Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
dupersaurus
Aug 1, 2012

Futurism was an art movement where dudes were all 'CARS ARE COOL AND THE PAST IS FOR CHUMPS. LET'S DRAW SOME CARS.'

The Ferret King posted:

They show up quite well on primary radar systems (thanks for reminding me I need to do a breakdown of those ASAP.)

I wasn't clear from the news stories whether this particular aircraft was in radar contact with an ATC organization during the time of the crash though. The reports I read made it sound like it was making scheduled check-ins via radio, which is more in line with non-radar forms of control. I know they've found radar plots of the aircraft from places like flightradar24.com and other entities, but I wasn't sure that any of those sources were actually responsible for control of that aircraft.

Either way, even with good radar coverage up high, it's likely that coverage disappears entirely at a certain altitude and below, especially over water.

I've tried to keep up with the reports periodically, could you link any stories you find regarding the radar data used for that flight so far?

This has confused me about the distinction between primary and secondary and I haven't seen a clear explanation. Is secondary radar only pinging the transponder and showing the response? Is the popular conception of how radar works and looks only primary radar?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply