Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what classes of buildings are excluded as permissible simulated targets in the instructions to pilots concerning the types of ground features which can be selected during low-level training flights.
§ Mr. NeubertI have nothing further to add to my reply to the hon. Member on 30 January 1989, at columns 33 and 34.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he has any evidence that environmental restraints in low-flying training have been a contributory factor in recent low-flying accidents.
243W
§ Mr. NeubertNo.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the outcome of the inquiry into a low-flying incident over Llanilar, Dyfed, on 25 August 1988.
§ Mr. NeubertAs far as my Department is aware, there has been no report of an incident over Llanilar, Dyfed on 25 August 1988.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of 1 July 1988,Official Report, column 400, if he will now declasify the instructions to Royal Air Force station commanders covering the investigation of complaints about low flying from members of the public.
§ Mr. NeubertNo.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what maximum permitted distance between initial point and simulated target is laid down in the regulations governing the conduct of low-level attack training sorties.
§ Mr. NeubertNone.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what measures pilots are instructed to take to alleviate noise disturbance when low flying at up to 550 knots in the run-up to simulated targets.
§ Mr. NeubertPilots engaged in low-flying training are instructed to keep any period of flight above the normal maximum cruising speeds to the minimum consistent with essential training requirements.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the locations and dates of periods of Royal Air Force police covert monitoring of low flying since 25 September 1987.
§ Mr. NeubertCovert monitoring of low-flying activity since 25 September 1987 has been conducted at the following locations over the periods stated:
1988
- 14–18 March, Amble
- 25–28 April, Quedgeley and Hardwicke
- 26–27 April, Braunston
- 7 June, Farndon
- 14–16 June, Crediton
- 21–23 June, Kidwelly
- 22 June, Tumble
- 27–29 June, Stonehouse
- 28–30 June, Keswick
- 12 July, Hexham
- 12 July, Holme on Spalding Moor
- 18–21 July, Builth Wells
- 26–27 July, Machynlleth
- 23–25 August, Morpeth
- 6–8 September, Halesworth
- 11–13 October, Melrose
- 18–20 October, Milford Haven
- Late October/early November, Redburn
- 15–17 November, Newark/Farndon
1989
- 6–9 February, Upper Chute
- 21–22 February, Market Bosworth
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the occasions since 1979 when Royal Air Force police covert monitoring of low flying has detected breaches of low-flying regulations.
244W
§ Mr. NeubertThe detailed information requested is not readily available and could not be obtained without disproportionate effort. Surveys do however indicate that pilots have a healthy respect for the low-flying regulations.
Dr. ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the aircraft handling reasons for United States Air Force F111 aircraft being permitted to fly at 480 knots in the low-flying system, as stated in his reply to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of 16 November 1987,Official Report, column 451.
§ Mr. NeubertBecause of the aerodynamic characteristics of the F111 aircraft, its handling properties are enhanced at a speed of 480 knots compared with a speed of 450 knots.