Legacy Bashfest - Bring it on!

[English]

bigD, you da man!

Now do we get to look forward to another 1000 posts bashing the mighty WSCoD?

If so, ERJ-140, your profile states you've flown the Citation. Which one?

 

[banned username 2]

1000!!!!

I'm sorry. I'm such a post whore.

THAT, my friend, is gonna cost you some BBQ!

 

[ERJ-140]

ERJ-140,

I have tried to tell you a million times but I will go through it one more time.
Back in 1998-1999 when I was flying the EMB-145 we had major major major problems with the radar. It wasn't just me, it was all of Continental Express Airlines. Since Continental Express was the launch customer for this POS airplane you love so much Honeywell, Embraer, and COEX all got together to come up with a fix for the radar problem. We tried everything known to man to get this thing to work and we still had problems. When I left COEX to go to a major the problems had yet to be resolved. Being that COEX was/is an airline that is in the business to fly passengers and make money they would just put a band-aid on the problem in hopes that it would go away. To my knowledge, it never did.
...

Furthermore, your "radar shadows" theory is absolute bunk. A radar shadow is a radar shadow. You can't pull shadows out of precip. IT CAN'T BE DONE!

...



On the other hand you state you are typed in the B-737. When asked very simple questions about the aircraft you dodge the question and dont even answer. That is why you have no credibility here. Every other day you are caught in a new lie.

Why dont you tell us about your B-737 type. Where were you typed and what do you know about the B-737?

I have no reason, desire, or obligation to divulge my knowledge or lack thereof regarding the B-737. I can only tell you that I am typed in it and grew up around it most of my life (my old man had over 25,000 hours in them over 30+ years of flying the type). This thread is about the Legacy, not the 737. When I have 1000 hours in the 737 I'll be glad to talk about it in another thread. I am woefully unqualified to discuss an airplane I am barely beginning to learn. Just because one is typed doesn't mean a thing.

Now in ERJs, on the other hand, I have almost 4,000 hours and over four years experience (135, 140, 145 - with more than 1000 as a PIC) and feel perfectly qualified to discuss it.

As for the shadow theory...perhaps we are talking at cross purposes. Are you trying to tell me that I cannot use the gain to pick a cell out of ground clutter, background noise, or precip by dialing it down? Are you telling me I cannot, for lack of a better term, "burn through" attenuation at a lower gain by dialing the gain up higher?

When did you last fly the ERJ and use the radar? Do you believe things have changed since then? Were you an expert wx radar man when you flew the ERJ? It sounds to me like you haven't flown it since 2001 and that you are "back dating" some of your since-acquired knowledge to your time on the ERJ.

Every carrier has had problems with the ERJ radar, not just COEX. It has certainly been a topic of discussion and consternation. But I can tell you from firsthand experience that more than 90% of the EMB's radar problems are operator-induced.

This is not an attack on you, so please, lighten up. The radar could use improvement, I wholeheartedly agree. But let's at least distribute (or try to distribute) the blame where it properly lies. Frankly it isn't all the equipment.

 

[bayoubandit]

I flew that POS with Dangerkitty and Bad-Andy. The radar is an absolute worthless, useless piece of crap.

It didn't matter what you did with the gain or tilt. It simply doesn't paint anything, even level 4's, until you are right in it.


That's the fact Jack!!

 

[Flechas]

I flew that POS with Dangerkitty and Bad-Andy. The radar is an absolute worthless, useless piece of crap.

It didn't matter what you did with the gain or tilt. It simply doesn't paint anything, even level 4's, until you are right in it.


That's the fact Jack!!

I would not push it that far, you can paint some stuff, but when you are in it or in terrain, it becomes worthless.

 

[bayoubandit]

Okay, that's fair.

Overall I remember it being unreliable.

 

[Dangerkitty]

As for the shadow theory...perhaps we are talking at cross purposes. Are you trying to tell me that I cannot use the gain to pick a cell out of ground clutter, background noise, or precip by dialing it down? Are you telling me I cannot, for lack of a better term, "burn through" attenuation at a lower gain by dialing the gain up higher?

