New offensive in Donbass?

[Nidan1]

edit.........

 

Thanks for correcting me. I am not a native english speaker and i see participating in english speaking forums as an opportunity to improve my english. I always try to do my best to use proper english, but natuarally i may sometimes make mistakes.

For a non-native English speaker I am very impressed with your abilities in the language. I wish I had been able to learn another language with enough confidence to verbally spar on a message board as you are able to do.

 

Your use of sarcasm in a non-native language is also quite impressive  ,that is of course that you don't posses fat fingers.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Nidan1

[agusto]

The system works like this: civilians air controllers, monitoring flights on their radars, can watch the blips on their screens with a datablock displayed near every return: this usually renders the altitude, the bearing and speed of the observed airplane. At last, IF the observed flight has its transponder on, that 4 number digit is displayed, along with the aforementioned data. So basically it is a measure which makes ATC work a little easier - air controllers can find a specific flight on the screen just by scanning it quickly, as the transponder code univocally identifies a single airplane with a number the controller knows. As air control radars are normally pretty cluttered with flights, especially in areas with mayor cities and airports, it somehow reduces the controller's workload.

 

But, having the transponder on or off doesn't change at all if an aircraft is visible or not - if an AC is observed without the transponder code, it is classified as "uncollaborative return" - yet the flight parameters of the aircraft are still displayed just like all the other contacts, so it's just the matter of that single air controller knowing at a glance which plane he is observing.

 

That is not correct. There are two different types of civillian radar: primary radar and secondary radar. Primary radar operates the classic way, with a an eletromagnetic wave beeing sent out from the radar, reflected from the aircraft and then received again by the radar. Secondary radar instead is passive and only works with actively emitting targets, i.e. aircraft that have their transponders turned on. If an aircraft turn off it' s transponder, it will be invisible to secondary radar. At airports and similar installation both radar types are usually used in conjunction, but there is not necessarily a civillian country-wide primary radar coverage. Technically it' s entirely possible to avoid beeing located by ATC by turning the transponder off.

 

Source:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prim%C3%A4rradar

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sekund%C3%A4rradar

 

 

As already said, flying in international airspace with no transponder broadcast has never been considered an aggressive action, and it would be treated like pretty much routine for ATCs located in Poland or Denmark, for example. "Civilians corridors" are not reserved to airliners by no aviation international law - they get criss-crossed every day hundreds of times by military aircraft all over the world - not only russian.

 

Whether or not the russian airplanes flying in international airspace with their transponders off can be considered an act of agressions also depends on whether or not the russians did such things in the past. Even if it' s internationally usual for military aircraft to operate outside of their countries airspace with their transponders turned off, it could still be viewed as an act of agression if Russia had not done such flights in the past but then changed its behaviour.

 

Russian military aircraft don't even have a transponder which is compatible with western ATC radars, they carry a military IFF transponder not unlike those carried by western military, which broadcasts an encrypted signal to military radar controllers and identify the aircraft as friendly or unknown (any plane not carrying that equipment would be classified as unknown).

 

Source? I couldnt find anything useful via google.

[agusto]

For a non-native English speaker I am very impressed with your abilities in the language. I wish I had been able to learn another language with enough confidence to verbally spar on a message board as you are able to do.

 

Your use of sarcasm in a non-native language is also quite impressive  ,that is of course that you don't posses fat fingers.

 

Thanks a lot! I always hated my english teacher at school, but it seems she did her job well.

Edited June 2, 2015 by agusto

[whitehot78]

 

From what I understand, the area where MH370 was flying contained numerous holes where radar and other tracking systems were either not present or not adequate enough to continuously track the aircraft's flight. It would not really have mattered if the transponder were turned off in those areas because there were no scanning systems watching that area of the sky anyway.

 

exactly

 

 

snowdens an attention whore clown

 

Your opinion is shared by many americans, which is very worrying. 

The doubt is taken away from the people - the government said he 's a traitor, then whatever he says isn't valid.

 

Are we kidding? What kind of moral stunt do we have to perform to keep using words like "freedom" and "democracy", when a citizen, which loves his country, and wants his country to adhere to the principles of its constitution, chooses to become persecuted by that nation, to live in exile and to even risk his life?

