WTF?
“False targets… are a clear part of a radar system,” said FAA official
Joseph Davies. “It comes with the territory.”
Yeah, until he is behind the scope having a coronary when the target
shows up in front of a 747 he cleared for take off.
These people are so out of touch… Amazing…
Wow! thats scary stuff! you would think there would be a better, simpler way to keep track of snowplows and such. At least there were no vehicles on runway that DIDN’T show up on radar!
I saw this on Fox News last night…
Unbelievable that the developer seems to think that is ok and says it is working exactly as it should.
False targets are to keep controllers on their toes…
What about the boy who cried wolf?
Soon to be ignored.
The problem you have is using radar to detect ground targets. There is naturally ground clutter that will show up. The question is, to you program the software to be very smart and edit those contacts out, and take the chance that an actual target is missed, or show everything and take the false positives it produces. Kind of a rock and a hard place situation, and most developers opt for false positives over false negatives. False negatives could kill.
For aircraft the solution is simple, use transponders. That is why civil radar sites rely on transponder equipped aircraft. They still have the ability to show actual radar returns, but there are too many false returns. The problem with the ground radar system is, not all vehicles are equipped, and you are also looking for the errant vehicle that may not supposed to be on the airfield.
What a load. Look, ASDE-X alerts on false targets. It had been known to alert on blowing leaves/grass/whatever. The less than desirable part is that it HAS missed aircraft crossing hold short lines. It is NOT “zero-fail.”