Home AI Drones Robotics Technology Data Science Categories Tags

28. June 2025

Usaf F-15 Fighters Engage In Authorized Night Training Amid Uk Airprox Incident

Usaf F-15 Fighters Engage In Authorized Night Training Amid Uk Airprox Incident

The Airprox Incident that Shook the UK Drone Community

On November 22, 2024, at 21:51 UTC, a National Police Air Service (NPAS) EC135 helicopter reported multiple “drones” maneuvering around it. However, in reality, the objects were USAF F15 fighters engaged in authorized night training in Class G airspace, coordinated by Lakenheath Approach (“Overlord”). This incident highlights the importance of situational awareness and the need for better coordination between air traffic control services.

Class G Airspace

Class G airspace is a designated area where general aviation aircraft are allowed to operate without prior permission or coordination with air traffic control. However, this does not mean that other types of aircraft, such as military jets, cannot be present in these areas. The USAF F15 fighters were operating under a separate agreement with the UK authorities and had notified Lakenheath Approach of their presence.

The Incident

The EC135 helicopter pilot reported seeing multiple “drones” maneuvering around him, which he believed to be a threat to his safety. He had initially thought that the lights were drones due to their behavior and lack of TCAS confirmation (Traffic Collision Avoidance System). The pilot’s initial report was not corroborated by any other aircraft or air traffic control services, leading to concerns about the safety of the situation.

However, upon further investigation, it became clear that the F15 fighters had been operating in the area all along. The radar recordings showed that the police helicopter pilot was likely reporting and reacting to activity from the F15s, rather than actual drones.

Consequences and Lessons Learned

The UK Airprox Board (UKAB) concluded that there was no risk of collision (Risk Category E) and attributed the report to misidentification and situational awareness breakdown. The incident highlights the need for better coordination between air traffic control services and more effective training programs for pilots.

Misidentification Risk

Even experienced police aircrew using EO/IR cameras mistook military jets for drones, demonstrating how easily drone operators can be blamed for aerial events they weren’t involved in. Drone operators must be aware of this risk and take steps to mitigate it, such as using advanced sensors and systems.

Electronic Conspicuity Limitations

The EC135’s TCAS did not detect the F-15s despite them squawking Modes A and C, highlighting the ongoing limitations of EC systems in complex or mixed-use airspace, particularly at night. Drone operators must ensure that their aircraft are equipped with advanced electronic conspicuity systems to avoid similar situations.

ATC Service Levels – Know the Difference

Under a Basic Service, ATC is not required to provide traffic information. Drone operators should consider requesting a Traffic Service or Deconfliction Service for BVLOS (Beyond Visual Line of Sight), urban, or sensitive operations to ensure they receive accurate and timely information about air traffic in their area.

Public Perception and Risk Assessment

The public often assumes that ATC sees and controls everything – which is untrue in Class G airspace. Coordination gaps between police helicopter tasking and USAF operations have led to similar incidents in the past. Drone operators must be aware of these gaps and take steps to mitigate them, such as pre-notifying military ATC when operating near MOD airspace.

Risk Assessment for UK Drone Operations

Potential Scenarios:

  1. Misidentification by other aircraft: Likelihood – Medium, Severity – Low to Medium, Risk Level – Moderate overall, but High reputationally.
  2. No traffic info under Basic Service: Likelihood – Medium, Severity – Medium, Risk Level – Moderate.
  3. Public/media backlash from perceived near-miss: Likelihood – High, Severity – High, Risk Level – High (especially for commercial operators).

Key Mitigations for Drone Operators

  1. Use dual EC systems (ADS-B OUT and ground-based detect-and-avoid).
  2. Maintain a telemetry and flight log archive for every operation.
  3. Pre-notify military ATC when operating near MOD airspace.
  4. File CANPs, NOTAMs, or Temporary Danger Areas when applicable.
  5. Train pilots to request an upgrade to Traffic Service where required.

Legal and Regulatory Observations

SERA.3205 and ANO Article 239 set the standard for proximity liability. Drone operators must ensure that they comply with these regulations and keep their compliance well-documented. Expect growing pressure for mandatory electronic conspicuity, with incidents like this cited in policy. If blamed in media or police statements without evidence, drone operators may have grounds for defamation or economic loss claims.

Conclusion

This incident highlights the importance of situational awareness and coordination between air traffic control services. Drone operators must be aware of these risks and take steps to mitigate them by controlling the narrative through data and improving their understanding of airspace regulations.

Latest Posts