Safe Landings in Thick Fog on Dark Nights

The cause of many airplane crashes has been NON-VISIBILITY of runways due to thick fog at night.

I would want some evidence to back up this claim.

Or you need to limit the statement to something that might explain why any pilot would violate not only every rule of international pilotage, but is finding his way around visually with passengers on board.

So perhaps we are talking small aircraft and private pilots breaking the rules?

We'll get into the hazards of lazer light shows and pilots after we get this part nailed down.

with the introduction of the

ILS system, Category III C , imho: only general aviation aircraft might still fall into this category of incident or accidents.

please reference the difference between Visual flight rules, VFR , and other types of authority to operate an aircraft.

i could paraphrase that for you , but , imho : reading the difference may clarify it for you.

Why don't you guys try it over there, and let us know how it works. Maybe some Chinese company could make a fortune fitting airports all over the globe.

If you have noticed a laser Light show is put on when the clouds are at a distance from the Lights and the atmosphere between the Lights and the clouds is clear.

With your scenario the Laser light would reflect off the clouds the plane was flying through exactly the same as the Landing Lights on any aurcraft do when flying through Fog while landing.

Before getting too serious, try building a few "light show" sea ports to allow fog-bound ships to arrive and depart in fog conditions in night and day. At least these can't fall out of the sky.

Great Answer DVader

It seems, you have not understood what the laser show is.

Laser show creates the illusion of objects. It doesn't show the existing objects.

On the other hand, as I know from various shows on NG and Discovery, now a days plane can land even with thick fog around, using autopilot, which takes guidance from a beam from the airstrip, may not be visible to human being / pilot.

Yes, the accidents can happen at airports where this system in not installed (like in many airports in India) or for small planes, which do not have this type of autopilot.

I would want some evidence to back up this claim.

Please refer National Geographic May day* Episode 6:Deadly Delay (Avianca Flight 52) .This flight crashed just 4 km outside JFK with all 4 engines flamed out.

So perhaps we are talking small aircraft and private pilots breaking the rules?

No. We're talking Boeng 747, 4-engined Commercial airliner. Captain says (as per CVR) "I didn't see the runway" and Co-pilot says "Me too (?)" or something to that effect.

We'll get into the hazards of lazer light shows and pilots after we get this part nailed down.

Now, I'm aware of the hazards of laser light being beamed into the cockpit. Please read my post again: I said "Laser light shows". These can be turned off once the pilots have confirmed that they have the runway alignment and have intercepted the ILS beam.In the above instance, having lost all 4 engines, consequent zero power, they could not even make a proper manual approach, what to speak of Autopilot. In any case, the details of SYSTEM Design can be worked out for a prototype trial, once there is a broad acceptance of the concept.

When down to or approaching Reserve Fuel (the fuel amount determined by the crew to make it to the alternate landing field based on CURRENT conditions) - the pilots are REQUIRED to either declare a fuel emergency and notify control or elect to divert to the alternate field and notify control. Instead the pilots accepted a hold and stayed in the hold pattern below Reserve Fuel while knowing of the delays involved and WITHOUT notifying control.

After 77 minutes of holding, when questioned whether they could continue hold, they finally admitted to low fuel - still failing to declare an emergency - but were cleared in immediately.

Once on approach, the aircraft waved off based on a windshear at 500'. They did not have fuel to go around the field, and the engines began to flame out on the next approach. At no time was the flight waved off for failing to see the runway.

So while there is room for debate about the procedures and possible confusion over the pilot's use of "priority" instead of the internationally mandated "Emergency", at no point was visibility an issue except for the delays caused by low visibility rules that caused the extended holds in the first place.

And these rules are in place not for difficulties finding the field, but to allow time for one aircraft to positively clear the runway before the next is brought in.

Yes, the accidents can happen at airports where this system in not installed (like in many airports in India) or for small planes, which do not have this type of autopilot.

And for these planes and airports we have rules designed to keep the passenger safe, not serve the airline schedule.

Aircraft not equipped are required to stay on the ground if the destination is not safe to land at For Thier Equipment.

Many thanks for the knowledgeable clarification on the incident.However, please recollect that the CVR revealed a remark by the Captain, while making the go around that he did not see the runway and his co-pilot concurred.

Yes, I do remember that the tower had asked the flight to maintain altitude and report when they intercepted the ILS beam. Yes, you're right about the windshear at or below 1500 feet, but this information was not given to the flight early enough. It (the windshear- recognised by the Captain) caught them by surprise!

Anyway, it is not my intention to go into the particular instance (this was only to clarify that it was not some small plane with an errant pilot), as there is considerable scope to debate; rather, the remark of the Captain having made a deep impression on my mind, set off the idea to use an available technology which can turn a disadvantage (Fog/Low Clouds) into an advantage.

The laser projectors would be on the ground and the "Audience" in the air.

Thanks again and regards!

I understand, my point was to illustrate that the problems that led up to the crash were not visual - but procedural.

And while your envisioned system might have application under some circumstances, those circumstances will not apply in any country within the ICAO for normal flights.