 

It's for the love of freedom and democracy, for the love of the truth being clearly given to the american people that this man has ruined his life, denouncing a government which illegaly appropriates all the information it wants from every citizen using electronic devices - and doing it secretly. It's just appalling that many people see Snowden as an attention whore and a traitor and don't even think for a second that he may just have tried to save his people liberties from what may be the biggest oppression machine human beings have ever created.

 

People is starting to behave like that it is not worth the effort, to understand what have caused matters like Snowden's one: we are so disturbed and afraid of having to ponder that most of what we are being fed on daily basis it's lies and fabrications, that we are better off with the official explanations, so we can continue to believe what suits us most, that we are the good guys, that other countries are the bad ones, that we are always in the right because we the west have democracy - this gives us moral and ethical superiority over whatever country or population is not western, and it makes us accept whatever is needed to inflict our democratic will to others.

 

Only having the doubt, that we the west have been lied many times about our moral and ethical superiority, that most of us don't actually even understand what democracy, freedom of speech, of press, transparency of the government ways mean - only having that doubt opens up scenarios so unsettling that we better get back posting **** on facebook and twitters, watching sports on the tv and get stuffed with gallons of beer on the couch. This makes us feel safe and keep clear of any feeling of guilt while we watch another "rogue country" getting bombed to bits by western air power.

[Nidan1]

Thanks a lot! I always hated my english teacher at school, but it seems she did her job well.

It also takes personal hard work and practice. I took eight years of German in school, and it was spoken in my home when I was young, and today I can barely put a cohesive sentence together auf deutsch. Language skills tend to prove the adage that "if you don't use it, you lose it".

[Sublime]

i dont think its worrying at all. he swore oaths and betrayed his nation. i dont think hes a traitor because obama said so i think he.s a traitor because he fits my definition of one. and trust me you can find many more worrying aspects about american society than opinion on snowden.

agusto honestly if you feel the value of my posts is so low because my hate speech or because i dont type in exact queens english than feel free to use the ignore function. i wont give a toss anymore than i do that you.re offended i post using my cell phone or that you lecture me on grammar and then when called on misspelling a word run to english is your second language. you speak excellent english, surely enough that you could just say ya i misspelled it than say its not my native tongue? it.d also do you well to see how americans and brits actually speak and type in everyday use versus what an oxford dictionary says. it has a lot of cultural value and allows you to become fluent in a language.

just use the ignore button anyways pls

and whitehot im not saying snowden made up all of his info im saying he knowingly and willingly gave it to US opponents or near enemies this in turn surely cost US lives since. and to act like the US and NSA is the only country to spy is foolhardy.

I also disagree with your aasertion about worrying about which rogue nation the US bombs next. you could say that for many nations in the world. which country will russia annex and invade next? which nation will israel bomb next? what town full of people will ISIS kill to make an internet video next? its not that americans believe snowdens info is made up its the whole giving it to foreign nations who routinely end up as opponents of the US to some degree or the other.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Sublime

[akd]

 im not saying snowden made up all of his info im saying he knowingly and willingly gave it to US opponents or near enemies this in turn surely cost US lives since. and to act like the US and NSA is the only country to spy is foolhardy.

 

its not that americans believe snowdens info is made up its the whole giving it to foreign nations who routinely end up as opponents of the US to some degree or the other.

 

Yet another American that has Snowden and Bradley Manning confused.  Watch from 7:07:

 

[whitehot78]

That is not correct. There are two different types of civillian radar: primary radar and secondary radar. Primary radar operates the classic way, with a an eletromagnetic wave beeing sent out from the radar, reflected from the aircraft and then received again by the radar. Secondary radar instead is passive and only works with actively emitting targets, i.e. aircraft that have their transponders turned on. If an aircraft turn off it' s transponder, it will be invisible to secondary radar. At airports and similar installation both radar types are usually used in conjunction, but there is not necessarily a civillian country-wide primary radar coverage. Technically it' s entirely possible to avoid beeing located by ATC by turning the transponder off.

