as well as the Auroras. I do see them there frequently, though.[/quote

That's correct. 442 Squadron SAR and the Auroras. It is setup to be a forward operating base of the CF-18 and they do visit on occasion, however they do not have a permanent presence. The Snowbirds also do their spring training there. If they are not there already they should be in the next week.
 
777
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:21 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:27 am

Quoting Hagic (Reply 1):

What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this?

Here in Europe after the 9/11 almost every Country has an agreement with its neighbours that allows a fighter jet escorting a flight under terrorists treats or a sospicious one to continue the escort, no matter if doing this it will get out from its air space.

Obviously as soon as the fighters of the second Country are ready to take the baton in this duty, the fighters coming from the previous Country will come back to their home base.

This to minimize the risk that a suspicious a/c may flight without escort while overflying from a Country to another one.

It is quite realistic to imagine that a similar agreement has been set also between US and Canada.
 
softrally
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:32 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:03 pm

Does anyone know the registration number? I've been on KE 777s several times recently (flight #KE073, KE074)....It could possibly the one! It would be quite interesting if it was the bird I've flown on just a few weeks ago.
Flown on: 738, 744, 762/763, 772, 77W, 788, A306, A318/319/320/321, A332/333, E145, E190, CRJ700
 
CrossChecked
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 8:06 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:09 pm

Quoting softrally (Reply 11):
It would be quite interesting if it was the bird I've flown on just a few weeks ago.

It would? Why? What would make it more interesting than if it were any other aircraft in the fleet?
Cabin crew, doors to manual and cross check.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 4441
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:23 pm

This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets. IIRC, there was a KE 747 that was not communicating with the best English, and was forced down at Whitehorse, I think, don't remember if that was something to do with 9/11 when flights to the US were grounded, or not, but I am almost 100% sure it was KE before.
Next Flights: PDX-HNL-OGG-LIH-PDX On AS, WP & HA
 
boeing773W
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:03 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:49 pm

Quoting CrossChecked (Reply 12):
Quoting softrally (Reply 11):
It would be quite interesting if it was the bird I've flown on just a few weeks ago.

It would? Why? What would make it more interesting than if it were any other aircraft in the fleet?

Are you serious?   
I'm sure the guy means that it'll be interesting for him personally as the aircraft would have some personal significance in his life. Nothing wrong with that.
 
northstardc4m
Posts: 2724
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:54 pm

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 13):
This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets. IIRC, there was a KE 747 that was not communicating with the best English, and was forced down at Whitehorse, I think, don't remember if that was something to do with 9/11 when flights to the US were grounded, or not, but I am almost 100% sure it was KE before.

It was on 9/11, and it sqwaked for hijacking as i recall as well.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 4441
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:31 pm

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 15):
It was on 9/11, and it sqwaked for hijacking as i recall as well

Thanks for that, my memory was fuzzy, but I was almost sure it was 9/11.  
Next Flights: PDX-HNL-OGG-LIH-PDX On AS, WP & HA
 
tempest1944
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:47 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:27 pm

The KE 777 is still here, though is ready to leave. It should be off the ground fairly soon. Its a pretty big event, here...not very often that anything bigger than a 737-8 or C-17 lands here.

I have often wondered why we don't have a couple CF-18s permanently based here...this shows why we should. Having USAF F-15s escort the plane here is amusing; seeing as if we did have CF-18s here, they could've done it.
Proud to be an AVN Flight tech with 407 (LRP) Sqn, RCAF. I looove the Aurora/Orion.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 1865
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:12 pm

Quoting aviationbuff08 (Reply 5):
Not to mention that a 777 with fuel for a TPAC flight would have the range for any city on the Western Coast of the US.

It would've had fuel for at least 10 hours of flying which would put all of North America, Western Europe and parts of S. America within its range. Ofc NORAD would've shot it down if the pilot didn't do exactly as instructed given the threat posed.
 
boeingfixer
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:02 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:13 pm

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 13):
This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets.

