ATC and weather avoidance

[SteveC]

I've mentioned before that relying on ATC for weather avoidance is not a great idea. The equipment that they have is still hit or miss on how well (if at all) they display weather. The good news is that they are getting upgraded as we speak. The bad news is that not everyone has the good stuff yet.

Perfect example yesterday of the different capabilities. I was flying single engine (no weather capabilities on-board), traveling through a cold front from north to south. The pre-flight briefing and radar indicated no nasty stuff on my route of flight, with the possibility for some light rain. Possibility of thunderboomers farther east along the cold front, though.

I get to the general area of the cold front and go IMC. I get a call from the approach controller a few miles down the road, saying she is showing some light precip about 8 miles ahead of me, and asks if I would like a vector around it or just fly on through. Well, never one to turn down help, I ask for the vector. "Turn right 15 degrees and call Chicago Center on 1xx.xx". I make the turn and give center a call.

Center answers back, and says "...let me know when you're done deviating and back on course". Oh boy, I can see how this is going to go. "Center, I was on a vector from Approach around some light weather. I'm currently IMC." Center responds "My equipment doesn't give any good weather info. Let me know when you go back on course."

So, there I am on a vector around weather with no way to know when I'm past it. Luckily I knew from pre-flight, and from the Approach controller, that there was probably not anything nasty out there.

Result? Asked for different altitudes until I got between layers, then proceeded back on course when it looked good (i.e. not *dark*) on-course. Could have given Flight Watch a call, too, if needed.

Just another reminder not to assume that ATC can (or will, for that matter) steer you around bad weather. Some have the capability to see it, and some are willing to give you a hand. But don't bet your life on it.

[triple7]

I flew back from NAgs head(kmqi) last saturday in the early morning to beat hurrican charley home. I was headed north and we new we had to beat a storm moving from sw to ne at 39 knots near richmond. atc was so awesome they gave us direct brooke(brv) vor from s of norfolk so that we could avoid all that weather. Brooke is jsut outside the potomac class b and the adiz. Potomac has been excellent with weather avoidance every time i have needed it. too bad not everyone has it.

[Bog]

Not to be a dcik about this, but remember as PIC it's up to you to avoid the stuff, not the controller. If something bad goes wrong and you land "prematurely," nothing will happen to the controller (history has proven that). You also don't want to fall into the trap that you rely upon certain sectors with good radar, because the day you need it, it'll be down. Then what?

Key words told to me by the DE who did my instrument rating: "You're now legal to kill yourself." Sobering thought.

If you can, print a hard copy of NEXRAD or something similar before you launch. Have an idea where that stuff is going and you're off to a good start. Plan your flight to completely avoid it, or just don't go.

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to be a dcik about this, but remember as PIC it's up to you to avoid the stuff, not the controller. If something bad goes wrong and you land "prematurely," nothing will happen to the controller (history has proven that). You also don't want to fall into the trap that you rely upon certain sectors with good radar, because the day you need it, it'll be down. Then what?

Key words told to me by the DE who did my instrument rating: "You're now legal to kill yourself." Sobering thought.

If you can, print a hard copy of NEXRAD or something similar before you launch. Have an idea where that stuff is going and you're off to a good start. Plan your flight to completely avoid it, or just don't go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dick.... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[rv7]

[ QUOTE ]
Dick....

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice.

[mtsu_av8er]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dick....

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, it's been called that befo...

Oh.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[danielsexton]

There was a lot of discussion about ATC and weather after AA1420 in LIT. American actually sued the FAA and the controller over it. The judge ruled you can't sue the controller because he/she is imune as a federal employee. I am not sure of the out come of American vs. FAA

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
There was a lot of discussion about ATC and weather after AA1420 in LIT. American actually sued the FAA and the controller over it. The judge ruled you can't sue the controller because he/she is imune as a federal employee. I am not sure of the out come of American vs. FAA

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been tried before. ATC has no responsiblity for weather avoidance. This has been tested in court cases and the FAA has consistently won since Delta 191 at DFW. The controller in LIT was scared to be in the tower, much less have an airplane landing in that storm, but by procedure he couldn't close the airport or deny landing clearance.

In the case of the new weather stuff that center is getting, a word of caution. They are receiving no training in using this equipment. And it is not as simple to interpret as you think. I would not rely on them for weather avoidance if they are unwilling to train their controllers. And when they do make a mistake and somebody gets spit out the bottom of a storm, they will fall back on "we have no responsibility in that area". Which, BTW, is absolutely true, which begs the question of why they install the equipment.

[tonyw]

So, we are paying good money to have the new equipment installed, but we aren't training the people who are supposed to know how to use it?

Lovely. Your tax dollars at work. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif[/img]

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
So, we are paying good money to have the new equipment installed, but we aren't training the people who are supposed to know how to use it?