 

Source:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prim%C3%A4rradar

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sekund%C3%A4rradar

 

 

 

You are not seeing this right.

You fail to understand what the links you posted mean, especially the "secondary radar" one.

Wikipedia states that :

 

Secondary surveillance radar (SSR)^[1] is a radar system used in air traffic control (ATC), that not only detects and measures the position of aircraft i.e. range and bearing, but also requests additional information from the aircraft itself such as its identity and altitude. Unlike primary radar systems that measure only the range and bearing of targets by detecting reflected radio signals, SSR relies on targets equipped with a radar transponder, that replies to each interrogation signal by transmitting a response containing encoded data. SSR is based on the military identification friend or foe (IFF) technology originally developed during World War II, therefore the two systems are still compatible. Monopulse secondary surveillance radar (MSSR), Mode S, TCAS andADS-B are similar modern methods of secondary surveillance.

 

So as you may have noticed, even secondary radar (which, by definition, is used as a backup of a primary one) is able to locate a target by range and bearing - that gives the operator a point on his screen, clearly showing the position of the aircraft. This, without any usage of the transponder.

 

The article describes how the system relies on transponder interrogation to extrapolate the target's identification (the 4 digit code I talked about previously), and altitude.

Keeping in mind that no civilian airspace is covered ONLY by SSR, at least in the developed world, even in the case of malfunction of ALL the primary radars in a given zone (many of them also overlap, which means that if one is down, another one can get the information), the SSR is able to have precise coordinates of a given flight.

Also, in the case of a russian military aircraft, the SSR would have the precise coordinates of said airplane, only lacking altitude data and identification. 

But yet again, SSR only would be a theoretical scenario - The real scenario, that is primary radars covering airspaces, would also get the altitude data on the russian aircraft, only lacking the identification digit - which is in all purposes - useless information.

 

 

Whether or not the russian airplanes flying in international airspace with their transponders off can be considered an act of agressions also depends on whether or not the russians did such things in the past. Even if it' s internationally usual for military aircraft to operate outside of their countries airspace with their transponders turned off, it could still be viewed as an act of agression if Russia had not done such flights in the past but then changed its behaviour.

 

 

Russian military airplanes, like Americans, British, German or Chinese, have ALWAYS been flying in international airspace without any transponder usage, the difference between the past and now is that this behaviour is reported by the press, and it's reported in such a way to make it appear as an aggressive act which makes civilian flights unsafe.

 

The logic by which these news are reported is flawed - If I fly without transponder and that makes me "stealth", how are controllers able to report to the press that there was a russian airplane in that zone at all?

 

The ignorance on the public on the procedures and the technologies involved, and the mala-fide of somebody in the reporting cycle, reporting alarmistic news to said public is what causes this kind of outcry.

Transponders are depicted like some kind of vital piece of equipment to keep airspaces safe - the truth is that they are important for civil aviation operators, who can perform their jobs more productively, but they are not mandatory on military traffic, which by its nature, is not interested in broadcasting informations about itself, depending on what kind of mission they are performing.

 

To have the informations you are requesting (transponders on russian military aircraft) you in fact have to find pages which describe what kind of radio equipment these planes are carrying. The aircraft involved in the news reports have been SU-27 Flankers, SU-24 Fencers, TU-95 Bears, IL-78 Midas tankers, in some cases IL-20 Coot surveillance AC. 

 

If you are interested I can provide a flight manual for the SU-27 Flanker and , I believe, some other older models, yet they are in Russian and they are in pdf format.

If that is not an option, if you don't put doubts in my honesty, you can take my word for it, as I have been around this kind of information for more than twenty years, and I'm not interested in advocating one particular country, or political parties or agendas.

[Sublime]

how do i have them confused? not from the video in your opinion i dont have the time to watch now.

also agusto i will not be putting you on ignore i enjoy your posts, but i recommend you put me on ignore.

Bradley Manning iirc was MiA for a length of time but probably deserted while in Afghan. Snowden took state secrets and once out of the country gave them away (who knows what other factors such as money or whatever were involved) so how do i have them confused?

