Hail Damaged A319

Betting they didn't know how to use radar.
 
If the nose looks like that what do the wings leading edge and tail look like.
 
I wonder when the lawsuits will start flying because the passengers got scared and thought they were goners.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Betting they didn't know how to use radar.
Click to expand...
I bet they did, but as I’m sure you know, radar is horrible at detecting dry top thunderstorms and dry precipitation (dry hail being one of the things it’s notoriously bad at). Add that to the fact that hail could be falling miles from a thunderstorm, I’m betting that they did all they could to avoid hazardous weather and got unlucky.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I bet they did, but as I’m sure you know, radar is horrible at detecting dry top thunderstorms and dry precipitation (dry hail being one of the things it’s notoriously bad at). Add that to the fact that hail could be falling miles from a thunderstorm, I’m betting that they did all they could to avoid hazardous weather and got unlucky.
Click to expand...
The ‘tongue’ of hail that hit my house last year showed up on radar for just a few minutes. Very easy to fly into it or be caught by the hail. No way skill with the radar would have anything to do with being hit.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I bet they did, but as I’m sure you know, radar is horrible at detecting dry top thunderstorms and dry precipitation (dry hail being one of the things it’s notoriously bad at). Add that to the fact that hail could be falling miles from a thunderstorm, I’m betting that they did all they could to avoid hazardous weather and got unlucky.
Click to expand...

Also possible, and you're correct that it's bad at detecting hail. But they wouldn't be the first airliner to misinterpret attenuation and then fly into the worst part of a bad storm (reference Southern Airways 242).

I would agree that they wouldn't have deliberately flown into that weather.
 
One of my fellow employees' parents were on that flight. He rushed into my office the morning after it happened because of course, he knew I'm a pilot.

He said the crews words to the passengers was very calm & they said "Ah, were going to make a precautionary landing due to a slight crack in the windshield from that storm we just flew through". I'm sure the pilots had no idea how damaged the nose cone became.
 
So did the hit the auto land button or something? The pilot could not have brought that down looking out the windshield..
 
Sluggo63 said:
I bet they did, but as I’m sure you know, radar is horrible at detecting dry top thunderstorms and dry precipitation (dry hail being one of the things it’s notoriously bad at). Add that to the fact that hail could be falling miles from a thunderstorm, I’m betting that they did all they could to avoid hazardous weather and got unlucky.
Click to expand...

I've flown with numerous pilots who think as long as the wing tip is not in the cloud your safe. I'll be trying to swing out 20 miles or ask for devations to avoid the anvil overhang to which I'll get a "WTF are you doing" response from the captain. Heck at my first 121 ATC would use us as path finders because of the company culture. I've sat at IAH during a severe thunderstorm and watched a 145 takeoff. We would tune to the departure freq and listen to them get their ass handed to them. I know sometimes you have no choice but to pick your way through. However, if it's a sqaull line, radar bow echo or radar attenuation run like hell. I've talk to some who didn't know about attenuation as they don't teach it in ground school. The 145 had a attenuation button that painted the areas blue which I miss in the CRJ.

Also a some don't know how to use the radar correctly. Half the time they're either painting the ground or the satellites wizzing by.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Betting they didn't know how to use radar.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine that flys 319s said that the older 319s (and this was an old one) have notoriously bad radar units. The newer ones are far better. As I recall, this plane was 18-ish years old.

So aside from dealing with the fact that hail may not show up on radar, and the fact that they were trying to fly between two pretty good sized lines of storms (in a part of the country where they do change quickly), they didn't have the best or latest equipment on board.
 
ARFlyer said:
I've flown with numerous pilots who think as long as the wing tip is not in the cloud your safe. I'll be trying to swing out 20 miles or ask for devations to avoid the anvil overhang to which I'll get a "WTF are you doing" response from the captain. Heck at my first 121 ATC would use us as path finders because of the company culture. I've sat at IAH during a severe thunderstorm and watched a 145 takeoff. We would tune to the departure freq and listen to them get their ass handed to them. I know sometimes you have no choice but to pick your way through. However, if it's a sqaull line, radar bow echo or radar attenuation run like hell. I've talk to some who didn't know about attenuation as they don't teach it in ground school. The 145 had a attenuation button that painted the areas blue which I miss in the CRJ.

Also a some don't know how to use the radar correctly. Half the time they're either painting the ground or the satellites wizzing by.
Click to expand...

Tarheelpilot said:
That’s kinda harsh.
Click to expand...

See above for my point. I would expect that in the 121 world it's better than in the 91/135 world, but a lot of people don't understand some of the more complex aspects of radar. By the way, I'm not saying that I'm an expert on it either, or that it couldn't happen to me as well. I fly around thunderstorms and the current radar I use in the MU-2 is an RDR 2000. I think it's great - it actually works and has vertical profiling. Better than what I've historically had which is radars that have some level of "not working worth a crap." I don't believe airlines are using formal training for use of their radars and it is a complex piece of equipment. Archie Trammell (now deceased) knew more about radar than probably anyone else in the world, and offered a very good course that few pilots have taken. He's been replaced by Erik Eliel, who does an equally good job. It's on my list to take his course one day but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

As I said previously, read the Southern Air 242 for an example of a 121 operator who got it dead wrong.

