No wind-shear radar guards Canada airspace

Mxsmanic wrote:

> >
> > No Canadian airport was required to deploy the system, called Terminal
> > Doppler Weather Radar, and none ever installed it, partly because of its
> > cost and partly because the threat to aviation of "wind shear" was not
> > perceived to be as great as in the United States. The system is now deployed
> > at all major U.S. airports.
>
> If that turns out to be a factor in this accident, the fur will fly.

Why should fur fly over the airport not having a radar system that is not
required? TDWR is designed to detect strange weather patterns. It can be a great
aid in predicting the arrival of bizarre weather patterns. Oddly, one article in
this topic indicated that a strong wind shear blast (microburst) was present at
the time of the crash. So the situation is that doppler radar at the location
confirmed that there was a micro burst and the pilot attempted a landing in the
midst of a very nasty storm with rain, hail, lightning. all of which we quite
visible to the naked high, so visible that visibility was significantly impaired.
Yet, some people are complaining that the airport was not equipped with a special
type of radar that would have warned that a storm like that was approaching. Well
duh... it was already there.


TDWR is in use in 44 airports across the US, so that does not constitute the "at
all major US airports" It is used at some of the major airports where it can help
detect strange wind patterns like a tornado vortex. There are no TDWR systems
across the entire north-western US or in any of the west coast states.

Mxsmanic wrote:

> Dave Smith writes:
>
> > Why should fur fly over the airport not having a radar system that is not
> > required?
>
> Just because it's not required doesn't mean it's not a good idea. Air
> France lost a Concorde because they chose not to make safety changes
> because they were "not required."

They lost that Concorde because it got a flat tire when it struck a piece of
metal that had dropped off the last plane ahead of it on the runway.

That radar system is used to detect bizarre weather systems approaching. At the
time of the crash of the AF plane in Toronto, the storm was not approaching. It
was already there. Another type of Doppler system detected the microburst.

Martin wrote:

>
> >> Why should fur fly over the airport not having a radar system that is not
> >> required?
> >
> >Just because it's not required doesn't mean it's not a good idea. Air
> >France lost a Concorde because they chose not to make safety changes
> >because they were "not required."
>
> Which safety changes were those?

The guy with the broom to clean up metal pieces from other planes on the runway.
:-)

Dave Smith wrote:

> Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>
>>>No Canadian airport was required to deploy the system, called Terminal
>>>Doppler Weather Radar, and none ever installed it, partly because of its
>>>cost and partly because the threat to aviation of "wind shear" was not
>>>perceived to be as great as in the United States. The system is now deployed
>>>at all major U.S. airports.
>>
>>If that turns out to be a factor in this accident, the fur will fly.
>
>
> Why should fur fly over the airport not having a radar system that is not
> required? TDWR is designed to detect strange weather patterns. It can be a great
> aid in predicting the arrival of bizarre weather patterns. Oddly, one article in
> this topic indicated that a strong wind shear blast (microburst) was present at
> the time of the crash. So the situation is that doppler radar at the location
> confirmed that there was a micro burst and the pilot attempted a landing in the
> midst of a very nasty storm with rain, hail, lightning. all of which we quite
> visible to the naked high, so visible that visibility was significantly impaired.
> Yet, some people are complaining that the airport was not equipped with a special
> type of radar that would have warned that a storm like that was approaching. Well
> duh... it was already there.
>
>
> TDWR is in use in 44 airports across the US, so that does not constitute the "at
> all major US airports" It is used at some of the major airports where it can help
> detect strange wind patterns like a tornado vortex. There are no TDWR systems
> across the entire north-western US or in any of the west coast states.
>
>
>
>
>


And just who would be able to require it?