This flight was not enroute to the US. It departed YVR to ICN. The only reason that the USAF intercepted the flight was that NORAD controls the airspace and the Alert F-15's at PDX were the closest asset available for the mission.

This speaks volumes about the lack of our own assets to protect our airspace. Back in the days of the CF-101 we at least had an interceptor asset available on both coasts. This won't get any better when the CF-18 is replaced by the meager number of F-35's we're buying.

Cheers,

John
Cheers, John YYC
 
flyboyseven
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:24 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:06 pm

Wow. That would be quite the sight to see. YQQ is my home airport. I was up there just a couple days ago. That would have been pretty cool to see.

How long would it take an F-15 to get to YQQ from Portland vs a CF-18 from Cold Lake? Portland is quite a lot closer, 270nm vs 610nm. How long a flight is that?
As long as the number of take-offs equals the number of landings...you're doing fine.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:19 pm

Quoting softrally (Reply 11):
Does anyone know the registration number?

Av Herald says HL7734

http://avherald.com/h?article=44dd2cea&opt=0
Clickable links only please!
 
tp1040
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:25 pm

Back to the load, 149 does seem like a light load.
 
softrally
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:32 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 5:25 pm

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 21):

Dear! I've been on that bird before..... January 31, 2012 KE073 ICN-YYZ as I remember. I will have to check again later.
Flown on: 738, 744, 762/763, 772, 77W, 788, A306, A318/319/320/321, A332/333, E145, E190, CRJ700
 
boeingorbust
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 3:44 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 5:59 pm

Quoting tp1040 (Reply 22):
Back to the load, 149 does seem like a light load.

Probably not a money maker, that's for sure!
 
WestJetYQQ
Posts: 2763
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:31 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:16 pm

Quoting flyboyseven (Reply 20):
How long would it take an F-15 to get to YQQ from Portland vs a CF-18 from Cold Lake? Portland is quite a lot closer, 270nm vs 610nm. How long a flight is that?

Let's go with the high altitude max speeds of both, Mach 2.5+ for the F-15 and only Mach 1.8 for the F18. Let's pretend they were dispatched direct to YQQ, but since the flight was 3 hours out of YVR it would have been significantly North of Comox. At 270nm and MAX speed the F-15 could make the distance in no less than 11.3 minutes, not including dispatch time, taxi time, or time to bring the a/c to full speed. Under the same set of conditions it would take Cold Lake's F-18s at least 35.4 minutes. I have heard that under regular operating circumstances it would take an hour from dispatch to get one of Cold Lake's F-18s to YQQ, and even if the Americans were to lollygag their way here, they'd still make it in under half an hour.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 6):
Are there no Hornet's at YQQ these days?

They they should fix that.

I'm disappointed I wasn't home to see this!

Cheers
Carson
Will You Try to Change Things? Use the Power that you have, the Power of a Million new Ideas.
 
boeingfixer
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:02 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:17 pm

Quoting flyboyseven (Reply 20):
How long would it take an F-15 to get to YQQ from Portland vs a CF-18 from Cold Lake? Portland is quite a lot closer, 270nm vs 610nm. How long a flight is that?

The CF-18 would have had to make a fuel stop before intercepting the 777. It's not known for its long range. The Alert F-15's would have been able to intercept the 777 as the un-refueled combat radius of the F-15 is more than triple that of the CF-18.

Cheers,

John
Cheers, John YYC
 
WestJetYQQ
Posts: 2763
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:31 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting boeingfixer (Reply 26):
The CF-18 would have had to make a fuel stop before intercepting the 777. It's not known for its long range. The Alert F-15's would have been able to intercept the 777 as the un-refueled combat radius of the F-15 is more than triple that of the CF-18.

I forgot to add that to my post! That's also a really good point... Canada's fighters are so sparse they'd have to refuel before an interception. Wow.

Quoting boeingfixer (Reply 19):
This won't get any better when the CF-18 is replaced by the meager number of F-35's we're buying.

