Have these been posted before?

[Kip Powick]

Hail damage out of Calgary (B727). I have a series of photos but not sure if they were posted during the summer or not.

[Southshore]

I saw them working on it but I haven't seen any pics of it. Nasty.

[le soixante neuf]

Here are a few more photos of said 727.

http://rofasix.blogspot.com/2006/08/hail-hell.html

It was a nasty night in YYC indeed. Other pilots related to me later that these guys were asking ATC for vectors around " red rain". Perhaps they had no radar or on old monochrome set.

[Moon The Loon]

Perhaps they had no radar or on old monochrome set.

Hooks, fingers and scalloped edges. Those were the days.

Weather radars are only as good as those interpreting the images. Interpretation of the image is only as good as the tilt function and good instruction on what to look for, and what to do.

There is "red rain". There is also nil return, lots of green, lots of yellow and some, maybe even a lot of red. On the other hand, there is also nil return, then a rapidly changing green to yellow to red. Even the modern colour radars can display some of the "old faithful" warning signs of hooks, fingers and scalloped edges.

Sometimes the worst place to go is where there is nil return, signifying the downwind region of an intense, hail producing cell.

Hail produces no return on x-band or modern colour radar. Unless it is wet, very wet. It might be seen on doppler sets.

Sound understanding of meteorology, local conditions, interpretation of forecasts and a thorough and detailed knowledge of radar technology and limitations should keep one out of harm's way.

Are our new pilots getting this training?

[Seeker]

Are our new pilots getting this training?

No, I don't believe they are. At least not in a classroom setting. Most RADAR skills are learned out on the line - just passed verbally between crews.

[Moon The Loon]

No, I don't believe they are. At least not in a classroom setting. Most RADAR skills are learned out on the line - just passed verbally between crews.

That's a shame. I know from my 9A days that the manufacturers are more than happy to hold seminars. They are very useful if your company can set one up for you/anyone.

Otherwise, one must rely on what one can read and the skills of those he/she flies with I suppose.

Consider one's chances of dealing with severe weather vs an engine failure at V1. Is there something missing in our training?

Regulator??

[Don Hudson]

Moon;

For "pencil-beam" (narrow beam) radars with digital displays, the 1:60 rule for determining the altitude of the moisture can be used. Dave Gwinn (TWA ret'd)has provided the profession with excellent tools to use this simple rule.

Determine the beam-width of your radar. Typically with modern flat-plate radars it is around 3deg. Our installation on the A320/330 is approximately 2.84deg (from the AOM).

This means that there is about 1.5deg of beam above the center, and 1.5deg below. Moisture returns will be within that beam-width. Like shining a flashlight, the beam gets wider with distance.

Beginning with just the beam center, the 1:60 rule can be used to determine the height of the center of the beam above or below the aircraft. Gwinn's method is simple:

Antenna tilt X distance-to-return X 100.

Example:

Distance to the return (thunderstorm etc) is 60nm

Antenna tilt 1.5 deg Down

1.5 X 60 X 100 = 9000ft. Therefore, the beam center is 9000ft below (down tilt) the aircraft at 60nm.

If the antenna tilt is 4deg, then the beam center at 60nm from the aircraft is:

4 X 60 X 100 = 24,000ft below the aircraft. You can readily see why ground return becomes a factor at higher antenna down-tilts.

The beam is 3deg wide, so 1.5deg will be above the center and 1.5deg below. When radar tilt is zero, the beam center is level with, or directed at the horizon and the radar is scanning 1.5deg above the horizon and 1.5deg below.

Using the same simple forumula above, the beam width can be determined. At 60nm from the aircraft, the beam width as spread out to:

3deg (beam width) X 60nm X 100 = 18,000ft. Radar returns at 60nm will therefore be within that beam width of 18,000ft.

How far above or below your aircraft that 18,000ft beam-width is depends on antenna-tilt.

If the antenna tilt is 1.5deg Down as it is in the example, a radar with a 3deg beam width is effectively scanning on the horizon and 3deg below the horizon which means at 60nm it is scanning 18,000ft below the aircraft altitude.

In this example, if you are flying at 38,000ft, the radar is effectively scanning down to 20,000ft at 60nm.

Scanning above and below so that "slices" can be taken of the weather return becomes important using this method.

All this is from Dave Gwinn's work. There are many other methods, but this one kinda stuck.

[cp fa]

Hooks, fingers and scalloped edges.

Are our new pilots getting this training?

According to a recent Sault College grad I know , they received fairly thorough training on this in third year.

[Moon The Loon]

That's a great tool Don, I've used it many times. Thanks for putting it to pen. The two times I've actually used it for effect were in the south Pacific and in West Africa. Both cells at 100 miles distance were still painting red with 6 degrees up. We were at 35,000' in both instances.

Are there any Airbus/Boeing production models that have horizontal scanning radar? Or doppler sets? I've seen both advertised for corporate aircraft but I have only old (relatively speaking) Boeing experience.

Edit: Thanks cpfa. You posted while I was "composing"!