On 03/03/2022 18:50, Sam Wilson wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>
>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>
> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>

The US us that type of aircraft for VIP use. Perhaps some top brass is
having a look for himself.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 03/03/2022 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
> It is unusual not to see one or two over/around the UK at some time of
> the day. The nearest ATM has just landed at Geilenkirchen after two
> two or three circuits West of Hamburg; currently 7 military aircraft
> are showing up over the UK, two RAF helicopters, 3 USA and 2 RAF
> aeroplanes.

A few weeks ago, one these went up the Great Glen doing loops each side
of the Glen. I saw them doing something similar in another area.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/shadow-r1/

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 16:21:49 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <Y7pTIcpq21HiFArM@perry.uk>, at 12:06:02 on Wed, 2 Mar 2022,
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>> In message <svm669$naj$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:19:53 on Tue, 1 Mar
>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <svl0ir$fl9$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:38:03 on Tue, 1 Mar 2022,
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> When the Mildenhall KC-135s do racetracks over the North Sea there are
>>>>>> rarely any other aircraft visible in attendance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you mean "in attendance and being refuelled"?
>>>>
>>>> I mean visible on FlightRadar24. There are often F-15s, Typhoons and Hawks
>>>> shown on FR24 but miraculously they never seem to go near either the
>>>> KC-135s or the other tankers while they’re running the racetrack patterns.
>>>>
>>>>> FWIW those tankers frequently fly literally over my house (+/- 50m) and
>>>>> the base commander keeps his hand in flying one from time to time. Why
>>>>> do I know that - I had lunch with him a few years ago. Hopefully I won't
>>>>> now get a visit from any black helicopters (they prefer to use Ospreys)
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9snZJadgkQ
>>>>
>>>> The KC-135s fly over a family member’s house too, but at a considerably
>>>> higher altitude. I’ve not seen an Osprey yet.
>>>
>>> Looking at FlightRadar24 just now there's an Osprey cruising across
>>> central Cambs at 3,700ft. Can't see any tankers; they'd be at whatever
>>> height that kind of aircraft is, 10 miles from landing.
>>
>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>
> It is unusual not to see one or two over/around the UK at some time of
> the day. The nearest ATM has just landed at Geilenkirchen after two
> two or three circuits West of Hamburg; currently 7 military aircraft
> are showing up over the UK, two RAF helicopters, 3 USA and 2 RAF
> aeroplanes.
>

I wonder, has such aerial activity over central Europe increased in the
last few weeks? For example, I'd expect the constant electronic
intelligence flights over Romania are new.

Jeremy Double <jmd.nospam@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 24/02/2022 08:54, MB wrote:
>>>> On 24/02/2022 07:40, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> A opposed to a very large plane ploughing into Sizewell B?
>>>>
>>>> Aren't the containtment buildings designed with that in mind.
>>>>
>>>> Nuclear power has to build layer up on layer of protection systems which
>>>> other generations system are not required to have.
>>>
>>> Chernobyl, Fukushima, 9 Mile Island…
>>
>> <cough> Three Mile Island </cough>
>>
>> Chernobyl - fundamentally flawed design driven into unstable state by badly
>> executed experiment
>> Fukushima - possibly unwise location and system design flaws
>> Three Mile Island - technical design faults and operator error
>> Windscale extremely dodgy design (in hindsight) which would have been much,
>> much worse except for Cockroft’s Folly
>
> Yes, but that’s the point. Not everything works as expected. It’s easy to
> be wise after the event. Look up Feynman’s comments about the probability
> of Space Shuttle failure as quoted by NASA and what the on-the-ground NASA
> engineers thought the probability of failure was, made when he was on the
> Challenger enquiry. The
>
> Empirical evidence shows that there’s a serious reactor accident somewhere
> in the world every 10 to 20 years.
>

And maybe not just accidents:
Fire at Ukrainian nuclear plant, Europe's largest, after Russian attack,
foreign minister says
<https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/top-wrap-1-europes-largest-nuclear-power-plant-fire-after-russian-attack-mayor-2022-03-04/>

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>
>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>
>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>
>
> Perhaps Artemis?
> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>

Very possibly.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 03/03/2022 18:50, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>
>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>
>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>
>
> The US us that type of aircraft for VIP use. Perhaps some top brass is
> having a look for himself.