And with a combat radius of 584nm, Canada would still have to get some help from down South if they didn't want to refuel first after dispatching their F-35s from Cold Lake  Yeah sure

[Edited 2012-04-11 11:23:27]
Will You Try to Change Things? Use the Power that you have, the Power of a Million new Ideas.
 
HorizonGirl
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:59 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:35 pm

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 27):
I forgot to add that to my post! That's also a really good point... Canada's fighters are so sparse they'd have to refuel before an interception. Wow.

I agree that not having CF-18s in Comox is an issue that should be fixed, cold lake is just a bit too far to go. It's a good thing that they seem to be in Comox fairly frequently, though. Just apparently not when they should be!


Devon
Flying high on the Wings of the Great Northwest!
 
RobertS975
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:14 pm

There is another factor which is difficult to understand... why have your interceptors based at a field which is in the middle of a vast country? Should this type of aircraft be based closer to a coast? Unless the purpose is to defend from a polar attack?
 
tempest1944
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:47 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:33 pm

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 27):
I forgot to add that to my post! That's also a really good point... Canada's fighters are so sparse they'd have to refuel before an interception. Wow.

Any fighters coming from Cold Lake to here would have to be refueled...thus why we need 2 or more CF-18s permanently posted to both Greenwood, and Comox. Or go back to fighter squadrons based on the coasts like there used to be.

Just adding....the 777 is still there. I've been going outside as often as I can to see if anything has happened, and....other than the APU apparently running (nav lights on), nothing has changed.

[Edited 2012-04-11 12:36:44]
Proud to be an AVN Flight tech with 407 (LRP) Sqn, RCAF. I looove the Aurora/Orion.
 
User avatar
redzeppelin
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:30 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:34 pm

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 29):
There is another factor which is difficult to understand... why have your interceptors based at a field which is in the middle of a vast country? Should this type of aircraft be based closer to a coast? Unless the purpose is to defend from a polar attack?

Perhaps the logic is similar to Fallon Naval Air Station in Nevada. It seems odd to have a naval air station so far from the coast, but there is good reason (or there was in the 1940s). As it was explained to me, because the airfield is at 4000 feet elevation, the aircraft of the time could leave Fallon and be over the coast at interception altitude faster than a fighter climbing to the same altitude from a coastal base. I doubt that still holds for modern aircraft, but it may be part of the history of the current Canadian defense posture. Cold Lake is further inland than Fallon, and not as high, but it might be a strategic location to defend both the Pacific and Arctic coasts.
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1452
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:36 pm

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 29):
There is another factor which is difficult to understand... why have your interceptors based at a field which is in the middle of a vast country? Should this type of aircraft be based closer to a coast? Unless the purpose is to defend from a polar attack?

That's exactly the purpose. Russian Bears go toward Alaska or through the polar region.

Now why the Canadians bought F-18's instead of F-15 is a different question. They could have used the extra range. Australia bought them too though and its a large country. Switzerland makes sense given 550NM basically covers the entire nation.

The newer Super Hornets do have an extra 30% more range however.

I am pretty sure NORAD has complete control and there are Canadian officers stationed there too. The intercept is really done by whatever asset is closest and best.
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:42 pm

I hope they catch the idiot that called in the threat, two days in a row, and the same flight both times. What, did the moron have a bad experience on KE 72?
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
sasd209
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:32 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:46 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 32):
I am pretty sure NORAD has complete control and there are Canadian officers stationed there too. The intercept is really done by whatever asset is closest and best.

according to wiki (yes, I know....)

"The NORAD commander is an American four-star General, or equivalent."

"In recent years deputy commanders have always been Canadian air force lieutenant generals. Prior to the 1968 unification of the Canadian Forces, the deputy commanders were RCAF Air Marshals."
 
Powerslide
Posts: 577
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:24 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 8:39 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 32):
am pretty sure NORAD has complete control and there are Canadian officers stationed there too. The intercept is really done by whatever asset is closest and best.