Edited June 2, 2015 by Sublime

[whitehot78]

i dont think its worrying at all. he swore oaths and betrayed his nation. i dont think hes a traitor because obama said so i think he.s a traitor because he fits my definition of one. and trust me you can find many more worrying aspects about american society than opinion on snowden.

its not that americans believe snowdens info is made up its the whole giving it to foreign nations who routinely end up as opponents of the US to some degree or the other.

 

So, you are asserting that:

 

-Snowden is a traitor

-The information he gave up (not only to foreign countries but to international press) is valid.

 

If the information is valid, which is admittedly true, it actually puts up serious difficulties in affirming that the United States (and probably most other western countries) are in a state of law and not in a police state - or at least, something in-between, which is not a state of law anyway.

 

The fact that Snowden is perceived as a traitor does nothing to negate the above. As an american citizen, should I be more worried to live under a state which is not ruled by law, or that the person who uncovered that fact is prosecuted? Because if, in your opinion, the second option is more important, then it is really time to be worried.

[AttorneyAtWar]

Russian military airplanes, like Americans, British, German or Chinese, have ALWAYS been flying in international airspace without any transponder usage, the difference between the past and now is that this behaviour is reported by the press, and it's reported in such a way to make it appear as an aggressive act which makes civilian flights unsafe.

 

So why do you think that the press only just now reporting this, because of the Ukraine situation?

 

Or using logic and what NATO has been saying, the Russians have stepped up patrols and probes of international airspace with military aircraft recently to project power and try and make a point, that's why its reported on, it is happening far more often and there have been many close calls. I don't need to entertain you with articles or evidence because its only a Google away.

 

Sorry there isn't a conspiracy against poor Russia, just a bunch of news journalists reporting on Russian fighter aircraft flying dangerously close to passenger planes, way more often they should be.

[Sublime]

actually im more worried about the former. whilst i dont think the us is a police state i do think it has and continues to illegally spy on citizens and has and continues to do nasty things to them. in fact its known fact the goverent assasinated several black panthers in the late 1960s. prosecuting snowden isnt a priority for me at all. none of this changes him being a traitor though and i dont think he released the secrets to be a hero or anything i genuinely think he just wantes attention

[Holien]

Watch the video...

I just did and it raises some serious issues in a very amusing and easy to understand way. It also gives some insight to Snowden.

[agusto]

 

You are not seeing this right.

You fail to understand what the links you posted mean, especially the "secondary radar" one.

Wikipedia states that :

 

Secondary surveillance radar (SSR)^[1] is a radar system used in air traffic control (ATC), that not only detects and measures the position of aircraft i.e. range and bearing, but also requests additional information from the aircraft itself such as its identity and altitude. Unlike primary radar systems that measure only the range and bearing of targets by detecting reflected radio signals, SSR relies on targets equipped with a radar transponder, that replies to each interrogation signal by transmitting a response containing encoded data. SSR is based on the military identification friend or foe (IFF) technology originally developed during World War II, therefore the two systems are still compatible. Monopulse secondary surveillance radar (MSSR), Mode S, TCAS andADS-B are similar modern methods of secondary surveillance.

 

So as you may have noticed, even secondary radar (which, by definition, is used as a backup of a primary one) is able to locate a target by range and bearing - that gives the operator a point on his screen, clearly showing the position of the aircraft. This, without any usage of the transponder.

 

The article describes how the system relies on transponder interrogation to extrapolate the target's identification (the 4 digit code I talked about previously), and altitude.

Keeping in mind that no civilian airspace is covered ONLY by SSR, at least in the developed world, even in the case of malfunction of ALL the primary radars in a given zone (many of them also overlap, which means that if one is down, another one can get the information), the SSR is able to have precise coordinates of a given flight.

Also, in the case of a russian military aircraft, the SSR would have the precise coordinates of said airplane, only lacking altitude data and identification. 

But yet again, SSR only would be a theoretical scenario - The real scenario, that is primary radars covering airspaces, would also get the altitude data on the russian aircraft, only lacking the identification digit - which is in all purposes - useless information.

 

The german Wikipedia article explicitly states that Secondary radar can not detect aircraft that have their transponders turned off.

