Babybus From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3512 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 22771 times:
Quoting BALandorlivery (Thread starter): I heard on the grapevine that a VS A340 encountered a microburst on approach to Dubai.
Is this really the season for microbursts in the Middle east? Once you get past February the weather is normally constant (Hot and stable) till February next year.
This event was obviously not newsworthy.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, RR: 14 Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 18557 times:
I have checked on another site which is always a hotbed of gossip ( the one that starts with P and ends with a dried plum ) and there is nothing mentioned there . Knowing how quick people are on that site to pick up on gossip , and bearing in mind that absolutely no evidence has been posted on this thread to back up the OP I have to say that I am very skeptical about this 'incident'
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
Hotelmode From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 459 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 17240 times:
There was an incident at HKG many years ago when VS first introduced the A340-300 and this just sounds like a rehash of that. Frankly with the threshold of DXB being 2 miles inland they would have had to drop nearly 1000ft, it would be all over the press were it true.
FuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2018 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 16624 times:
Quoting Babybus (Reply 2): This event was obviously not newsworthy.
How do you figure that? Microbursts are becoming evermore dangerous in aviation. For those of us living in the U.S. we all saw what it's relative, a downburst, did to the Dallas Cowgirls practice facility. Pilots are trained to avoid microbursts, but I have to wonder if there is some early warning system, because if not, it is time for one. The early warning system cannot happen when the plane enters the microburst.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
Bassbonebobo From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 66 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 13705 times:
Giants fan here but I think that's inappropriate considering people are paralyzed from it.
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 1):
since , at this stage , this is only an unsubstantiated rumor perhaps your topic should have had a question mark in the title?
- You would think that there would also be a regulatory agency investigation going also - whether from Britian or the UAE.
FuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2018 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 12320 times:
Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 11): Are they getting stronger or what? In what way are they "becoming ever more dangerous" compared to say, last September? This statement makes no sense.
I meant more dangerous because they're occuring a lot more because of changing weather patterns due to global warning NOT because they are getting stronger. That would be a completely dumb thing for me to say. Microbursts are happening more an more in places that they never used to. http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/gu...s/mtr/svr/comp/out/micro/home.rxml
Quoting 7673mech (Reply 14): Giants fan here but I think that's inappropriate considering people are paralyzed from it.
I meant it towards the team, not those who were injured.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
Csavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1332 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11581 times:
Quoting FuturePilot16 (Reply 15): I meant more dangerous because they're occuring a lot more because of changing weather patterns due to global warning NOT because they are getting stronger. That would be a completely dumb thing for me to say. Microbursts are happening more an more in places that they never used to.
What is the factual basis for such an assertion. How do we know that we are just getting better at monitoring, seeing microbursts where they always occured but not detectable until now?
(I am NOT a global warming skeptic, by any means, the evidence is fairly strong, but you can't point to an event and say, look Global Warming! By the same token skeptics can't point to an event - like a cold snap - and say, look Global Warming Bunk!)
It is the aggregate averages over a few decades. Is there data that show that *over two decades* microbusts have increased and have increased in places where they didn't occur previously?
I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
Borism From Estonia, joined Oct 2006, 431 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11427 times:
I don't think we can reach any reasonable conclusion on whether microbursts are occurring more often, in more new places and are stronger than ever. We just haven't studied them that long in that many places, unlike we have with air temperature.
But it is fairly certain that we fly to more places than ever where microburst occurrences can be expected. It seems Gulf states fit pretty nicely into this risk group.
Dw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1244 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11208 times:
Quoting Borism (Reply 10):
Ground effect would have kicked in 180 feet above that for A340.
Ground effect is nill compared to the power of a microburst and all but a non-factor. In addition, ground effect is most pronounced within half a wingspan, so less than 100AGL for an A340. Still, it really doesn't matter in this case.
FuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2018 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8840 times:
Quoting Borism (Reply 18): But it is fairly certain that we fly to more places than ever where microburst occurrences can be expected. It seems Gulf states fit pretty nicely into this risk group.
Which is reasonable for my assumption, yes I called it an assumption, that Microbursts are becoming more dangerous because of several different factors, including this one.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
Nitepilot79 From Turkey, joined May 2008, 248 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8626 times:
Quoting Babybus (Reply 2): Is this really the season for microbursts in the Middle east? Once you get past February the weather is normally constant (Hot and stable) till February next year
Not this year. I live in SE Turkey, and up until last week it has been stormy. I mean healthy lightning storms with plenty of wind and rain. I am not aware of the actual weather at said location and time. I'm just saying that the weather over here has been consistently way out of the ordinary this spring/summer.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8499 times:
Quoting Csavel (Reply 17): What is the factual basis for such an assertion. How do we know that we are just getting better at monitoring, seeing microbursts where they always occured but not detectable until now?
The act of measuring changes the result.
This is quite true in meteorology. By having greater ability to measure storms, we log more of them, and this is not the equivalent of a rise in this type of activity.
A prime example is hurricane strength. It used to be measured from the ground (where winds are ALWAYS weaker). Then it was measured by aircraft, and they "got stronger" and then by satellite, where they are "estimated" and always, always stronger than experienced.
But the act of measuring has changed results. We are now seeing "more" higher category storms despite not experiencing higher winds on the surface than storms of the past.
Smoke and mirrors. But why?
Quoting Csavel (Reply 17): (I am NOT a global warming skeptic, by any means, the evidence is fairly strong, but you can't point to an event and say, look Global Warming! By the same token skeptics can't point to an event - like a cold snap - and say, look Global Warming Bunk!)
And yet they do. Especially those who support the theory, because they make money from the reality of it being true. Funding, funding, funding, makes the world go round. Nobody funds "all is well" or predictions of normalcy...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Borism From Estonia, joined Oct 2006, 431 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3341 times:
Quoting CX flyboy (Reply 24): Sounds very much like the HKG incident where apparently after that Virgin treated it as a full crash investigation, since they were so close to it.
Any link to this? Nothing on aviation-safety.net or Google about this...
Sponsor Message: 
From UK - England, joined Jan 2005, 358 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3512 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 706 posts, 
From Peru, joined Apr 2008, 719 posts, 
From Estonia, joined Oct 2006, 431 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, 
- You would think that there would also be a regulatory agency investigation going also - whether from Britian or the UAE.
From Turkey, joined May 2008, 248 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