See Recliner’s posting. Seems unlikely to be a VIP unless he’s got very
good binoculars.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 16:21:49 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <Y7pTIcpq21HiFArM@perry.uk>, at 12:06:02 on Wed, 2 Mar 2022,
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> In message <svm669$naj$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:19:53 on Tue, 1 Mar
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <svl0ir$fl9$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:38:03 on Tue, 1 Mar 2022,
>>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When the Mildenhall KC-135s do racetracks over the North Sea there are
>>>>>>> rarely any other aircraft visible in attendance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean "in attendance and being refuelled"?
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean visible on FlightRadar24. There are often F-15s, Typhoons and Hawks
>>>>> shown on FR24 but miraculously they never seem to go near either the
>>>>> KC-135s or the other tankers while they’re running the racetrack patterns.
>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW those tankers frequently fly literally over my house (+/- 50m) and
>>>>>> the base commander keeps his hand in flying one from time to time. Why
>>>>>> do I know that - I had lunch with him a few years ago. Hopefully I won't
>>>>>> now get a visit from any black helicopters (they prefer to use Ospreys)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9snZJadgkQ
>>>>>
>>>>> The KC-135s fly over a family member’s house too, but at a considerably
>>>>> higher altitude. I’ve not seen an Osprey yet.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at FlightRadar24 just now there's an Osprey cruising across
>>>> central Cambs at 3,700ft. Can't see any tankers; they'd be at whatever
>>>> height that kind of aircraft is, 10 miles from landing.
>>>
>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>
>> It is unusual not to see one or two over/around the UK at some time of
>> the day. The nearest ATM has just landed at Geilenkirchen after two
>> two or three circuits West of Hamburg; currently 7 military aircraft
>> are showing up over the UK, two RAF helicopters, 3 USA and 2 RAF
>> aeroplanes.
>>
>
> I wonder, has such aerial activity over central Europe increased in the
> last few weeks? For example, I'd expect the constant electronic
> intelligence flights over Romania are new.

Romania is new; up to last week they were over the northern and eastern
borders of Ukraine.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeremy Double <jmd.nospam@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 24/02/2022 08:54, MB wrote:
>>>>> On 24/02/2022 07:40, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>> A opposed to a very large plane ploughing into Sizewell B?
>>>>>
>>>>> Aren't the containtment buildings designed with that in mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nuclear power has to build layer up on layer of protection systems which
>>>>> other generations system are not required to have.
>>>>
>>>> Chernobyl, Fukushima, 9 Mile Island…
>>>
>>> <cough> Three Mile Island </cough>
>>>
>>> Chernobyl - fundamentally flawed design driven into unstable state by badly
>>> executed experiment
>>> Fukushima - possibly unwise location and system design flaws
>>> Three Mile Island - technical design faults and operator error
>>> Windscale extremely dodgy design (in hindsight) which would have been much,
>>> much worse except for Cockroft’s Folly
>>
>> Yes, but that’s the point. Not everything works as expected. It’s easy to
>> be wise after the event. Look up Feynman’s comments about the probability
>> of Space Shuttle failure as quoted by NASA and what the on-the-ground NASA
>> engineers thought the probability of failure was, made when he was on the
>> Challenger enquiry. The
>>
>> Empirical evidence shows that there’s a serious reactor accident somewhere
>> in the world every 10 to 20 years.
>>
>
> And maybe not just accidents:
> Fire at Ukrainian nuclear plant, Europe's largest, after Russian attack,
> foreign minister says
> <https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/top-wrap-1-europes-largest-nuclear-power-plant-fire-after-russian-attack-mayor-2022-03-04/>
>
>

Either a highly calculated action to avoid the actual reactor or lucky to
have got away with it.
I’m sure the Russians know very well that any leaking radiation could cross
into Ukraines nearest neighbours which is mainly themselves. OTOH Russian
history has the trait that the government in Moscow doesn’t have qualms
about sacrificing their own subjects for what they see as the good of the
whole.

GH

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>
>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>
>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.

I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)

It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...

BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
leasing company rather than directly US military.

> Perhaps Artemis?
> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>

That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
operational duties.

