Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Vor Radar

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

iflyabeech

el Piloto
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Posts
379
I read this story and sent the reporter an email outlining his errors. He sent me a smart a$$ reply. I thought maybe some of you might send him an email as well to set him straight. I can't stand when someone butchers an aviation story like this!


http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/anchorage/story/8106318p-7998895c.html

Airport radar tilts with Fire Island windmills

FIRE ISLAND: Electric generation could interfere with airport system.
By MATT WHITE
Anchorage Daily News
Published: August 21, 2006
Last Modified: August 21, 2006 at 04:00 AM

http://www.adn.com/ips_rich_content/647-21WindmillsFireIsland.gif


A Chugach Electric idea to put giant, electricity-producing windmills on Fire Island is giving its neighbor, Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, a case of bad vibes.
Radar experts recently found that electromagnetic waves from the proposed 33-windmill project would be so strong they would warp the signal of the airport's main air traffic control radar. On top of that, the sheer size of the windmills, whose blade tips could reach 400 feet in the air, would also physically block the signal of another key radar already on Fire Island.
Those conclusions come from radar engineers hired by the Federal Aviation Administration to examine what effects Chugach's proposed wind farm would have on the airport. The FAA runs the nation's air traffic systems, including radars and control towers at airports.
A Chugach Electric Association official said the company has already modified its concept so that the windmills won't block the Fire Island radar, a navigational beacon known in pilot-speak as a "VOR."
But electromagnetic problems remain between the wind project and the airport's primary air traffic control radar.
Anchorage-based Chugach is the state's largest power utility, with customers from Homer to Fairbanks. It has toyed with using wind power for years as a way to bring less-polluting, non-fuel-using electricity generation to the state's Railbelt region. It has studied costs, demand and the best locations for windmills.
About a thousand VOR radars are spread across North America as navigational beacons. Virtually all planes flying near Anchorage use the Fire Island VOR, from private Cessnas landing at Merrill Field to Elmendorf's fighters to airliners passing five miles overhead. VOR radars need clear lines of sight in all directions, down to a specific angle from the ground.
Phil Steyer, a Chugach manager closely involved with the project, said that to accommodate the VOR, "we've done some turbine reallocations, some went away and some added with height limitations."
Chugach is partners in the wind-power initiative with three other utilities: Anchorage's Municipal Light & Power, Homer Electric Association and Golden Valley Electric Association in Fairbanks.
The original concept was for 33 windmills on Fire Island generating up to 3 megawatts each, which in peak conditions could hit 100 megawatts of power, about a fifth of the energy Anchorage can demand. A 3-megawatt windmill stands 265 feet tall, with blades almost 150 feet long. But to fit around the VOR, Steyer said, the utility scaled down the idea to two dozen 1.5-megawatt windmills, cutting the project's possible output.
"That still leaves issues with the approach radar," Steyer said.
Air traffic controllers use an "approach" radar to guide planes arriving at and departing from the airport.
As a modern windmill spins in a breeze, its blades turn an electric turbine, which uses an electromagnetic field to create electricity. That field, if large enough, can radiate for miles and disrupt radio transmissions of all kinds.
According to the FAA's engineers, even Chugach's smaller windmills could produce electromagnetic fields that cause "false target presentations and permanent echoes on air traffic control radar displays."
In other words, controllers in the airport's control tower might see planes where there were none or be blind to real ones.
Officials with both the FAA and Chugach said they are continuing to work together on the problem, though it's unclear what, if anything, can be done. FAA spokesman Allan Kenitzer said the agency is "assessing methods of modifying the radar to avoid any adverse effects" to airport operations but would not be more specific. He also would not say whether Chugach's revised concept would alleviate concerns with the Fire Island VOR.
The idea of using Anchorage's natural wind tunnel, otherwise known as Turnagain Arm, to generate electricity is not new, nor is this the first time Chugach Electric's hopes for developing wind power have hit, well, turbulence.
"We have been looking at the potential for wind generation around Southcentral Alaska since at least 1998," said Steyer. "It's all dependent upon economics of the project. No decisions have been made whether to try and bring the process forward."
Chugach declared Fire Island a favorite spot for a wind farm in 2004, after several years of studying possible sites around the region.
A site near Whittier was deemed too windy and likely to damage the machines. One at Bird Point on the Seward Highway was too small. The Army declared military land near Arctic Valley off limits. And the wind at a site above Bear Valley was too icy.
And projects at any of those sites, officials said at the time, would have been scorned as eyesores.
But Fire Island has plenty of windy real estate owned by Cook Inlet Regional Inc., the Anchorage regional Native corporation, which signed on to the project. And three miles from the nearest scenic overlook, the site was less likely to draw aesthetic complaints.
On the downside, construction on the island would be more costly than on a mainland site, said Steyer, and power cables would need to run underwater to the mainland.
Daily News reporter Matt White can be reached at [email protected] or 257-4350.
 
