Narrative:

A C172 came from syr approach at 4;000 ft; radar was intermitten at best. We were finally able to call radar contact; and vectored him to a 130 on a downwind and then a 210 for the base turn and lost radar. We called bgm approach to get control of the aircraft. We climbed the aircraft to 5;000 and didn't have radar on the C172. When we finally got the aircraft in radar [we sent] him direct to the ith VOR and we lost radar again. We climbed the aircraft to 6;000 ft and still could not see the aircraft. Syr approach saw him and called 'radar contact'; so we sent him over to syr and they worked him back to rme airport. We need our radar fixed. I think the trees up at the radar site need to be cut down so we can have better coverage.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ELM reporter voiced concern regarding the existing RADAR coverage providing an example event of a lost target; the reporter indicating tree height may be blocking the needed RADAR coverage.

Narrative: A C172 came from SYR Approach at 4;000 FT; RADAR was intermitten at best. We were finally able to call RADAR contact; and vectored him to a 130 on a downwind and then a 210 for the base turn and lost RADAR. We called BGM Approach to get control of the aircraft. We climbed the aircraft to 5;000 and didn't have RADAR on the C172. When we finally got the aircraft in RADAR [we sent] him direct to the ITH VOR and we lost RADAR again. We climbed the aircraft to 6;000 FT and still could not see the aircraft. SYR Approach saw him and called 'RADAR contact'; so we sent him over to SYR and they worked him back to RME airport. We need our RADAR fixed. I think the trees up at the RADAR site need to be cut down so we can have better coverage.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.