Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Aircraft using multiple resources to avoid a severe thunderstorm...

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

  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    ...I made the Evan-like suggestion that ATC should have the FINAL rule on whether a non-emergency landing can proceed due to weather...So now, are you agreeing with me?...
    No- I tend to not agree with you and this is again, one of those times.

    The pilot in command should have the final authority, consider yourself heavily jumped upon.

    My comments are regarding the whole system and the willingness of pilots to get up close and personal to nasty storms (see footnote).

    I contend that ATC is rather silent and that the system of the weather bureau communicating nasty thunderstorms has some big weaknesses.

    I want ATC to say, "Aircraft XYZ, the storm 6 miles off the departure end is severe with hail and rotation" (Even though the guys are probably looking at it on their own in-plane radar.)

    I want ATC to say, "takeoff not recommended"

    OR

    I want ATC to say, After departure, turn left to a heading of 240 to avoid the storm out there (I think this option was available, but would have required deviation from the normal departure AND require the pilots to reprogram the FMS because you won't let them hand fly it.)

    AND

    I kind of like Bobby's threat of fines (although severe physical punishment is always good too). You show up on youtube (and Flightaware) busting through a hook echo / wall cloud (after ATC warns you)...you're (and the dispatcher, and the airline safety officer (if there is such a thing)) are talking to the Feds.

    AND

    Some training..not super big deal...but a listing of stuff like this (and maybe the crash you cite) with the comment, "This is not ok guys."

    And, we could add some more stuff...no entering red returns (without a damn good reason).

    And maybe we need a meteorologist in the tower who does nothing but watch the weather radar and generate some meaningful, up-to-the-minute updates that are broadcast by controllers in real time.

    Footnote: If I haven't said it, I am confident the pilots were sort of actively avoiding the storm. Radar picks up rain drops. But tornadoes tend to form in non-raining areas off to the SW edge of the storm...and it wasn't raining much in the video. But my beef remains...why in the hell would you fly through the updraft/wall cloud/hook area of a nasty thunderstorm...is it because you don't give a poop? Is it because your black and white procedural thinking told you you were a mile or two from the red stuff? Or is it that 'we have a big, powerful plane, engage the warp drive.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    (and even Evan-like demands) that I wish the industry would do something more and tangible to avoid storms.
    Ok, let's climb into the wayback machine, a few years or so, to when a certain Columbian 737NG continued a landing in direct proximity to CB's and ended up like a broken Twix on the runway. I made the Evan-like suggestion that ATC should have the FINAL rule on whether a non-emergency landing can proceed due to weather. I seem to remember being heavily jumped upon by the rabble for suggesting this. No no no! The Pilot-in-Command should always have full authority! All hail the PIC!!

    So now, are you agreeing with me? We have to place our faith somewhere. Should it be placed in a tower with lots of weather awareness from multiple sources (including aircraft) or should it be placed in a small cockpit with a small display dependent on a small antenna that needs to be pointing a relatively narrow beam in the right direction at the right time? Somebody has to protect us from this kind of rodeo behavior. I think ATC should be the ones to do that. With today's technology, weather-restricted airspace zones could probably be uplinked from ATC the same way NOTAM's are and displayed in the nav displays well before any red returns appear, and they would be hard no-go lines subject to serious repercussions. It's feasible, if the will is there...

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Again, not at all, I think that there should be penalties for both the pilot's and the Company's that either push or allow the crews to BLATANTLY take-off, land or operate an aircraft in KNOWN dangerous weather. This DOES NOT in ANY WAY mean that there will not be mitigating situations such as low fuel etc. that make it necessary.
    Thanks...

    ...in the meantime, I'll hope that my crews think like you do, and should confess that I don't think ever really ridden on a 'thunderstorm penetration' or tornado sight-seeing flyby- but have ridden through a few holes in squall lines / thunderstorm circumnavigation where you are in clouds and rain and have seated FA's.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    ***What in the hell were the pilots thinking? What in the hell was ATC thinking? AND is the weather data on bad-ass potentially tornadic thunderstorms flowing as it should? Should it not have been painfully obvious to not take off (or not make some sort non-standard turn).***
    For the sake of 100% correctness, the plane did not take off and knowingly fly towards an existing tornado.

