NOTAM 17-9-20

[iang3856]

I totally agree with RAV65's last comments. Stop debating the issue and just comply, otherwise this valuable resource could be lost for good.
Rant over, good spotting!

[EGLL_EGGW-Spotter]

Tower closed as of 11am and NOTAM Down

https://ffdmovements.blogspot.co.uk

[Raski]

I think there's a bit too much kool-aid drinking going on in this thread!

Let's cut the hysteria and fear-mongering and think this through logically :

If the USAF were genuinely bothered about their security and giving a 'heads up' of their whereabouts to their 'enemies' then they wouldn't be filing full detailed plans of their upcoming activities in the civilian flight plan system whereby pretty much anyone with a loose connection to the aviation industry can easily access it. It's hardly a secret that whenever the U2s fly and leave the UK shores they are going to perform a 6 hour STAY either over the Baltic or somewhere over SW Lithuania. This has been happening for years.

The argument that posting the callsign gives the 'enemy' a heads up of what's coming is laughable. It's literally a 30 second exercise for Russia (or whoever) to log in to the FPL system (civil or mil) and run a filter for ATYP/U2 and have full details of callsign, planned departure time, exact routing, flight level, mission STAY time and location all presented to them before the pilots have even finished their breakfast and got in the plane. Do you think that by posting this highly classified callsign info you'll be alerting the 'enemy' to something they don't already know? Pleeeeeeeeease....

There is also the small matter of all USAF planes transmitting their location and flight path via ADS-B, which can be received and displayed in all their glory on any £20 RTL-SDR dongle set-up, or if you prefer, a choice of public flight tracking sites. Russia can see all the E3s, C135s, B52s, C12s, Q4s, P8s orbiting around the borders of Kaliningrad right there in plain sight on ADSB exchange and Radarbox without even needing to look at any FPLs! They don't even make any attempt to disguise their activities so it's fairly safe to assume that they don't care and I very much doubt they'd be discussing their security protocols with avgeeks lining the Fairford perimeter fence.

I do find it amusing how many of the members here fall over themselves to be the first to post about Russia having a sneaky snoop around our shorelines via QRA launch topics, but apparently it's a threat to national security when someone posts about a C135 going to the Barents, or a U2 going to the Baltic or some B52s going to the Black Sea... One rule for one?

[Paulgul]

@Raski a sensible post at last :-)

just to note some if not all U2's are equipped with ads-b it's just they normally don't use it, occasionally they will show on plotting sites.

[jigsaw]

I think there's a bit too much kool-aid drinking going on in this thread!

Let's cut the hysteria and fear-mongering and think this through logically :

If the USAF were genuinely bothered about their security and giving a 'heads up' of their whereabouts to their 'enemies' then they wouldn't be filing full detailed plans of their upcoming activities in the civilian flight plan system whereby pretty much anyone with a loose connection to the aviation industry can easily access it. It's hardly a secret that whenever the U2s fly and leave the UK shores they are going to perform a 6 hour STAY either over the Baltic or somewhere over SW Lithuania. This has been happening for years.

The argument that posting the callsign gives the 'enemy' a heads up of what's coming is laughable. It's literally a 30 second exercise for Russia (or whoever) to log in to the FPL system (civil or mil) and run a filter for ATYP/U2 and have full details of callsign, planned departure time, exact routing, flight level, mission STAY time and location all presented to them before the pilots have even finished their breakfast and got in the plane. Do you think that by posting this highly classified callsign info you'll be alerting the 'enemy' to something they don't already know? Pleeeeeeeeease....

There is also the small matter of all USAF planes transmitting their location and flight path via ADS-B (albeit not the U2s yet as they're not equipped), which can be received and displayed in all their glory on any £20 RTL-SDR dongle set-up, or if you prefer, a choice of public flight tracking sites. Russia can see all the E3s, C135s, B52s, C12s, Q4s, P8s orbiting around the borders of Kaliningrad right there in plain sight on ADSB exchange and Radarbox without even needing to look at any FPLs! They don't even make any attempt to disguise their activities so it's fairly safe to assume that they don't care and I very much doubt they'd be discussing their security protocols with avgeeks lining the Fairford perimeter fence.

