Storm Scope

[Pinecone]

Working up my wish list for an avionics upgrade next January.

I currently have a Storm Scope, likely original 1986 installation (maybe WX-11).  It still works.

Should I plan on keeping it?

Just removing it?

Or replacing it is the remote one that will interface with GTN and G3X (I think WX-500)?

[Fly Boomer]

1 minute ago, Pinecone said:

Or replacing it is the remote one that will interface with GTN and G3X (I think WX-500)?

I think the WX-500 is a headless WX-950.  Nice when panel space is at a premium.  Used price around 7 AMU.

[jetdriven]

WX500 is the only remote option, unfortunately they quit making it, used ones are around 5 grand, and the repairs are flat rate and theyre also around 3500-4000$. 

[ArtVandelay]

Wx500 has been discontinued, I think there’s only 1 SS model still being made. ADSB has made them almost obsolete.

[jetdriven]

not even close to being obsolete. ADSB lightning is far too stale for real tactical avoidance

[ArtVandelay]

not even close to being obsolete. ADSB lightning is far too stale for real tactical avoidance

And yet they have a warning:

Never use your Stormscope system to attempt to penetrate a thunderstorm…

[jetdriven]

i agree.  But nothing else tells you better where thunderstorms are than a Stormscope.

[slowflyin]

My shop tried talking me into removing my WX500 during my panel upgrade.   I refused.  Some days it's still a very relevant tool in the box.  Three weeks ago, what sounded like a very seasoned controller issued me a vector into what she thought was light to moderate precipitation.  The storm scope looked like a video game.  I politely declined and requested a different route.  Many times, on the East coast we will have widespread showers with no convection.  The WX 500 offers an additional level of safety and peace of mind when I'm droning along IMC.   When I'm IMC, the storm scope is on.    All that being said, I would never use it to penetrate a line of thunderstorms.  Like most things, it has its limitations and shouldn't be confused with on-board radar.  

[Hank]

Love my Storm Scope!

It was nice in WV, but it's necessary here in the Deep South.

[Pinecone]

OK, so it sounds like some form of Storm Scope should be retained.

But keep the original one, with it's separate display or get a used WX-500 that will interface with the new displays planned (G3X and GTN-750)?

[mhrivnak]

I decided to remove mine when doing a G3x Touch panel upgrade. Though that was helped by the fact that it wasn't working correctly, and I'm not sure what it would have taken to revive it. But I live in the south-east US where we have thunderstorms nearly every day in the summer. I just don't tend to fly often in proximity to such convection where real-time strike data would make much difference.

The storms around here build and develop quickly, and even before the first lightning bolt they are well-worth avoiding. If there's convective precipitation along my route, I like to either be high enough to see and avoid the large buildups (usually 10k plus on a hot summer day), or low enough to be below the bases so I can see and avoid heavy rain. On the rare day with thick IMC and embedded convection, I just avoid that. Others with more experience navigating such weather, or more of a logistical need to get places on those days, could benefit from live strike data.

Before you decide, consider this: look at the big antenna on the belly of your plane, imagine its interaction with airflow, and then imagine it gone. Think about how heavy the whole system is, including the cable that's nearly the length of the plane and is a good 1" thick. For my typical flying, I was more interested in reducing weight and drag than to keep/fix/upgrade/replace a piece of avionics I'd rarely use.

But clearly it has a lot of value to some pilots, and we each get to weigh the trade-offs for our own situations.

[Hank]

59 minutes ago, mhrivnak said:

Before you decide, consider this: look at the big antenna on the belly of your plane, imagine its interaction with airflow, and then imagine it gone. Think about how heavy the whole system is, including the cable that's nearly the length of the plane and is a good 1" thick. For my typical flying, I was more interested in reducing weight and drag than to keep/fix/upgrade/replace a piece of avionics I'd rarely use.

Your StormScope had an antenna outside the fuselage? Mine is inside the belly, zero drag, and the cable is much smaller than 1" thick, more like TV-type coax.

[mhrivnak]

I had a Strike Finder that was installed at the factory (I think in 1991, a year after initial delivery), and this was the antenna. The antenna cable had tens of individual conductors in various shielded groups, all wrapped into one big cable. It's been a couple of years, so my memory could be exaggerating the thickness, but it was a big heavy cable.

[hubcap]

No experience with a Storm Scope, but I am curious how it compares to Xm Weather.

[ilovecornfields]

1 minute ago, hubcap said:

No experience with a Storm Scope, but I am curious how it compares to Xm Weather.

It’s about 15 min faster

[LANCECASPER]

7 hours ago, Pinecone said:

OK, so it sounds like some form of Storm Scope should be retained.

But keep the original one, with it's separate display or get a used WX-500 that will interface with the new displays planned (G3X and GTN-750)?

The WX-11 came out in 1981 and has a heavy display that goes in the panel and a heavy processor that goes in the back. The WX-500 just a processor less than 3 pounds that's compatible with virtually every PFD, MFD, GPS Map out there. If you don't want a blank in the panel someday when the WX-11 dies, do it once and do it right.

https://www.valentineaviation.com/stormscopes.html

 

[81X]

When I redid my panel last year, I put a wx500 in. It’s really nice to have in the southeast.   
 

[Pinecone]

OK, I think I will bite the bullet and go with the WX500.

I like having all the tools that I can to deal with potential hazards.

[Fly Boomer]

14 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

OK, I think I will bite the bullet and go with the WX500.

I like having all the tools that I can to deal with potential hazards.

I don't know your weight and balance but, for me, I like anything that shifts weight aft.

[65MooneyPilot]

Back in the 90’s when I flew checks and freight the Storm Scope is a great tool. I flew in some horrible weather and it kept me out of trouble all the time. I would definitely keep it. 

[DCarlton]

I took my WX900 out a few years back and regret it.  It worked fine.  Probably the only regrettable decision I've made with the Mooney.  I listed it on Ebay and it sold almost immediately.  

[Pinecone]

3 hours ago, Fly Boomer said:

I don't know your weight and balance but, for me, I like anything that shifts weight aft.

I like shifting CG aft also.  So getting rid of the rest of the round dials will help.  And the CDI.  Storm Scope display may help, but may not make that much difference with removing the processor and replacing with later version.  Probably lighter.

[seaero]

Actually, this company still manufactures the WX500 if you want to pay $15000 for a system - - https://extantaerospace.com/commercial.php

They acquired the Stormscope and Skywatch products from L3 a few years ago.

 

[Pinecone]

OUCH.