Delta A320 vs Hail

[derg]

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....

Even then, the data may be old and, at the end of the day, it's not three-dimensional.

The multi-phase is great. It's essentially "stay out of that box" with not much intervention necessary.

The current radar, you run it in CAL gain until about FL200, then you have to actively learn where the right tilt position is for that phase of flight and for THAT particular airplane as you modulate range and manual gain until what is on the radar closely resembles what you see outside, IF you can even see outside.

Sometimes I've painted scary pictures of Chicago, other days I have the gain maxed out, ranged in and it won't even see a cell that's 12 o'clock and 50 miles. Whoever decided to take that radar as an option when ordering the 320s probably thought "Cheaper is better, don't ya NOH!".

For the airlines, it's always a cost issue. For the FAA it's always industry pressure and their Ludditic approach to modern technology, acceptances of Gutenberg-era teletypes and rejection of human-friendly graphical technology.

The Feds have no problem conducting architectural design by text-block, contractions, acronyms and IBM Selectric-friendly abbreviations that it takes a lot of time to decode and interpret instead of just saying "Here's the blueprint, go get 'em Tiger"

 

[Boris Badenov]

Even then, the data may be old and, at the end of the day, it's not three-dimensional.

It's not three dimensional at the beginning of the day, either. Or at night.

 

[derg]

It's not three dimensional at the beginning of the day, either. Or at night.

I've been dabbling with FSAV and I'm completely dumfounded why this information isn't "legally" available.

 

[Baronman]

Even then, the data may be old and, at the end of the day, it's not three-dimensional.

The multi-phase is great. It's essentially "stay out of that box" with not much intervention necessary.

The current radar, you run it in CAL gain until about FL200, then you have to actively learn where the right tilt position is for that phase of flight and for THAT particular airplane as you modulate range and manual gain until what is on the radar closely resembles what you see outside, IF you can even see outside.

Sometimes I've painted scary pictures of Chicago, other days I have the gain maxed out, ranged in and it won't even see a cell that's 12 o'clock and 50 miles. Whoever decided to take that radar as an option when ordering the 320s probably thought "Cheaper is better, don't ya NOH!".

For the airlines, it's always a cost issue. For the FAA it's always industry pressure and their Ludditic approach to modern technology, acceptances of Gutenberg-era teletypes and rejection of human-friendly graphical technology.

The Feds have no problem conducting architectural design by text-block, contractions, acronyms and IBM Selectric-friendly abbreviations that it takes a lot of time to decode and interpret instead of just saying "Here's the blueprint, go get 'em Tiger"

Are the DL 320's fairly old airframes? Mostly CRT screens vs the newer LED? I'm not sure which radar you guys have but it must be different than ours (B6). Most guys (plenty from other airlines/planes) don't complain too much about it. Especially the newest airframes with the new radar system which is pretty slick.

At BlueJet I believe we're approved to use our WSI Aviation Weather App in flight hooked up to the aircraft WiFi. Works great usually for longer range planning.

 

[surreal1221]

Hmm, I thought an airplane hit some hail.

It did.

And it shouldn't have.

And some of us are discussing the merits of improved convective weather training, strategic avoidance techniques, and (IMHO) a perceived lack of respect for the very weather we are entrusted to be aware of and avoid.

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

Thanks for doing the leg work TP. I celebrated my daughter's first birthday today and didn't have the time to check back on this until now.

I'm lucky to have spent a fair amount of time with RC's engineers earlier this year and am blown away by their WXR-2100. While less time with Honeywell engineers, Honeywell's Intuvue 3d is equally impressive and once fully deployed in air transport fleets I am optimistic they'll gain great support from pilots.

That said, pilots should instead of complaining about the reliability of their airborne weather systems should dedicate greater time to fully understanding the manual controls of the system. Additionally, clearly, training departments have a lot of work to do in building weather knowledge amongst ATP rated pilots.

For an airline like Delta that has such a cadre of professional meteorologists working on behalf of the company I wonder to what extent those folks are allowed to provide weather related training to the front line pilots.

(Written on iPhone, apologize for typos...main cabin door closing).

 

[Seggy]

These folks are VERY lucky it didn't turn into another Southern 242.

If you look at the radar you can see that the Delta flight tried to split these two cells. From other posts I have read (including a few that heard the Delta flight declare the emergency), it looked like a hole on the radar but was really thick and filled in. Those that went south of everything had a great ride.

Remember, radar isn't a weather penetration tool!

 

[derg]

Remember, radar isn't a weather penetration tool!

Deez is the penetration tool?

It's a weather avoidance tool, a lot of folks don't realize that though.

