VFR "picking his way thru" heavy cells with XM Radio weather

On 6/4/2007 1:19:37 PM, Luke Skywalker wrote:

I think that your instincts are pretty good here.

I guess my primary point, which may not have come across in the original
post, is that if ATC has the ability to provide weather avoidance, pilots of
a less-equipped aircraft (including the subject of this thread) should be
very thankful to accept that service rather than go about it on his/her own.

The clip I am putting together will hopefully back up my impression that the
pilot believed his Garmin 396 was a real-time radar with capabilities similar
to the commercial carriers' type. To counter his impression, my experience as
an IFR pilot over the last five years demonstrates that even airline pilots
will take all the ATC weather avoidance assistance provided, despite having
their own real-time radar on board and assuming those vectors don't conflict
with the pilots' weather perspective.

--
Peter

"Larry Dighera" wrote:


[Story of cluelessly inept pilot narrowly escaping disaster snipped]

Did you happen to note the aircraft's N number?

Someone should relate this incident to the appropriate FSDO office
before the tapes are wiped, so that the pilot can benefit from some
badly needed remedial WX training before his bumbling casts yet more
negative public opinion on GA, and saddens his friends and family.

Oh, nuts, Larry.

The pilot in question may or may not have acted irresponsibly; there's not
enough information here to know. It sounds like he was pushing the weather
too hard, but without being there we can't be sure.

Deciding to rat out another pilot to the FSDO requires much more egregious
conduct than this as a rationale, and much stronger evidence, too.


--
Dan

"Gut feeling"

Intestinologists concur that the human gut does not contain any
rational thoughts.

What the human gut *is* full of is moderately well
known.

On Jun 4, 1:24 pm, "Peter R." wrote:
To counter his impression, my experience as
an IFR pilot over the last five years demonstrates that even airline pilots
will take all the ATC weather avoidance assistance provided, despite having
their own real-time radar on board and assuming those vectors don't conflict
with the pilots' weather perspective.

--
Peter

Absolutly I am a line check airman and a DE in the B737...

Most pilots do not realize how limited WX Radar is on a light plane.
The antenna size is small compared to wavelength, the power limited,
hence the farther out you "go" the worst the picture gets conforming
to real life.

Airline radars are so much better because of power and antenna size
then General Aviation radars...but even they are no match for the
power and resultion of even ATC radars in terms of WX. ATC radars are
air search not so much WX but with modern technology the WX
information can be "used" before it is stripped off for primary target
display.

With modern digital processing ATC has a pretty good handle on what is
going on "long range" and airline pilots use it whenever the help is
offered.

Robert

On 6/4/2007 2:03:50 PM, "Peter R." wrote:

For education purposes, though, I thought it might be beneficial to
retrieve and edit the archive files into a short clip (and also removing
the majority of the tail ID so the resulting clip cannot be used against
the pilot) with the relevant content. When I have the clip, I will post it
to a file sharing site and the link to this thread.

Here's the clip. I uploaded it to a free file hosting site and then attempted
to copy the direct download link, bypassing the annoying
wait-30-seconds-to-read-the-ads page. If the download doesn't work, let me
know and I will upload it to a different location:

I have edited the clip by removing non-essential communications and removing
dead air. The clip is about 3.1 Mb and approx. 4 minutes long.

http://download2-6.files-upload.com/.../XMweather.mp3

--
Peter

On 6/4/2007 2:06:25 PM, "Steve Foley" wrote:

How about filing a NASA form? Isn't that exactly what they were designed
for?

Having only the audio side and being a third party bystander to this moment,
I am not sure I really have the proper perspective to be able to accurately
do so.

--
Peter

Having only the audio side and being a third party bystander to this moment,
I am not sure I really have the proper perspective to be able to accurately
do so.

I presume that those reading the form will figure out whether it is
worth pursuing. If they pursue it (to gather more information, for
example), they will have a better perspective.

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article . com,
Jay Honeck wrote:

Penetrating a line of storms associated with a front is dicey at best,
even with a 396/496. Flying *around* "popcorn" thunderstorms,
however, can be perfectly safe, given decent visibility. It's even
doable without XM in the plane, but the satellite data in the cockpit
makes it MUCH less stressful, mostly because you can tell where the
storms are building, and where they are subsiding. This gives you an
important strategic leg up on the situation that makes it truly easy
to stay out of trouble.

When I was working this past Sunday morning, I watched the sky go from
clear to 8/10ths broken towering cumulus in 15 minutes. You will not out
climb it, you will not out run it. You will get caught in the middle of
it.

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 14:03:52 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote in :

I am not going to be the one to
report anyone, since IMO this is quite a gray area.

I understand your reluctance to squeal on a fellow airman, but how are
you going to feel when you learn that his ineptitude has caused his,
and perhaps the deaths of others?

It might be reasonable to contact the airman directly. Just a
thought.

"Jay Honeck" wrote ...

We call them "popcorn storms".


That was a good one ;-)

Haven't heard that one before. (oops, sign of my sub-1000 hrs experience ;-)
But then most of my flying is local anyway, so it's easy to stay on ground
when the popcorns appear.

I much prefer the edible variant

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:07:12 -0500, "Viperdoc"
wrote in
:

Just had a simliar experience today flying into PDX (portland, OR).

The onboard radar demonstrated some clear spots through heavy precip (no
electrical activity on Stormscope)


So your experience wasn't anything at all like that in the OP; there
was no CB.

I was taught, and experience has confirmed, that it's prudent to skirt
a cell by 20 miles to avoid hail damage, especially on the downwind
side.

The airman in the OP was clearly not exercising good judgment, and his
final comment about diverting toward the direction of advancing line
of CBs underscores his cluelessness.