News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Wind farms ‘a threat to national security’

Started by FOTD, February 04, 2008, 03:28:15 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ed W

Military search radars use very high power in order to get a return from the skin of an aircraft.  They also use the doppler effect to estimate speed.  Civilian navigational radar uses an interrogator pulse that triggers a transponder aboard an aircraft, and that transponder sends a signal back identifying the aircraft and its altitude.  I'd presume that any military radar could be programmed to ignore low velocity returns like you'd get from the blades of a wind turbine. So unless the Russkies attack in ancient Cessna 150s equipped with very light weight nukes, there doesn't seem to be a really valid reason for opposing the wind turbines.

That is, provided Dick Cheney doesn't mind.
Ed

May you live in interesting times.

rwarn17588

Oh, fer cryin' out loud.

Recalibrate your radar, you ninnies, and everything will be fine.

dbacks fan

?????????????????????????????

Um, how do they fly into and out of Palm Desert?Palm Springs with the windmill farm just to the west of the area? If it is interfering with the highly precise (?) military radar I would think that it would make the radar at a commericial airport useless.

Conan71

quote:
Originally posted by FOTD

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3300814.ece


How much oil and coal company money was behind that opinion?



Dunno, how big is the oil, gas, & coal lobby in Brittain?  Didn't have anything to do with our wind farms.  If that was an issue, I'd guarantee there wouldn't be any within a 100 mile radious of the Clinton-Sherman strip in Burns Flat, Tinker, or Altus.
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

cannon_fodder

Just an FYI AOX, but many of the oil companies (most) are hedging their bets by researching alternative fuels.  It is clear that they will not be able to meet demand for energy in the coming decades with current technologies (no, we are not running out of oil... but we are reaching peak economical production).  It would be very Automobile Industry circa 1965 to sit on those piles of cash instead of investing in R & D.

In this instance, alternative energy.  Clearly there are some vested interests.  But in my lifetime oil is likely to remain in strong demand - so they may as well profit from wind, hydrogen, or any other form of energy too.
- - - - - - - - -
I crush grooves.

Ed W

quote:
Originally posted by dbacks fan

?????????????????????????????

...If it is interfering with the highly precise (?) military radar I would think that it would make the radar at a commericial airport useless.



Military radars emit huge amounts of power compared to civilian radar.  They need it to get a signal bounce from the skin of an aircraft.  (Stealth aircraft are designed to deflect the beam away from the radar antenna, hence all the weird angles.)  Power decreases by the square of the distance.  In the old days, they used lower frequencies because they were provided better returns.

Civilian navigation radar works differently.  It uses far less power because it relies on a transponder aboard the aircraft.  This operates much like a PikePass.  An interrogator pulse goes out from the radar site.  The aircraft transponder receives it, adds identification information, and sends a radio pulse back to the ground station.  It doesn't take much power to do this, only a few watts.  Still, I wouldn't stand in front of any radar antenna especially a military one.  You'd be cooked.

Remember that radar is line-of-sight.  It travels in a straight line while the earth curves away.  So at greater distances, it looks higher and higher into the atmosphere and it's effectively blind at ground level.  So by siting a radar carefully, you could have it working above the level of the wind generators.

I think there's still an old radar text book around here somewhere.  If i find it, i can get REALLY pedantic!

Ed

May you live in interesting times.

guido911

Funny, whenever I hear about the problems associated with wind farms, the image I get is the Kennedy's whining about the Cape Cod wind farm project impacting fishing and tourism.

http://www.projo.com/business/content/bz_kennedy_heating16_01-16-08_BK8KHEM_v10.1b9c840.html

Just more hypocrisy from the "Do as I say, Not as I do" environmentalists out there who want everyone to be green.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.

FOTD

quote:
Originally posted by guido911

Funny, whenever I hear about the problems associated with wind farms, the image I get is the Kennedy's whining about the Cape Cod wind farm project impacting fishing and tourism.

http://www.projo.com/business/content/bz_kennedy_heating16_01-16-08_BK8KHEM_v10.1b9c840.html

Just more hypocrisy from the "Do as I say, Not as I do" environmentalists out there who want everyone to be green.



That's not hypocrisy. That's Patrick not Robert Jr.
I was addressing my suspicion of the competitive industries. And that is where your post link makes more sense. Who does Kennedy paddle for here? Bet it's protection of his or someone's property. It could be oil, gas, or coal lobbyists at work too.



FOTD

Oh that's just great. Thanks. I lost him last week when he was the lone wolf Kennedy coming out for the witch side.

dbacks fan

quote:
Originally posted by Ed W

quote:
Originally posted by dbacks fan

?????????????????????????????

...If it is interfering with the highly precise (?) military radar I would think that it would make the radar at a commericial airport useless.



Military radars emit huge amounts of power compared to civilian radar.  They need it to get a signal bounce from the skin of an aircraft.  (Stealth aircraft are designed to deflect the beam away from the radar antenna, hence all the weird angles.)  Power decreases by the square of the distance.  In the old days, they used lower frequencies because they were provided better returns.

Civilian navigation radar works differently.  It uses far less power because it relies on a transponder aboard the aircraft.  This operates much like a PikePass.  An interrogator pulse goes out from the radar site.  The aircraft transponder receives it, adds identification information, and sends a radio pulse back to the ground station.  It doesn't take much power to do this, only a few watts.  Still, I wouldn't stand in front of any radar antenna especially a military one.  You'd be cooked.

Remember that radar is line-of-sight.  It travels in a straight line while the earth curves away.  So at greater distances, it looks higher and higher into the atmosphere and it's effectively blind at ground level.  So by siting a radar carefully, you could have it working above the level of the wind generators.

I think there's still an old radar text book around here somewhere.  If i find it, i can get REALLY pedantic!





Thanks for the refesher Ed, I remebered most of it from my school days. It makes sense to me now how it could create a hole in their coverage. (I think blind spot might be a better word for it) I know that before stealth technology the tactics used by the military was to fly low and fast towards the target "under the radar" then gain altitude at the last minute drop the ordinance, then firewall the throtles and turn and bank away.

A friend of mine in Tucson has a picture of a B-52 flying through the canyon on Lake Powell several years ago, it is a wicked thing to see.

FOTD

Navy must comply with no-sonar rule
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110ap_navy_sonar.html

Obviously NOT one of the Bush / Rove appointees!
George on the floor right now crying, kicking, spinning, and spitting! Watch, he'll get his way.

Wrinkle

If they aren't able to detect incomming before reaching a known, fixed, obstruction, then we all should be scared anyway.

Seems buildings and all other towers would be similarly problematic, or not.

This is competative industry attempting to slow wind development, al la Kennedy. Or, at least one more 'authority' wishing to exert its' influence on the approval process.

The US/DOD/FAA have resolved this issue, for the most part, allowing development to proceed.
LINK



guido911

quote:
Originally posted by FOTD

Navy must comply with no-sonar rule
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110ap_navy_sonar.html

Obviously NOT one of the Bush / Rove appointees!
George on the floor right now crying, kicking, spinning, and spitting! Watch, he'll get his way.



I read about this yesterday. I am glad that unelected judges are now determining what our military can do to train to protect American citizen's lives.
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.