Aviathor wrote:
The use of firearms follows a strict protocol. The police are only allowed to make use of their firearms if they are themselves threatened, or to protect the population from an imminent threat. So yes. The idea that a policeman will just shoot you is absurd.The Gendarmerie on the other hand is allowed to fire after having made appropriate warning, even on a fugitive ie someone running away.
It is exactly as Peter said, and you just proved it: It requires knowledge far more intimate than even a typical French resident/citizen has of the powers of different police forces, and how to recognise them, and what their respective missions are, to know whether they are allowed to shoot or not. The same about the military that are patrolling just about any public place. That being said, I’m enough of a crass optimist that I still think that even though they are legally allowed to shoot in such a scenario, the Gendarmerie wouldn’t.
Just to get vocabulary straight, France (the republic, as opposed to its subdivisions such as Paris Prefecture or municipalities) has two police forces, one is called “Police Nationale” and the other “Gendarmerie Nationale”.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Just fly off won’t do unless you think you can outrun a Rafale
Can be done 
I met a guy who outwitted a Mig-15 or 17 with a Piper Cub, the Mig tried to shoot it down but it didn’t work.
It must have been quite unnerving. I don’t see how the finer points of the different French security forces really matter to be honest; it’s just not a nice thing to happen just before a flight.
I feel that the real issue here is that the police was on the maneuvering area without authorisation or even contact with ATC
ATC described them as “two men”.
Normally the airport police have a line to ATC, for this sort of situation. For example, years ago I diverted to Biggin Hill (Shoreham fogged in again) and taxied up to a hangar in which I then had an “arrangement”; the opposite side of the runway to the main terminal. Just as I was about to shut down, ATC called me up saying the police want to see me, and that I was to taxi the plane there. I had arrived from the Isle of Man which as we all know is the world centre for terrorism, so I had to get a police check. Had shut down a bit sooner, they would have sent a vehicle over.
AFAIU the bottom line is that Peter screwed up by leaving significantly before EOBT communicated to customs. End of story.
Even back in 2002 when I flew from the US to Canada and back, one did not take this kind of stuff lightly. On my way back I landed at an airport to which they had to send immigration officers from the Portland airport. I landed shortly before ETA and was expecting to see immigration officers waiting for us. When nobody showed UK I called immigration to inquire. I regretted not having landed at Portland because it took them over one hour to get to us and during that time we needed to stay with the airplane in the sun.
Aviathor wrote:
Peter screwed up by leaving significantly before EOBT
That’s an incorrect statement (and worded somewhat more strongly that you wanted to?). 15 minutes before filed EOBT is in no way significant, and well within IFR limits.
Aviathor wrote:
You are not supposed to leave before EOBT when customs/immigration check is required.
Says who?
I’ve been a keen advocate for agents of the PAG or Gendarmerie de l’Air who have been, since the Bataclan attacks, kept overstretched by posturing politicians. But after all this time, the fact that we don’t have the right information on who to communicate to (email addresses) and when (notice periods) is simply ridiculous. This is not a bloody Pink Panther movie, ffs.
Peter,
It sounds as if the “two men” were not trained, equipped or sufficient in number to execute a “hard stop”. Not sure about small airplanes, but SOP for a car is simultaneous 5,56 mm carbine rounds fired through each wheel so as to perforate the wheel rim. This requires teamwork, training, practice – and rifles.
However, you did the right thing. Rule of thumb is to do whatever a man or woman in uniform says. If they are armed, even with pistols, it is not altogether safe to assume that they will not shoot without justification.
The problem, if there are two or more, is when they give conflicting instructions. A friend of mine was subjected to a hard stop just outside his home by a squad of “kevlar cowboys” from the Met’s SO19 (as it then was). When they simultaneously shouted “don’t move” and “get out of the car” he chose the former, which proved to be correct.
The saddest thing was that the press appeared to have been informed that the officers used Hatton rounds to deflate the tyres, whereas for many years the poor old Merc’s bodywork bore the unmistakable scars of the 5.56 mm cartridge cases which a G36C rifle ejects with considerable energy. It was an unnecessary lie, but by no means out of character for the Metropolitan police at that time.
lionel wrote:
two police forces, one is called “Police Nationale” and the other “Gendarmerie Nationale”.
Not entirely correct. The ‘Gendarmerie Nationale’ is technically part of the military, they are *not * police.
JasonC wrote:
Certainly in Germany I have always been told you must be available until your filed departure time.
By the airport agents? So you can’t move a flight plan forward for example if you’re ready earlier?
