Then you would doubt wrong. Wind turbines can and do cause significant problems for primary radars. The interference appears as clutter on the radar screens. The CAA is well aware of the issues, see CAP764 for details. Without effective mitigation, it may be necessary for controllers to apply both vertical and horizontal separation, particularly in areas where there is a mix of cooperating and non-cooperating traffic.

There are several windfarm mitigation solutions coming to market, each of which offers to resolve the problem.

S-D

In respect or North East Lincolnshire the problem is that there are currently 12 potential wind farm projects with three built, over 80 turbines in total. If they were all to go ahead in the small area from Yarburgh to Humberston and the Wolds to the sea, with some up to 4OO feet high the low flying area would be compromised. In addition the wind farms would channel low flying aircraft directly over the villages. Let us not also forget the massive arrays going in offshore the Lincs coast and the Humber.

As a matter of interest I have attempted to raise this issue with the flight safety officer at Cranwell and the Commandant. Neither could be bothered to reply to my correspondence. I I have also spoken to MOD safeguarding at length with little response.

I have come to believe that this is a political issue and flight safety may not be top of the agenda.

I'd rather see a whole bunch of thorium-fuelled nuclear power stations.

Two turbines beside a runway:-

Hawk T2 air to airs | Talk Photography

Not sure of the locus.

Departure/arrival from Kinloss using Lossie approach used to get the standard response "limited deconfliction service due to turbines " (or words to that effect) when near the very large collection of turbines south of Elgin and Forres. Always used to make me think "well why didn't you (MoD) object before they built them!" :}

Easy Street and salad-dodger, thank you for pointing that out.
I did a short ground tour as an RAF ATCO using, IIRC, AR-1.
I remember MTI (and losing contact for a sweep or two).
As you say, I can now understand that would be a problem.

EMA have a documented issue with interference from a new turbine some miles North at Spondon Derby bit about it here East Midlands Airport confident of dealing with radar problems caused by Spondon wind turbines | Derby Telegraph Also for many years while Cottesmore was active, all turbines around the locality in Rutland were objected to by the MOD and none were constructed I personally hate the things unless they are in a windy location offshore. I think they destabilise the energy market and greatly increase the risk of blackouts unless they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets.

"they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets."

Wouldn't you have the fossil fuelled gen sets as a back up for Wind Power in autonomous off grid communities ?

On a cost basis alone to start with.

Genuine question.

East Midlands have a pair on the airfield, they have the facility to shut them down at certain headings as the effect the radar, oddly enough they have objected to others in the vicinity of the airport as closer to the radar is less detrimental than one that is further away.

Will this help your cause?

Proposed Wind Farm ar Bullington Cross

As a rotary guy I have no issues at all (ignoring aesthetics and the fact there are better ways to generate "efficient" energy) in fact, build them all over the UK; we wont hit civvy "clutter" produced by turbines at our height and we get loads of stuff to distract enemy radar in the next world war. Winner!

Nutloose. If you know EMA, and you clearly do, then you will also know that the two wind turbines on the airport are tiny (relatively speaking). You will also know where they are, and that they are not sited in a critical area for the controllers.

S-D

In my experience with an air to air radar every wind turbine generates a return therefore you either live with clutter and distraction or turn off the air to air radar and accept greater risk of collision. It surprises me in this safety conscious age that this is permitted to detract from safety.

"they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets."

Wouldn't you have the fossil fuelled gen sets as a back up for Wind Power in autonomous off grid communities ?

On a cost basis alone to start with.

Genuine question.


Yeh sorry got that round the wrong way


What I meant is that its is your own choice if you chose to be on a wind turbine ort solar PV off Grid and live with the consequence. Either maintain some sort of fossil fuelled or wood burning backup for heating and power when the renewable power sources are out of their generation window or live the with consequence of no power


The rest of us on grid want to know for certain that even in the coldest stillest winter night, we will still have 100% electrical supply
That means of course that in a privatised world, someone has to pay to keep assets online not generating to be used when the turbines and PV arrays stop generating and of course with the gas supply used for domestic heating increasingly wasted as fast buck for power generation, and now looking a decidedly unstable supply, we could be heading for the rocks in the next bad winter. Domestic produced coal fired and a number of modern nuclear stations are the only way to guarantee a stable grid even if through politics, they just sit there on standby. anyhow we drifted off radar somehow

No worries.

Gas fired power stations are I believe good for overload powering up.
We have one in Melbourne.

Until Wind can stand on it's own two feet without subsidies and stop bending the rules
to get them installed - trampling over any green issues, then I reserve my opinion.
It costs more (green power) over here anyway.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...1INBZpo46cSPLA

Wot you mean like giving the control of fissile materials to a profit driven organisation? **** off!

Big Dave's dad in law is a big supporter of wind farms, he makes quite a few bob out of them so I guess there's not much chance of seeing them curbed unless they get booted out next year.

I used to think they were OK actually, they made navigating over the wastes of the Cambridge and Lincolnshire Fens much easier. There are so many of them now though that you don't know which farm you're looking at. They really are popping up all over the place. I have a plan to have them painted in different colours as an aid to aviators.

or perhaps use energy storage. Just the modern stuff rather than the energy storage that requires many thousands of years like that carbon-based stuff.

interesting articles about the problems with solar power it's storage and possible solutions

BBC News - Vanadium: The metal that may soon be powering your neighbourhood

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27071303

and off topic

There is a pumped storage scheme to store off peak generation capacity and release at high demand in wales, very interesting trip round there a few years go

http://www.fhc.co.uk/dinorwig.htm

Anything with "wind turbine" in the title is bound to invite a lot of trolling from the energy armchair specialists...so here's a little fuel for the fire...

Nuclear power is by a country mile the most expensive way the human race has ever discovered to produce electricity. And BTW, pumped storage was originally built in the UK grid in the fifties, to stabilise what what was planned to be an predominantly nuclear powered grid, because back then, nuclear power was pretty much completely inflexible.

If you want to see what a modern flexible power grid looks like, hop over the water to Norway...it's the envy of the modern world. Guess what...it's got a shedload of pumped storage and interconnectors...which means its flexible to the problems of intermittency and can adapt to most power sources.

The UK is headed towards a power gap in a few years time, with blackouts an increasing possibility. Neither additional nuclear power nor locally sourced shale gas will have any effect whatsoever on this power gap, because neither is remotely close to coming on stream.

Currently there are no (no as in zero, zilch, nothing) shale gas reserves in the UK (as reported to the UK Parliamentary Committee on Energy, by the British Geological Survey). There are shale gas deposits, but it will take some years of exploratory drilling before anybody knows if they are economically exploitable or not.

I could go on but you are all bored and wondering what my point it.

It is this...99% of everything you read and hear about energy in the UK is pure spraff and hot air (pun intended). That's how we do it over here...it allows the politicians and energy companies to treat us like the mugs we are, by getting us to argue amongst ourselves about stuff we do not have a scoobies about.

From one armchair expert to another, the cost is not really the issue when one looks at the long term. In terms of availability ther is enough fissile thorium to last (the planet) several hundred years. In addition the principal deposits are in 'friendly' countries.