VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > Safety
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-28-2016, 04:23 AM
terrykohler terrykohler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,009
Default NTSB Safety Alert - XM and ADS-B Weather

Fellow pilot Doug Ranz forwarded the following alert after a morning discussion on the value and limitations of XM and ADS-B weather. Everyone using this service should be aware of its limitations -
Terry

Actual Age of NEXRAD Data Can Differ Significantly From Age Indicated on Display
The problem
Weather radar ?mosaic? imagery created from Next Generation Radar (NEXRAD) data is available to pilots in the cockpit via the flight information service-broadcast (FIS-B) and private satellite weather service providers.
A mosaic image presents radar data from multiple radar ground sites on a single image on the cockpit display. When a mosaic image is updated, it may not contain new information from each ground site.
The age indicator associated with the mosaic image on the cockpit display does not show the age of the actual weather conditions as detected by the NEXRAD network. Instead, the age indicator displays the age of the mosaic image created by the service provider. Weather conditions depicted on the mosaic image will ALWAYS be older than the age indicated on the display.
Due to latencies inherent in processes used to detect and deliver the NEXRAD data from the ground site to the service provider, as well as the time intervals used for the mosaic-creation process set by the service provider, NEXRAD data can age significantly by the time the mosaic image is created.
Although such situations are not believed to be typical, in extreme latency and mosaic-creation scenarios, the actual age of the oldest NEXRAD data in the mosaic can EXCEED the age indication in the cockpit by
15 to 20 minutes.1
Even small time differences between the age indicator and actual conditions can be important for safety of flight, especially when considering fast-moving weather hazards, quickly developing weather scenarios, and/or fast-moving aircraft.
1 Actual maximum age differences can vary between service type (FIS-B versus satellite) and provider.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has recently investigated two fatal
accidents where in-cockpit NEXRAD mosaic imagery was available to pilots
operating near quickly developing and fast-moving convective weather.
o On March 25, 2010, a Eurocopter AS350 B3, N855HW, impacted
terrain near Brownsville, Tennessee. 2 During the flight, the pilot?s
cockpit display indicated that it had received one NEXRAD image
roughly halfway through the flight that indicated it was about 1 minute
old; however, the weather conditions were actually about 5 minutes old.
The image indicated that the severe weather was about 7 miles away
from the home base where the pilot was attempting to land, but the
severe weather was actually just crossing over the home base at about
the time the display received the NEXRAD image.
o On December 19, 2011, a Piper PA-32-260, N3590T, collided with
terrain following an in-flight breakup near Bryan, Texas.3 The pilot had
been diverting to avoid weather and had likely received several
NEXRAD updates in the minutes leading up to the accident. According
to the NEXRAD data the pilot likely would have received, he was flying
clear of the precipitation along the edge of the rain. Near the end of the
flight, the pilot flew into a section of the developing rain shower. His
display should have shown that he still remained clear of the
precipitation. The last three NEXRAD updates that the pilot received
should have each said that they were 1 minute old at the time they were
received; however, the actual weather conditions at the time the images
were received in the cockpit were about 6, 7, and almost 8 minutes old,
respectively.
The general issue of latency with in-cockpit NEXRAD is discussed in pilots? guides, in
industry literature, and on service providers? websites. However, the NTSB has not
found that such guidance contains details about the potential time difference between
the age indicator and actual conditions.
2 The Cockpit Display Factual Report for this accident, NTSB case number ERA10MA188, can be found at
http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F50000-5...4%2F466399.pdf, and additional information about the
accident can be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/index.aspx.
3 The Weather Study for this accident, NTSB case number CEN12FA108, can be found at
http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F52500-5...6%2F492704.pdf, and additional information about the
accident can be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/index.aspx.
What can pilots do?
Remember that the in-cockpit NEXRAD display depicts where the weather WAS, not
where it IS. The age indicator does not show the age of the actual weather conditions
but rather the age of the mosaic image. The actual weather conditions could be up to
15 to 20 minutes OLDER than the age indicated on the display. You should consider
this potential delay when using in-cockpit NEXRAD capabilities, as the movement
and/or intensification of weather could adversely affect safety of flight.
Understand that the common perception of a ?5-minute latency? with radar data is not
always correct.
Get your preflight weather briefing! Having in-cockpit weather capabilities does not
circumvent the need for a complete weather briefing before takeoff.
Use all appropriate sources of weather information to make in-flight decisions.
Let your fellow pilots know about the limitations of in-cockpit NEXRAD.
Need more information?
While some published Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) documents, including the
Aeronautical Information Manual, Advisory Circular 00-45G (?Aviation Weather Services?),
and the Advanced Avionics Handbook (FAA-H-8083-6), contain useful information about
in-cockpit NEXRAD capabilities, the NTSB is not aware of any discussion or guidance in
these documents regarding the potential amount of time difference between actual
radar-observed conditions and the age displayed in the cockpit
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-28-2016, 09:12 AM
Chkaharyer99 Chkaharyer99 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pilot Hill, CA
Posts: 845
Default

Great reminder.

