Ual 4933
08-24-2024 | 05:10 AM
#271
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,194
Likes: 240
I am entitled to an opinion. I do not speculate and I do not guess. My opinion won't change the speed of the world one iota.
I didn't dodge a damn thing. I'm not going to give you an opinion on the matter. No need, given the information that I already provided, including links.
Do I have an opinion on this matter? I do not. You say I wouldn't post, without an opinion? Bull ****.
You speculate and chase conspiracies. I stick to facts, and back them up.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda. You can read. Read the docket that's been linked. It's all there.
I didn't dodge a damn thing. I'm not going to give you an opinion on the matter. No need, given the information that I already provided, including links.
Do I have an opinion on this matter? I do not. You say I wouldn't post, without an opinion? Bull ****.
You speculate and chase conspiracies. I stick to facts, and back them up.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda. You can read. Read the docket that's been linked. It's all there.
The question wasn't one of conspiracy theories. The question was of the timeliness of NTSB reports in general. This one was an outlier even by NTSB standards, but taking years rather than months was not. Is that timely enough? Are they under resourced? Or has 'slow' simply become the default standard? Because other people - yes, including the military - do the investigations and get the facts out quicker. And getting the facts out quicker is sometimes life saving.
Fight all the political culture wars you want on either side - I don't care. This isn't about political culture, it's about safety culture.
08-24-2024 | 05:20 AM
#272
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,194
Likes: 240
This one seems like it took too long, given that facts.
Possible reasons?
Challenging technical analysis of snow and LOC antennas? Apparently more snow was previously allowed on LOC vs GS (different frequency, different signal propagation characteristics). Maybe they had to analyze the effects of various snow conditions, such as snow partially melting and refreezing into ice? Snow vs. water vs. ice could have different effects on the signal. Maybe FAA had to outsource that analysis?
On the machiavellian side, maybe they were politically afraid to come out and say we need to OOS every ILS in snow country when it's cold out until we figure this out? Bureaucratic vapor lock?
Possible reasons?
Challenging technical analysis of snow and LOC antennas? Apparently more snow was previously allowed on LOC vs GS (different frequency, different signal propagation characteristics). Maybe they had to analyze the effects of various snow conditions, such as snow partially melting and refreezing into ice? Snow vs. water vs. ice could have different effects on the signal. Maybe FAA had to outsource that analysis?
On the machiavellian side, maybe they were politically afraid to come out and say we need to OOS every ILS in snow country when it's cold out until we figure this out? Bureaucratic vapor lock?
And maybe you don't have to OOS every ILS in snow country. Just tell them to keep the localizer antenna free of snow until we figure this out as an interim recommendation? Given that under those conditions someone is probably shoveling snow off the runway anyway, that wouldn't seem to a terribly resource intensive bit of insurance.
Addendum: it doesn't appear like any outside analysis actually happened
https://postimg.cc/qzMH4ySk
Last edited by Excargodog; 08-24-2024 at 05:35 AM.
08-24-2024 | 07:10 AM
#273
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,923
Likes: 698
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Begs the question of who had to do the analysis if they had to do a technical analysis. And how timely was the contract to get that info? Did this take them multiple winters to research it? If so, where is the analysis because the US is scarcely the only nation with ILSs subjected to ice and snow. Be nice to spread that info around if they have it.
And maybe you don't have to OOS every ILS in snow country. Just tell them to keep the localizer antenna free of snow until we figure this out as an interim recommendation? Given that under those conditions someone is probably shoveling snow off the runway anyway, that wouldn't seem to a terribly resource intensive bit of insurance.
Addendum: it doesn't appear like any outside analysis actually happened
And maybe you don't have to OOS every ILS in snow country. Just tell them to keep the localizer antenna free of snow until we figure this out as an interim recommendation? Given that under those conditions someone is probably shoveling snow off the runway anyway, that wouldn't seem to a terribly resource intensive bit of insurance.
Addendum: it doesn't appear like any outside analysis actually happened
I could dig out my old textbooks and over an afternoon could probably calculate beam effect from a *homogenous* snowbank of a certain dimension. If you need to account for various densities in the bank, and a frozen surface that could act as an ice lens, while also possibly also wet, you'd need some Phd's for that. Top Men, probably not NTSB/FAA staff.
08-24-2024 | 07:32 AM
#274
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,194
Likes: 240
They did some testing but that didn't cover all possible snow conditions. Maybe they had to do analysis for that. Easy to say just keep the snow clear but what if it's really coming down and vis is low... do you have a snowplow out on the in-field trying to keep up? That would interfere with the antenna too.
I could dig out my old textbooks and over an afternoon could probably calculate beam effect from a *homogenous* snowbank of a certain dimension. If you need to account for various densities in the bank, and a frozen surface that could act as an ice lens, while also possibly also wet, you'd need some Phd's for that. Top Men, probably not NTSB/FAA staff.
I could dig out my old textbooks and over an afternoon could probably calculate beam effect from a *homogenous* snowbank of a certain dimension. If you need to account for various densities in the bank, and a frozen surface that could act as an ice lens, while also possibly also wet, you'd need some Phd's for that. Top Men, probably not NTSB/FAA staff.
And realistically, the finer points of electromagnetic wave propagation through frozen water - while intellectually stimulating - probably are still going to boil down to 'just clear rhe damn antenna' as far as practical economics. And I'd agree with that.
Call me old fashioned, but that doesn't sound like a report it would take two years to write up...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EngineOut
Regional
153
05-10-2017 10:12 AM