I do find it amusing how many of the members here fall over themselves to be the first to post about Russia having a sneaky snoop around our shorelines via QRA launch topics, but apparently it's a threat to national security when someone posts about a C135 going to the Barents, or a U2 going to the Baltic or some B52s going to the Black Sea... One rule for one?

As i mentioned previously, the squadron have asked us not to. We should respect that. end of discussion.
Also U2's can transmit mode-s. been seen many many times.

[Raski]

As i mentioned previously, the squadron have asked us not to. We should respect that. end of discussion.
Also U2's can transmit mode-s. been seen many many times.

I stand corrected on the ADS-B and have edited my post accordingly. However, before berating other members I would kindly ask that you get your own house in order first :

viewtopic.php?f=45&t=190977&p=1194962#p1194962

Dragon01 just been up for a short round of circuits.

[Raski]

Further, with regards your earlier statement: "The squadron have repeatedly asked for mission callsigns to not be published", can you please provide a link to these repeated statements sent out by the official squadron channel(s). In fact, just one will do. Thanks.

[jigsaw]

Ok, before you come after me like you have. you need to make the simple distinction between a MISSION callsign, and a training callsign for circuits. Also you've just referenced a quote of mine which was after the plane had landed. (they dont mind once the jet lands)

Also, i will go and find you it when i have time, however all the locals to Fairford are more than aware of what the 99th RS have asked of us all.
This is not a post for discussion, it is today's notam, if you wanna talk. send me a private message.

As i mentioned previously, the squadron have asked us not to. We should respect that. end of discussion.
Also U2's can transmit mode-s. been seen many many times.

I stand corrected on the ADS-B and have edited my post accordingly. However, before berating other members I would kindly ask that you get your own house in order first :

viewtopic.php?f=45&t=190977&p=1194962#p1194962

Dragon01 just been up for a short round of circuits.

The squadron have repeatedly asked for MISSION callsigns to not be published until the jet returns...

[Raski]

Also, i will go and find you it when i have time, however all the locals to Fairford are more than aware of what the 99th RS have asked of us all.

So you claim. I look forward to reading these repeated statements as I must have missed them and I can't see any mention of them on the 99th RS channels.

This is not a post for discussion, it is today's notam, if you wanna talk. send me a private message.

I would rather not if it's all the same. Such an important security matter should be kept in the public domain, not behind closed doors, and I'm sure the mods will be looking forward to the source(s) of the official 99th RS statement(s) so that they can pin it to the top of the forums to make all members aware.

[Cranberry]

I cannot believe there’s even any doubt about whether anyone here would do anything but the most they can do to help preserve the effectiveness of an operational mission or the personal security of military personnel. Wow, just wow.

[graham luxton]

I disagree with you Raski, the USAF care very much about who has access to their FPL's. Otherwise they wouldn't be `Status Protected`, which means that only those with a professional need to know should have access to them. Leaking FPL details to all and sundry around the world could land you in a lot of trouble. The U-2 people monitor FC and I suspect, will be very interested in you're post as to how their supposedly secure information is being made public knowledge and will doubtless complain to the IFPS to close this security loophole.

[dragonhunter20]

Also, i will go and find you it when i have time, however all the locals to Fairford are more than aware of what the 99th RS have asked of us all.

So you claim. I look forward to reading these repeated statements as I must have missed them and I can't see any mention of them on the 99th RS channels.

This is not a post for discussion, it is today's notam, if you wanna talk. send me a private message.

I would rather not if it's all the same. Such an important security matter should be kept in the public domain, not behind closed doors, and I'm sure the mods will be looking forward to the source(s) of the official 99th RS statement(s) so that they can pin it to the top of the forums to make all members aware.