    But it did take off and knowingly fly towards a nasty little thunderstorm that a dumbass aggie (named 3BS) knew was potentially tornadic, and clearly flew towards the Southwest edge of the storm where again a dumbass aggie (named 3BS) knows is a likely spot for tornadoes to form.

    I would think that professional pilots and professional ATC and professional meteorologists might do a better job of making a go-no-go decision for takeoff (or at least the routing). I know that ATC and the meteorologists have limited authority compared to the pilot in command, but I'm not sure that any procedures (formal or informal) are ever being used for them to make meaningful recommendations.

    Absolute bold and italic statements are a slight exaggeration, but I sort of stand behind the comments that it ain't much!

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Thanks...forgive me for the outsider, ass-hat pontification (and even Evan-like demands) that I wish the industry would do something more and tangible to avoid storms.

    I do actually understand that sometimes, you might be low on fuel, and nowhere else to land, and I understand major airports and not-so-severe storms where plane after plane can provide 'no-big-deal' ride reports on 3 minute intervals (or maybe 1 minute intervals for multi-parallel runways).

    BUT this incident really get's my goat. What in the hell were the pilots thinking? What in the hell was ATC thinking? AND is the weather data on bad-ass potentially tornadic thunderstorms flowing as it should? Should it not have been painfully obvious to not take off (or not make some sort non-standard turn).

    Makes me want to rant for more regulations and procedures and changes...(And apologies for feeling that way on this.)

    I still gotta push you one more time, Bobby, are you saying, "Tough poo poo, we can't 'regulate' this so just keep your fingers crossed that your crew will think like me"?
    Again, not at all, I think that there should be penalties for both the pilot's and the Company's that either push or allow the crews to BLATANTLY take-off, land or operate an aircraft in KNOWN dangerous weather. This DOES NOT in ANY WAY mean that there will not be mitigating situations such as low fuel etc. that make it necessary.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    I have only one sentence for this men only picnic man.

    The level of communication clearly drops into a big hole every time I see Brian, but I already have said something about bored ole ...
    I believe that the normal language barrier has caused you to misinterpret Brian's humourous-but-relevant-and-appropriate comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    I am sorry if you read me the wrong way here 3, You are absolutely right and you know it. There will always be the ones that think they are better than the rest, and will take risks that others do not. There will ALWAYS be the pressure, implied or not from the Company to go, go, go on time. Having grown up in a different age of electronic weather detection than the ones available in today's aircraft, we were a bit more cautious I guess.

    BB
    Thanks...forgive me for the outsider, ass-hat pontification (and even Evan-like demands) that I wish the industry would do something more and tangible to avoid storms.

    I do actually understand that sometimes, you might be low on fuel, and nowhere else to land, and I understand major airports and not-so-severe storms where plane after plane can provide 'no-big-deal' ride reports on 3 minute intervals (or maybe 1 minute intervals for multi-parallel runways).

    BUT this incident really get's my goat. What in the hell were the pilots thinking? What in the hell was ATC thinking? AND is the weather data on bad-ass potentially tornadic thunderstorms flowing as it should? Should it not have been painfully obvious to not take off (or not make some sort non-standard turn).

    Makes me want to rant for more regulations and procedures and changes...(And apologies for feeling that way on this.)

    I still gotta push you one more time, Bobby, are you saying, "Tough poo poo, we can't 'regulate' this so just keep your fingers crossed that your crew will think like me"?

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Look man, I've always appreciated that you seem to have more cautious standards regarding weather.

    ...BUT...I'm not sure I've ever seen you say, "Yeah, that does look bad", or "Yeah, I know guys and situations where they push things more than what they really should", or maybe even- "Yeah, it's bad but there's just no way to regulate it"...

    That's the source of my razz...sort of a refusal to discuss, instead, short, rather useless pontifications...make sense?

    I am sorry if you read me the wrong way here 3, You are absolutely right and you know it. There will always be the ones that think they are better than the rest, and will take risks that others do not. There will ALWAYS be the pressure, implied or not from the Company to go, go, go on time. Having grown up in a different age of electronic weather detection than the ones available in today's aircraft, we were a bit more cautious I guess.