Radar shadows have nothing to do with ground clutter or "background noise".
A radar shadow is a radar shadow. Thats it. A radar shadow is a cell so strong that the radar cannot see through the precip and tell you whats on the other side. As I have stated earlier, no amount of changing the gain, or the tilt will see through heavy precip and tell you whats on the other side.
YOU CANT SEE PAST A RADAR SHADOW! IT CANT BE DONE! I don't care what type of radar you are using.

When did you last fly the ERJ and use the radar? Do you believe things have changed since then? Were you an expert wx radar man when you flew the ERJ? It sounds to me like you haven't flown it since 2001 and that you are "back dating" some of your since-acquired knowledge to your time on the ERJ.

The last time I had the displeasure to fly the WSCoD was in 2000. Maybe they have totally changed the radar and put in new units, but I doubt it.
I wouldn't really call Embraer's customer support all that stellar. Heck, it was almost impossible to understand their manuals. It took me about a six months or so to be able to decipher their Portugeuse to Spanish to English translations.

This is not an attack on you, so please, lighten up. The radar could use improvement, I wholeheartedly agree. But let's at least distribute (or try to distribute) the blame where it properly lies. Frankly it isn't all the equipment.

Ok lets now talk about the aileron actuators breaking in flight were you would only have an aileron actuator on one side. The problem got so bad that Embraer came out with an emergency directive to make all EMB-135/145 operators to inspect the aileron operators everyday.

Many times we would be waiting for pax only to find out that our plane was grounded. This was because of the aileron actuator breaking. I once went out side to take a look. The pieces of the actuator were on the ground where the mechanic had opened the inspection port.

Probably my biggest fear was both actuators breaking in flight and loosing all control over the ailerons. I then asked the Chief of Maintenence what would happen if both broke and was told that no one was really sure. He then told me that the problem would most likely be fixed when 3 crew and 50 passengers were dead. Luckily the problem was finally fixed 3-4 months later but it didn't make for tranquil flights during the ordeal.

As for you being typed in the B-737 I still don't believe you. Companies dont type you and then you don't fly the airplane. Just doesn't work like that.
You could however tell us where you were typed. I think at the very least you could remember that.

I will be waiting for another 1-2 weeks for you to call your Captain and find out where B-737 type training talkes place.

 

[Dangerkitty]

Ha ha ha! My pm list is 10:1 against you wankers. Everyone is saying "keep it up" or "screw those clueless idiots on flightinfo". I actually got an interview out of this thread! Ha ha ha!

FalconCapt is a loser. Still can't disprove 320 nm range at 390 with 8 pax and ifr reserve!

Haha ha ha! Ban imminent! Ha yha ha ha!

Losers and idiots all. Live in your fantasy world. I'm gone. Cya!!!

Legacy rulz. Peace.

And now from the "ERJ-140 has now credibility department."

So, ERJ-140 how did the job interview go? Oh yeah, thats right there was no job interview was there? Falcon Captain being a moderator was able to look at you PM list and see that no such coorespondence took place.

Just another example of you being a liar and a fraud.

Besides, if I were the pilot on 730 then that would only prove I know more about the Legacy than you do. Don't you think I would be keen to admit that? It might enhance my credibility. I doubt it, but it might.

I have no reason, desire, or obligation to divulge my knowledge or lack thereof regarding the B-737. I can only tell you that I am typed in it and grew up around it most of my life (my old man had over 25,000 hours in them over 30+ years of flying the type). This thread is about the Legacy, not the 737. When I have 1000 hours in the 737 I'll be glad to talk about it in another thread. I am woefully unqualified to discuss an airplane I am barely beginning to learn. Just because one is typed doesn't mean a thing.

Well whats it going to be ERJ-140? First you state that you are not typed in the 737 and then you state you are but have no exprerience in flying it? Why would it be that a company types you but never has you fly the airplane?

These three quotes are just a small example of why everyone here knows that you are full of $hit. Falcon Captain has busted you a million times. You have had the same IP address as all your other aliases. Then you get on here one night obviously very very intoxicated and make an absolute fool of yourself.