--
David

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jeremy Double <jmd.nospam@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 24/02/2022 08:54, MB wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/02/2022 07:40, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>>>> A opposed to a very large plane ploughing into Sizewell B?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aren't the containtment buildings designed with that in mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nuclear power has to build layer up on layer of protection systems which
>>>>>> other generations system are not required to have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chernobyl, Fukushima, 9 Mile Island…
>>>>
>>>> <cough> Three Mile Island </cough>
>>>>
>>>> Chernobyl - fundamentally flawed design driven into unstable state by badly
>>>> executed experiment
>>>> Fukushima - possibly unwise location and system design flaws
>>>> Three Mile Island - technical design faults and operator error
>>>> Windscale extremely dodgy design (in hindsight) which would have been much,
>>>> much worse except for Cockroft’s Folly
>>>
>>> Yes, but that’s the point. Not everything works as expected. It’s easy to
>>> be wise after the event. Look up Feynman’s comments about the probability
>>> of Space Shuttle failure as quoted by NASA and what the on-the-ground NASA
>>> engineers thought the probability of failure was, made when he was on the
>>> Challenger enquiry. The
>>>
>>> Empirical evidence shows that there’s a serious reactor accident somewhere
>>> in the world every 10 to 20 years.
>>>
>>
>> And maybe not just accidents:
>> Fire at Ukrainian nuclear plant, Europe's largest, after Russian attack,
>> foreign minister says
>> <https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/top-wrap-1-europes-largest-nuclear-power-plant-fire-after-russian-attack-mayor-2022-03-04/>
>>
>>
>
> Either a highly calculated action to avoid the actual reactor or lucky to
> have got away with it.
> I’m sure the Russians know very well that any leaking radiation could cross
> into Ukraines nearest neighbours which is mainly themselves. OTOH Russian
> history has the trait that the government in Moscow doesn’t have qualms
> about sacrificing their own subjects for what they see as the good of the
> whole.

I think you may have mistyped 'whole' when you meant 'elite'?

David Williams <davidw_3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>
>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>
> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)

Yesm, FR24. I’m not very sophisticated. :-) It’s up again today, seems to
be based out of Constantain Bulgaria.

> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...

Absolutely, Flying the same sort of patterns as the USAF and RAF RC-135s.

> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>
>> Perhaps Artemis?
>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>
> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
> operational duties.

Thank you,

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>
>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>
> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>
> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>
> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>
>> Perhaps Artemis?
>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>
> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
> operational duties.
>

Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
the Nrtn Sea!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>>
>>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>
>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
>> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
>> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
>> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
>> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
>> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>>
>> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
>> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
>> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
>> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>>
>> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
>> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
>> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
>> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>>
>>> Perhaps Artemis?
>>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>>
>> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
>> operational duties.
>>
>
> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
> the Nrtn Sea!

Registrations are 60-x and 61-x so at least these ones are likely younger
than I am!

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>>
>>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>
>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
>> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
>> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
>> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
>> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
>> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>>
>> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
>> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
>> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
>> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>>
>> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
>> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
>> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
>> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>>
>>> Perhaps Artemis?
>>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>>
>> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
>> operational duties.
>>
>
> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
> the Nrtn Sea!
>

With their tracks sometimes shown dotted, presumably because they turned
off their transponders (or went into some sort of 'stealth mode')?

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>>
>>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
>>> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
>>> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
>>> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
>>> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
>>> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>>>
>>> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
>>> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
>>> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
>>> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>>>
>>> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
>>> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
>>> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
>>> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>>>
>>>> Perhaps Artemis?
>>>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>>>
>>> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
>>> operational duties.
>>>
>>
>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>> the Nrtn Sea!
>
> Registrations are 60-x and 61-x so at least these ones are likely younger
> than I am!
>

I thought only the final, 'H' variant was still in service, and they were
all built in 1961-2.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:

<SNIP earlier chat about intelligence gathering flights>

>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>> the Nrtn Sea!

I think they just wanted some Lego or a look at the
Schleswig-Holstein situation. ;-)

In any case, Roland and I have survived their low passes (4000
feet) over Cambridgeshire on March 2nd. They seem to be having
day trips in all directions from RAF Fairford.

> With their tracks sometimes shown dotted, presumably because they turned
> off their transponders (or went into some sort of 'stealth mode')?