There might be applications for special/emergency conditions I cannot envision.

Good day.

No sir. You have got it wrong please. We are not suggesting pointing the lasers into the cockpit-rather, projecting them away into the closely surrounding fog and low clouds, just to make the whole job of locating the airport/runway that much easier in a very bad situation! Precious (Crucial) minutes can be saved for a flight in an emergency.

Thanks for a great new idea!!

'Synthetic vision' instrument approaches are about to be implemented all over the U.S. It has been used for several years in Alaska for both cross country and airport vicinity approached with outstanding results. Russia collected high precision terrain maps of the entire world surface and had made that data available--so you airplane navigation system, using the GPS environment, KNOWS your precise position in 3 dimensions. Simple matter to then paint the terrain on the multi-function display. Voila! looks like what you WOULD see if you could.

I understand what you mean. There are 2 key issues here: first, the airport will probably be closed down and air traffic diverted because of the very poor visibility level under such climatic conditions. It is highly unlikely any airport manager will want to accept incoming aircraft under such conditions because he has to answer for it should an air crash occur as a result of it. Second, while the laser is being projected into the fog, the fog will scatter the light. Aside from the stroboscopic effect of the light scattering confusing the pilot or even making him nauseous, there is also the possibility that the reflected light will dazzle him.

There is no harm in trying it out on a small scale in a laboratory simulator though: after all, I am only theorizing on the possible effects of such a system. I may be wrong about it. If I am, and your system does work out, all the best to you, but if I'm right, at least you would have saved some money on a full-scale pilot plant. Even better, you would know what to expect, so that you can either figure out a way to resolve the problem, or to abandon the idea if it's found to be potentially hazardous like I suggested.

I live in one of the foggiest places on earth, so I have lots of experience driving a car in dense fog. You cannot use your high beams in fog: it drastically reduces your visibility because the light is reflected and scattered by the fog immediately in front. All you see is a wall of glowing fog around you. Low beams, directed to the solid pavement in front of you, can only illuminate the lines that tell you you're still on the road for a meter or two, in the worst conditions, if at all. Streetlights do not penetrate as far as the road: the light is reflected off the fog and all you see is a diffuse glow around them, if anything at all.

Fog causes far more accidents for drivers than it does for planes. We do not have the navaids that aircraft use to compensate for these conditions. If there was a technology that could create effective visual aids for automotive drivers in fog, I'm sure it would be received with accolades. So it's a good subject for your creative thoughts and worthy experiments.

But laser light shows, afaict, are subject to the same problems as other light aids in fog: they will be scattered, or they will fail to penetrate. I think you will have to look further for an answer to this problem.

Thank you.You could be right. I welcome your observations.When we witness a 3D laser show, we feel ok (thrilled, in fact).So, I guess the Pilots also should feel ok.Yes, of course, a small scale demo in lab will be the first step.

Thanks again for the encouragement.

Ron

Are you commenting on my post or the original thread.

You are countering all points, which original thread says. I am fully with you only.!!!

Dear Mr. Keith E. Bowers,

That is a great development, integrating a variety of technologies. While being thankful to the Russians, we also need to appreciate their coming out of the "Iron Curtain" and reaching out to the rest of humanity, after having lost the cold war.

I think I can drop my proposal* in view of your revelation of "Synthetic Vision"! I am a great believer of placing total faith in Instrumentation and associated systems.

Thanks indeed and regards.

D.Ramakrishna Naidu

*It could still be useful for those who are very much in VFR and have found themselves in sudden bad weather and have ventured to fly, despite warnings, for humanitarian missions.

Thank you for your kind comments. You have made me think on this problem of fog of which we have enough in various parts of our country, India. Not only the plains in winter but also the hilly regions all through the year. The roads are hazardous. Off the cuff, cheap (low cost) RFID chips can be implanted in the roads and detectors can be placed in the vehicles. Of course, the transmission signals have to be strong enough to penetrate thick ice and heavy drifts of snow.

Alternately,We can also try embedding cables in the middle of the lanes of the highway, carrying different frequencies to distinguish the lanes. these can be a permanent feature as future cars are likely to be more autonomous, with very little human participation in the driving and navigating functions.

I beleive what he is trying to do is make the various parts of the airport visable by outlining them using lasers. Kind of like what people do around christmas when they outline their homes with lights. Or the really old video games that just showed outlines a the various objects you were supposed to see.

The only reson i can see for using a laser is the intensity of the light might actually show thru the fog.

Its a good idea in thought. Not sure if could actually work in a natural fog enviroment. You have to deal with wind blowing around and your canvas (fog) constantly changing both in density & the constant movement of the canvas.

I know there are fog lights far cars. How exaclty do these work. Is it the wave length that makes them work? If so how about a laser based on this wave length.

Or using a more reflective paint along the edges of both the buildings and runways that would react to the fog light laser wave length and make them glow in the dark.

EXCELLENT!!

This is proactive thinking.Your understanding (though slightly off of what I meant) is an even better proposition. I meant to create 3d Laser images for projection from the end of the runways and along the runways on to the nebulous stuff (fog/clouds).

