The real culprit in "bad weather" or IMC is the change in atmospheric energy states. The transformation of energy from potential to kinetic and from heat to motion to electrical account for the phenomenom we experience during Instrument Meteorlogical Conditions. Mix in a little water state change (i.e. gas to liquid to solid)  and a dash of air column behavior. Then throw the laws of thermal dynamics and fluid behavior, sidereal motion and geography into the mix and you have - well you need a super computer to predict what you have.

To put this into perspective let's look at a static model of an average to small Florida summer cloudburst.

ASSUMPTIONS
 

                                        Rainfall area (sf):                   5 square miles, 5 x 5,280^2 =                           139,392,000 sf                                       (Given)
                                                     depth (in):                 rate (in/hr) x duration (hr), 2 x 0.50 =                                  1 in                                       (Given)
                                                     volume (cu ft):          139,392,000 sf x 0.083 ft =                                  11,616,000 cu ft                           (Calculated)
                                                     weight (lbs):             62.4 lbs per cu ft x 11,616,000 cu ft =                724,838,400 lbs                             (Calculated)
                                                     rate (lbs/min):          724,838,400 lbs / 30 =                                          24,161,280 lbs/min                      (Calculated)

This is a small localized storm cell dumping a 30 minute cloudburst over a five square mile area. The energy in this small cell alone can rain down the equivalent of eight to ten F-150 pickup trucks every minute on your sorry butt so you better have a BIG umbrella handy!! Imagine the energy in a hurricane dropping a foot of rain over an area of several thousand square miles. The energy state of a Boeing 777-200ER landing at 250,000 lbs gross weight and 150 KIAS is pretty insignificant in comparison. It is also why it's best to avoid even the small cells indicated on radar. Even the largest jet can be thrown around depending on the energy state of the cell at the time it is encountered. This example only deals with precipitation in a storm. The movement of precipitation and the resultant energy released also generate lightning, turbulence, wind shear and micro bursts. The flight crew has to be ready to deal with each or all of these weather related occurances as they're encountered.

In the early to mid seventies I flew Anti Submarine Warfare missions as aircrew on a Navy Orion P3C The Orion was introduced by Lockheed in the early sixties as a passenger liner, the Electra. It had four turbo prop engines, stubby wings and a thirteen hour mission radius. We flew North Atlantic high low high mission profiles in the GIUK Gap. The GIUK Gap is an area of the North Atlantic bounded by Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom that the Russkies use to transit from their sub bases such as Polyarny to the open sea. We often spent six or more hours at 300 feet AGL loitering at 150-160 KIAS on two engines looking for elusive Russkie submarines. The Orion is still in service as a maritime and border patrol aircraft and hurricane hunter. It is being retired and replaced as a Navy asset by the Boeing P8 Poseidon which is the military version of the 737-800.

I experienced firsthand what weather can even do to a robust all-weather aircraft that was designed to handle everything up to and including hurricanes. Missions weren't called off because the ride was rough or the view out the window obscured by rain. On several occasions everyone and I mean EVERY member of our 13 man crew was puking, gut wrenching airsick -- including the pilots -- especially the pilots!

We were seasoned and salty naval aviators and we still got sick. Imagine a plane load of civilians, all airsick, being tossed like a salad shooter on their way to Granny's for Thanksgiving dinner. My point is that commercial pilots seldom select a route that is hard on or discomforting to the paying customer. They tend to err on the side of caution when expecting storms or turbulence. Sometimes flying in less than ideal conditions is unavoidable like the southeast in summer or the northeast in winter. Most of the PIREPS I've seen via ASN have had more to do with warning of turbulence at altitude or during the approach and landing phase of flight than other weather events . Friends that actually fly the heavies use the Wx/T mode even in the absence of SIGMET conditions. Passenger safety and the safety of the aircraft are of course their greatest concern but passenger comfort is also always on their mind.

Weather radar is an important cockpit tool that requires crew mastery of weather science and expert knowledge of radar propagation and physics. Don't expect to use it properly nor interpret it correctly without study and practice. For now it's another nice piece of eye candy but has tremendous possibilities for the simmer anxious use it realistically and to willingly learn it's capabilities and thus be able to integrate it in their flying.

Am I right in saying that we have no ability to alter the elevation of the radar scan?

I experienced firsthand what weather can even do to a robust all-weather aircraft that was designed to handle everything up to and including hurricanes. Missions weren't called off because the ride was rough or the view out the window obscured by rain. On several occasions everyone and I mean EVERY member of our 13 man crew was puking, gut wrenching airsick -- including the pilots -- especially the pilots!

We were seasoned and salty naval aviators and we still got sick. Imagine a plane load of civilians, all airsick, being tossed like a salad shooter on their way to Granny's for Thanksgiving dinner.

