Could somebody explain what the knob on the radom of this 777F is good for, please?
The aircraft is N862FD. Looks like a nozzle for air to air fueling, but I am almost shure, it is not...
Picture taken on July 30, 2018 - so just recently.
THX!

It is a synthetic vision device. Fedex is working with the FAA trying to develop a Synthetic Vision approach. Has been ongoing for a couple of years.

http://interactive.aviationtoday.com/av ... w-landing/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-188380/

This is installed on several Fed Ex MD11's as well. Pretty common on the Gulfstream and Glex where it has been certified now for a number of years.

It just like the EFVS camera that was on the MD-11.

I work for FedEx as a structures tech. What you are looking at is the forward looking infrared (FLIR) port on the radome.The new 767's that we receive will get a radome change- out when it arrives at FedEx along with a heads-up display installation and satcom communications capability. I currently work on one of the teams installing the heads-up display and radome. The radomes are made by Nordam out of Tulsa, OK. The small glass port is made of sapphire glass and is very tough as well as expensive, around $92k. This system allows our planes to see through inclement weather that would normally divert or delay other ships that do not have this system. It allows you to "see" in zero visibility. Installation of these systems and their maintenance are very detail oriented in that they require precise alignment and careful handling. You will see these one the 757's, 767's, MD10's, MD11's, and 777's. Not sure if this system has been designated for the Airbus series of ships.

Gregory

gregorygoodwin wrote:

I work for FedEx as a structures tech. What you are looking at is the forward looking infrared (FLIR) port on the radome.The new 767's that we receive will get a radome change- out when it arrives at FedEx along with a heads-up display installation and satcom communications capability. I currently work on one of the teams installing the heads-up display and radome. The radomes are made by Nordam out of Tulsa, OK. The small glass port is made of sapphire glass and is very tough as well as expensive, around $92k. This system allows our planes to see through inclement weather that would normally divert or delay other ships that do not have this system. It allows you to "see" in zero visibility. Installation of these systems and their maintenance are very detail oriented in that they require precise alignment and careful handling. You will see these one the 757's, 767's, MD10's, MD11's, and 777's. Not sure if this system has been designated for the Airbus series of ships.

Gregory

Thanks for the info. $92K seems like a lot but not having to divert a dozen times would have it more than paid off.

I had one instance in the MD-11 where the EFVS could not see thru the rain. Monsoon in Mumbai. Two missed approaches and a divert.

I’d expect EVS to not “see” in monsoon rain—the rain masks the temperature gradients required for it to work. Try Mumbai or Delhi in the winter with heavy smoke and haze see the lights at 8 miles while the RVR is 500m.

EVS is best in dry obstructions like smoke, smog, haze, dry snow if not heavy. Night visibility is much improved.

GF

THX for all the insight information, especially to Gregory!

I noticed those ports on the one or the other bizjet, assuming it to be simply a camera for providing a forward few on screens for the PAX in the cabin - like the ones on the A380 for instance...

mmo wrote:

It is a synthetic vision device. Fedex is working with the FAA trying to develop a Synthetic Vision approach. Has been ongoing for a couple of years.

Nitpick: this is an Enhanced Vision System. It's taking in real images from outside the aircraft.

Synthetic Vision is a computer-generated display based on a terrain and object database. Usually this is displayed "behind" the PFD. It's sort of like a flight simulator view built in.

There is work underway (if not already implemented) to blend the two systems together and show them on the HUD overlaid on terrain.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I’d expect EVS to not “see” in monsoon rain—the rain masks the temperature gradients required for it to work. Try Mumbai or Delhi in the winter with heavy smoke and haze see the lights at 8 miles while the RVR is 500m.

EVS is best in dry obstructions like smoke, smog, haze, dry snow if not heavy. Night visibility is much improved.

GF

Yes, I agree and understand. At the time I was using all the tools in my bag and just commented that of all the times it worked beautifully (and I did love it) this was one time it met it's match. And yes, smoke, haze etc but also fog (wonderful at STN) and light rain.

CosmicCruiser wrote:

I had one instance in the MD-11 where the EFVS could not see thru the rain. Monsoon in Mumbai. Two missed approaches and a divert.

Hope you had fuel to go somewhere nice.

zeke wrote:

CosmicCruiser wrote:

I had one instance in the MD-11 where the EFVS could not see thru the rain. Monsoon in Mumbai. Two missed approaches and a divert.

Hope you had fuel to go somewhere nice.

Reminds me of an evening flight into BLR. Could see the airport and runway, departure end on the descent. Turned final and never saw the runway again. Noce divert to BKK thought, so it wasn't all bad.

redcap1962 wrote:

THX for all the insight information, especially to Gregory!

I noticed those ports on the one or the other bizjet, assuming it to be simply a camera for providing a forward few on screens for the PAX in the cabin - like the ones on the A380 for instance...