"I know there are fog lights far cars. How exaclty do these work. Is it the wave length that makes them work? If so how about a laser based on this wave length"

Excellent again! Yes indeed the wave length (Shorter the better-like that of sodium vapour lamps) is able to penetrate the fog.This is okay for illuminating the building and making it visible. What I had in mind is to be able to use the reflectivity of the fine moisture (fog) for creating the images of the runways and the tower/terminal buildings.

All said and done, if we have enabled the brave blighters in the cockpit to know where to go (overcoming disorientation), we would have done yeoman service.

surface markings are standardized.

finding an all weather reflective paint to augment an airfields markings couldn't hurt. if not already in place, possible to upgrade paint material ?

possibly : in some airport classes in the US, the airfield has a runway, taxiway lighting system in reserve; upon receiving a radio xmission ; activates the ils, runway, taxiway lighting sys.

as seeing SFO , Luxembourg , PDX & a few more in fog so thick you can not see your hand held at arms length.

as much as i empathize with your concern for the plight of the recovery aircrew , craft and the people in dire need if the supplies being airlifted in,

imho: especially these types of remote airstrip need to have these air ~ radio nav aid surface aid systems mandatory. the systems work, the capital outlay should be funded by each states " FAA". nations that can afford to pursue nuclear processes can certainly afford to have their air transportation system up to the standards of the 21st century. ie: i do understand the arguement to not have every airfield manned. i don't understand not having every airfield minimum requirement to have a radio activated ils , surface markings, etc lighting system mandatory.

Thank you. We're still learning on the run. IMHO=?

Here is a site for acronyms

http://www.acronymfinder.com

A good discussion.

Thank you ddk.

Regards DRN

I know there are fog lights far cars. How exaclty do these work. Is it the wave length that makes them work?

I am not sure about it, but I believe that halogen lamps, those with a yellowish color are used for fog lights. Besides, the fog headlights are installed in the frontal lowest side, for the light to creep "under" the fog. I have had such headlights and it was a difference between using them and the regular headlights. Not that is was much better visibility (it was an improvement anyways). I think that your idea of using reflecting stripes, on the ground, illuminated with high energy light (even from laser) would make an improved visibility. On the other hand I remember driving in a thick fog, with no visibility beyond 4 yards. I wonder if they thought for a sonar type visualisation system? RRRR Jack Daniels, for me

I know next to nothing about flying an aircraft. I don't even take a flight more than maybe once every couple of years. So I really don't know what a pilot sees as they are coming in for a landing on a clear day or nasty day. I prefer to drive to my designation and don't travel much anyway.

I've often wondered if air craft would be better off without their landing lights in foggy conditions. And just have some sort of better lighting on the run ways. I know most larger aircraft pretty much land themselves if the pilot wants to let it. But even if they do let to computer handle most of the landing, I would imagine it would make the pilot much more comfortable to actually see the runway before touch down.

Hi DRN,

An interesting video of an ILS Cat111 landing for you, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3wnl1Ut--o

Cheers,

Bob

Thank you very much Bob.That was a perfect touch down. what I am a bit intrigued about is that most of the footage showed the flight above the cloud cover (perhaps at 30,000 feet or more and given a rate of descent at 1000-1500 feet per minute, it should have taken at least 30 to 20 minutes to touch down) totally clear and yet, within a short while the runway lights appear, with the aircraft perfectly aligned and flaring out on the threshold. Is the video recording of a genuine ILS approach?

Yes, indeed I have sat through very turbulent weather (Cyclonic rain storms) and on ILS approach with a very highly skilled Pilot, my Dad, sometime during the late 60s.

I'll be happy to be corrected wrt my remarks on the video.

Thanks again and regards.

DRN

I think you will find that what you see in this footage is not cloud cover at 30,000ft but fog from 2,000ft to ground. This would be the fog that your laser lighting would be using as a screen for image display.

Thanks AussieBob for lifting the fog off my mind! Now, it all fits perfectly together. I am thankful for your measure of understanding of what I saw as a possible solution. Therefore, you have my vote for a Good Answer.

I have put a small group of guys to design and build (subject to funding) an experiment to test out the idea. I also see a possible application in the Navy, in the thick of battle smoke to be able to recover dogfight fatigued fighters back on to the Carrier decks.

It is been good discussing with you.

Thanks and regards

DRN

A friend of mine is a retired Navy Pilot. The two worse things he has ever had to do is Eject out of disabled aircraft & land on a carrier in the dark.

A "Retired" Navy Pilot is a very precious friend. Our present Chief of Navy is a distinguished Naval Pilot. President Bush (Sr.) is also a retired Navy Pilot. Your friend's two worse things are very legitimate and it is for this very reason, CR4 members should Conceptualise/Innovate/Design/Engineer/ Realise/ Materialise their ideas and concepts. Naval Pilots are indeed SUPERMEN! Any thing we can do to make their jobs easier will be a positive contribution.

Thanks for the info. scotchdrnkr. Regards.

DRN