Multi-Scan Wx Radar

[Graybeard]

This was deleted from the AF447 thread. Maybe there's more tolerance for Wx radar discussion here. After all, Mr. Gourgeon himself brought up the implication of Wx radar in the accident.
-------

DJ77 questioned my comment on AF choosing minimum acceptable WXR when buying new planes.

Here's what was left in my cut&paste:
-------
While my comment was specific about AF buying the minimum legal radar for their A330 fleet, rather than spending a little more for the latest and greatest, it is an industry-wide practice. What the SLF don't see is largely relegated to minimum legal requirement.

The same goes for mandatory vs. optional replacement of problematic pitot probes, and who is going to pay the cost.

While the multi-scan may do no better a job than an astute pilot, it reduces workload, and training required, which training is sorely lacking at most airlines.

I know airline Wx radar, but have no flight experience with the multi-scan radar. Sure, GCS wipes out some rainfall return, because it has little horizontal movement, or scintillation. Is that gentle rainfall of any value in evaluating a storm?

I'm sure others here would appreciate elaboration of user experience on the subject.
-------

GB

[Jimmy Do Little]

Multi Scan is best defined as a "Weather Radar Emulator". It also makes "Assumptions" based on the tempurature and ISA deviation. (Which is why you'll see green returns where no visible weather exists). It's acutally predicting turbulance at levels above weather that it had previously scanned below - at times far below - your level.

If anyone wants a copy of the Collins / Honeywell Operations Manual for the system here, email me at ... misterautonomy AT yahoo DOT com DOT sg

Cheers

[Iceman49]

Currently operate aircraft with the multi-scan radar, I like it for its ability to provide long distance info...(320mi) in addition to the short range info. There was an excellent article in Aviation Week about a 1-2 years ago concerning the multi-scan.