Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8722 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 20163 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, 461 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 18846 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.
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."
Csavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1397 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 13187 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 (6 years 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 13033 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, 1267 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 12814 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.
Nitepilot79 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10232 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, 21791 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10105 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.