You change your story with every post and when you are called on it either state that it wasn't you or that you were just being sarcastic. If I were you I would just come out and tell the truth but since you are so deep in the web of lies you have constructed I guess you dont have the balls to do that. My bet is that you will continue to make a total fool or yourself.

By the way were did you get your B-737 type? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[O-Line]

I have no reason, desire, or obligation to divulge my knowledge or lack thereof regarding the B-737. I can only tell you that I am typed in it and grew up around it most of my life (my old man had over 25,000 hours in them over 30+ years of flying the type).

You know it's rather amusing to go back and read some of Skull-One's old postings.

One of the benefits of having a popular SWA senior Captain for a father are the connections it provides. I have far more worries about keeping my CHQ job than I do about my ability to get hired at SWA when I meet the requirements. Trust me, I have plenty of friends there.

Apparently at one time our resident Legacy expert wasn't such the expert either. This one was posted a little more than a year ago.

Stupid question, but does the EMB-135BJ (Legacy) fall under the same type rating as the EMB-145 and vice versa?

And apparently even this guy concedes that the W in WSCoD stands for whistling.

H10-13.4 with custom molded ear plugs. Keep it at or below 300 KIAS and it is a quiet airplane.

 

[ERJ-140]

Radar shadows have nothing to do with ground clutter or "background noise".
A radar shadow is a radar shadow. Thats it. A radar shadow is a cell so strong that the radar cannot see through the precip and tell you whats on the other side. As I have stated earlier, no amount of changing the gain, or the tilt will see through heavy precip and tell you whats on the other side.
YOU CANT SEE PAST A RADAR SHADOW! IT CANT BE DONE! I don't care what type of radar you are using.

I may be using the wrong terminology but the effect is the same. You can manipulate the gain to create a "shadow", i.e. distinguish heavier precip from what is around it (rain, noise, whatever you wish to call it).

The last time I had the displeasure to fly the WSCoD was in 2000. Maybe they have totally changed the radar and put in new units, but I doubt it.

Agreed. But in this electronic age, software plays a large role in what the radar will tell you. Also the Legacy has an 880 which is at least a modest improvement over the 660. 99% of the ERJ fleet has the 660.

I wouldn't really call Embraer's customer support all that stellar. Heck, it was almost impossible to understand their manuals. It took me about a six months or so to be able to decipher their Portugeuse to Spanish to English translations.

Heh! Well the manuals are better now than they were, but again I agree they were pretty lame at one point.

Ok lets now talk about the aileron actuators breaking in flight were you would only have an aileron actuator on one side. The problem got so bad that Embraer came out with an emergency directive to make all EMB-135/145 operators to inspect the aileron operators everyday.

Many times we would be waiting for pax only to find out that our plane was grounded. This was because of the aileron actuator breaking. I once went out side to take a look. The pieces of the actuator were on the ground where the mechanic had opened the inspection port.

Probably my biggest fear was both actuators breaking in flight and loosing all control over the ailerons. I then asked the Chief of Maintenence what would happen if both broke and was told that no one was really sure. He then told me that the problem would most likely be fixed when 3 crew and 50 passengers were dead. Luckily the problem was finally fixed 3-4 months later but it didn't make for tranquil flights during the ordeal.

Not an issue of any kind since I started flying it. Obviously this was fixed.

As for you being typed in the B-737 I still don't believe you. Companies dont type you and then you don't fly the airplane. Just doesn't work like that.
You could however tell us where you were typed. I think at the very least you could remember that.

I could photo copy my license for you, too, but I won't. It doesn't matter. I am not going to reveal every single detail of my life to people I don't know. How I got it, where I got it, and who I work for are not relevant. I am here as an individual pilot, not as an employee or representative of my employer.

Please stop prying. It's not relevant. I am here merely to discuss this airplane, nothing more.

 

[Dangerkitty]

I may be using the wrong terminology but the effect is the same. You can manipulate the gain to create a "shadow", i.e. distinguish heavier precip from what is around it (rain, noise, whatever you wish to call it).