If this was over the North Sea, it might just be reception
difficulties. I saw different callsigns early in the flights,
which might be a sign of garbled signals or a mismatch somewhere
in a database.

FlightRadar24 (FR24) uses dashed lines to show where they are
estimating a route - usually a great circle path from last
received position. BTW, FR24 has reiterated answers to some FAQs
on Twitter over the last few days.

--
David

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:

<SNIP earlier chat about intelligence gathering flights>

>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>> the Nrtn Sea!

I think they just wanted some Lego or a look at the
Schleswig-Holstein situation. ;-)

In any case, Roland and I have survived their low passes (4000
feet) over Cambridgeshire on March 2nd. They seem to be having
day trips in all directions from RAF Fairford.

> With their tracks sometimes shown dotted, presumably because they turned
> off their transponders (or went into some sort of 'stealth mode')?

If this was over the North Sea, it might just be reception
difficulties. I saw different callsigns early in the flights,
which might be a sign of garbled signals or a mismatch somewhere
in a database.

FlightRadar24 (FR24) uses dashed lines to show where they are
estimating a route - usually a great circle path from last
received position. BTW, FR24 has reiterated answers to some FAQs
on Twitter over the last few days.

--
David

On 04/03/2022 11:06, David Williams wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>
> <SNIP earlier chat about intelligence gathering flights>
>
>>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>>> the Nrtn Sea!
>
> I think they just wanted some Lego or a look at the
> Schleswig-Holstein situation. ;-)
>
> In any case, Roland and I have survived their low passes (4000
> feet) over Cambridgeshire on March 2nd. They seem to be having
> day trips in all directions from RAF Fairford.
>
>> With their tracks sometimes shown dotted, presumably because they turned
>> off their transponders (or went into some sort of 'stealth mode')?
>
> If this was over the North Sea, it might just be reception
> difficulties. I saw different callsigns early in the flights,
> which might be a sign of garbled signals or a mismatch somewhere
> in a database.
>
> FlightRadar24 (FR24) uses dashed lines to show where they are
> estimating a route - usually a great circle path from last
> received position. BTW, FR24 has reiterated answers to some FAQs
> on Twitter over the last few days.
>

For some reason there's an RAF Voyager doing circuits over western
Lithuania. Do these have any ELINT capability? I thought they were just
tankers/transports.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 11:06, David Williams wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>>
>> <SNIP earlier chat about intelligence gathering flights>
>>
>>>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>>>> the Nrtn Sea!
>>
>> I think they just wanted some Lego or a look at the
>> Schleswig-Holstein situation. ;-)
>>
>> In any case, Roland and I have survived their low passes (4000
>> feet) over Cambridgeshire on March 2nd. They seem to be having
>> day trips in all directions from RAF Fairford.
>>
>>> With their tracks sometimes shown dotted, presumably because they turned
>>> off their transponders (or went into some sort of 'stealth mode')?
>>
>> If this was over the North Sea, it might just be reception
>> difficulties. I saw different callsigns early in the flights,
>> which might be a sign of garbled signals or a mismatch somewhere
>> in a database.
>>
>> FlightRadar24 (FR24) uses dashed lines to show where they are
>> estimating a route - usually a great circle path from last
>> received position. BTW, FR24 has reiterated answers to some FAQs
>> on Twitter over the last few days.
>>
>
> For some reason there's an RAF Voyager doing circuits over western
> Lithuania. Do these have any ELINT capability? I thought they were just
> tankers/transports.
>

Yes, they're just air tankers (and VIP transports).

It'll be refuelling other military planes that don't show up on the radar,
most probably RAF Typhoons patrolling close to the NATO frontier with
Belarus and Russia. For example:

https://twitter.com/royalairforce/status/1499413752483127306?s=21

It's flying at 27,000', typical of the refuelling altitude.

There's a USAF RC-135-W flying over Poland doing the ELINT work. The USAF
also has a KC-10-A tanker doing circuits in the area, so it's probably
supporting USAF fighters on patrol (I noticed an F16 with its transponder
on yesterday in the same area).