They’re standard on large Gulfstreams and Globals and have been for years. In Part 91, operators can get an operational advantage using EVS to continue below 200’ DA using the EVS in the HUD, if lights are visible, but must see the runway at 100’ without the EVS. I don’t believe air carriers have OpsSpecs permitting this, but they usually have CAT II or III.

GF

gregorygoodwin wrote:

I work for FedEx as a structures tech. What you are looking at is the forward looking infrared (FLIR) port on the radome.The new 767's that we receive will get a radome change- out when it arrives at FedEx along with a heads-up display installation and satcom communications capability. I currently work on one of the teams installing the heads-up display and radome. The radomes are made by Nordam out of Tulsa, OK. The small glass port is made of sapphire glass and is very tough as well as expensive, around $92k. This system allows our planes to see through inclement weather that would normally divert or delay other ships that do not have this system. It allows you to "see" in zero visibility. Installation of these systems and their maintenance are very detail oriented in that they require precise alignment and careful handling. You will see these one the 757's, 767's, MD10's, MD11's, and 777's. Not sure if this system has been designated for the Airbus series of ships.

Gregory

What does it do, put up images of the runway lights on the HUD?

I vaguely recall that Boeing looked at installing EVS for QF years ago. It would put up an infrared image of the runway lights on the HUD so you could continue through decision height even if you couldn’t see the runway lights in the visual spectrum. This would allow an approach to CAT 3 minima even if it was, say, a CAT 1 ILS.

It’s an infrared video camera; instead of visible light, it sees gradients of heat. Incandescent lighting is warmer than the surrounding ground, so they show up in sort of a monochromatic image. A marshaller is warm, so he’s very visible. Cold terrain is dark gray to black, warm asphalt is bright white. The use of LED airport lighting is a problem as it doesn’t produce heat.

https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Product ... stems.aspx


Here’s the FAR 91.175 section:

Approach to straight-in landing operations below DH, or MDA using an enhanced flight vision system (EFVS). For straight-in instrument approach procedures other than Category II or Category III, no pilot operating under this section or Secs. 121.651, 125.381, and 135.225 of this chapter may operate an aircraft at any airport below the authorized MDA or continue an approach below the authorized DH and land unless--
(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers, and, for operations conducted under part 121 or part 135 of this chapter, the descent rate will allow touchdown to occur within the touchdown zone of the runway of intended landing;
(2) The pilot determines that the enhanced flight visibility observed by use of a certified enhanced flight vision system is not less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure being used;
(3) The following visual references for the intended runway are distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot using the enhanced flight vision system:
(i) The approach light system (if installed); or
(ii) The following visual references in both paragraphs (l)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section:
(A) The runway threshold, identified by at least one of the following:
(1) The beginning of the runway landing surface;
(2) The threshold lights; or
(3) The runway end identifier lights.
(B) The touchdown zone, identified by at least one of the following:
(1) The runway touchdown zone landing surface;
(2) The touchdown zone lights;
(3) The touchdown zone markings; or
(4) The runway lights.
(4) At 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation of the runway of intended landing and below that altitude, the flight visibility must be sufficient for the following to be distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot without reliance on the enhanced flight vision system to continue to a landing:
(i) The lights or markings of the threshold; or
(ii) The lights or markings of the touchdown zone;
(5) The pilot(s) is qualified to use an EFVS as follows--
(i) For parts 119 and 125 certificate holders, the applicable training, testing and qualification provisions of parts 121, 125, and 135 of this chapter;
(ii) For foreign persons, in accordance with the requirements of the civil aviation authority of the State of the operator; or
(iii) For persons conducting any other operation, in accordance with the applicable currency and proficiency requirements of part 61 of this chapter;
(6) For parts 119 and 125 certificate holders, and part 129 operations specifications holders, their operations specifications authorize use of EFVS; and
(7) The aircraft is equipped with, and the pilot uses, an enhanced flight vision system, the display of which is suitable for maneuvering the aircraft and has either an FAA type design approval or, for a foreign-registered aircraft, the EFVS complies with all of the EFVS requirements of this chapter.
(m) For purposes of this section, "enhanced flight vision system" (EFVS) is an installed airborne system comprised of the following features and characteristics:
(1) An electronic means to provide a display of the forward external scene topography (the natural or manmade features of a place or region especially in a way to show their relative positions and elevation) through the use of imaging sensors, such as a forward-looking infrared, millimeter wave radiometry, millimeter wave radar, and low-light level image intensifying;
(2) The EFVS sensor imagery and aircraft flight symbology (i.e., at least airspeed, vertical speed, aircraft attitude, heading, altitude, command guidance as appropriate for the approach to be flown, path deviation indications, and flight path vector, and flight path angle reference cue) are presented on a head-up display, or an equivalent display, so that they are clearly visible to the pilot flying in his or her normal position and line of vision and looking forward along the flight path, to include:
(i) The displayed EFVS imagery, attitude symbology, flight path vector, and flight path angle reference cue, and other cues, which are referenced to this imagery and external scene topography, must be presented so that they are aligned with and scaled to the external view; and
(ii) The flight path angle reference cue must be displayed with the pitch scale, selectable by the pilot to the desired descent angle for the approach, and suitable for monitoring the vertical flight path of the aircraft on approaches without vertical guidance; and
(iii) The displayed imagery and aircraft flight symbology do not adversely obscure the pilot's outside view or field of view through the cockpit window;
(3) The EFVS includes the display element, sensors, computers and power supplies, indications, and controls. It may receive inputs from an airborne navigation system or flight guidance system; and
(4) The display characteristics and dynamics are suitable for manual control of the aircraft.]



