Air traffic controllers have been criticised after RAF jets were involved in a “near miss” with a passenger plane over Guisborough.
An investigation into the incident has concluded there was “insufficient coordination” between the controller at Durham Tees Valley Airport and a military air controller at Swanwick, London, during the incident at 9.20am on April 28.
But even though the two Hawk jets from RAF Leeming came within about 2.7 miles of the Amsterdam-bound Fokker 70 KLM passenger plane, north-east of Guisborough, there was no collision risk.
Details of the incident are set out in a report by the UK Airprox Board, which investigates reports of near misses.
The Fokker pilot reported that while climbing away from Durham Tees Valley, he was given traffic information about two fighter jets approaching from the right. When he saw the jets, they were doing an “evasive right turn”; a few seconds later, the formation turned left towards him again, triggering the Fokker’s TCAS (traffic collision avoidance system) to adjust its vertical speed.
Eventually, with his and the Hawks’ TCAS systems no longer needed, “another evasive turn was made by the jets and he continued his climb”.
In the report, the board says the DTV controller “was in a difficult position in trying to avoid fast jets who were manoeuvering.”
But after the Hawks turned north and he had turned the F70 eastwards, he “should have reassessed the plan and given an avoiding action turn.”
The board also felt the military controller could have been “more pro-active in helping him to achieve co-ordination” and was “disappointed” that the Hawks pilots hadn’t been told of the incident earlier, because they now couldn’t remember it.
As a result, “it could now not be known what had caused them to maintain a northerly track towards another aircraft (of which they had been given traffic information).”
The report added: “It was felt that they had probably exacerbated the situation by firstly not giving due consideration to the needs of other airspace users, and secondly giving scant assistance to the controllers who were trying to sequence their activities.”
A CAA spokesperson: “These sorts of incidents are graded into various severity levels and this was Category C, which means there was no risk of collision. They weren’t on the same trajectory.
“These things are investigated because very often, there is a reduced separation between the aircraft. Effectively, they get closer than they ideally should be, but they weren’t on a collision course.
“Even if no avoiding action had been taken, a collision wouldn’t have occurred. However, it has been assessed by a panel of experts and their conclusions published.”
