Could an aircraft 'hide' in the aircraft shadow of another aircraft without being detected or noticed?

Manfred
  • Could an aircraft 'hide' in the aircraft shadow of another aircraft without being detected or noticed? Manfred

    I just finished reading an interesting post where the author suggests that the missing Malaysian Airlines flight 370 could have 'hidden' under the cover of Singapore Airlines flight 68 to fly to a covert airstrip.

    I've read multiple thrillers where submarines have hidden behind the acoustic signal of large cargo vessels to mask their sound over sonar arrays, and this (at least in the book) sounds plausible. I also read another book where a bomber (flying under the identity of a commercial jet) masked a business jet to get it into an area without detection. Naturally, both examples are taken from fiction, but I'm wondering:

    • Would there be any hints now in retrospective to suggest they were being followed? Their transponder was off of course, but I'm wondering if for instance there might be some radio interference or static from such as large aircraft behind them? Are there every any issues when refueling aircraft do this sort of thing?

    • What is the resolution of radar? Would one be able to notice the two blips on the screen unless they were literally under or beside each other, or would it still appear as one dot on secondary radar if say they were 200 meters behind and below?

  • Radar resolution is defined in terms of degrees of arc (or alternatively in steradians/solid angles) and as such, the further away from the radar, the larger volume is being sampled. At altitude and some distance from the radar you should have a bit of leeway on how loose of a formation you can fly and show up as one contact on the radar display. I'm not giving credence to the theory presented, but I am saying it is plausible that one aircraft could fly a formation with another and be detected as one airplane by a radar.

    If the transponder is off, the aircraft you are following will not see you on TCAS and if you are behind them you will be visually undetectable by the crew or passengers. If you fly above them you will be clear of their wake, so I would put behind and above the best position to shadow. A lateral offset might be safer, but if you stray too much, you might wander into the FOV of the cabin. I can't see any way the following airplane would cause nav or com interference in the followed airplane.

    The biggest threat to being detected in this scenario are being seen by other airplane. If ATC calls traffic and you see two planes in formation instead, you would probably say something. In the case of the airplane you refer to however, it was night and if you turn all of your position lights, beacons, strobes, tail lights and if there is no moon out you might escape visual detection by a third party.

  • I think this is more possible in theory than in fact.

    One radar station has given blind spots, but most nations use a whole array of stations. So if you were not seen on one sensor you'd probably be seen on another. Plus shadowing behind another jet would likely put you in a zone of dangerous wake turbulence.

    Over the ocean it's easier not to be noticed since ATC radar stations are built on land.

    Aside from sensors noticing you dilligence is required by those who monitor the sensors. Seems like that might have been absent on the Malaysian jet, if it actually diverted course radically and crossed the Malaysian peninsula as is being suggested in the news.

  • Theoretically possible once you get close enough. In fact military aircraft do it all the time, making a group of smaller aircraft look like a single larger one.
    But there's a catch, getting close enough in the first place, and without being noticed.
    The crew and passengers of the other airliner would notice a T7 flying in close formation, and even if they didn't see it, they would notice the buffeting and certainly the proximity alarm on the other airliner would notify the crew, who'd notify ATC, who'd send in fighter aircraft to see what the heck was going on.
    And don't forget that it takes rather serious training to get aircraft to fly that close, and close coordination between the aircraft to retain that formation and not crash into one another. All of which would not be in place in your scenario.

    So no, it's just another conspiracy theory dreamed up by people who've seen aircraft with crews trained for it fly in close formation at an airshow and didn't know what is involved, just like the idea that the T7 would have flown at wavetop level to avoid radio contact, or diving and weaving through the mountains just over the ground.

Tags
Related questions and answers
  • I just finished reading an interesting post where the author suggests that the missing Malaysian Airlines flight 370 could have 'hidden' under the cover of Singapore Airlines flight 68 to fly...) sounds plausible. I also read another book where a bomber (flying under the identity of a commercial jet) masked a business jet to get it into an area without detection. Naturally, both examples are taken... there might be some radio interference or static from such as large aircraft behind them? Are there every any issues when refueling aircraft do this sort of thing? What is the resolution of radar? Would one

  • Here are a few thoughts: 'Real' accidents happen much too seldom to be of any real measure, and they would have to be compensated for the number of passenger kilometers as well to be objective. Large airlines may have be involved in more accidents, but they have more aircraft. Many airlines low down on the reports had accidents many years ago. Avherald and the like may be good sources but emphasize that they don't report on all accidents. Different jurisdictions have different reporting requirements. What is a fair and unbiased method of measuring airline safety?

