Viewing page 18 of 84

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

lithometeor, or other obscuring phenomena is responsible for a reportable obstruction to vision. Of particular concern is properly distinguishing smoke from haze, and vice versa. Both phenomena should be reported only when the observer feels that both actually exist; a report of 'HK' should not be made just as a catch-all report."

In August of 1963 I corresponded with Aviation Weather Service personnel pointing out that the problem of air pollution is of such magnitude, and the cumulative effect of thousands of false references to smoke as haze so distorts public and even professional understanding, that continued erroneous identification of smoke as haze by the aviation industry generally and the Aviation Weather Service in particular could be viewed as no less than a crime against the nation.

AN UNINTENTIONAL DECEPTION

Correct reporting of smoke will cause some lifted eyebrows if not more than a little hell raising by those who profess to see no problem in our currently contaminated skies.

Many people have the immediate response that with a limited visibility, what difference to the pilot does it make if the report is haze or smoke? It is a fair question and here is the answer.

First, there is no need to discuss the seriousness of smoke as a hazard to navigation, or as the cause of an economic loss to the airlines through accidents, holding delays on the ground or in the air, cancellations due to below minimum visibilities.

Second, we are not in the air pollution control business. To a degree we are one of the offenders.

Third, and the nub of the matter, is that we are observers and reporters, qualified by years of interested observation over long reaches, repeatedly within a given air mass watching it become polluted by every combustion process, agricultural, domestic and industrial. Through lack of knowledge of the fact that haze means salt crystals or dust we are cooperating with the Weather Bureau in an unintentional deception of the real air pollution control people, John and Mary Doe. The impact of aviation terminology in this instance cannot be overstated. 

TELEVISION WEATHERMAN

For example, a television weather man in Boston, who identified himself as a meteorologist, reported that Boston had had haze, and that the chief feature of the weather on the next day would be the same. A big block letter word -HAZE- was displayed. The weather section of the paper also displayed the large block letter word -HAZE.

Actually what the town was blessed with at the time was cumulative smoke from countless distant sources, all well mixed and now reported not as smoke, but as haze. Even though John and Mary Doe may have a partial understanding that what is commonly called haze is exotic smoke, the word haze deceives. There is everything in a name and the name is smoke!

Or, suppose you come home from a trip beat and the little woman says, "Tough trip, hon?"

"You said it," comes your reply. "Had to wait in line an hour and a half for takeoff at Smellsville. When we were about to return to the ramp for more fuel we got a clearance. Almost got a little airplane through the windshield before we got on top of the haze level. Same thing all the way to Belle Air and on over to Sparkle Heights. VFR traffic and we can't see our hand in front of our face."

"Weather bad all the way, hmm?"

"No, just haze." 

So? Nothing happens-absolutely nothing. Haze is an act of God. but, just run through the same story and tell the truth. Say smoke. The little woman's ears will go poin-n-ng.

"Smoke? SMOKE?" will be her reply. Smoke is an act of man, controllable. It sets her thinking and when the whistle is blown on uncontrolled aerial dumping of scrap by-products you will find the little women of this country quite out of breath. 

At every level of government this nation is now busily engaged in hacking its way into an impenetrable jungle of ambient air standards, restrictions, socio-economic philosophy and legislation dealing with air pollution. This is being done at great loss of time and money and to the distress of responsible industry. Effective, fair legislation and control can come only if the nature and extent of the problem is known. You have heard the old adage, measure twice and cut once. With respect to air pollution, our legislators are trying to cut without having an identification much less a measurement.

Because smoke from Chicago shows up as "haze" in South Georgia on U.S. Weather reports and because we as pilots have unwittingly supported the error, there simply does not exist a correct record of smoke limited visibilities, let alone a record or understanding of the density, depth and extent of the nation's aerial dump at any given time. That such is true is borne out by the terminology and concepts in air pollution literature. Therein are to be found "urban air pollution problems; ambient air standards; dispersion; dilution; blown away by the wind; stack height; plant location, etc." Lost is the fact that a plant in a windy, remote section of the far west dumping ten tons of pollutants per day is exactly the same problem as a ten ton dumper in Manhattan. The problem is not in any way modified by where, how high, how much wind, how many inversions, how many people, how many complaints. The problem is in each instance ten tons of pollutants dumped into the air, to remain there until carried to earth by precipitation. The word haze did not exist prior to the industrial revolution and the consequent rapid increase in the use of fuels of one kind or another. A reasonable assumption is that there was no need for the word.

A CLEANER PLACE

This is borne out by the recent findings of Dr. Henri Bader, research professor at the University of Miami. An article in the Miami News says, "The world before the Industrial Revolution apparently was a cleaner place," Dr. Bader
(Continued on Page 23)

PAGE 16                THE AIR LINE PILOT