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>>>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>>>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>>>
>>>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
>>>> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
>>>> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
>>>> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
>>>> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
>>>> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>>>>
>>>> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
>>>> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
>>>> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
>>>> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>>>>
>>>> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
>>>> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
>>>> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
>>>> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps Artemis?
>>>>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>>>>
>>>> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
>>>> operational duties.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>>> the Nrtn Sea!
>>
>> Registrations are 60-x and 61-x so at least these ones are likely younger
>> than I am!
>>
>
> I thought only the final, 'H' variant was still in service, and they were
> all built in 1961-2.

Some weren’t delivered until 63, according to Wikipedia, but it agrees that
the first were in 61. I have only a very slight knowledge of US military
aircraft numbering, but IIUC the USAF digits before the “-“ refer to the
year the aicraft procurement began, so it can be several years before the
thing is actually manufactured, never mind when it enters service.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 04/03/2022 23:22, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 03/03/2022 16:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> An RC135W 10 miles out at 2pm today, 2,100 ft.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have noticed what looked like some of the smaller ELINT aircraft as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There’s something which is identified as a Bombardier Challenger 650,
>>>>>>> callsign CL60, but with no registration and no other details, which
>>>>>>> regularly flies up and down there. Could be anything, really.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24). FR24 is displaying the
>>>>> ICAO type code of the aircraft as the callsign, and hiding other
>>>>> details. Other sites show registration N488CR, typically a
>>>>> callsign of BRIO68, and mark the aircraft as being under the FAA
>>>>> LADD scheme, which indicates a request for privacy of
>>>>> data. (That's my short hand-waving summary, E&OE.)
>>>>>
>>>>> It has regularly been flying patterns on the edge of NATO
>>>>> territory from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, since January at
>>>>> least. Those patterns look plausible for surveillance or
>>>>> intelligence gathering. If it walks like a duck ...
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, when I've seen BRIO68, it's been identified as a Challenger
>>>>> CL-600 not 650 - but that's the level of detail that can vary
>>>>> between monitoring sites. Also, its owner or operator is a
>>>>> leasing company rather than directly US military.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps Artemis?
>>>>>> <https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/05/27/looking-at-high-speed-isr-jet-capability-us-army-deploys-demonstrator-to-europe/>
>>>>>
>>>>> That seems a good guess. Presumably, it's nearing or actually at
>>>>> operational duties.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't want to worry you but there are a couple of B52s heading out over
>>>> the Nrtn Sea!
>>>
>>> Registrations are 60-x and 61-x so at least these ones are likely younger
>>> than I am!
>>>
>>
>> I thought only the final, 'H' variant was still in service, and they were
>> all built in 1961-2.
>
> Some weren’t delivered until 63, according to Wikipedia, but it agrees that
> the first were in 61. I have only a very slight knowledge of US military
> aircraft numbering, but IIUC the USAF digits before the “-“ refer to the
> year the aicraft procurement began, so it can be several years before the
> thing is actually manufactured, never mind when it enters service.
>

A bit like London Underground stock.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24).

Not sure who the question is addressed to but I only very rarely look at
FR24, much prefer ADSB

On 04/03/2022 09:56, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Absolutely, Flying the same sort of patterns as the USAF and RAF RC-135s.

A NORTHROP GRUMMAN RQ-4 Global Hawk has been going up and down the
Eastern border of Poland for ages.

MB <MB@nospam.net> writes:

> On 04/03/2022 09:31, David Williams wrote:
>> I guess you're using Flightradar24 (FR24).
>

Attribution and context have got lost somewhere but up-subthread
I was asking Sam Wilson because he mentioned an aircraft type
being reported as a callsign, and that is typical of what FR24
does when it is missing or suppressing a callsign.

> Not sure who the question is addressed to but I only very rarely look
> at FR24, much prefer ADSB

And now everybody knows about adsbexchange.com! I look at both,
for their individual strengths and because when you see two
versions you get a better sense of what is wrongly reported or
missing.

FR24 seems to be the site journalists go to, and that attracts
other viewers - to overload and collapse in the early days of
this "special military operation". FR24 has restored access but
still seems sluggish compared to its previous performanc

--
David

On 05/03/2022 12:51, David Williams wrote:
> FR24 seems to be the site journalists go to

Probably because they or their employer subscribe to it.

Some time ago I was going to give them a feed from my receiver but they
do not accept feeds from Windows, I think Android only.