 

"Allerdings ist dazu die Mitarbeit des Ziels notwendig. Fehlt diese Mitarbeit, zum Beispiel weil der Transponder defekt ist, so ist das Sekundärradar nicht arbeitsfähig und dieses Flugobjekt wird nicht erkannt. Deshalb arbeiten die meisten Sekundärradargeräte in einer Kombination mit einem Primärradar."

 

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sekund%C3%A4rradar#Funktionsweise

 

I think we need better sources than Wikipedia.

[A Canadian Cat]

actually im more worried about the former. whilst i dont think the us is a police state i do think it has and continues to illegally spy on citizens and has and continues to do nasty things to them. in fact its known fact the goverent assasinated several black panthers in the late 1960s. prosecuting snowden isnt a priority for me at all. none of this changes him being a traitor though and i dont think he released the secrets to be a hero or anything i genuinely think he just wantes attention

 

Yeah figuring out how to classify someone as serious or attention seeking as a traitor or a hero is not always clear. Or on the other hand perhaps it is - both.  I never had the impression that Snowden was out for attention as his main objective but even if your objective is to get important information out you kinda have to jump up and down and try to attract attention.  And if you know about a secret government program that you think is unconstitutional but your boss says no its a state secret there is really no way to blow the whistle on that with out becoming a traitor by definition.  It puts us all in a bit of an interesting spot cause generally we don't like traitors for good reason.  On the other hand how else are we going to know if our government is breaking its own laws?

 

Watch the video...

I just did and it raises some serious issues in a very amusing and easy to understand way. It also gives some insight to Snowden.

 

That it does.  I have noticed a distinct lack of concern in my country (Canada) about these kinds of issues too. Next time I have that conversation I'll use the dick pic technique and see if I get a better response.

 

At any rate this is insanely off topic that's for sure.

[whitehot78]

So why do you think that the press only just now reporting this, because of the Ukraine situation?

 

It is in fact my point - either somebody trying to sell a few more copies by the usual terror tactics, or something even more disturbing

 

 

 

Or using logic and what NATO has been saying, the Russians have stepped up patrols and probes of international airspace with military aircraft recently to project power and try and make a point, that's why its reported on, it is happening far more often and there have been many close calls. I don't need to entertain you with articles or evidence because its only a Google away.

 

International airspace doesn't need to be "probed" by definition - probes were what both US and Soviet aircraft made during the cold war in places like the Bering strait, or the borders between NATO and WarPac countries. If the Russians have stepped up patrols in international airspace, they aren't violating any international law - NATO countries actually patrols international airspace. Unless NATO has obtained some kind of United Nations mandate, by which the international air space is a big no-fly zone for Russian military aircraft, then something is amiss.

 

It takes no genius to see a pattern by which, as the relations between Russia and the West worsened, this kind of reports on news became very frequent.

Since I have a profound disrespect for press which actively operates to increase the amount of fear and anxiety in public opinions, out of their own personal greed to increase their sellings, or out of something else more subtle which would be like playing the same tune all-over to the advantage of some interested political entity, I believe that something should be clarified, to people absolutely ignoring historical facts, naming and operating procedures, and technology.

 

btw, as Augusto reported, notice how the german wikipedia page says that secondary surveillance radars NEED to have transponder replies to be able to pin-point the location of observed targets, which is something that for people knowing the involved technologies, is a completely wrong information.

 

And, I'm not worried abt a conspiracy against Russia, but abt one against western public opinions which have to get distorted facts and embellished news by intellectually corrupt press (I'm not saying all the press is like this), and be terrorized into thinking that Russia is preying on their childrens.

Edited June 2, 2015 by whitehot78

[Nidan1]

Back in 1971 a USMC F-4 collided with a DC-9 near California. The DC-9 was descending into LAX and was at 15000 feet when it was struck by the Marine jet. Everyone on the DC-9 was killed, the backseat guy in the Phantom was able to eject, the pilot was killed.

 

"PROBABLE CAUSE: The failure of both crews to see and avoid each other but it is recognized that they had only marginal capability to detect, assess, and avoid the collision. Other causal factors include a very high closure rate, co-mingling of IFR and VFR traffic in an area where the limitation of the ATC system precludes effective separation of such traffic, and failure of the crew of BuNo458 (the F-4) to request radar advisory service, particularly considering the fact that they had an inoperable transponder."

