A New Method for Collecting Tornado-Related Data

[Bart_Comstock]

Our nation's airspace is one of the busiest and yet safest for a reason. They are heavily focused on inspections already and most of the major incidents that have happened involving comercial air liners in the last few years have been the result of plans that are from overseas that the FAA does not have much control over when out of the US.

Regardless of your feelings about the FAA it doesn't change the fact that at this moment it is illegal to use the aircraft as you have described and thus the data cannot be used in any real research. You need to get the proper permits first.

Small hail and rain may not damage the airframe but what about causing damage to the jet engine? The blades of the jet in the model are not as strong as the ones in a real airliner.

5 miles seams like a lot of range but not when you consider the forward speed of most tornadoes is around 30kts and to stay ahead of the tornado for a meaningful amount of time with then plane, and not drove along side the storm at the same time, will be pretty hard if not impossoble.

It sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse here in regards to tackling such a project with out first amassing a proper amount of experience chasing in the areas you will deploy in and on the kind of storms you wish to tackle.

I think you are underestimating how much clear air there is infront of a tornado in the BEWR and how close your plane will have to get to have the tornado ingest the probes while they are in flight.

Using barometric pressure as an altimeter in a tight pressure falls gradient like a tornado is going to give you many false levels if the probe actually makes it into the tornado.

Getting a non fenced off grass field large enough to retrieve and deploy your plane is not as easy as you think. You will also find that more often than not that ground will be muddy, spongy, and wet from the forward flank of the storm having already passed over it.

I also understand that aircraft can and do take off from unpaved surfaces but the plane you have selected, a model F16, will likely require a paved runway due to the design of the landing gear.

No offense, but simply having seen a tornado as a kid and owning a consumer weather station doesn't make you a qualified expert on the subject or give the skills needed to complete your task, though I see you say you will recruit help but this likely will not come for free.

Tornadoes in the deep south, and chasing in that region is fairly different from the plains. Often the storms that produce tornadoes in the deep south are smaller, faster, and have less large hail. You will need a few years of chasing the big monster supercell of the plains if you really want to learn the feasibility of your project.

I still don't see this project as a good idea.

 

[Mike Benefield]

I agree that it's just a matter of time before the political agency known as the FAA will back down on their extreme policing of the R/C industry. Maybe they could redirect their interests in the area of increased passenger jet safety, and stuff like that. I mean, shooting down a radio-controlled plane? Incredible...

Hey, I just thought of a use for the re-purposed A-10. They could use their 30mm cannon to shoot down civilian drones!

 

[Mike Benefield]

Our nation's airspace is one of the busiest and yet safest for a reason. They are heavily focused on inspections already and most of the major incidents that have happened involving comercial air liners in the last few years have been the result of plans that are from overseas that the FAA does not have much control over when out of the US.

Regardless of your feelings about the FAA it doesn't change the fact that at this moment it is illegal to use the aircraft as you have described and thus the data cannot be used in any real research. You need to get the proper permits first.

Small hail and rain may not damage the airframe but what about causing damage to the jet engine? The blades of the jet in the model are not as strong as the ones in a real airliner.

5 miles seams like a lot of range but not when you consider the forward speed of most tornadoes is around 30kts and to stay ahead of the tornado for a meaningful amount of time with then plane, and not drove along side the storm at the same time, will be pretty hard if not impossoble.

It sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse here in regards to tackling such a project with out first amassing a proper amount of experience chasing in the areas you will deploy in and on the kind of storms you wish to tackle.

I think you are underestimating how much clear air there is infront of a tornado in the BEWR and how close your plane will have to get to have the tornado ingest the probes while they are in flight.

Using barometric pressure as an altimeter in a tight pressure falls gradient like a tornado is going to give you many false levels if the probe actually makes it into the tornado.

Getting a non fenced off grass field large enough to retrieve and deploy your plane is not as easy as you think. You will also find that more often than not that ground will be muddy, spongy, and wet from the forward flank of the storm having already passed over it.