No no no no no. A radar shadow is an area behind heavy precip that the radar can not penetrate. It is nothing more, nothing less. It is statements like the above that make me believe that you are no pilot at all just a bored internet troll. Or an Embraer salesman trying to defend a substandard product.

Agreed. But in this electronic age, software plays a large role in what the radar will tell you. Also the Legacy has an 880 which is at least a modest improvement over the 660. 99% of the ERJ fleet has the 660.

If they fixed it then fine. However installing new software would indeed indicate that they were having problems with the original radars. Wouldn't that?

Heh! Well the manuals are better now than they were, but again I agree they were pretty lame at one point.

Yes, they sucked

I could photo copy my license for you, too, but I won't. It doesn't matter. I am not going to reveal every single detail of my life to people I don't know. How I got it, where I got it, and who I work for are not relevant. I am here as an individual pilot, not as an employee or representative of my employer.

Please stop prying. It's not relevant. I am here merely to discuss this airplane, nothing more.

I am only asking where you got your B-737 type rating. I know where I got mine. I state this because like I said before I really dont think you are a pilot at all. I am asking a very simple question. It shouldn't be that hard.

By the way how did your interview go from all the PM's you received defending you and bashing us? Did you get the job?

 

[ERJ-140]

No no no no no. A radar shadow is an area behind heavy precip that the radar can not penetrate. It is nothing more, nothing less. It is statements like the above that make me believe that you are no pilot at all just a bored internet troll. Or an Embraer salesman trying to defend a substandard product.

You can paint ground clutter all around and even through some cells. By reducing the gain you can make the cell stand out. The ground clutter will still show (though not as "brightly") but the clutter behind the cell will disappear. You tell me what it is if it isn't a "shadow effect". Tell me what the right term is and I'll use it.

Obviously heavier precip is more likely to produce a shadow, but you can still "pull stuff out" of lighter precip or clutter around it even if it isn't heavy rainfall.

If they fixed it then fine. However installing new software would indeed indicate that they were having problems with the original radars. Wouldn't that?

Yes, and I completely agreeed with you that the radar has had issues. But what I am trying to get across to everyone is that many of the well-known issues that the EMB had have been addressed. They aren't going to leave known issues unresolved, there is too much liability involved at the very least, not to mention the detrimental effect that would have on sales.

I would agree in the past tense. But I do not think they are nearly as bad now, and as stated before, the Legacy and ERJ radar sets are different.

Yes, they sucked

The manuals were translated from Portuguese to Spanish to English. Originally they made very little sense. They are on Revision 7 now. Much improved since 2000.

I am only asking where you got your B-737 type rating. I know where I got mine. I state this because like I said before I really dont think you are a pilot at all. I am asking a very simple question. It shouldn't be that hard.

And when you get the answer I will either be accused of looking it up on the Internet or going to a school that would "pass any moron with money" and I don't feel like denigrating those folks and costing them business (face it, there will be some sort of aspersions cast regardless my answer, so best to keep quiet and leave it at that). My type in a 737 is irrelevant. We're discussing ERJs and Legacys.

I will say that it was a -300 sim and was about 25-30 hours of sim time. I simply cannot say any more. It was an excellent course.

And yes, people do get multiple types and then never fly the planes. Several of our pilots fly one airplane exclusively but are still sent to recurrent on the others. I don't pay the bills. I don't ask questions. I just fly what I am told.

 

[banned username 2]

going to a school that would "pass any moron with money"

YOU said it, not us!!!

 

[Dangerkitty]

You can paint ground clutter all around and even through some cells. By reducing the gain you can make the cell stand out. The ground clutter will still show (though not as "brightly") but the clutter behind the cell will disappear. You tell me what it is if it isn't a "shadow effect". Tell me what the right term is and I'll use it.

Obviously heavier precip is more likely to produce a shadow, but you can still "pull stuff out" of lighter precip or clutter around it even if it isn't heavy rainfall.

Ok, very deep breath. Count to ten 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10. OK, I think I am ready now.