GF

Well, we just completed another Heads-Up -Display installation, radome change out, and FLIR installation on one of our 767's just yesterday. The ship will get it's test flight to see is all the systems work tonight by a flight crew that is bringing in our next new 767 direct from Boeing. I have taken photos of what we do to install the Heads-Up -Display on our aircraft, but am leery of posting them what with today's corporate legal. But, it is one of the most interesting projects I have worked on in quite a while. The amount of work and attention to detail is quite remarkable to get this system installed and operating. You would think that a Heads-Up-Display would sort of just take what is shown on the flight deck instruments and simply display it on the flip-down screen. Not so. For reasons only an avionics engineer can explain, it must have precise alignment of the overhead combiner, the radome camera for the FLIR, and the longitudinal axis of the ship. The flight crew and our avionics techs can "electronically" zero in the system on the test flight, but we must have the overall installation within very precise limits. It is very interesting work.

Gregory

Very interesting! I had no idea that my question would start a thread that consists of more than just a few answers...

I am curious as to which manufactorer will be the first to come up with such a system in a large passenger-aircraft.

redcap1962 wrote:

Very interesting! I had no idea that my question would start a thread that consists of more than just a few answers...

I am curious as to which manufactorer will be the first to come up with such a system in a large passenger-aircraft.

EVS is under development for any number of pax aircraft. The problem is the market for it is weak when you already have CAT3 available. Remember that most airports that are served by the likes of the 777/787 handle the approach and landing phase with existing automation and the NEXTGEN has provisions for this as well. The EVS got its launch in the corporate arena simply because the airports sered in many cases do not support the CAT3 model.

The 787 currently has 2 HUDS but Boeing went cheap and there are few benefits outside reduced T.O. mins. What FedEX is doing is remarkable and I would love to see their business model vs the cost of this installation.

BravoOne wrote:

redcap1962 wrote:

Very interesting! I had no idea that my question would start a thread that consists of more than just a few answers...

I am curious as to which manufactorer will be the first to come up with such a system in a large passenger-aircraft.

EVS is under development for any number of pax aircraft. The problem is the market for it is weak when you already have CAT3 available. Remember that most airports that are served by the likes of the 777/787 handle the approach and landing phase with existing automation and the NEXTGEN has provisions for this as well. The EVS got its launch in the corporate arena simply because the airports sered in many cases do not support the CAT3 model.

The 787 currently has 2 HUDS but Boeing went cheap and there are few benefits outside reduced T.O. mins. What FedEX is doing is remarkable and I would love to see their business model vs the cost of this installation.

Boeing went cheap because there wasn’t a customer market for more technology. In fact, HUDs will be optional on the 777X because many customers don’t need them.

Let’s not incorrectly make it sound like Boeing went cheap to be cheap. Boeing went cheap because that’s what the customers demand.

As you pointed out, most Boeing airplanes are already Cat 3b Autoland capable.

BoeingGuy wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

redcap1962 wrote:

Very interesting! I had no idea that my question would start a thread that consists of more than just a few answers...

I am curious as to which manufactorer will be the first to come up with such a system in a large passenger-aircraft.

EVS is under development for any number of pax aircraft. The problem is the market for it is weak when you already have CAT3 available. Remember that most airports that are served by the likes of the 777/787 handle the approach and landing phase with existing automation and the NEXTGEN has provisions for this as well. The EVS got its launch in the corporate arena simply because the airports sered in many cases do not support the CAT3 model.

The 787 currently has 2 HUDS but Boeing went cheap and there are few benefits outside reduced T.O. mins. What FedEX is doing is remarkable and I would love to see their business model vs the cost of this installation.

Boeing went cheap because there wasn’t a customer market for more technology. In fact, HUDs will be optional on the 777X because many customers don’t need them.

Let’s not incorrectly make it sound like Boeing went cheap to be cheap. Boeing went cheap because that’s what the customers demand.