 

[derg]

Are the DL 320's fairly old airframes? Mostly CRT screens vs the newer LED? I'm not sure which radar you guys have but it must be different than ours (B6). Most guys (plenty from other airlines/planes) don't complain too much about it. Especially the newest airframes with the new radar system which is pretty slick.

At BlueJet I believe we're approved to use our WSI Aviation Weather App in flight hooked up to the aircraft WiFi. Works great usually for longer range planning.

Some are "very early", but you'll have to ask @Minuteman for some [HASHTAG]#qutchfacts[/HASHTAG] on some of the ages.

 

[Snuggle]

Yea I haven't really had any issues with the 320's radar. Our 321's radar is way better though. Combined with the wsi app and inflight wifi like @Baronman said, it's greatly increases SA.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

I'll second @Derg on our radar. It is very lacking, even when you use it very well. It's worse than what we had in the CRJ. I do hope this causes a retrofit of the multi-scan. What a difference that was!

Oh, and I snagged a picture of them taxiing in:

 

[Tommay85]

Scooting ones seat forward, leaning forward and blocking all light and looking out the window for at least 30 minutes does wonders too. Why not descend out of the embedded layer to get a peak at least? Fuel burn goes up, but if it really is crap, you're not going through it anyways. Shouldn't at least...

 

[seagull]

@seagull do you have those radar articles handy? I seem to recall that there was something in one of them saying that 100ish miles was about the limit.

A few here https://airlinesafety.wordpress.com/list-of-articles/

 

[seagull]

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/~/media/Files/Unsecure/Products/Product Brochures/Radar and Surveillance/Weather Radar/WXR-2100/MultiScan ThreatTrack Quick Reference Guide - Boeing.aspx



TP

Still some signs ant limitations and "gotchas" with these new systems, but a Great Leap Forward.

 

[seagull]

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.

Looked to be around 8pm, was it not?

 

[Springer]

Some are "very early", but you'll have to ask @Minuteman for some [HASHTAG]#qutchfacts[/HASHTAG] on some of the ages.

NWA received the first 320 in 1989.

Time for you all to push to use your iPads or whatever brand it is. My RV-8 has the capability to receive better wx info than the 320's radar is capable of.

I will say that DAL has probably the best weather dept of all the airlines with the merger of NWA.

 

[seagull]

NWA received the first 320 in 1989.

Time for you all to push to use your iPads or whatever brand it is. My RV-8 has the capability to receive better wx info than the 320's radar is capable of.

I will say that DAL has probably the best weather dept of all the airlines with the merger of NWA.

Actually, not on both counts. NWA held that reputation. On the Ipad, uplinked weather has some substantial delays, and is often up to 15 minutes old. Useless in a situation like this where a gap that ATC has been routing aircraft through is closing fast. It will be interesting to see how recently other aircraft had passed through there before the incident.

 

[#1FMS]

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.

Most of us try to give more than TP text data, and try to describe the location of the Wx in relation to your route, and suggest a way around the Wx. Sometimes I wish I could just send a screenshot of what I see directly to the cockpit.
Wouldn't that be nice?

 

[jtrain609]

Most of us try to give more than TP text data, and try to describe the location of the Wx in relation to your route, and suggest a way around the Wx. Sometimes I wish I could just send a screenshot of what I see directly to the cockpit.
Wouldn't that be nice?

It'd be nice if airplanes had internet connections so that pilots could get more weather information that just what's produced with small radar dishes. Or have more in depth conversations with dispatch than ACARS allows.

If only there were a way.

Oh well, at least passengers can look up cat pictures now.

 

[Baronman]

Is your management team petitioning to allow usage of internet in the cockpit?

Fortunately it's allowed at B6. I'll tell you what.....If my plane had Wi-Fi (but at a carrier where I wasn't permitted to access it), and I was faced with some tough decisions, I would probably throw caution to the wind and see what's going on weather wise. There are regs that are broken from time to time (sterile cockpit etc.) but I would in good faith feel that I was increasing safety by seeing a weather site.

 

[Baronman]

I'll second @Derg on our radar. It is very lacking, even when you use it very well. It's worse than what we had in the CRJ. I do hope this causes a retrofit of the multi-scan. What a difference that was!

Oh, and I snagged a picture of them taxiing in:

The Honeywell RDR-4000 on our newer jets is nice (it's different).... But even our older jets (which are probably the same vintage as most of Dl's fleet) still have a pretty good radar. Way better than what was on the ERJ. So, we must have different equipment. I saw Doug talking about CAL mode, ours 99% of the time is fine in "Auto," rarely do we adjust the gain. I don't even think we have a CAL mode.