  • 447, which crashed in the Atlantic), where the recorders were found some time later on the ocean floor. Additionally, it seems reasonable to me that one would want to have the recorders not float so...In a recent BBC article regarding the disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 (MH-370), the writer refers to a US Naval officer's statement: Commander William Marks from the US Seventh... in the water, the radar could pick it up. They [flight recorders] typically have a radio beacon and so for example our P3 [radar] - if they are flying within a certain range of that - will pick up

  • Without getting into the mess of redesigning existing Flight Data Recorders, I have a simple proposal that I think would help in deep water crashes. I propose that several floating cushion sets... would help find water crashes sooner, but if you add a simple USB memory stick in the center, then have data similar to the current FDR's being fed into it, then finding one of the floaties would give... 370 and Air France Flight 447 would have both been greatly aided if these floaties were in those planes. What do you think?

  • Sometimes, when I'm flying on the airlines, I'll board an aircraft where the aisles seem incredibly cramped, where it's almost impossible to move past without bumping every seat. I can't imagine how much of a nuisance it'd be for people larger than me! I once saw an obese person a bit stuck between one of the aisles, blocking the way for others to move into the aircraft. But then I thought about what would happen in an emergency. What if there were numerous large people on board, and there was a fire? So, are there any limits to how much the airlines can squeeze their planes' aisles?

  • position at 3:11AM. From the ping at 3:11AM, another circle can be drawn, like the one drawn at 8:11AM. The intersection of the two circles give an arc of most likely 3:11 AM positions. At 4:11AM, we will have a series of circles from max distance and one circle from the ping. These intersections will give a series of possible arcs. This process can be repeated (with increasing complexity... information available. For example, from the ping circles separated by one hour, we can get plausible directions the plane may have taken. Why isn't anyone pursuing this line of analysis

  • I was looking through my virtual radar logs one of the days and found this "glitchy" ADS-B behavior. I am almost 100% sure that this is not due to my antenna or setup since two independent different radars confirmed this weird behavior from FlightRadar24. Also A/C before and after this one did not exhibit this behavior. Does anybody have any thoughts as to what may be happening??? Why... of occurrence is approximately: 3/16/2014 6:09pm CST I have also verified FlightAware is ALSO showing the same weird glitch. See below "yellow" highlighted airplane: Same A/C from FlightRadar24

  • protect the president whilst in the air? I have heard of TFRs for "VIP in the area" reasons — is that for AF1? I am guessing that the aircraft identification is blocked, but wouldn't they still need to have the transponder on for TCAS? Specifically, the Wikipedia page on Air Force One has the following quote: Air traffic controllers gave Air Force One an ominous warning that a passenger jet was close to Air Force One and was unresponsive to calls. "As we got over Gainesville, Fla., we got the word from Jacksonville Center. They said, 'Air Force One you have traffic behind you

  • Based on the reading I've been doing of FAA's Next Generation Air Traffic Control (NextGen) plans, I've been wondering if and how radar systems will continue to be used for ATC as NextGen rolls out? Questions include: Is it correct to assert that radar coverage will effectively become a less precise, backup only, data feed? I am suggesting this because my understanding (which could easily be incorrect) is that ADS-B will mandated for most (everyone?) and so aircraft will be actively reporting their precise position without the need for a radar track. Will existing radar coverage eventually

  • Primary target: An aircraft not reporting mode-C, the only thing the controller has is the return on the radar. When a controller reports a primary target as traffic to other aircraft, the controller does not have the altitude of the target. Given this, I conclude that ATC radar does not have the altitude (angle-up) to the target, and only provides azimuth. So then without the altitude, how does the radar-system know where to put the target laterally on the screen? Example, a radar picks up a target that is 10 miles from the station. If the target is 0 AGL, the proper position would be 10

Data information