Sounds like fun!

 

Ever had the feeling the plane was going to fall apart?.......l mean robust airplane, made for it......that is all great, but I then wonder, after 30 years of service, is it still as robust as on day 1?

 

 

Thx for the great post.......airline flying is quite boring in comparison to military flying.......the more boring, the better job the pilots did I allways say.

So yes, very much so on the cautious side.

 

Even more so since the discovery of "ice chrystal icing"

Something new apperantely that has caused engine damage worldwide on quite a few airplanes allready.

For this reason, at cruise flight levels, you are now supposed to avoid even the green stuff around big convective clouds as much as operationally possible.

Were in the past St Elmus fire was a cool thing to look at, It is now an indication of having done a poor job at avpiding that green stuff.......airline flying just got even more boring, lol.

Saw a documentary of those hurricane hunters on the Discovery Channel the other day. Not for the faint of heart ...

That was an awesome post Rick, thank you. The P-3 is a great aircraft, it seem they are converting the remaining ones in MPA/ASW configuration into Elint assets. I've seen a few EP-3s around the caribbean (Aruba, Curacao, Puerto Rico) and one that operates out of Panama city (MPTO) quite often.

 

By the way, a quick side note: there's an old but good and fun naval warfare simulator called Dangerous Waters that has a P-3 which you can use for ASW/ASuW in many areas around the world, including the gap!. The flight sim aspect isn't realistic at all, it's just the sensors and the naval warfare side of it that makes it fun. The acoustic model isn't the best, but with a mod called LWAMI makes it close enough so you can correctly employ sonobuoys and MAD to prosecute subs ;-).

 

 

 

Ever had the feeling the plane was going to fall apart?.......l mean robust airplane, made for it......that is all great, but I then wonder, after 30 years of service, is it still as robust as on day 1?

 

I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but from my buddies in the industry I understand they perform "non destructive testing" on wings and airframes (among others)  using special liquids and ultrasound, electro-optical, infrared, x/gamma ray and resonance equipment to check for cracks and signs of fatigue / stress in the materials. In the case of fighter jets which consist of a "single cell" airframe, these are checked after a certain type of hours specially if pulling high-g manoeuvres with load in the pylons under the wings.

 

On the other hand, to my knowledge, repairing an airframe of an aircraft such as the P-3 is more cost-effective and even relatively simple to do compared to other (and more modern) aircraft that use composite materials. Especially with modern airlines such as the 787 in which the fuselage is a single piece built using these materials (check out this link: http://www.aviationpros.com/article/11251294/fuselage-fix-rewriting-the-book-with-787-repair).

 

As a last short story, most of the airlines in Venezuela have been phasing out their ageing fleet of DC-9s built in the late 60s for more "modern" MD-83s. I remember flying in a DC-9-30 which according to the plaque on the cabin was built in 1967, however in this particular flight (this was like 6 or 7 years ago) the aircraft had a few holes in its fuselage which were covered with some strange material glued to the inside of the cabin with the help of many layers of duct tape. That particular day the aircraft went through a storm and some medium turbulence. After 15 minutes or so, still climbing to cruise level, a constant flow of water drops started to fall from the air conditioning ducts over two different rows with very unfortunate (and angry) passengers. This leak was unrelated to the holes in the fuselage, but it made for quite an adventure. The landing was uneventful and we were making jokes about the situation with the cabin crew.

 

A few years later, a same-series DC-9 with the same airline landed hard and both engines fell off the aircraft (it was a write-off):

 

 

It is all about proper maintenance :-)

 

cheers

-E

Am I right in saying that we have no ability to alter the elevation of the radar scan?

 

Richard, the tilt control alters the 'elevation' of the scan by varying the angle between beam and aircraft longitudal axis. This is somewhat modelled in the ASN simulation.

 

 

 

Navy Orion P3C

 

Rick, whenever I see a Navy Orion (HLS flies the P-3's around here) I recall my time in the Azores where the aircraft were all Navy, the trucks all Air Force and the boats all Army. I strongly recommend anyone who loves an exciting true story read, "Osborn, Shane (2001). Born to Fly: The Untold Story of the Downed American Reconnaissance Plane. Broadway." This is a first hand account of the Hainan Island incident told by the aircraft commander.

I'm hoping for a chance to crew a 40' Nordhavn trawler to the Med next summer. We have planned stops in Bermuda (shakedown) and the Azores. A friend of a friend is moving his boat over to cruise the Med and Adriatic. It's cheaper to shuttle the boat but what an adventure if he decides to take the trip on its own bottom. The Nordhavn is a great expedition style boat with the legs and seaworthiness for the trip.