ERJ-140,

I just talked to 2 buddies of mine and asked them what a radar shadow was. They both nailed it. You on the other hand are talking about a bunch of BS when it comes to the definition.

Let me state this point for about the 5th-6th time now.

Ground Clutter has nothing to do with a radar shadow.

Gain has nothing to do with a radar shadow.

I have for some time not been mentioning the fact that the Honeywell Radar has a feature where a line forms at the end of the radar IF the attenuation of the radar is such that the radar can't determine what is on the other side of a cell. This will without a shadow of a doubt indicate a radar shadow.

With all your experience with the Legacy radar (I am stating this sarcastically of course) I thought you would have brought this up. But since you haven't I can only be led to believe that you are a fraud and have no clue what you are talking about.

You have no idea what a radar shadow is and have no clue how to identify one yet your mighty WSCoD is suppose to do it for you. Then why are you coming up with all this BS and admitting that the WSCoD is so great and not even mentioning this feature that Honeywell has installed? Could it be that you have no clue about the radar or the plane itself?

For your information I will type out what a radar shadow is since you are not able to grasp the subject. From my last radar course:

There are instances where extremely heavy rainfall can attenuate the transmitted pulse of any radar to useless levels in the order of a couple of miles. This attenuation could be so great that the pilot could interpret the return as indicating no rainfall ahead when, in fact, the aircraft may be entering an area of serious and destructive thundertstorm activity. These areas of "no returns" or "radar shadows" are caused by the inability of the radar pulses to penetrate the storm. The reason the pulses cannot get through is that the line of storms contains extremely heavy rain, possilby large hail, and almost certainly severe turbulence.

There it is dumba$$. Now go ask your pilot friends what all that means because you seem to have no clue.

Oh and by the way why haven't you answered my questions about the job interview you stated to have received? Did you interview yet via the PM's you received where you called all of us idiots?

Once again ERJ-140 you have shown that you are nothing more than a moronic tool. You have no clue of what you speak. Go solo a C-152 and then maybe we can talk. Until then I will have no respect for you and your useless ramblings.

You have no clue and you know it.

 

[bigD]

THAT, my friend, is gonna cost you some BBQ!

Bring it on! Get your @ss down here and I'll buy you all the BBQ you want.

 

[banned username 2]

Bring it on! Get your @ss down here and I'll buy you all the BBQ you want.

I'm closer than you think!

 

[ERJ-140]

I have for some time not been mentioning the fact that the Honeywell Radar has a feature where a line forms at the end of the radar IF the attenuation of the radar is such that the radar can't determine what is on the other side of a cell. This will without a shadow of a doubt indicate a radar shadow.
...

There are instances where extremely heavy rainfall can attenuate the transmitted pulse of any radar to useless levels in the order of a couple of miles. This attenuation could be so great that the pilot could interpret the return as indicating no rainfall ahead when, in fact, the aircraft may be entering an area of serious and destructive thundertstorm activity. These areas of "no returns" or "radar shadows" are caused by the inability of the radar pulses to penetrate the storm. The reason the pulses cannot get through is that the line of storms contains extremely heavy rain, possilby large hail, and almost certainly severe turbulence.

There it is dumba$$. Now go ask your pilot friends what all that means because you seem to have no clue.

Whatever dude. I know exactly what a shadow is. And I am telling you that you have NO IDEA HOW THE EMB RADAR WORKS. PERIOD. If you have an area of ground clutter or rainfall that extends beyond your "shadow" area then you know you are painting a cell. You can manipulate what the radar shows you by adjusting gain. YOU CAN PAINT "NOISE" WITH THE ANTENNA POINTED UP 15 DEGREES BY MANUALLY PUTTING THE GAIN TO MAX! THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR PRECIP FOR THE RADAR TO SHOW NOISE. YOU CAN TELL A RETURN IS REALLY RAIN BY FORCING IT TO ATTENUATE AT A LOWER POWER SETTING THROUGH THE GAIN. I WILL QUOTE THE AOM FOR YOU AGAIN SINCE YOU COULDN'T READ IT THE FIRST TIME:


