So? What's your point?

I wouldn't turn it off even on an clear gin day but I've seen guys do it, perfectly understandable.
I've seen CB's grow with absolutely no return on the wx radar at all but absolutely massive in size. Still no answer to why they turned it off....
Everyone knows how difficult it is to spot a CB (or Embedded CB for that matter) at night with no moon and low cloud so it's pitch black

The report says the radar was turned off 'in accordance with normal procedures'. Is that correct? Is that a BMI procedure or an A321 procedure?

Not an Airbus procedure for sure

Might be BMI but if you look at the SIGMET chart for that sector you would be a bit thick to switch it off. If only fair weather CU was observed I can understand that you can turn the WX radar off, but with TCU all over the area and still crossing the Alps, I dunno man.

Crew expected turbulence when entering the Cirrus Cloud, still elected to leave the WX radar off......

Oops, I meant to say how stupid it was flying over the Alps with forecast T/S with no radar selected.

One thought that occurs to me; the crew continued based on the fact that they did not realise the severity of the damage. However my personal view would be that anything that damaged the windscreen that badly on both sides must probably have done quite a bit of damage else where. As I have said only my personal view but what would be your thoughts?

SRJUMBO,

I'm with you. My post on the original forum was slagged off, as are most views that dont conform to the ultimate commanders authority/ professional/ safety et al buzz words that apparrantly exempt all UK atpl holders of accountability for their actions.Any divergance will very soon get you an alleged chip on your shoulder from the proffessionals and a slagging worthy of any bitchy cabin crew.

Not a good day at the office, either an oversight, complacency or downright negligence but either way an accountable **** up, not a heroic action by a super pilot.

There have always been those pilots who make a point of turning the radar off and those who make a point of leaving it on.

I started flying without it and can remember the shock of hitting cb.'s that we didn't expect. I welcomed its introduction and when we passed the stage of development that enabled it to be on continuously without "wearing anything out" I joined the latter.

There is the Navigation aspect of leaving it on during a long Ocean crossing, even when there is (or should be) nothing to see. The RAF crew who fortunately had it running on the North Atlantic saw a return that the Navigator claimed to be a large ice mass. He was right, but unfortunately it was the ice mass that covers Greenland - a coastline that should have been several hundred miles to their north...and off the screen.

As for leaving it on in any form of cloud on the offchance of their being something there that you haven't noticed, . I think that the
case has been proved yet again.

Taken from the AAIB report (not a newspaper)-

"After the aircraft had been repaired AAIB inspectors, with the assistance of the operator's engineers,
carried out a full operational check of the weather radar and its recording on the DFDR. The DFDR
data was downloaded after the check and analysis confirmed that the DFDR faithfully recorded the
use of the weather radar. It should be noted however that the data recording was not confirmed post
incident before major repair work had been undertaken and some radar components had
been replaced. "

And-

"Therefore because the reliability of the recorded evidence could be questioned the investigation
accepted the account of the events provided by the crew. "

Well I think it was a good day at the office...

Heros= No, they did what they are paid to do.

Prats= Maybe, But the report does not actually say the crew were at fault.

Human= Yes

We all make mistakes, (with the exception of a few on this forum) ranging from silly to outright dangerous, but we all make some kind of mistake every day and there are many of us who have crossed into the dangerous mistake zone a few times.

Can you honestly say that you will never cock anything up??

What is important for me is not the action/lack of, that caused the damage to the a/c,-that is someone else's task, it's the action afterwards. The facts speak for themselves with the pictures shown here, a lot of very pale people with a very damaged a/c... ON THE GROUND, not in the side of a mountain or in a pile of poo at the end of the runway.

I was more trying to make a comment about the as usual over reporting of what - thanks to a good day at the office by the BMI crew, turned out to be a bit of a non event..

OTB:ok:

Hail can Cloud the Issue
 

Unfortunately hail isn't always found in cloud. Frequently it's found many miles downwind of a large cumulo-nimbus in clear air. Radar won't always "paint" hail-showers clearly either.But if you can alter heading to pass upwind of a large thunderstorm cell, you'll probably avoid damaging encounters like this.

Because hail is a falling phenomenon, you may be inside radar detection range before it's left the cloud (it may never get inside your tilt setting until v close). Like most precipitation it starts lightly and then intensifies. That shadow on radar may not be all that noticeable as it builds slowly. It's rarely the case that a heavy hail-shower persists and muggins just flies into it because he's not watching the scope. The ones that I've hit were in clear air and we didn't see it coming, just heard its arrival.

I wouldn't be too critical of these guys if they were to claim that they'd had nil warning. But flying around with the radar off probably isn't a great defence either.

it makes interesting reading to look thru the original PPRUNE thread .......

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...5&pagenumber=1

one or two guys in it need to Duck!!!! ;) ;) ;)

Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) Report
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group....hcsp#P87_2070
Weather Radar cannot see dry hail, but hail is a convective by-product of thunderstorms which can be seen.

Just checked Grahams photos and was a little bit surprised how

you can continue a flight with a windshield looking like that and

such a damaged nose - i know that pilots cannot walk out during

flight to check their ship (but coming out of a hailstorm and

looking into a "blind windshield" - cockpit might assume that the

A/C is not in the best condition anymore???

And doesn´t these damages really effect the operation of wx-

radar etc.?? - maybe a company-minded-cockpit???

And i cannot imagine that such CBs appear within seconds -

without any possibility to avoid the weather!!

Just to clarify: I´m a simple groundie - dont want to blame

anybody- neither BMI-cockpit nor company but simply interested

in the opinions of cockpit-crews

P.S: Fortunately no fatalities!!

Surely they must have been VMC on top at some stage before entering said wx. They must have seen something coming irrespective if they had the radar on or off just by looking out in front of them.

I believe they hit embedded CB's which would not be visible and only detectable by wx radar.

ES ;)

GOING AROUND

Thats what i meant - even if CBs were embedded - the crew

should have been aware of what can wait inside and try to

avoid!!

Why are hailstones as big as golfballs, but never as big as table tennis balls?

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mlb/hailtbl.html

B.B., PEA, MARBLE LESS THAN 3/4" (NOT CONSIDERED "SEVERE")
DIME LESS THAN 3/4" (NOT CONSIDERED "SEVERE")
NICKEL 3/4"
PENNY 3/4"
QUARTER 1"
HALF DOLLAR 1 1/4"
WALNUT 1 1/2"
GOLFBALL 1 3/4"
HEN EGG 2"
TENNIS BALL 2 1/2"
BASEBALL 2 3/4"
GRAPEFRUIT 4"
SOFTBALL 4 1/2"

Because they're solid and multi-layered. Table-tennis balls are hollow.:O

Doesn't matter a s**t what size or shape the hail stones are. These guys should have had the radar on- no excuses. Monarch behind them did, as should any other professional pilot flying in areas of forecast T/S. As I said in my previous posting, PRATS!