Like I said, I'm not immune at all and that was not meant as an "I'm better than them" statement. I do what I can to avoid situations that might result in hail damage. I do use best practices to try to avoid the anvils but sometimes you do end up pretty close to a cell.

wsuffa said:
A friend of mine that flys 319s said that the older 319s (and this was an old one) have notoriously bad radar units. The newer ones are far better. As I recall, this plane was 18-ish years old.

So aside from dealing with the fact that hail may not show up on radar, and the fact that they were trying to fly between two pretty good sized lines of storms (in a part of the country where they do change quickly), they didn't have the best or latest equipment on board.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting data point as well. I know nothing about airline radars other than that, by having a larger radome, they should be better/more powerful, but I don't even know any of the model numbers and how they compare to the ones we see in typical GA birds.
 
AKBill said:
The pilot could not have brought that down looking out the windshield..
Click to expand...
Perhaps the pilot has some experience landing a Pitts or any of a number of other taildraggers where it's a matter of "if you can't see the airport, you are probably lined up with the runway."

But, obviously, some pilots know how to use radar.
"See that little sliver of black between those two ugly clouds?"
2:51
 
I decided to look it up - it was an old America West airplane - they took delivery in 1999. Don’t know the Airbus, so I have no idea what kind of radar that vintage of airplane had.

Glad the crew got it down safe.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I bet they did, but as I’m sure you know, radar is horrible at detecting dry top thunderstorms and dry precipitation (dry hail being one of the things it’s notoriously bad at). Add that to the fact that hail could be falling miles from a thunderstorm, I’m betting that they did all they could to avoid hazardous weather and got unlucky.
Click to expand...

I wonder if that type of weather would show up on a modern stormscope. I have been flying more and more recently in aircraft with radar and I find that I miss my trusty stormscope at times.
 
This would not have happened in an autonomous airliner.








:stirpot:

I’m just trollin’ don’t get mad.
 
dell30rb said:
I wonder if that type of weather would show up on a modern stormscope. I have been flying more and more recently in aircraft with radar and I find that I miss my trusty stormscope at times.
Click to expand...

I’m a big fan of the WX-500. Might add one to the MU-2.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I don't believe airlines are using formal training for use of their radars and it is a complex piece of equipment. Archie Trammell (now deceased) knew more about radar than probably anyone else in the world, and offered a very good course that few pilots have taken. He's been replaced by Erik Eliel, who does an equally good job. It's on my list to take his course one day but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
Click to expand...

My last two 121s both didn't cover radar theory or operation. They both would get to the slides and skip over them saying either it was useless or you'll learn on the job. All I know is just from reading the radar manuals on my commutes, playing with it during long flights, and asking captains questions. The airline was always more interested in covering winter operations. Thunderstorms and other non winter weather were always quickly summarized and you moved on to "more important" information.

I don't know what I don't know. Some guys are amazing at using that box.
 
ARFlyer said:
My last two 121s both didn't cover radar theory or operation. They both would get to the slides and skip over them saying either it was useless or you'll learn on the job. All I know is just from reading the radar manuals on my commutes, playing with it during long flights, and asking captains questions. The airline was always more interested in covering winter operations. Thunderstorms and other non winter weather were always quickly summarized and you moved on to "more important" information.

I don't know what I don't know. Some guys are amazing at using that box.
Click to expand...
+1
 
denverpilot said:
Reports elsewhere say no auto land capability on that airframe. Sounds like they did some of that pilot ****. :)
Click to expand...
I would like to see a link for that.

If you are talking about that particular airplane, I wonder what the write-up was. As it is, I would have taken the autopilot until the radar altimeter called out 10 feet then flared.

If you are talking about 319/320’s in general, they are very much capable of autolands.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
If you are talking about that particular airplane, I wonder what the write-up was. As it is, I would have taken the autopilot until the radar altimeter called out 10 feet then flared.

If you are talking about 319/320’s in general, they are very much capable of autolands.
Click to expand...

The news on another forum from someone who said they were close enough to know (employee on the other forum with the usual pseudonyms there), said that particular aircraft wasn’t autoland capable. They don’t say why.

Take with appropriate grains of salt as needed, call your doctor if feelings of inaccuracy last more than four hours. :)
 
denverpilot said:
The news on another forum from someone who said they were close enough to know (employee on the other forum with the usual pseudonyms there), said that particular aircraft wasn’t autoland capable. They don’t say why.

Take with appropriate grains of salt as needed, call your doctor if feelings of inaccuracy last more than four hours. :)
Click to expand...

having flow the tail number in front of that one and the one after it, it was cat IIIb, all of AA buses are catIIIb unless mel'd. he might have been confusing it with rnp approval. the old basic planes are not RNP approved.

the older "basic" buses, that one is a "basic", have terrible radars and terrible terrain systems. the "advanced" have great radar systems in them.

bob
 
We must have two threads going on this one. I posted a video that has some interesting weather radar shots in it of their encounter with that cell in the other thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top