Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shouldn't pilots be disciplined for flying through weather like this?!...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shouldn't pilots be disciplined for flying through weather like this?!...

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...bo-jet-5980058

    OK, why not divert to an alternate airport?? I know, passengers NEED to keep their seat belts all the time when they're seated, but this is ridiculous! As damaged as the nose of this 747 was, as you can see in the photo, I'm surprised that the radar was still working-if it was.

  • #2
    Originally posted by UALdave View Post
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...bo-jet-5980058

    OK, why not divert to an alternate airport?? I know, passengers NEED to keep their seat belts all the time when they're seated, but this is ridiculous! As damaged as the nose of this 747 was, as you can see in the photo, I'm surprised that the radar was still working-if it was.

    When you have no idea what you are talking about it's best not to post anything at all.

    Comment


    • #3
      No one would fly into weather that would do that damage intentionally.

      But we can't always predict it. Its a fact of life that weather is powerful, and while we do our best to predict it, you don't always get it right.

      You'll also see that while there is damage to the radome (which is expected), there is no hole in the aircraft.

      This is exactly why passengers are told to keep their seatbelts on (and in fact on this occasion the seatbelt sign was on to ensure it...) - weather is just unpredictable and sometimes you have to ride out what you get.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by MCM View Post
        No one would fly into weather that would do that damage intentionally.

        But we can't always predict it. Its a fact of life that weather is powerful, and while we do our best to predict it, you don't always get it right.

        You'll also see that while there is damage to the radome (which is expected), there is no hole in the aircraft.

        This is exactly why passengers are told to keep their seatbelts on (and in fact on this occasion the seatbelt sign was on to ensure it...) - weather is just unpredictable and sometimes you have to ride out what you get.
        I agree that the OP was over the top with claiming that discipline was in order. That being said, I get the arm chair QB aspect of why didn't they (and why were they unable to) divert around it with on board RADAR, etc.

        And while I respect MCMs answer, it would be nice to hear how you could envision this happening...

        I would agree with the OP that it seems shocking that they couldn't find their way around a hail core.

        Seems like this should not happen.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #5
          I can very easily envision it happening. Multiple times per day aircraft penetrate weather systems that the pilots thought would be more or less intense than the pilots expect them to be. Weather radar interpretation is an art based on experience.

          In general there is a high level of conservatism around the matter, and so aircraft divert around weather that they probably didn't need to. But sometimes, when you think you're in the clear, you cop it.

          There are many limitations surrounding weather radar, and if you are interested in the matter I suggest you do some reading on it. Come back after the many thousands of pages of written material about techniques, operating guides and particularly limitations.

          I'd then invite you to read the thousands of pages discussing different weather cells - including their behaviour differences based on global location.

          The first question I'd love answered is - where is this 'hail core' that you speak of?

          Then have a go at:
          -Can a weather radar detect hail?
          Where am I likely to find hail in, for example, a squall line? How about those around a cyclone? Are these locations always where you find it, or does it vary?

          Then we're presented with a system of weather that is impossible to fly around (some of these are hundred of miles wide). The weather line is going to be penetrated, so where should I do it? Does the onboard radar give me a complete picture of the weather? Do I am for the less intense returns, or the more intense returns?

          How much hail does the aircraft have to hit to create the damage in the photo?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by MCM View Post
            Can a weather radar detect hail?
            Yes, the problem is that hail has a much weaker return that rain, so a heavy wall of hail can be taken as a light rain.

            Then we're presented with a system of weather that is impossible to fly around (some of these are hundred of miles wide). The weather line is going to be penetrated, so where should I do it?
            Not necesarily.
            Impossible to fly aorund? Maybe.
            Impossible to turn around? Unlikely.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              Yes, the problem is that hail has a much weaker return that rain, so a heavy wall of hail can be taken as a light rain.


              Not necesarily.
              Impossible to fly aorund? Maybe.
              Impossible to turn around? Unlikely.

              Aw Gabe, finally! Even the best radar units out there today DO NOT paint frozen precip!

              Hence, my first response. MCM is spot on in his post. I mostly have been flying the -8 lately. This is the latest and greatest of the 747 line with a cost of 335 million each. The radar in the a/c is quite sophisticated, shows turbulence and precipitation. It DOES NOT show frozen water!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MCM View Post
                1. I can very easily envision it happening.

