deadstick
Well-Known Member
Size does matter.
I was wondering about the size of the stuff that these aircraft (747, 787, 320) hit at altitude. That 747 took quite a thrashing.
Delta A320 vs Hail
- Thread starter Hacker15e
- Start date
Size does matter.
I was wondering about the size of the stuff that these aircraft (747, 787, 320) hit at altitude. That 747 took quite a thrashing.
seagull
Well-Known Member
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
Not to be an armchair quarterback but how come they didn't deviate more right? From this picture it looks like they still had room.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
It's pretty legit and a regular occurrence. But, as it would appear, someone already beat me to the broader explanation.
Tickle the thunderstorm if you wish, but I am getting a bit tired of seeing perfectly good airplanes with supposedly superior pilots at the controls causing significant amounts of damage because of poor weather related ADM.
From the tweet referenced...at the top of the linked article.
Perhaps instead of giving the pilot(s) a sizable bonus for saving the passenger's butts...Delta needs to use that wealth of meteorological knowledge over at the crystal palace to educate pilots on convective weather development and improved avoidance techniques. Oh, and perhaps they should spend some money on advanced airborne weather radar systems - any of you guys been watching what Rockwell and Honeywell (independently) have been producing? Quite impressive technology.
deadstick
Well-Known Member
Just remember this was at night. It's much easier to get around this crud when you can see where it is AND what it's doing. There are no light areas at night and you can't tell the hue of the clouds. The last NVG's I flew with were monochromatic and only gave you 20/40 acuity.
Airborne radar is only so good and the big picture ADS-B/XM has a significant lag. I wonder whether the only way they could have avoided this was with real-time wide area radar data. Time will tell. Luckily people were only inconvenienced.
PositionAndHold
Well-Known Member
I've been in a Lear 45 for the past 6 years. For the last year or so we've been using a Stratus II/ForeFlight with ADS-B weather. I trust our radar out to about 50 miles, maybe 75. The ADS-B NEXRAD has allowed us to deviate sooner, up to 150 to 200 miles out, only adding a minute or two to our time. Even if it's old, you can very easily see the direction of movement and what has been building. Instead of getting close, and going right 15 deg, back left 30 and right another 10. I simply find a way point upwind that'll keep us out of most of it and ask for direct. I continue to monitor the onboard radar for any changes. The amount of time it has saved has easily paid for itself. I realize the limitations and only use it for long range planning. If used properly the information is invaluable.Just remember this was at night. It's much easier to get around this crud when you can see where it is AND what it's doing. There are no light areas at night and you can't tell the hue of the clouds. The last NVG's I flew with were monochromatic and only gave you 20/40 acuity.
typhoonpilot
Well-Known Member
What size is the antenna on the Lear?
Most modern airliners have 30 inch antennas with a 3 degree beam. You can easily make good strategic avoidance decisions for severe weather at 160 miles+ with that kind of equipment. That's not to say I wouldn't like to have the other information that corporate aircraft have, but the airliner radars are generally superior due to antenna size.
TP
PositionAndHold
Well-Known Member
It's only a 12" antenna if I remember right. At the most it's 18". It just doesn't seem to have that kind of range you speak of. Either way, in my mind having a larger wx picture with ADS-B radar is awesome. As long as you know the limitations and what it's telling you. Just like every thing else in aviation I guess.
Tommay85
Well-Known Member
It worked for me bombing around in a 210 in the Midwest. I could refresh the image on my phone over Mankato, MN and Fort Dodge, IA. Obviously not for close avoidance, but more for "am I beating that line into Omaha or not?". Fort Dodge was always my go/no go point if I got a signal. The absolute big picture is very valuable.It's only a 12" antenna if I remember right. At the most it's 18". It just doesn't seem to have that kind of range you speak of. Either way, in my mind having a larger wx picture with ADS-B radar is awesome. As long as you know the limitations and what it's telling you. Just like every thing else in aviation I guess.
ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
While it isnt perfect, I loved having this in the 207. You could get an idea where crap was and where it was going.
typhoonpilot
Well-Known Member
The Rockwell Collins WXR 2100 Multi-Scan radar is good for making strategic decisions out to 320 NM. At least that's what Rockwell Collins says. I don't personally tend to turn until the weather is at 160 NM or so.
https://www.rockwellcollins.com/~/media/Files/Unsecure/Products/Product Brochures/Radar and Surveillance/Weather Radar/WXR-2100/WXR-2100 MultiScan ThreatTrack.aspx
and:
https://www.rockwellcollins.com/~/m...reatTrack Quick Reference Guide - Boeing.aspx
TP
So many scientists have said there is no global warming...Many with a Ph.D. You are politicizing the hard science that argues against global warming.
We would need more evidence/hard science than one jet encountering hail...in a thunderstorm...in the summer.
Maybe this will make the case for multiscan radar upgrades.
When I did IOE I was amazed how poor the radar was in the 320.
It's really cool to look at all the data and graphics from the comforts of our hotel beds and the laptop, but this is information that you don't have (or even allowed to access legally) in the air and the best we'll get from dispatch is a string of semi-intelligible TP text data that, by the time you interpret it, you're already getting your ass beat because the radar couldn't paint it anyway.
When I did IOE I was amazed how poor the radar was in the 320.
It's really cool to look at all the data and graphics from the comforts of our hotel beds and the laptop, but this is information that you don't have (or even allowed to access legally) in the air and the best we'll get from dispatch is a string of semi-intelligible TP text data that, by the time you interpret it, you're already getting your ass beat because the radar couldn't paint it anyway.
So does anyone's cousins,brothers, friend of a ramp guy, who knows a pilot that uses go-go to check weather......
Hypothetically of course....
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
The radar on the newer a320s is a nice leap forward. I would also like to have he ability to have access to weather related info over the onboard internet. I'm surprised that there as many people pointing fingers at these pilots. I'm going to stop short of calling it bad luck but it could happen to any one of us. "Any idea how people are getting through the weather up there?" "Yeah the last 5 guys have gone through that hole at 12 o'clock , smooth ride" . You see the hole and the blue sky and off you go. Only when you are committed does it start to close up on you and it may be to late. Err on the side of being conservative and carry some
Deviation fuel.
Deviation fuel.
Last edited:
Tommay85
Well-Known Member
Ah, interesting. Will read tonight!