This is the primary reason why we don't have fighters anymore in Comox. Another reason is the lack of funding, we don't have the money to operate a QRA out of Comox anymore. Biggest reason though however is the local population wouldn't allow it, they already get upset when CF-18's visit for lengthy periods. The local hippies will complain why it was US fighters escorting an airliner over Canadian Airspace, blaming the government, and the next day complain of the constant jet noise, again, blaming the government. You can't win.

Quoting tempest1944 (Reply 30):
Any fighters coming from Cold Lake to here would have to be refueled

Wrong. They can make the transit just fine without a full fuel load.
 
tp1040
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 8:55 pm

The 18 has a short combat radius of less than 500 nmi, but I can understand carrier needs.

The 15 is a long range fighter/bomber with a radius of over 1000 nmi.

But the F-22 Raptors at Elmendorf-Richardson only have a radius of less than 500 nmi.

Why would anybody put assets like that in areas that require long range missions?
 
User avatar
redzeppelin
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:30 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:39 pm

Does the combat radius imply one-way distance, with the expectation of returning to the point of origin without refueling? If so, the radius isn't really important here, as it wouldn't be necessary to return to Cold Lake. Right? The question is if they have the range to intercept the aircraft and escort it to Comox. They can then refuel at Comox before returning to the home base.
 
Powerslide
Posts: 577
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:24 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:43 pm

Quoting tp1040 (Reply 36):
Why would anybody put assets like that in areas that require long range missions?

You are right, Military commanders have no idea how to delegate assets.  
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18858
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:48 pm

Quoting aviationbuff08 (Reply 5):
I doubt the US fighters ever got near the Korean Air plane but were airborne off the coast of Washington State as a precaution.

Not correct. See the NORAD press release.
http://www.norad.mil/News/2012/041112.html

Excerpt:

The fighters were scrambled out of Portland, Ore. The Korean Airliner was intercepted, diverted and the aircraft was shadowed until it landed at Canadian Forces Base Comox at approximately 5:30 PDT.
 
tempest1944
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:47 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:05 am

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 35):
Wrong. They can make the transit just fine without a full fuel load.

They can transit from Cold Lake to here just fine, yes. But to do any missions, the CF-18s would have to refuel here before doing the missions. I'm sorry I didn't clarify that.

The local population should take note of the fact that the base has been here since 1942...the noise, whether jet, or turboprop, won't end. Its been there before any of the subdivisions around it have been, so I really don't think they have any right to complain. They knew the base was here when they moved in.....
Proud to be an AVN Flight tech with 407 (LRP) Sqn, RCAF. I looove the Aurora/Orion.
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:25 am

Quoting tp1040 (Reply 22):
Back to the load, 149 does seem like a light load.


Its a light load, but I am not surprised.
I was on SQ15 SFO-ICN-SIN recently, and the load was probably similar on the SFO-ICN leg, and not very much better on ICN-SIN.
Is this seasonal maybe?
SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
 
aviationbuff08
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:54 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:31 am

Quoting boeingfixer (Reply 26):
The CF-18 would have had to make a fuel stop before intercepting the 777. It's not known for its long range. The Alert F-15's would have been able to intercept the 777 as the un-refueled combat radius of the F-15 is more than triple that of the CF-18.



Well my first though was to station a few aerial refueling tankers at CYQQ that can be already fueled and launched to support CF-18 from CFB Cold Lake. but according to Wikipedia the RCAF doesn't have any of these aircraft. The closest US based is the KC-135 of the 92d Air refueling wing at Fairchild AFB (Spokane, WA). You still have the primary problem is that CFB cold lake is too far inland from the pacific coast of Canada and CF-18 have slightly over an hour response time, and then they have to refuel before intercepting suspicious aircraft.

Unless the joint NORAD commmand of US and Canadian military are content with using US assets in Alaska, Washington, and Oregon to secure the western coast of both countries and let the RCAF cover the polar region from attack.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 35):
Biggest reason though however is the local population wouldn't allow it, they already get upset when CF-18's visit for lengthy periods. The local hippies will complain why it was US fighters escorting an airliner over Canadian Airspace, blaming the government, and the next day complain of the constant jet noise, again, blaming the government. You can't win.



