The ELM Is Smoking Crack

[Catfish]

^ Tschocky, thank you for clearing this up

(did not know civilian tracking only uses horizontal radar..)

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ Tschocky, thank you for clearing this up

(did not know civilian tracking only uses horizontal radar..)

Pleasure

There's a reason military radars are so expensive, height-finders and actual aircraft identification is tricky. ATC is moving towards more use of satellites and aircraft broadcast data, but at the moment a mix of primary (bouncing radio waves off of metal) and secondary (interrogating onboard systems for identity and altitude) radar is what we use.

I'd show pics I have of the Russians poking around the North Sea, but that would be very much not allowed

[ikalugin]

Thanks for the good input.

However my point was that the civilian air traffic control has radar data, thus if there is any aircraft in the area that does not provide secondary data, then the civilian air traffic controller could use radar data available to him to shepherd the civilian aircraft to safety.

As civilian aircraft tend to fly at high altitudes (over the neutral waters) then in most cases such radar data should be available in Europe.

As to my point of the article being alarmist - as it is not about the safety as such, but Russia being evil and conducting things evil countries shouldn't be allowed to do.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Thanks for the good input.

However my point was that the civilian air traffic control has radar data, thus if there is any aircraft in the area that does not provide secondary data, then the civilian air traffic controller could use radar data available to him to shepherd the civilian aircraft to safety.

That's true but I think you're underestimating exactly how much work that involves. Quite frankly we have more than enough to do already without having to vector traffic around unidentified and unpredictable armed aircraft.

Think of driving the wrong way down 4 highways at once. And one guy has to move the cars out of the way.

[Catfish]

^ Of course you know, Russia is evil. Since communism (well it was not, but..) err .. let's say faded away, the NATO urgently needs a new reason for its existence.

So who else should they declare to be the "enemy" ?

Taliban and IS are much too "asymmetrical", and a "war" against terrorists is no war, contrary to what all those military geniusses and Fox News try to get into the heads of their listeners.

China has too much investments in the US and besides, all major corporations now produce in China. There is no environmental thinking, (the pollution stops at the chinese wall as everyone knows), and workers get a dollar an hour – if as much.

Imagine Russia being a member of the NATO, as they proposed back then. No one would have to shout when just another ally flies around, over the North Sea.

So unfortunately, Russia is the scapegoat. Again. [/cyn]

[Oberon]

So in conclusion.

Russia =/= Evil

Russia = Reckless?

Russia = A Pain in the Arse for European Air Traffic Controllers.

[Catfish]

^last thing for sure. Question is if other nations behave any better. After all, the other surrounding states let their military fly around in open air space as well without announcements.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^last thing for sure. Question is if other nations behave any better. After all, the other surrounding states let their military fly around in open air space as well without announcements.

I don't know, you'd have to ask Tchocky about that, but I'm fairly sure that, unless it's an emergency, NATO forces go through the usual channels when flying in European airspace, and they have their transponders on.
In regards to NATO SigInt aircraft, that I couldn't say...and I don't know if Tchocky would be allowed to say.