 

After this accident stricter flight restrictions were put in place for military aircraft flying near commercial airports. Better layers of ATC coverage and improved radars have dramatically lowered the chances of military vs. commercial collisions. This of course is in US domestic airspace, but there are probably incidents of planes getting too close to one another, as a previous poster already mentioned. 

[agusto]

btw, as Augusto reported, notice how the german wikipedia page says that secondary surveillance radars NEED to have transponder replies to be able to pin-point the location of observed targets, which is something that for people knowing the involved technologies, is a completely wrong information.

 

The german Wikipedia article explicitly states that Secondary radar can not detect aircraft that have their transponders turned off.

 

(...)

 

I think we need better sources than Wikipedia.

 

I asked a professional pilot i personally know today and he told me that secondary radar does not detect aircraft if they have their transponder turned off. Furthermore he told me that there is an international agency, the ICAO, that standardises aviation procedures. Russia is a member state of the ICAO and a such is obligated to follow ICAO regulations. According to ICAO regulations, all aircraft of all memberstates must obey to specific rules. All aircraft, civillian and military, that fly in controlled airspace must have their transponders turned or, if they dont have any, at least be in radio contact with ATC controllers on the ground.  Above international waters air traffic is generally free, but aircraft that use or cross airways are still obligated to have their transponders (if they have any) turned on and to make contact with ATC (if available). Military exercises during which aircraft fly with their transponders turned off an without beeing in contact with the ATC are held in restricted airspace

Edited June 2, 2015 by agusto

[whitehot78]

I asked a professional pilot i personally know today and he told me that secondary radar does not detect aircraft if they have their transponder turned off. Furthermore he told me that there is an international agency, the ICAO, that standardises aviation procedures. Russia is a member state of the ICAO and a such is obligated to follow ICAO regulations. According to ICAO regulations, all aircraft of all memberstates must obey to specific rules. All aircraft, civillian and military, that fly in controlled airspace must have their transponders turned or, if they dont have any, at least be in radio contact with ATC controllers on the ground.  Above international waters air traffic is generally free, but aircraft that use or cross airways are still obligated to have their transponders (if they have any) turned on and to make contact with ATC (if available). Military exercises during which aircraft fly with their transponders turned off an without beeing in contact with the ATC are held in restricted airspace

 

Russia is a member of ICAO but those rules are applied only to civilians airplanes. Military aircraft are not by any mean obliged to follow ICAO regulations, they may choose to cooperate with civilians controllers or they may not with no violation of international law.

 

"Above international waters.." are you kidding? and where it would be international airspace located, over national lands? Do you (or your pilot acquaintance) understand that the airspace over the land of a given country is considered national and as such, if russian military airplanes entered say, the polish one, it would be an act of war?

Is it clear that the news reported events about the russian warplanes talked about international airspace therefore, above international waters, or there is people out there believing that russian air force planes conduct patrolling and training inside national airspaces of foreign countries ?

 

Same goes for the secondary radar matter - either the pilot you know lied to you, or was misinformed - VFR pilots may even not be required to be informed about IFR flight rules, which apply to the whole "transponder fuss" thing, and I still haven't found a single document which states that secondary radar is unable to locate an aircraft without transponder (which is rather obvious, if you want to keep things logic: a radar is made to indipendently locate objects, otherwise, it's not even called a radar). And - the area in question, basically the baltic sea, is anyway covered by primary surveillance radars, which makes the usage of secondary ones useless (I believe that these days they are anyway kept off the air, or on standby mode)

[Lethaface]

 

SSR requires transponder on. The workings are explained in the video. Google has plenty more, like http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-primary-and-secondary-radar.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Lethaface

[whitehot78]

 

SSR requires transponder on. The workings are explained in the video. Google has plenty more, like http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-primary-and-secondary-radar.

 

so, if the vid is accurate I think that earlier posts created a little confusion on the definition of primary and secondary radars.

 

The system described in the video you posted, is the complete system, Primary and secondary.

