If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
The sferics requires a lot of interpretation
- and few pilots have the skill set to use it to maximum effect. What are the kinds of things involved in this interpretation? Could you give me a few examples? Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
Jose wrote:
The sferics requires a lot of interpretation - and few pilots have the skill set to use it to maximum effect. What are the kinds of things involved in this interpretation? Could you give me a few examples? I can give you individual examples, but that won't give you a useful understanding of how to do it. Example: The distance to the strikes is very approximate - however, you can estimate the distance quite accurately by monitoring how long it takes a radial to spread. For example: You're doing 90 kts, and in 5 minutes the dots go from showing up at your 1 o'clock position to your 1:30 (15 degree shift). That's 3 degrees per minute, and you're doing 1.5 miles per minute, so the distance from you to the cell is actually 30 miles. That can be pretty imprtant if you are expecting a right turn sometime soon. Example: Not all strikes are created equal. The stormscope sees static discharges, of which lightning is just one flavor. Generally, lightning strikes will show as more than one dot, all along one radial line. With time, you get pretty good at separating out real convective activity from the light turbulence. Example: When approaching a line perpendicularly, the point just ahead of you will look like the weakest spot. This is because that radial takes the shortest path through the line. When approaching, you need to make some heading changes to see where the real weak spots are, by comparing the way the screen populates with dots. To properly describe all the issues involved would take a book - or at least a long article. Michael |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
I can give you individual examples
Thanks, they were illustriative. To properly describe all the issues involved would take a book - or at least a long article. It would probably be a =very= useful long article. You could post it as a series. In fact, I wonder if Jay's website might be a good place to put such things... Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
In article ,
Peter wrote: NEXRAD can be a couple minutes old, or up to several minutes old (assuming you receive the 5 minute updates.) It isn't "at least seven minutes old." However, you have no idea HOW old it is, so I certainly wouldn't use it to navigate around thunderstorms unless I was VMC. In that case, why have it at all. In VMC, one doesn't need radar to avoid the stuff. Because you have no idea what's up ahead, and whether or not you need to divert now, or will be able to complete your flight. JKG |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
There are several ways of getting the Nexrad. But the best way is how
Garmin is doing it, using the XMradio satellite radio channel. It is quite good. Just as in GPS, satellites are a superior way for ground and airbased vehicles to get their position data and any other data (highway traffic for cars etc) they need. At any rate the XMradio is a great solution for this sort of thing. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
Peter,
What is the worldwide coverage like with XM? Nil. There are two geostationary satellites covering the western and eastern US, aptly named "Rock" and "Roll" (XM does music radio, primarily). The frequencies used are allocated to military/public services in much of Europe, for example, so don't hold your breath on an international expansion. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
Peter,
Thomas, are you aware of any service which can be used for airborne data - other than the full TCP/IP thing from say Iridium? Inmarsat offers a service, I think. Connexion by Boeing works with Inmarsat, too. And Iridium, as you say. I believe there is a data service run by Ericsson, on the back of their GSM network or something like that. GSM wouldn't work. The antennas don't receive from higher altitudes (above, say, 3000 feet). -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
Thomas, are you aware of any service which can be used for airborne
data - other than the full TCP/IP thing from say Iridium? Inmarsat offers a service, I think. Connexion by Boeing works with Inmarsat, too. And Iridium, as you say. Article in todays Wall Street Journal.... Boeing is dumping the Connexion business. Boeing to Shutter Connexion As Web Service Failed to Catch On By J. LYNN LUNSFORD August 18, 2006 In a setback for efforts to make Internet service widely available to air travelers, Boeing Co. threw in the towel on its Connexion in-flight Internet venture, saying it plans to shut down the unprofitable six-year-old service by year's end. Boeing acknowledged in June that it was in talks with commercial-satellite operators and other potential suitors, but it also hinted strongly that it might abandon the business altogether. The satellite operators concluded that there was too much risk in buying Connexion outright, a person familiar with the situation said. In a statement, Boeing Chairman and Chief Executive Jim McNerney said: "Regrettably, the market for this service has not materialized as had been expected. We believe this decision best balances the long-term interests of all parties with a stake in Connexion by Boeing." Boeing's experience with Connexion underscores how difficult it has been for companies to find a profitable way to keep passengers connected to the ground, even though such ability would enable business travelers to be more productive. Many airlines that might have been customers appear to be leaning toward a much-cheaper technology with less capacity that relies on traditional cellular networks, but even those fledgling projects aren't without financial and technical challenges. Boeing said it plans to take a charge of as much as $320 million, or 26 cents a share, to cover the costs of shutting the service. About $290 million of that will be taken in the third quarter and the balance in the fourth. The company previously estimated that the potential charge could be as much as $350 million. Beginning next year, the company said, it expects a benefit of about 15 cents a share to reflect the discontinued investment in Connexion. The U.S. unit of Luxembourg's SES Global SA -- a supplier of satellite capacity for Connexion -- confirmed that it had been in discussions with Boeing about possibly taking over the service, but after months of discussions no agreement was reached. Monica Morgan, a spokeswoman for the unit, declined to elaborate. Annual revenue for the unit from Boeing's onboard Internet service is less than $25 million, according to industry officials. But Ms. Morgan said SES also has booked about $300 million in its order backlog related to Connexion. She said Boeing and SES are in talks about phasing out the service, and what penalties Boeing will have to pay for canceling long-term leases of satellite capacity. SES declined to discuss details of those talks. Boeing said it expected that most of the 560 employees of Connexion would be moved to jobs within Boeing. It said it would work with customers to begin an orderly shutdown of the service. In addition to a handful of international airlines, Connexion is used on several U.S. government planes, including Air Force One. A company spokesman said that Boeing plans to honor its contracts with the government until a solution can be worked out. The service is available on select long-haul flights by a handful of airlines, including Lufthansa, Japan Airlines, Singapore Airlines and others. A Boeing spokesman said that even on those flights, the usage rate among passengers was "in the low single digits." Boeing has never said how much it invested in Connexion, but people familiar with the venture put the figure at about $1 billion. Mr. McNerney, who took over as chairman, president and chief executive of Boeing just over a year ago, made it clear that he wasn't as enamored as his predecessors were with Boeing's foray outside of its core businesses. This year, Mr. McNerney gave the first outward signal that changes were afoot when he removed the Connexion unit from reporting directly to his office and put it under the oversight of the company's director of mergers and acquisitions. --Andy Pasztor contributed to this article. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
sferics vs Nexrad
Article in todays Wall Street Journal.... Boeing is dumping the
Connexion business. IF we won't be able to carry laptops and cellphones and PDAs in the cabin, Connexion is toast anyway. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Best site for METARS, TAFs, Nexrad on a Treo | Maule Driver | Piloting | 2 | April 25th 05 10:30 PM |
Nexrad versus on-board radar | Wyatt Emmerich | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | December 23rd 03 02:15 AM |
Uplink weather advice | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | August 31st 03 11:39 PM |
Uplink weather advice | Richard Kaplan | Owning | 14 | August 31st 03 11:39 PM |
Uplink weather advice | Richard Kaplan | Piloting | 14 | August 31st 03 11:39 PM |