"NAVIGATION AND
COMMUNICATION
AIRPLANE
OPERATIONS
MANUAL
2-18-45
Page
12
Code
01 REVISION 6
ANTENNA STABILIZATION (STAB or STB)
The antenna is normally pitch and roll-stabilized by using attitude
information from the IRS. Momentarily pushing the STAB (or STB)
button disables antenna stabilization and an amber “STAB”
annunciation label is presented on the PFDs’ and MFDs’ radar mode
field.
RECEIVER GAIN (GAIN)
The GAIN knob is a rotary control and push/pull switch that controls
radar receiver gain. Two gain modes are available: calibrated or
variable.
Calibrated: When the GAIN knob is pushed in, receiver gain is preset
and calibrated, which is the normal mode of operation. In calibrated
gain, the rotary function of the GAIN knob is disabled.
Variable (VAR): When the GAIN knob is pulled out, the system enters
the variable gain mode. Variable gain is used for additional weather
analysis and for ground mapping. In the WX mode, variable gain can
increase receiver sensitivity over the calibrated level to show very weak
targets or can be reduced below the calibrated level to eliminate weak
returns. In the GMAP mode, variable gain is used to reduce the level of
strong returns from ground targets."



CALL IT A SHADOW. CALL IT A RETURN. CALL IT A DEADSPOT. CALL IT WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT. THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE REFER TO WHEN THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT PULLING A SHADOW OUT OF A RETURN. THIS IS HOW YOU DISTINGUISH PRECIP FROM CLUTTER!!!!!!!!!! If you are painting everywhere to 100 miles and in one spot only paint to 75 miles then you are probably seeing a cell. This is an X-band radar if I am right so it will attenuate fairly easily. The gain helps you interpret what it is telling you. Leaving it in AUTO will give you either all black, all green, a green egg for an area of heavy rain when you get close to it, or all green, red, yellow. The GAIN helps you determine what you are or are NOT seeing and helps you do so at greater range than leaving everything in AUTO.

Geeeeeze.....amazing what a lunkhead you are acting like over phraseology. I have asked you to correct the terminology and all you do is call me names. I am really trying to explain this in intuitive terms and it just isn't sinking in. Well, I may be a fraud but I can spot weather with an EMB radar better than you can obviously.

If you can't keep a civil tone then please go discuss this topic with the voices in your head.

 

[CatYaaak]

Hey guys, just passing through stateside briefly and am pleased to see that the well-deserved flogging of the mighty WSCoD and the latest version of it's chief (and only) cheerleader continues. Wow, 1,000 posts (way to go "D", you whore!), and STILL no good, factual answers forthcoming from him regarding.....well, anything.

Does the world need his kind of baseless, tiresome, unsupportable nattering and prattling-on about how great it is? Well, that's one of those Big Philosophical Questions I can't begin answer here, but nowadays they make Discovery Channel documentaries trying to convince us that packs of hyenas are quite "interesting", how wonderfully "cute" octopii are, and Great White sharks needn't be feared (you irrational silly people!) because they kill and eat fewer humans every year than, say... crocodiles....which in turn (we find out the very next evening) are supposedly nothing more than loveable, overgrown newts. Given this condition we're in, I suppose it's no suprise that likewise even a hunk-o-junk Sh1tmachine like the WSCoD will produce a rabid, yet schizophrenic, fan.

Well, carry-on men (and chicks), and keep up the righteous work of trying to smack the clueless into aviation reality. Let the flogging continue!.....

Yaaak

 

[bigD]

LMAO....sh!tmachine. Priceless!

 

[ERJ-140]

Hey guys, just passing through stateside briefly and am pleased to see that the well-deserved flogging of the mighty WSCoD and the latest version of it's chief (and only) cheerleader continues. Wow, 1,000 posts (way to go "D", you whore!), and STILL no good, factual answers forthcoming from him regarding.....well, anything.

Plenty of factual information presented, irrefutable information actually. You either ignored it (like everyone else here) or it went over your head.