I can’t understand what’s hard to believe about someone commenting on what’s been said. More so I find it comical how you’ve written song and peace and tried to gain the attention of the Admin for whatever reason. It was mentioned at Fairford that the squadron weren’t happy with information being shared regarding the mission bird and what it was equipped with. It’s why a lot of the groups from that neck of the woods don’t share much info until the plane has landed. Understandable considering getting the nature of what they do and where they go. All Jigsaw is doing is reiterating what’s been said so in my opinion you are taking it the wrong way and making him out to look like an idiot. Easy to hide behind a laptop screen and try to be the bigger man but imo you just look like an idiot

[jigsaw]

New NOTAM.
U4293/20 - FAIRFORD MIL ATZ ACTIVE, AD, RWY 27/09 OPEN. 17 SEP 16:00 2020 UNTIL 17 SEP 20:00
2020. CREATED: 17 SEP 15:10 2020

[adimale1981]

So in short, can we move the U-2 movements to a protected forum such as the OTT ones? That may allay some fears relating to security in the short term, they're (strangely) in the public domain as far as I can tell. (plus keeping information to limited detail as much as possible)

[Yammer]

"" The U-2 people monitor FC and I suspect, will be very interested in you're post as to how their supposedly secure information is being made public knowledge and will doubtless complain to the IFPS to close this security loophole.""

That's good and if there are holes then then should be plugged - it's amazing that such holes could be found by the enthusiasts community with regard to sensitive aircraft flight plans.

[Raski]

I disagree with you Raski, the USAF care very much about who has access to their FPL's. Otherwise they wouldn't be `Status Protected`, which means that only those with a professional need to know should have access to them. Leaking FPL details to all and sundry around the world could land you in a lot of trouble. The U-2 people monitor FC and I suspect, will be very interested in you're post as to how their supposedly secure information is being made public knowledge and will doubtless complain to the IFPS to close this security loophole.

But they are not "status protected" . Where are you getting this info from? I can see from 2 different systems at work which plans are in the public system and which ones are not. The U2s are in the public system which, as stated, is available to basically anyone with a vague connection to the aviation industry. Even universities can get access under the guise of "research" if so desired. The B52s are the same. There's actually very little NOT in the public system. If the USAF cared then I'm fairly confident they would put measures in place to hide/disguise their activities as RCH KC10s with phony hex codes like they did for Trump on Boxing Day a couple of years back. As they don't and they've been happily broadcasting their activities over the airwaves to anyone wielding a cheap scanner for more years than I care to remember, it's safe to say they don't really give a toss.

I suspect the truth of the matter behind all this faux outrage and hysteria over callsigns and FPLs is that much of it originates from private Facebook groups whose Walter Mitty members are part of a small clique 'in the know' and are miffed that people from outside their exclusive little clique are also 'in the know' and are sharing the info in the wider aviation community for everyone to benefit from. I remember this happening with a Mildenhall Facebook group a few years back... If your name's not down, you're not coming in.

[sabrejet]

Yet again, we expect common sense to prevail and are usually disappointed. I think most will get the message however (or knew it long ago).

[big john]

Black 01 working 277.625 descending fl200.
PS. I am breaking the wireless telegraphy act as well. do I care.

[TB1]

Well if he is a troll he is a very useful one.

Passing on gen, surely that is what sites like this are for.

[slogen51]

Probably a worthwhile discussion but in the wrong place! It is such a pain to tidy up a thread and move posts to a more appropriate section grrrrr.

Raski as far as I can see was just expressing an opinion , ironically he/she hasn't actually posted a callsign on this particular thread. Also there is no need to sarcastically say grow up or call someone a troll - although I personally have had a lot worse

I personally post U-2 movements and of course anyone can watch them take off from Fairford and head north east and also listen to them contacting Copenhagen on 134.680. Basically, If a U-2 mission is not operational then it is clearly not doing its job! But nobody on here really knows what they do when they go tactical and if they do I haven't seen it posted on here - they might even change callsign. At the end of the day we are just logging movements in and out of an airfield which is a tiny component of the whole mission program.

Importantly these U-2 posts and QRA movements ( which incidentally I personally think should only be mentioned after the event) are not against FC rules so I think we should just work within those FC rules which we all agreed to when we joined FC.