"Although such situations are not believed to be typical, in extreme latency and mosaic-creation scenarios, the actual age of the oldest NEXRAD data in the mosaic can EXCEED the age indication in the cockpit by 15 to 20 minutes."
__________________
Charlie
RV-8
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-28-2016, 09:58 AM
vic syracuse vic syracuse is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,626
Default

I have found that the XM and ADSB weather are usually pretty good for the summer-type pop-up thunderstorms that aren't moving. Most of the cockpit glass systems do have an "age" indicator in the weather display (which is ONLY the age of YOUR last update to your screen, not the age of the data). A couple of times I noticed that the view out the window did not match the weather depiction on the screen and it was then that I noticed the "age" indicator was showing over 30 minutes. Most of the time it is less than 6.

For fast moving fronts neither of them should be used for tactical, close-in decision making. Long-range strategic planning seems to work well to keep us out of the stuff. If and when you blunder into a weather mess, by all means use ATC. Most of the large facilities, like Atlanta have radar that has absolutely amazing weather depiction and they can be of great assistance.

Don't forget the data sent to you is not raw data. It is massaged, and can be misleading at times. We have seen rain depicted when we were in clear air with blue skies, and no weather depicted when we were in precipitation.

Vic
__________________
Vic Syracuse

Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-28-2016, 10:40 AM
TajMahal's Avatar
TajMahal TajMahal is offline
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Tenino, WA
Posts: 17
Default It's where it was...

I've experienced similar discrepancies in displayed vs actual as Vic illustrated, with varying degrees of aging on the imagery. The voice inside keeps reminding myself, it's showing where the weather WAS... not is.

A great tool to have in-flight, as long as you remember it's limitations. Thanks for posting the reminder.
__________________
Chris Michalak
Tenino, WA (KOLM - Olympia, WA)
RV-8: QB Wings
N828CM - Reserved
EAA Lifer
2017 VAF dues happily paid
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-29-2016, 08:09 AM
pierre smith's Avatar
pierre smith pierre smith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
Default Yep

I recently renewed my CFI course online, for the first time. They have a section on the new "Glass" cockpits. Two interesting observations were that weather problems and inadvertent flight into IMC conditions have increased, but fuel starvation issues have nearly disappeared.

Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga

It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132


Dues gladly paid!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-29-2016, 08:25 AM
JonJay's Avatar
JonJay JonJay is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Battleground
Posts: 4,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith View Post
I recently renewed my CFI course online, for the first time. They have a section on the new "Glass" cockpits. Two interesting observations were that weather problems and inadvertent flight into IMC conditions have increased, but fuel starvation issues have nearly disappeared.

Best,
Very interesting Pierre, but not surprising. ETE and ETA are pretty easily calculated in our modern "glass" world. Weather can only be reported after it happens.

I would be curious Pierre, in your recent course work, did they spend as much time on weather theory and flight planning resources related to weather as they used to?
__________________
Smart People do Stupid things all the time. I know, I've seen me do'em.

RV6 - Builder/Flying
Bucker Jungmann
Fiat G.46 -(restoration in progress, if I have enough life left in me)
RV1 - Proud Pilot.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-29-2016, 12:38 PM
pierre smith's Avatar
pierre smith pierre smith is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Louisville, Ga
Posts: 7,840
Default Nope

Very little on trip planning regarding weather.

Best,
__________________
Pierre Smith
RV-10, 510 TT
RV6A (Sojourner) 180 HP, Catto 3 Bl (502Hrs), gone...and already missed
Air Tractor AT 502B PT 6-15 Sold
Air Tractor 402 PT-6-20 Sold
EAA Flight Advisor/CFI/Tech Counselor
Louisville, Ga

It's never skill or craftsmanship that completes airplanes, it's the will to do so,
Patrick Kenny, EAA 275132


Dues gladly paid!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-29-2016, 03:00 PM
BenNabors BenNabors is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Alabama
Posts: 127
Default Air Safety Institute case study.

A good case study on the subject of delayed next rad images. https://youtu.be/83uvKWJS2os?list=PLCC59953860B62145
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-29-2016, 03:10 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 6,797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pierre smith View Post
I recently renewed my CFI course online, for the first time. They have a section on the new "Glass" cockpits. Two interesting observations were that weather problems and inadvertent flight into IMC conditions have increased, but fuel starvation issues have nearly disappeared.

Best,
Which on line class? King, Gleim, AOPA, ?
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:08 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.