NTSB: Crossfield Not Warned Of Adverse Weather

wrote:


I think that depends on how well the FAA does in getting a low cost
system in play like they claim they will...

Dean


The FAA has little to do with the cost of the in-aircraft equipment other
than the requirements for certification. (Which I admit are not
insignificant) Now look at the cost of say a AM/FM/CD player that is legal
for certified aircraft
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/aicd3.php. The thing costs in
excess of $1500.

Low cost and FAA certified really can't be used in the same sentence with a
straight face.

Danny Deger wrote:

Last I checked many controllers only have transponder indications with
no weather on their display at all.

Maybe you're thinking of a Class D contract tower?

Two years ago, I took a GREAT two-hour+ private tour of BDL TRACON and
tower. I spent an hour downstairs sitting with an approach controller,
and another in the tower cab, rotating among the jobs up there. The
tour took place on an IFR w/ thunderstorms and low-level wind shear
evening, from ~ 1800-2030 local.

The TRACON folks had a complete set of keys at each position that could
display, or not display, all kinds of different weather information,
overlaying on the individual controller's screen. They were also
actively soliciting PIREPS from nearly every approach and several
departures.

During a post tour debriefing with the duty-supervisor, were were led to
believe that the equipment we saw was FAA standard issue nationwide.

Since the radar paints were all computer generated, the BDL folks could
flip a few switches and actually work Boston or NY Metro approach /
departure traffic. In a training room, it was demonstrated how the
center of the screen could be moved to the center of whatever they
wanted to define as a "sector". They even moved the center to JFK,
zoomed it in, and we watched approaches to all the NY area airports,
with and without weather.

One thing I took away from the tour was the weather assistance available
for the asking. I was glad that the tour wasn't on a severe clear night!

On Aug 3, 12:17 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
wrote:

I think that depends on how well the FAA does in getting a low cost
system in play like they claim they will...

Dean

The FAA has little to do with the cost of the in-aircraft equipment other
than the requirements for certification. (Which I admit are not
insignificant) Now look at the cost of say a AM/FM/CD player that is legal
for certified aircrafthttp://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/aicd3.php. The thing costs in
excess of $1500.

Low cost and FAA certified really can't be used in the same sentence with a
straight face.

I spoke with the FAA people behind ADS-B at Oshkosh last year, and
they told me that they were working with major avionics manufacturers
to try to come up with a standard, reasonably priced (due to higher
volumes and streamlined certification process) box that could go in
light singles. Whether they can pull it off or not remains to be
seen...

wrote:
On Aug 3, 12:17 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
wrote:

I think that depends on how well the FAA does in getting a low cost
system in play like they claim they will...

Dean

The FAA has little to do with the cost of the in-aircraft equipment
other than the requirements for certification. (Which I admit are not
insignificant) Now look at the cost of say a AM/FM/CD player that is
legal for certified
aircrafthttp://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/aicd3.php. The
thing costs in excess of $1500.

Low cost and FAA certified really can't be used in the same sentence
with a straight face.

I spoke with the FAA people behind ADS-B at Oshkosh last year, and
they told me that they were working with major avionics manufacturers
to try to come up with a standard, reasonably priced (due to higher
volumes and streamlined certification process) box that could go in
light singles. Whether they can pull it off or not remains to be
seen...


I'm not going to hold my breath. I will be delighted if it happens but what
the FAA and even the major avionics manufacturers consider reasonably priced
and what the average 172/182 owner does has in every case that I can think
of been two very different things.

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Danny Deger" wrote:

Last I checked many controllers only have transponder indications with no
weather on their display at all.

How many? Where did you check?

I don't think any of the "Centers" have skin paint. Having said this, I
don't know if Crossfield was talking to approach, Center, or tower. As far
as I know most, if not all, approach control radars can paint rain. But if
they are busy, they are not obliged to help pilots out with weather. I am
sure there are towers out there that have no radar at all. I personally
NEVER rely on a controller for weather information. If I get some
information that is great, but you can not rely on it.

Danny Deger

"Danny Deger" wrote in message
...

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Danny Deger" wrote:

Last I checked many controllers only have transponder indications with
no weather on their display at all.

How many? Where did you check?

I don't think any of the "Centers" have skin paint. Having said this, I
don't know if Crossfield was talking to approach, Center, or tower. As
far as I know most, if not all, approach control radars can paint rain.
But if they are busy, they are not obliged to help pilots out with
weather. I am sure there are towers out there that have no radar at all.
I personally NEVER rely on a controller for weather information. If I get
some information that is great, but you can not rely on it.

I finally got through to the story and it states the controller did have a
paint on the weather, but didn't trust his own weather paint.

Danny Deger

Danny Deger wrote:



I don't think any of the "Centers" have skin paint.

They all do. And thus they have weather.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..


Danny Deger wrote:



I don't think any of the "Centers" have skin paint.

They all do. And thus they have weather.


Then you have operated in a different flight control system I have for the
last 35 years. A friend of mine died because he lost his transponder and
Washington Center didn't have his skin paint.

Danny Deger

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:15:17 -0500, "Danny Deger"
wrote:


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Paul kgyy" wrote:

Using XM radio to avoid Tstorms can be pretty hazardous unless you
allow a very wide margin of error.

It is odd that he was taking so much advice from ATC. XM Wx should easily
keep you clear of level 5-6 stuff, and is much better than depending on
controllers to avoid big CBs.

Last I checked many controllers only have transponder indications with no
weather on their display at all. Even if they can paint the weather, they
have no obligation to help you with weather if they are under heavy
workload.

When sitting up around 10 to 12,000 I've had approach from several
airports ask me what I was seeing and then relayed it to aircraft in
those areas. Two I remember are Toledo and Kalamazoo. I also had
At Kazoo (at 8000 IIRC) the front and line of thunderstorms was within
a couple of miles of the airport. For Toledo the aircraft reporting
the rough ride, and lightning were in storms quite a ways north and
not showing on Toledo's RADAR.
Minneapolis Center asked about visibility over the UP of Michigan and
over Lake Michigan on a night flight with thunderstorms coming out
over Lake Michigan from the West. OTOH they may have just breaking up
the monotony of making sure I was still awake as the storms were quite
a ways from me, (but they were visible and moving way slower than
forecast).



Danny Deger
Lots of good flying stories on my web site,
www.dannydeger.net

I am hoping that ADS-B will help to prevent these kinds of tragedies.
Having real-time traffic and weather data streaming into your avionics
from ground stations should make all of us safer if we know where to
look for each other in flight, and we all give severe weather the
respect and wide berth it deserves...

I am confused. He could not look outside and see that weather was
bad? Technology is nice but common sense is needed more by some
pilots.

Ron Lee