I also understand that aircraft can and do take off from unpaved surfaces but the plane you have selected, a model F16, will likely require a paved runway due to the design of the landing gear.

No offense, but simply having seen a tornado as a kid and owning a consumer weather station doesn't make you a qualified expert on the subject or give the skills needed to complete your task, though I see you say you will recruit help but this likely will not come for free.

Tornadoes in the deep south, and chasing in that region is fairly different from the plains. Often the storms that produce tornadoes in the deep south are smaller, faster, and have less large hail. You will need a few years of chasing the big monster supercell of the plains if you really want to learn the feasibility of your project.

I still don't see this project as a good idea.

I will get the required permits first.

Now, addressing the jet engine. There is a simple solution to the problem of hail and other debris damaging the fan blades. A small grille, mounted to the front of the engine intake, will block most hail and debris of the size that would damage the fan blades. In any endeavor, there is always an element of risk.

I agree, 5 miles is a relatively short distance when tracking a moving object. Anything that slows the progress of the chase is a liability. Therefore, I've decided to increase the range to 18 miles for radio control, and 9 miles for video transmission. This will give plenty of time to make course adjustments due to unpredictable roads and other unforeseen obstacles. There are many challenges in a project of this magnitude, and the only way to succeed is to brainstorm, experiment, study, and make test runs.

I guess you realized that I'm not answering every question. But I will answer a few more.

True, the ground won't be in the best of conditions. If necessary, I will try larger tires. One thing is for sure, I don't expect to find an excellent airstrip waiting on me, but there will be a way to take-off and land. It might take little searching, but it can be done.

To assume that seeing a tornado as a kid and owning a cheap consumer weather station (as a kid, also) somehow limits my capacity to learn is absurd. I mentioned those things to show you I had an interest in the weather at an early age. At no time did I make a statement that I was an "expert" at anything. Skills are another thing. Anyone, with proper motivation and the willingness to learn, will develop the necessary skills. And, not knowing me at all, how can you say that I don't have the abilities to accomplish such a feat?

 

[Mike Benefield]

I agree with everything Bart has said. I am currently participating in research using a Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) to gather atmospheric data. Beyond all the problems of design, durability, flight pattern, and types of probes; I'd like to touch more upon the FAA guidelines.

Bart is completely correct on this point. If the FAA finds out they, will lay the hammer down with cease and desist letters as well as threatening to shoot the plane down. As of now, until the FAA loosens their guidelines on UAV's (only a matter of time) you are unable to fly planes like this gathering scientific research without their authorization. They might not find out the first couple times, but the data you gather was gathered illegally and so it cannot be used for research at all. So if one of your main priorities is truly gathering data, I would think about that for a little bit. There is a lot of red tape to go through in order to gather data with this method that is usable, but currently that is the only way to do it.

I don't mean to rain on your parade, because I am equally as excited and passionate about gathering data in this regard, but we all have to play by the same rules..

I knew I should have added a chaff disperser and flares! LOL

 

[Mike Benefield]

You realize you're going to freak the Storm Gnats out? (News choppers.)

"Storm Gnats". I love it!

 

[Mike Benefield]

I read a thread about windshield wipers a little while ago, and it got me thinking about how well ordinary wipers would work on my jet's canopy, At 220 mph the performance would probably be less than desirable, so I did a little research. The British car company McClaren has implemented a military-style ultrasonic wiper system for their aircraft that uses sound waves to remove rain, ice, and even bird-droppings from their windshields. All indications show that this system works well, after all, the military uses it.

This would be perfect for my jet, because any time moving parts are eliminated from a machine the reliability increases. You would think that the price for such a device would be exorbitant, but in fact, it costs less than the standard windshield wiper. Wind-tunnel testing will be conducted to determine the efficacy of the ultrasonic wind shield wiper system. If it looks good, its a go for the jet.

 

[Mike Benefield]

Probe Deployment Unit (PDU) is currently being designed and developed.