Yeah those damn NIMBY's want the best of both worlds don't they. They complain about noise of the airplanes but fail to realise that the airport whether military or civilian was there before they bought or built their home.

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 31):
Perhaps the logic is similar to Fallon Naval Air Station in Nevada. It seems odd to have a naval air station so far from the coast, but there is good reason (or there was in the 1940s). As it was explained to me, because the airfield is at 4000 feet elevation, the aircraft of the time could leave Fallon and be over the coast at interception altitude faster than a fighter climbing to the same altitude from a coastal base.



This is a logical reason, I though NAS Fallon, NV was because it was near the vast desert of SW United States and could operate without NIMBY's complaining about the noise.
 
tp1040
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:45 am

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 38):
You are right, Military commanders have no idea how to delegate assets.

Yep, our military leaders always know best and never respond to politics.
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2261
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:05 am

Quoting boeingfixer (Reply 19):
the Alert F-15's at PDX were the closest asset available for the mission.

It was for the YQQ spotters, the F15 is a waaay cooler plane than our F18's 

Anyway, KE72 just departed YQQ at 1741 and arrived back at YVR 1802.
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
toltommy
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 9:04 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:14 am

So why did it go to YQQ to begin with? looking at Flightaware, it appears to have turned around, passed YQQ on the way to YVR, only to turn back to YQQ. Perhaps it was seen as a credible threat, but doesn't look like it went direct to Comox when they decided to turn back.
 
threepoint
Posts: 1292
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:49 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:43 am

Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 29):
why have your interceptors based at a field which is in the middle of a vast country? Should this type of aircraft be based closer to a coast? Unless the purpose is to defend from a polar attack?

Cold Lake takes advantage of the vast & (until-recently) remote Primrose Air Weapons Range training area used for bombing exercises (and home to Maple Flag), not because it is strategically located near any valuable assets.

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 31):
As it was explained to me, because the airfield is at 4000 feet elevation, the aircraft of the time could leave Fallon and be over the coast at interception altitude faster than a fighter climbing to the same altitude from a coastal base.

No. The field elevation has nothing to do with it. High-performance aircraft can climb that distance in about 25 heartbeats. Fallon, like Cold Lake, is located next to oodles of prime land for shooting, dropping and firing stuff over. That's it.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 35):
The local hippies will complain

Local hippies? These days, the Comox Valley is filled with Albertan retirees - not known for their left-wing views.
The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
 
tempest1944
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:47 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:04 am

Quoting aviationbuff08 (Reply 42):
Well my first though was to station a few aerial refueling tankers at CYQQ that can be already fueled and launched to support CF-18 from CFB Cold Lake. but according to Wikipedia the RCAF doesn't have any of these aircraft. The closest US based is the KC-135 of the 92d Air refueling wing at Fairchild AFB (Spokane, WA). You still have the primary problem is that CFB cold lake is too far inland from the pacific coast of Canada and CF-18 have slightly over an hour response time, and then they have to refuel before intercepting suspicious aircraft.

Wikipedia lies....we have some Hercs that we use for ariel refueling. One of them may or may not have been destroyed in a mid-air fire in Florida a couple months ago though.

As a point, about the bomb threat...I have not heard if there actually was a bomb or not, but. EOD did detonate a 'suspicious package", this morning.
Proud to be an AVN Flight tech with 407 (LRP) Sqn, RCAF. I looove the Aurora/Orion.
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2261
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:01 am

KE72 has now departed YVR at 2028 to ICN
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: KE 777 Emergency Landing In Comox,BC

Thu Apr 12, 2012 6:12 am

Quoting tempest1944 (Reply 17):
I have often wondered why we don't have a couple CF-18s permanently based here...


they may get some F-35's in the next 10 years or so that won't have much to do..

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, B737900ER, CALTECH, eicvd, flymco753, GloomyDe, Google Adsense [Bot], Jano, jfk777, mrromalley, PlymSpotter, rutankrd, seahawk, StTim and 263 guests