Does anybody have a copy of
"Airborne Weather Radar: A User's Guide by James C. Barr"?

Training! Training! Training!
 

Gentlemen:


If your airline was worth a XXXX, it would provide proper RADAR training. Mine did. We spent two days with....not a training department pilot....but, an avionics eingineer. This was done on initial (when you're first hired with the airline as part of the basic indoc).

While it's true, using the RADAR is an art that is learned from experience, you have to be taught the basics...including basic SOPs regarding use, limitations, caveats, etc.

As stated many times previously, Airbus has great documentation to give some of the basics and overview. I don't know if Boeing has similar.

If your airline's SOP is inadequate, it's time to talk to your buddy in the training department to get the company up to speed.

Fly safe,


PantLoad

Just found this white paper on the Collins Multi-Scan radar, which has been around since 2002: http://www.rockwellcollins.com/ecat/.../WXR2100WP.pdf

It is instructive of the problem, and the solution.

GB

it's a "White Paper"..
 

Greybeard, sorry, am extremely skeptical about that..

maybe someone in this forum already has experience with that equipment..

but having been exposed to a wide variety of WX radars, installed in different airplanes, i.e. different antenna sizes, different radomes etc etc..I'm veeery skeptical..

I do not really buy it that automation in this regard, as well meant as it may be by the designers, and as logically as it may be explained, will solve the known issues..

my point is, that there are just way too many variables in the equation, and that is by the nature of WX radar technology and the elements involved..

or simply said, knowing all the limits of WX radar, I would not feel comfortable to rely on more automated circuits in a radar installation..

Some of our airbuses have the autotilt function that adjust the tilt to get an optimum picture against clutter across the whole scan. I have to say, desite initial reservations, it does an impressive job and can provide a picture that I would struggle to achieve even with constant tilt adjustment.

All DC-9 and larger planes can house a 29" flat plate antenna with about a 3 degree beam width. Smaller planes require a smaller antenna, meaning wider beam width and reduced precision of the return.

GB

Airborne Weather Radar
 

The video by Archie Trammell you mentioned is now available on DVD or CD Rom. He publishes a monthly website also with training tips and techniques. Check it out: radar4pilots.com

Have to agree, there was a bit of a learning curve involved, now when the other guy switches to manual and starts scanning around, I just give a sigh and ask that when he's done, please return to Auto, nuff said.

Dream Land is right....
 

Actually, occasional change to manual mode is acceptable, but Airbus recommends exactly what Dream Land states.....returning to the auto mode afterward.

Personally, I use a combination of the two modes....I'm still not totally sold on the new dual-scan RADAR. But, please, don't throw rocks at me, I'm a slow learner.


Fly safe,


PantLoad

airborne weather radar
 

Who wants to know about the study that cites the poor understanding of radar by professional pilots.

I have a copy,

Archie Trammell
www.radar4pilots.com

Hello Archie! I bought your full Radar course (Foolscap notes, "Severe Weather Flying book", Video & Jeppesen binder sized précis) in 1996. Best single piece of aviation info I have ever bought. Nice to see you're still about! :}

radar
 

It may also help if a crew understands the "stability of the atmosphere". The vast majority of red returns on a radar display are just large H20 drops, and may not be convective in nature. Weather attenuation is primarily a function of wavelength, not power. Knowing the stability of the atmosphere is crucial in correctly interpreting the radar display. Often it is the winds aloft that a crew may not pay enough attention to and that is one of the most important tools in analyzing how far and where to deviate. Non severe storms frequently have wind < 15 knots at altitude. A wx return that is severe will be there "because of the wind" and the stronger the wind the more dangerous the echo. This is especially true of targets in the mid latitudes of the U.S. I have found that understanding meteorology, especially in different parts of the world, the most beneficial tool in analyzing radar targets.

Sadly, the best teacher on radar and its limitations is now in Heaven. If you find any articles by Dave Gwinn, they will be worth reading.

Our new ships have the new multi scan radar installed, and the auto mode is really quite something. Two sweeps (at least displayed sweeps, who knows what its actually doing in the background), one high, one low, and you got a picture, entirely free of ground clutter. All the way up to maximum range, the terrain database seems to be pretty accurate. Managed to show a fat downpour at just 2000ft agl from 40 miles away while we were still at 15000. Not too bad in my opinion. On other days though I could see what looked like a massive CB, but with no return on the calibrated auto view, turning up the gain showed something, but going to manual tilt at 0 / +1 showed it very clearly...

collins wr 2100
 

Falcon,

THis new radar is very impressive. It can significantly reduce pilot workload. Collins did a tremendous amount of reserach with a BBJ and a research meteorologist that has done hundereds of penetrations in the Nasa DC-8. They used the results to program the algorithms into the database. I wish Id had the mutiscan in the 75/76 I flew. It has many other capabilities in addition to this. However, there is no radar today that can penetrate heavy weather and this is because of wavelength. X band radars can see tiny water droplets. S band Nexrad can penetrate much heavier wx because of its longer wavelength and thats why it was chosen by the NWS. Additionally the TDWR used by many airports now ( look on the back of the Jep 10-9 page) is C band radar and it also suffers from attenuation. Wet hail can cause significant areas of attenuation and some in the tower may not know this. The addition of Nexrad in the cockpit ( excluding of course operating over the tracks ) is an excellent tool to augment airborne radar. Often pilots write up a radar when its really a radome problem, i.e. water ingestion. This often occurs and is completely overlooked by maintenance. Note: I dont work for Collins.