I agree with everything Bart has said. I am currently participating in research using a Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) to gather atmospheric data. Beyond all the problems of design, durability, flight pattern, and types of probes; I'd like to touch more upon the FAA guidelines.

Bart is completely correct on this point. If the FAA finds out they, will lay the hammer down with cease and desist letters as well as threatening to shoot the plane down. As of now, until the FAA loosens their guidelines on UAV's (only a matter of time) you are unable to fly planes like this gathering scientific research without their authorization. They might not find out the first couple times, but the data you gather was gathered illegally and so it cannot be used for research at all. So if one of your main priorities is truly gathering data, I would think about that for a little bit. There is a lot of red tape to go through in order to gather data with this method that is usable, but currently that is the only way to do it.

I don't mean to rain on your parade, because I am equally as excited and passionate about gathering data in this regard, but we all have to play by the same rules..

Alex, my goal is to have the plane, support systems, and personnel ready by next April. In your opinion, do you think the FAA will loosen their restrictions enough to allow a data-gathering flight to be undertaken by that time? Also, do you have any experience in obtaining a permit to allow research flights, or is that even possible at this time?

If the FAA won't allow a research flight to gather data, do you think they would allow flights that do everything but gather data, the purpose of which would be to gain experience flying in that environment and videoing the storm?

 

[Mike Benefield]

The FAA is very strict about this matter. I know of several people who have revived letters from the FAA for their drone usage. The FAA wouldn't even let the VORTEX2 project fly their drones, causing that portion of the mission to be scuttled.

Our nation's airspace is one of the busiest and yet safest for a reason. They are heavily focused on inspections already and most of the major incidents that have happened involving comercial air liners in the last few years have been the result of plans that are from overseas that the FAA does not have much control over when out of the US.

Regardless of your feelings about the FAA it doesn't change the fact that at this moment it is illegal to use the aircraft as you have described and thus the data cannot be used in any real research. You need to get the proper permits first.

Small hail and rain may not damage the airframe but what about causing damage to the jet engine? The blades of the jet in the model are not as strong as the ones in a real airliner.

5 miles seams like a lot of range but not when you consider the forward speed of most tornadoes is around 30kts and to stay ahead of the tornado for a meaningful amount of time with then plane, and not drove along side the storm at the same time, will be pretty hard if not impossoble.

It sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse here in regards to tackling such a project with out first amassing a proper amount of experience chasing in the areas you will deploy in and on the kind of storms you wish to tackle.

I think you are underestimating how much clear air there is infront of a tornado in the BEWR and how close your plane will have to get to have the tornado ingest the probes while they are in flight.

Using barometric pressure as an altimeter in a tight pressure falls gradient like a tornado is going to give you many false levels if the probe actually makes it into the tornado.

Getting a non fenced off grass field large enough to retrieve and deploy your plane is not as easy as you think. You will also find that more often than not that ground will be muddy, spongy, and wet from the forward flank of the storm having already passed over it.

I also understand that aircraft can and do take off from unpaved surfaces but the plane you have selected, a model F16, will likely require a paved runway due to the design of the landing gear.

No offense, but simply having seen a tornado as a kid and owning a consumer weather station doesn't make you a qualified expert on the subject or give the skills needed to complete your task, though I see you say you will recruit help but this likely will not come for free.

Tornadoes in the deep south, and chasing in that region is fairly different from the plains. Often the storms that produce tornadoes in the deep south are smaller, faster, and have less large hail. You will need a few years of chasing the big monster supercell of the plains if you really want to learn the feasibility of your project.

I still don't see this project as a good idea.

Bart, I appreciate your feedback. You have many valid points that I agree with. I know there's growing tension between law enforcement and chasers and I certainly don't want to make things worse. I will abide by FAA guidelines. When it comes to chasing, I am indeed a rookie. Every chaser was once a rookie. I admit this project I'm working on is quite challenging, but it's the challenge that makes it worthwhile.