                2. The first question I'd love answered is - where is this 'hail core' that you speak of?
                1. Thank you. That's what Id call insight, while this is a rare circumstance- the fact that you easily envision it means something to us arm chair types.

                2. Our TV weather guys (whom I trust only moderately) are routinely giving us radar based hail reports and doing a pretty good job with accuracy. It does involve a 'signiature' and thus a touch of art (as opposed to simple direct detection) but perhaps a 'hail algorithm' will be available to airliners soon especially via the unlinked weather data.
                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                  2. Our TV weather guys (whom I trust only moderately) are routinely giving us radar based hail reports and doing a pretty good job with accuracy. It does involve a 'signature' and thus a touch of art (as opposed to simple direct detection) but perhaps a 'hail algorithm' will be available to airliners soon especially via the unlinked weather data.
                  The hail reports are highly based on tops height and tops temperature, which are provided by IR satellite imagery.

                  --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                  --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Isn't hail generally accompanied by things that can be recognized on radar? The ice that downed AF447 was invisible but the final report has no problem in listing the decision to proceed into a dangerous system (and failure to properly orient the radar to fully detect it) as a probable cause. AFAIK there is no such thing as 'clear-air hail'.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Evan View Post
                      Isn't hail generally accompanied by things that can be recognized on radar? The ice that downed AF447 was invisible but the final report has no problem in listing the decision to proceed into a dangerous system (and failure to properly orient the radar to fully detect it) as a probable cause. AFAIK there is no such thing as 'clear-air hail'.


                      Hail can be blown miles away from a super cell. Ground based radar is much different than what we have. I suggest you do a search for Archie Trammell. He has been giving courses on radar operation and interpretation for years.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                        The hail reports are highly based on tops height and tops temperature, which are provided by IR satellite imagery.
                        Naw, these guys are giving very timely and very small specific hail forecasts in rapidly evolving cells...

                        I'm pretty sure the IR data are both variable near a cloud top and that the IR data are several minutes old.

                        Also, I'm sure the accuracy is a dissertation- probably a lot of false positives, but also I think I can safely say that they have few false negatives.

                        I'm sure air temps are figured in in the background, but this definitely seems to be a feature of their Doppler radar system and more than, whoops this little area just four one oh'd itself....(again- some sort of algorithm and not a direct detection- but something more than just cloud tops).

                        In fact, doesn't a thunderstorm almost guarantee that there's frozen precip??....hail is more of a deal of strong updrafts to recycle droplets up and down several times to grow hail stones- a lot more than just an IR cloud top temperature.

                        Just last night we had a severe storm and a small purple core briefly appeared on the NWS depiction....sure enough, this AM there were multiple hail reports in the news, right where the purple stuff was.

                        Given that I can't think of too many total hail disasters other than Southern 242* (and some of that was engine management and attenuation), I'm not screaming foul to MCM and BB, but, much like the TPMS deal, maybe it wouldn't hurt to have a little extra info on potential hail available to flight crews given that our TV weather guys seem to have a halfway useful product???

                        (*of course discounting numerous light aircraft chewed up and spit out by Cbs)

                        What I read of this incident is that the damaged plane is likely off to the bone yard and ironingly, a mothballed 747 from the bone yard is being brought back to replace it so, to hell with safety, this cost $$$$ and we can't have that, can we!!!!!!!!!!
                        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          By the way- a few years ago, I was blown away that aircraft have on-board systems to detect wind shear ahead of the aircraft...

                          ...that's some pretty sophisticated stuff, so (issues acknowledged) maybe better hail detection is not too far off.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                            By the way- a few years ago, I was blown away that aircraft have on-board systems to detect wind shear ahead of the aircraft...

                            ...that's some pretty sophisticated stuff, so (issues acknowledged) maybe better hail detection is not too far off.
                            Hopefully it's not. I apologize for overreacting; I was just upset after reading this story. How much would it have cost Delta to repair this 747?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                              When you have no idea what you are talking about it's best not to post anything at all.
                              There was no reason for you to act like a complete troll in this post. You're making a false assumption that those of us in this community who aren't pilots are complete morons about aviation. I can assure you that while I don't have as much aviation knowledge as you do, I still know a lot more then your average Joe about commercial aircraft.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X