    BB

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    I have only one sentence for this men only picnic man.

    The level of communication clearly drops into a big hole every time I see Brian, but I already have said something about bored ole ...

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Thank you!

    And fortunately, Tornadoes tend to be 'immediately' associated with updrafts- and there's too many non PC juxtapositions I can come up with for your analogy.
    Are you sure that you like to talk to a man who mentions the words 'men only picnic' in a forum that strictly is AVIATION ONLY?!

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Where is that coming from? I did nothing but agree with you.
    Look man, I've always appreciated that you seem to have more cautious standards regarding weather.

    ...BUT...I'm not sure I've ever seen you say, "Yeah, that does look bad", or "Yeah, I know guys and situations where they push things more than what they really should", or maybe even- "Yeah, it's bad but there's just no way to regulate it"...

    That's the source of my razz...sort of a refusal to discuss, instead, short, rather useless pontifications...make sense?

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
    ....and then add “Hey, why are we dropping like a whores knickers at a men only picnic while we are at takeoff power and configuration ?”

    Guess I’m agreeing with both you AND Bobby !
    Thank you!

    And fortunately, Tornadoes tend to be 'immediately' associated with updrafts- and there's too many non PC juxtapositions I can come up with for your analogy.

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Bullcrap!

    The NWS radar is ~15 miles to the Southwest, the airplane radar is right in the nose, and the location of the video is 6 miles right down the extended centerline of the runway on the normal South/West departure route. I can't tell you exactly where the phones are at the NWS and the control tower, but they are nevertheless, handy.

    A deliberate decision was made to takeoff and fly in very close proximity of a strong thunderstorm when the option of waiting on the ground was available.

    ..........

    But whatever...cleared for takeoff power set 80 knots cross check V1 Rotate Positive Rate Gear up contact departure...
    ....and then add “Hey, why are we dropping like a whores knickers at a men only picnic while we are at takeoff power and configuration ?”

    Guess I’m agreeing with both you AND Bobby !

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Schwartz View Post
    It would be irresponsible to judge the actions of ATC and pilots without knowing the policies and procedures and having the exact data that everyone had access to at the time.
    Bullcrap!

    The NWS radar is ~15 miles to the Southwest, the airplane radar is right in the nose, and the location of the video is 6 miles right down the extended centerline of the runway on the normal South/West departure route. I can't tell you exactly where the phones are at the NWS and the control tower, but they are nevertheless, handy.

    A deliberate decision was made to takeoff and fly in very close proximity of a strong thunderstorm when the option of waiting on the ground was available.

    Sorry, but clear data were available in spite of your attempt to play the 'you weren't there' card.

    Not only that- but in fact I "was there" roughly 5 miles to the south, tracking the storms myself for 30+ minutes, noting how the storm was near the centerline of the primary runways and their approach/departure paths...and noting that rotation was evident...and it was not a surprise to hear that an actual tornado formed.

    But whatever...cleared for takeoff power set 80 knots cross check V1 Rotate Positive Rate Gear up contact departure...

    Leave a comment:


  • Schwartz
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Yes.

    BUT

    This incident is kinda sorta extreme and maybe a tad dangerous.

    AND

    Is kinda sorta just about almost 100% avoidable.


    Bobby probably would steer clear. However, the rest of us paying-self-loading-freight are being put at a risk that I call pretty damn unnecessary. (No planes are not routinely doing tornado fly by's, but I still say that thunderstorm encounters are too frequent and normal operations fall way way way short of Bobby's standards, and that they should be beefed up and actually followed (I know what's in the books- and it was NOT demonstrated in my youtube))

    I would like to hear him state that, Yeah, that was rather bad and the pilots and ATC should be subjected to over-the-top physical punishment- and somehow engage in what I see as an issue.

    Bobby's weather avoidance rules are not the issue.

    It would be irresponsible to judge the actions of ATC and pilots without knowing the policies and procedures and having the exact data that everyone had access to at the time.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X