 

[Greg Campbell]

The extreme weather is my biggest concern. The wings are made from carbon-fiber and have several layers of laminate for strength. Still, hail is a big concern, so my strategy is to try to avoid it altogether. It could probably survive a few minutes of dime-size hail, but anything bigger would be a problem. I can easily land in a grass field, so that's not a problem. I never liked the idea of inserting probes by rocket. I'm into model rockets also and I'm well aware of the difficulty of getting them to go where you want them to go. They have a strong tendency to "weathercock", that is, turn into the wind.

Have you tried mixing RC airplane gyro tech with rockets? It shouldn't be too hard to make a rocket maintain a given orientation. Of course, lateral drift would be another issue altogether.
Also, I think you're underestimating the debris threat to both plane and rocket once you get close to just about any tornado. Carbon fiber whoop-de-whoop or not, a terminal encounter with a big chunk of who-knows-what seems inevitable.

 

[Greg Campbell]

Also, I can't fathom why you'd want to risk such an expensive model. IMO, what you really want is something like a ruggedized Ugly Stik. (A multi-engine pusher configuration might be more tolerant of debris hits.)
Make if cheap, tough, and wildly overpowered, with plenty of control authority so the gyros have half a hope of keeping the thing in the air amidst the incredible turbulence the plane will encounter.

 

[Mike Benefield]

Also, I can't fathom why you'd want to risk such an expensive model. IMO, what you really want is something like a ruggedized Ugly Stik. (A multi-engine pusher configuration might be more tolerant of debris hits.)
Make if cheap, tough, and wildly overpowered, with plenty of control authority so the gyros have half a hope of keeping the thing in the air amidst the incredible turbulence the plane will encounter.

Yes, gyros are a good idea. I completely missed that one. And yes, debris is just as much a threat as the wildly unpredictable wind fields. I became too focused on other areas of concern that I missed the obvious.

The reason I want to use a high-performance jet is to get in and get out as quickly as possible. Speed and maneuverability are crucial to success. But you've got me looking at other options. My plan was to start with an inexpensive prop plane to get some experience flying in such a harsh environment, then when I'm comfortable with that I would fly the jet on an actual mission. It's obvious that I need to rethink my plans. Thanks for the feedback! This is a complex project and I need all the help I can get.

 

[Anders Petersson]

Hi Mike
We at Sparv Embedded develop small radiosondes that can also be used as dropsondes. See: http://windsond.com
We're already in contact with a university that wants to deploy them from a UAV for measuring tornadoes, similar to your probes. Maybe we can do something together. It would at least be interesting to hear what you have planned. Feel free to contact me.

 

[Steve Miller]

We at Sparv Embedded develop small radiosondes that can also be used as dropsondes. See: http://windsond.com
We're already in contact with a university that wants to deploy them from a UAV for measuring tornadoes, similar to your probes. Maybe we can do something together. It would at least be interesting to hear what you have planned. Feel free to contact me.

Wouldn't mind talking with you about small balloon-delivered radiosondes, @Anders Petersson. See this thread: https://stormtrack.org/threads/why-not-balloons.27800/#post-323696
Thanks!

 

[Mike Benefield]

Wouldn't mind talking with you about small balloon-delivered radiosondes, @Anders Petersson. See this thread: https://stormtrack.org/threads/why-not-balloons.27800/#post-323696
Thanks!

Sounds interesting. How would you get the balloons to enter the inflow area, so they could travel up into the tornado/mesocyclone? If my jet is used, the balloons would create a tremendous amount of drag. A slower, yet powerful enough, UAV might be a solution.

 

[Steve Miller]

Balloon right into the inflow would be the mode. Smaller balloon with a reasonable light payload and some balancing via gyros, etc would deliver cameras and a radiosonde into an area of rotation. How long that balloon would survive for the instruments to do any good is questionable but the images derived from such a flight opportunity would be amazing I'd imagine.

I've considered a UAV and actually have a DJI Phantom 2+ that could act as a sacrificial lamb since I've recently upgraded. With my luck though, the silly thing would fall out of the sky or become a projectile and hurt someone.