Here is his reply to me:


It's always nice to have readers who pay close attention (particularly in Florida!).

It sounds like you have a background in aviation, as do I. Obviously, a VOR and the ASR-8 at ANC are very different systems. I hope you can appreciate that the audience I am writing for is not nearly so saavy on aviation issues as you are. To a typical reader, a VOR and approach radar both help planes navigate, both emit radio signals, both are run by the FAA and, in this story, both conflict with the windmills.

To have broken the issues down much farther would have drowned the story in techno-speak. Not for you and I, but certainly for the average reader.

I made sure to call the VOR a beacon, which I hope you'll agree is a good description. Since all radars, at the core, emit radio signals, I called it good.

Thanks again. I always appreciate hearing from informed readers.

Matt

If he sends you something..post it here!
 
I dunno that I would call that a "smart ass reply". He had his reasons, he knows how dumb the average american reader is out there.
Ever watch Jay Leno's street interviews? I am astounded they can tie their own shoes.
 
goodgig said:
I dunno that I would call that a "smart ass reply". He had his reasons, he knows how dumb the average american reader is out there.
Ever watch Jay Leno's street interviews? I am astounded they can tie their own shoes.
So lets make them dumber by making things up? Come on now. This guy actually published the term "VOR RADAR" and said, "A Chugach Electric Association official said the company has already modified its concept so that the windmills won't block the Fire Island radar, a navigational beacon known in pilot-speak as a "VOR."" And he claimed to have an, "aviation background!"

This isn't one of those things that is a big deal, but when reporters mix up terms it confuses the public. They intentionally do this some times on issues regarding airport noise and security. We need to call them on it and let them know they can't get away with shoddy, lazy journalism. If they are going to write an article, it should be the facts, not made up crap.

By the way, the Anchorage paper probably has the most aviation savvy readers in the country!

I didn't post the whole email conversation I had with this guy, but trust me, he was being a smart ass.
 
I don't see anything wrong with his reply. He does have to dumb it down, considering this isn't being written for an aviation magazine. I don't really think "VOR radar" was the best way to put it, but if it makes the average reader understand, then hey.

It's kind of like how you don't break out the lift equation on the first aerodynamics ground lesson with a private student.
 
Last edited:
unreal said:
I don't see anything wrong with his reply. He does have to dumb it down, considering this isn't being written for an aviation magazine. I don't really think "VOR radar" was the best way to put it, but if it makes the average reader understand, then hey.

It's kind of like how you don't break out the lift equation on the first aerodynamics ground lesson with a private student.

I am glad you weren't my instructor!
 
Alright, I hope I can still wash clothes tomorrow when a power outage disrupts my refridgowasher.
 
iflyabeech said:
I am glad you weren't my instructor!

What's that supposed to mean? Do you really think a fresh out of the box 17 year old private student is going to get a grasp of how an airplane flies by throwing "L=clqS" at them the first day? You'd bring that out at some point, but the first lesson?

I don't think I'm alone on that one, either.

Sorry for the thread hijack. Comments like this just piss me off.
 
unreal said:
What's that supposed to mean? Do you really think a fresh out of the box 17 year old private student is going to get a grasp of how an airplane flies by throwing "L=clqS" at them the first day? You'd bring that out at some point, but the first lesson?

I don't think I'm alone on that one, either.

Sorry for the thread hijack. Comments like this just piss me off.

I think the point is, simplifying things is one thing, saying something which is just incorrect serves no purpose, and at best it would have to be corrected later. To use you instructor analogy yeah, you don't delve into transsonic flow and compressibility on the introductory lesson. But no matter how young or stupid you perceive the student to be, telling them that lift is created by invisible green bugs because that's simpler can only lead to problems. At best he's going to be wondering how you can tell the bugs are green if they're invisible, at worst he's going to think you're a monumental moron and look for a different instructor. Simplify to the extent you need, but don't say things which are just flat wrong. That's the lame excure that the writer is attempting to rationalize calling a VOR "RADAR"
 

Latest resources

Back
Top