Lovely. Your tax dollars at work. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I know. And I had a long e-mail conversation with the head safety guy for Atlanta center. He was offended at the suggestion that he would need training to interpret a weather radar. (This mirrors a similar sentiment from many pilots by the way).

He told me, among other things, that he doesn't care how high a storm is because he works low altitude, it just wasn't relevant to him. So he could very possibly steer you away from a heavy rain area that tops out at 5,000' and toward a light rain area that tops out at 41,000'. And this is their safety rep. If he's not into training who would be? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Bog]

[ QUOTE ]
He was offended at the suggestion that he would need training to interpret a weather radar. (This mirrors a similar sentiment from many pilots by the way).

[/ QUOTE ]

I've flown with a few who brush off the radar or think they know everything. Our training on weather radar: "You'll learn it online from your Captains." Yeah, well, who trained them? Can I get a lil help here?!

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
[I've flown with a few who brush off the radar or think they know everything. Our training on weather radar: "You'll learn it online from your Captains." Yeah, well, who trained them? Can I get a lil help here?!

[/ QUOTE ]

When radar was first introduced into commercial aviation, flight departments rejected training pilots. It was the marketing departments that wanted the radars after United got the idea to paint "Radar Equipped Smooth Ride" on the side of their airplanes.

The man who had test flown the radars knew that pilots would have to be trained or it could actually get them in more trouble. The first radars were very tricky to interpret, especially in the area of attenuation of signal. Long story short, the flight department people rejected the training and basically since the advent of the jet. crews have been flying into thunderstorms with perfectly funcitioning radars, then wondering how they got there.

The good news is that new radars are easier to interpret. The bad news, most guys still don't know how to use tilt, and it still gets them in trouble.

[Wolverine]

In the airline world, it's the dispatcher's responsibility to keep the captain informed of the weather, including any changes in flight. I made up many new routes today to keep my planes out of the mass of weather in Kansas and Missouri, and I called up a couple captains on AirInc to recommend a wx deviation. Everybody landed at their planned destination safely with spare fuel, so I think I did well today.

All airliners have wx radar on board, but I figure that's only good for dodging scattered storms and finding holes. When a plane is flying toward the middle of a 200 mile line of storms, I assume that he has no idea how big that line is and I'll call him to recommend a deviation around it.

Having wx radar onboard and a dispatcher on the ground is a luxury that GA planes don't have. I've found that captains do a better job of dodging storms with wx radar than they do with help from ATC.

It's hard to predict where weather is going to move, so having a radar summary printout at T/O will not always help you enroute 3 hours later.

[Bog]

[ QUOTE ]
I made up many new routes today to keep my planes out of the mass of weather in Kansas and Missouri, and I called up a couple captains on AirInc to recommend a wx deviation.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must not work at YV. Our dispatchers are too overworked for stuff like that.

[flyover]

You did a great job. I always appreciated dispatchers getting involved and helping us with deviations. It was pretty rare.

It is long past time for airliners to get data linked weather. For years I pushed for stormscopes, which will never happen. Now I'm hoping for data-link. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif[/img]

[mtsu_av8er]

How many licensed dispatchers are on JC? I'm curious....

My chief flight instructor still gets a kick out of the fact that I am one...he's never met anyone with that ticket... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Wolverine]

Actually, I do work for YV. I had an unusual day when all 18 of my planes were running smoothly so I had time to actually do my job, what a concept! The only weather was enroute, so I didn't have to deal with delays and the non-stop phone calls from stations asking where their plane is.

But, things had to fall apart at some time. As soon as I called to order a sandwich from the deli downstairs, I had 2 planes go down for mx simultaneously. By the time I dealt with that, my bread had soaked up all the juice from the tomato. I should know better than to plan for a smooth operation.

Berto: From you're avatar, I assume you're flying the HP side. I'm working the United side this month, but I want to work the HP 900s.

[seagull]

If you are flying larger aircraft, or intend to, take Dave Gwinn's course. Actually, I'd recommend his course over any others (like Archie Trammel, for example) regardless. You will know how to work the radar when you have finished his course:

www.davegwinn.com

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are flying larger aircraft, or intend to, take Dave Gwinn's course. Actually, I'd recommend his course over any others (like Archie Trammel, for example) regardless. You will know how to work the radar when you have finished his course:

www.davegwinn.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree, Dave is good. But I'd change your recommendation to "if you are going to fly radar equipped aitplanes, regardless of size".

Also, you need a good basic book on thunderstorm evaluation. None better than Dennis Newton's book. Taking a radar course without a solid foundation in thunderstorm meteorology is less than optimal. Dennis's book is very basic and understandable.

http://www.pilotsbooks.com/severe_weather_flying.htm

[SteveC]

Good advice seagull and flyover.

Thanks.