× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
g
3
3
2
J
2
p
2
m
2
h
2
s
2
r
2
d
2
l
2
a
2
New Topic  
Juliakg1 Juliakg1
wrote...
Posts: 46
Rep: 0 0
11 years ago
Lets say, the air is saturated with water vapor (humidity somewhere between 70% - 100%) and the likes of a heavy 747-300 (no winglets) passes through. Will the weather radar (WXR) of an airplane behind it (safe distance) be able to detect/show the wake turbulence/wingtip vortices of the 747-300 since its lack of winglets generates a lot and WXR is very good at "seeing" air movement when there is enough moisture for the WXR to "see"?
Read 684 times
3 Replies

Related Topics

Replies
wrote...
11 years ago
"WXR is very good at "seeing" air movement when there is enough moisture for the WXR to "see"

you miss the principle of weather radar, completely.
it§s not MOISTURE the radar senses. it's PRECIPITATION.

weather radar can be clear, yet there can be 100 percent humidity and inversion fog within radius of 100NM.

even the snow flakes are unsignificant when it comes to radar crossection.

so, the weather radar is of no use in detecting wake turbulence.
guess how they mapped the Venus surface.. hidden under clouds, for centuries. using the radiolocation.
wrote...
11 years ago
No.
wrote...
11 years ago
Weather radar is for weather, not turbulence (that's what the WX means). It relies on liquid or solid water in the air, so it cannot see movements of air that contains only water vapor. It doesn't have the resolution to detect the small patterns of wake turbulence or vortices, even if liquid or solid water is involved.

It's easy to avoid wake turbulence with some simple precautions, so even if radar could see it, it wouldn't be necessary.
New Topic      
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1066 People Browsing
 120 Signed Up Today
Related Images
  
 870
  
 617
  
 366
Your Opinion
Which country would you like to visit for its food?
Votes: 204