As you pointed out, most Boeing airplanes are already Cat 3b Autoland capable.

Mine was poorly worded point, however Boeing could have done better with the 787. The fact is as you pointer out, the market is just not there and other that a few notable 737 operators, like SWA and AK, not many operators have cheked off the HUD box and even then it;s not EVS.

The problem with with EVS as typically installed the left seat pilot gets all that visual information while the rah seater is still in the blind.

No, he’s not-the MFD can display the EVS image just as the pilot sees it. Not as good as dual HUD/EVS, but the right seat is in the loop.

GF

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

No, he’s not-the MFD can display the EVS image just as the pilot sees it. Not as good as dual HUD/EVS, but the right seat is in the loop.

GF

Interesting bit of info. I assume if the pilot was incapacitated for whatever reason that from the FARs point of view, you'd no longer be able to continue the approach and would need to divert using traditional ILS equipment - even if he could watch it on the MFD?

Correct, the HUD is required for using the EVS. The MFD is for F/Os awareness only. A dual HUD installation would get around this restriction. Still, if I were flying solo, it’d require a pretty dire emergency to make the arrival dependent on HUD/EVS minimums.

GF

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I’d expect EVS to not “see” in monsoon rain—the rain masks the temperature gradients required for it to work. Try Mumbai or Delhi in the winter with heavy smoke and haze see the lights at 8 miles while the RVR is 500m.

EVS is best in dry obstructions like smoke, smog, haze, dry snow if not heavy. Night visibility is much improved.

GF

No commercial radar would see through a monsoon like that except for the APS 115 radar I flew with aboard on the P-3C, which is entirely too much radar for any commercial airplane. But! More military tech is finding it's way into the commercial sector every day so I would not say they won't be there soon.

The avionics OEMs have been talking about fused vision enhancements bringing IR, SVS together and perhaps even millimeter wave radar, but I first heard it 15 years ago at the ATA conference.

GF

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Correct, the HUD is required for using the EVS. The MFD is for F/Os awareness only. A dual HUD installation would get around this restriction. Still, if I were flying solo, it’d require a pretty dire emergency to make the arrival dependent on HUD/EVS minimums.

GF

As an FYI, the 787 HUD installation is dual. On both sides. The 777X will be dual also, for customers who purchase the optional HUD installation.

strfyr51 wrote:

No commercial radar would see through a monsoon like that except for the APS 115 radar I flew with aboard on the P-3C, which is entirely too much radar for any commercial airplane. But! More military tech is finding it's way into the commercial sector every day so I would not say they won't be there soon.

Utter rubbish, I fly through monsoon rain and typhoons every year with standard commercial weather radars. They work just fine as long as you know how to use them, many people don’t in heavy rain.

The poster was talking about EVS, the V is visual, ie the data source is a camera. IR cameras do not perform well where temperature gradients are not sufficient to differentiate one object from another. Similar also happens with the new generation of runway lights which are LED based which run cooler than traditional bulbs and are not seen as well by EVS systems.

Boeing Guy: the bizjet builders haven’t yet done a dual HUD installation, no demand for it. In fact, once the $900,000 price gets on the table; where it’s optional the take rate isn’t high.

Zeke: when the WC-130 “Hurricane Hunters” converted to “J” models the commercial weather radar was found inferior to the old very high wattage sets in the “H”s. From what I was told by the DO, once in hurricane rainfall gradients, raw power is needed to get thru the rain and see the dangerous storms.

GF

The Garmin GHD 2100 can be installed on many types as a dual setup. It is a lot more cost effective that other HUDs. Been looking at them for a cockpit upgrade project with the G5000.

The Herc application you mentioned is a special purpose, still does not change the fact that a high power X band radar has nothing to do with getting a better visual IR image on a flight deck HUD.

Commercial radars are just fine for monsoon rain, just need to know how to use manual gain correctly.

I have to agree with Zeke on this issue. The whole key to using commercially available WX radar is knowing what you are doing. Far too many times, I have seen crews just sit back and leave the gain in auto and later they are trying to figure out why the ride is so bad! My opinion is anyone who flew the old steam gauge aircraft will have a much better understanding of the manual gain use and how to use it correctly to help you view the WX. With those experienced people having to retire, me, the corporate knowledge is decreasing.

Having flown in the Asia region for over 35 years, both Mil and Airline, both radars work just fine and do an excellent job of weather avoidance.

Hello everyone,

I wanted to post an update for this topic to show what the topic author was actually looking at. This photo shows a close-up of a B767 radome that has the FLIR port on it.



This photo shows, somewhat blurry, the inside of the radome and the FLIR camera. If I recall correctly, this installation is different than what you would see on a MD-10 or MD-11 in that they have the camera mounted on structure that is on the forward pressure bulkhead, not the radome itself.



Gregory