Captain Sim Weather Radar Crack
Eduviges Gearlds
We are now leveraging our big data smarts to deliver on the promise of IoT. By integrating our hyper-local weather data with Smart Home connected devices we are delievering predictive energy efficiency insight to homeowners and Utility companies.
Spin - you're not alone. I, too, am having this problem. I followed all the steps you mentioned, to no avail. I do, however, recall being able to see weather on the gauge when I first purchased My E-jets a couple of years ago. KB.
Captain Sim Weather Radar can be added to any FSX aircraft using the installation utility provided. The primary use of this radar is to aid the pilot in avoiding thunderstorms and associated turbulence. Operational techniques for the radar are similar to earlier generation weather avoidance radars.
Narrative: With operation of the Rockwell Collins MultiScan Weather Radar unit installed in the B787 we are continuing to see anomalies that are unexplained. These continuing anomalies are leading many pilots on the 787 to lose faith in the weather radar system. With what is being seen; we are potentially putting our aircraft and passenger's safety in jeopardy.During our flight over the ocean we observed a few of these Weather Radar anomalies that I would hope can explain what is occurring with the system to aid in correcting defective radar hardware/software or lack of training in the use or understanding of the equipment. While in WX+T AUTO there was a strong return at the 3 o'clock position and approximately 40 miles. At approximately 120 miles from the cell we placed a waypoint over it to aid in our ability to watch it as we approached the cell. There was no convective activity in that area which should cause this return. However; it appeared that there was an island located in the area of this strong radar return. The question is; with no convective activity in this area; with the system in WX+T Auto; why would there be such a strong radar return there; even if there was an island in that area? [We also] attempted to intentionally bypass the Ground Clutter Suppression (GCS) feature of the radar and paint a ground return by manually directing the radar tilt to a very low level with the system in MAP mode while over the South ocean. There was no change of display or ground return while in the AUTO position. The use of both AUTO and MAN did not result in any sort of ground return arc where the radar energy first strikes the ground and where the energy last strikes the ground farther from the aircraft. There was no visible indication of any radar return arc at low tilt settings. Why is this? Hours later into the flight while still over the ocean the same tilt and radar settings did result in a typical arc of ground return that would be considered normal. Why do we see two different radar returns (one with no ground return arc and one with a ground return arc) with what appear to be the same operating conditions? Our B787 flight manual has only a dozen pages devoted to the MultiScan radar unit and its features. The Rockwell Collins pilot operator's manual on this equipment is in excess of 220 pages. Granted; that manual is devoted to both Boeing and Airbus installations but contains much more detailed information on the use of the system and is of value to us as pilots. We should have access to this more detailed technical information in some form to help us develop a better understanding of the MultiScan radar features; its value and use of this system.Why is it that we continue to hear NOTHING from the manufacturer; the Fleet; the FAA; the training center or flight operations management regarding this ongoing safety and/or training issue?
Tech. Sgt. Christopher Johnson checks the inventory number on a component for the Next Generation Weather Radar off-base Aug. 4 in Guam. The Communication Squadron provides maintenance support for the lone weather radar on island. Sergeant Johnson is the 36th Communications Squadron NCO in charge of ground radar systems. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Shane Dunaway)
This Next Generation Weather Radar weather radar provides data for the 36th Operations Support Squadron at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Weather Service. Members of the 36th Communications Squadron ground radar systems flight provide maintenance support for the radar. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Shane Dunaway)
When a cub TV reporter walked into the Weather Bureau office in Galveston, Texas on a muggy summer day in 1961, he saw something that few people had ever seen, a live weather radar image of an approaching hurricane. It was Hurricane Carla and the new weather radar was showing the eye clearly as the storm approached the Texas Coast.
The reporter realised immediately that this was a powerful image and it had to be a part of his story about the approaching storm. The weather bureau thought otherwise. It might cause panic was the thought, but after some discussion that apparently went all the way to headquarters in Washington, he was able to film the image of the radar scope and show it on TV that evening. Many feel that that image caused a lot of people to evacuate that might not have otherwise. As far as I know, this is the first time weather radar was shown in almost real-time on TV, and the story got that young reporter noticed by the network folks.
Weather radar does not show rain or snow. It does not show severe storms or tornadoes either. What it does show is reflected radio wave energy bounced back by objects in the path of the narrow high powered beam. Yes, you say, I knew that, but do you really? I have looked at radar images every day for 40 years and I can tell you, that I am often scratching my head and trying to deduce what I am really looking at. What you think you are seeing is often not really what is there and for those who have not been trained to interpret the images, this is nearly always the case.
The most frequent question I get from viewers is about why storms approaching their city tend to split and miss them. They do not of course, but the reason they think so is based on the radar images we show on TV and online. In the case of that tour boat captain, the consequences were far more serious. His misunderstanding of that radar image cost lives. Both of these are examples of the Dunning Kruger effect.
In the case of the boat captain in Missouri, his ignorance of what that radar image showed trumped the knowledge of the local NWS office who had put out a strongly worded severe thunderstorm warning, that explicitly mentioned very high straight-line winds.
Did you read the blog post I linked to? In general, a broken line of storms at a good distance from the radar will appear to be a solid line due to the drop in resolution at that distance. As it gets closer the line appears as it really is, broken. Thus there was always a chance that some spots would not see heavy rain as it passed.
Your damn right we should. In fact the stations should interupt programming to continually show severe weather until it is no longer a threat to their viewing area. There are still many people who have no good signal acess for data to their phones!
Dan Satterfield has worked as an on air meteorologist for 32 years in Oklahoma, Florida and Alabama. Forecasting weather is Dan's job, but all of Earth Science is his passion. This journal is where Dan writes about things he has too little time for on air. Dan blogs about peer-reviewed Earth science for Junior High level audiences and up.
MORE ABOUT DAN >>
Outside, on the morning of 4 June, the weather was quiet, with only a light breeze blowing. Despite this, the weather was unsettled, with a series of low-pressure systems developing out in the North Atlantic and heading towards the English Channel.
On the afternoon of 4 June, when the weather began to deteriorate as the first storm approached, Stagg noticed an observation from a single ship stationed six hundred miles west of Ireland reporting a rise in the barometric pressure. The pressure kept rising. Stagg deduced that there could be a break in the weather on 6 June.
That forecast was a pivotal moment in world history. If the forecast was wrong, the lives of thousands of men and massive amounts of equipment would be lost. But, on the other hand, if the unsettled weather forecast for 5 June had not happened and the weather had been good, the Germans might have spied the massive build-up of forces along the coast of southern England.
Late on June 4, Captain Stagg met again with the Allied commanders. Outside, the trees swayed in the wind, and a hard rain fell. Stagg told Eisenhower that they thought the weather would improve. There might be winds of force 3 or 4, rising to force 5 in a few places, but the sky should be clear. It might cloud over later, but the cloud bases should stay high enough for the naval gunners to spot their shots. Not ideal, but good enough.
On 5 June, the convoys set out in force 5 winds to begin their seventeen-hour crossing. Early on the morning of 6 June, the Pathfinder planes for the paratroops ran into unexpected banks of clouds over the coast of France. They dropped their visual and radar beacons, but many fell in the wrong places. In addition, many of the visual beacons could not be seen with the cloud cover. The paratroops themselves went in C47 transport aircraft, and they too hit the cloud bank. The pilots had to break formation to prevent collisions. Some tried to get above the clouds. Some tried to go below. Some took evasive action as the antiaircraft fire began. As a result, the paratroops were dropped or glided in far from their intended targets.
aa06259810