The primary system is a 3d radar which gets the target parameters, all of them.

The secondary one, is THE system which listens to transponder codes, and actually would defy the definition of radar - it's not a transmitter/receiver that indipendently locates objects, but just an antenna interrogating the transponders on the aircraft.

 

This would be more of an indication that you can't have airspace scanned ONLY by secondary radar.

The result on operators screens doesn't change - They get the blips with the contacts both collaborative and uncollaborative (xpdr on or off). 

Anyway, the wiki link about transponders :

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transponder_(aeronautics)

 

please note, that in no case said system does broadcast the aircrafts coordinates in space, hence negating the need to use what we have called a "primary radar" so far. It can broadcast the target altitude, but again, having the need of a primary radar following the flight, that parameter is already extrapolated by the radar returns, which makes the altitude broadcast from the transponder redundant.

Edited June 2, 2015 by whitehot78

[agusto]

Russia is a member of ICAO but those rules are applied only to civilians airplanes. Military aircraft are not by any mean obliged to follow ICAO regulations, they may choose to cooperate with civilians controllers or they may not with no violation of international law.

 

The ICAO regulates the cooperation of civllian an military aircraft. Military aircraft must have due regard for the saftey of navigation civil aircraft and they must cooperate with civillian ATM services if saftey requires it.

 

http://www.icao.int/apac/meetings/2012_cmc/cir330_en.pdf

 

"Above international waters.." are you kidding? and where it would be international airspace located, over national lands? Do you (or your pilot acquaintance) understand that the airspace over the land of a given country is considered national and as such, if russian military airplanes entered say, the polish one, it would be an act of war?

 

Just because you are in international airspace doesnt mean you can do what you want and ignore the ICAOs regulations. The US for example provides ATC services over a large part of the Pacific Ocean, even though the airspace is international.

 

Same goes for the secondary radar matter - either the pilot you know lied to you, or was misinformed

 

Both very unlikely.

Edited June 2, 2015 by agusto

[A Canadian Cat]

Wow, what a lot of FUD and miss information or at least FUD and miss communication.

I live in Canada. During the cold war the Soviet air force used to test the US and Canadian air defence partnership with frequent flights were close to our air space. Similar flights were conducted near other counties air space. Once the cold war ended so did those provocative flights.

Putin started them again.

That is what we are talking about. All this justification over radar and transponders and misinformed reporters and baffle gab is just a distribution.

Putin's government has brought back an old provocation from a conflict that we thought was passed. He chose to do that. The only conclusion is that Putin's government is seeking additional conflict or at least trying to bully other counties.

That is obvious and clear. Just because some reporter screwed up the details and some people here used incorrect terminology or you misunderstood understood what they were talking about does not change that.

Quite frankly this is a common strategy when someone has no legitimate point on which to stand. Distract the other side with issues of details either real or made up in an attempt to avoid the basic issues.

Putin's government has been conducting deliberate provocative flights for the purpose of intimidation. Are you actually attempting to deny that? Do you feel it is some how justifiable? Let us stop being distracted by pointlessness.

 

Edited to remove odd phone auto correction involving piglets of all things ???

Edited June 3, 2015 by IanL

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

Putin's government has been conducting deliberate provocative flights for the purpose of intimidation. Are you actually attempting to deny that? Do you feel it is some how justifiable? Let us stop being distracted by pointlessness.

 

Not to mention alone of all countries on Earth, Russia is actively drilling to use manned bombers to deliver nuclear weapons on targets that would kill literally tens of thousands at best, and furthermore in recent wargames included launching nuclear strikes on Warsaw as an acceptable outcome for ensuring Russian interests were kept.

 

There's no justifying that, compliance with aviation agreements (Which there is not) be damned.  

[sburke]

To get back to the OP's question, things do appear to be seeing some escalation. There are counterclaims from both sides, but the OSCE report for Monday says that of the 109 "explosions" they counted Monday, the vast majority were outgoing, in other words the OSCE is confirming what Kiev is saying in terms of some type of heavy probe or attack by Russian backed forces near Donetsk.

The peace talks are also apparently going poorly.