TRUSTING XM AND FLYING ANY TYPE OF CLOUD

[ChristianGodin]

I am a new IFR rated pilot flying a 201. Equipment is a 430, VOR, ILS, 496, XM on my ipad and the 496, autopilot couple to 430. My experience is approx. 10 hours filing IFR in VFR or MVFR. Living in North East. Beside avoiding ice and tunderstorm can I fly in any type of clouds? Can i trust my XM? Should I file if I am not sure to be on top?

[gregwatts]

Yes

Yes

Yes

The XM shows you what was..........usually up to a few minutes ago. You have to interpret movement of the depicted weather, but I find it extremely accurate and useful. By filing....you are in the system, and you can always request a higher altitude to get on top or request slight deviations to go around something. You can always cancel if you don't like your clearance as long as you can maintain VFR.

As to your first question, you can, but there are some that you shouldn't fly into......if at all possible.

My opinion only......

[John Pleisse]

Nexrad is to be used for defensive avoidance, not tatical penatration. You cannot fly in any type of cloud.

Whenever you file, be prepared to never get on top and do an approach to mins. Start off with climbing and decending through thin decks. Then frontload benign weather, gradually working tougher weather to your destination.

Keep dipping you toe in. Don't launch into an organized system until you have significant experience.

[sbethune]

Get yourself a mentor if, and continue to ask questions.  A reasonable objective should be to develop creativity with options for any scenario you might encounter, so that you never get backed into a corner.

Regarding NEXRAD - while it's pretty obvious you should avoid yellow and red echoes, what might not be obvious is the tendency for unstable systems to spontaneously deteriorate, therefore you would be wise to beware any system you see with yellow or red echoes anywhere as it is demonstrating that conditions are ripe.  Nexrad is not real time, it's not 100% accurate, and it doesn't cover the entire contininent.  Flying in an unstable environment is like rolling the dice, an unwise way to start your IFR career.  Get old, before you get bold.

[FlyDave]

I agree with sbethune - get with a good instrument instructor or some sort of mentor to discuss weather, your abilities and your limits. Just because you have the instrument ticket doesn't mean you go doing what the airline guys do!

You definately do not want to fly into the side of a cumulus cloud - unless you want at best an e-ticket ride on the gauges and at wost, well, let's just say that if you survive you'll have to change your shorts a couple of times. The potential for severe turbulence and icing in something like that can be very high.

Start with a much more conservative approach to instrument flying and grow your limits flying with someone more experienced.  As you get more and more confortable push your limits back. But always always always know what you're comfortable doing - especially when you're on your own.

Get a subscription to IFR magazine - it's a great publication.

Best of luck with your new instrument rating!

[jetdriven]

A XM or Skyradar only shows precipitation.  Yellow may be rain only, or it might be a developing thunderstorm. Only a Stormscope can show you realtime which it is. XM can be delayed 6 minutes or more, which is a helluva long time concerning things which can grow at 6,000 feet per minute.  I am not sure which (XM/skyradar or Stormscope) is more valuable, but if you are going to be flying a lot of IFR with precip around, you need both.  Do not count on a forecats or a controller to keep you out of the convective activity.   Funny how an airplane crashes into the ground and that controller didn't feel a thing.

[BorealOne]

Living where you do, I'd be very cautious in a 201. Having a freshly minted IFR ticket in a light piston with modest capability at altitude and no de-ice in the Northeast is an opportunity to gain experience in a few thousand feet of stratus cloud. By no means will you want to start playing around the edges of the convectives until you've gained considerable experience and a lot of weather sense. XM is a great tool, but as folks have already pointed out, what's happened in the past is not necessarily a guide to the future. Good luck and congratulations on the IR ticket - even with the limitations of a single, it opens up a whole new world of opportunities!

[Piloto]

I found XM\WX to be pretty reliable to avoid bad weather. As for clouds one simple rule: "The taller they are the nastier they are" Even if there is no precipitation or radar return there will be turbulence. XM\WX has a Cloud Tops feature that let you know the heights of the clouds so you could either overfly them or circunavigate around. I found this feature accurate enough to decide if it is worth it to climb over. Beware of flying in or underneath of very high altitude clouds. These could contain hail that will seriously damage the leading edges.

José

[DrBill]

I dont have XM or othere weather but I file IFR for any flight over 20 miles or so. ATC is usually pretty good about keeping me clear of bad stuff.  One time coming out of Roanoke VA, there was a line of Tstorms to the south (my direction) and ATC gave me vectors aournd the heavy stuff till I got to the other side.  I've been tossed aournd in some unsusspecting clouds too. Now that I got the Mooney and it climbs so well, I always try to be on top. Event if the headwinds are bad.  A smoooth long ride is a LOT better than a short bumpy one.

Two weeks ago heading to Fla, I took off and ATC gave be a westerly heading (unusual for CLT).  Then told me he was steering me around a patch of rain.  After 5 mi, he put me on course.  I thanked him profusely when he switched me over to the next controller.  It's the little stuff like that that I appreciate flying in "the system".

BILL

 

BILL

 

[jackn]

Last summer on a hot, humid August day, I saw a dark mass to my 11:00. I was able to check the metars for the nearby airports, to see what they were seeing from the ground. A check of the stormscope showed no lightning(yet) to the west. I requested a deviation to the east, having XM made this no problem.

A while later, a VFR only pilot came on the frequency to say he was stuck above an solid cloud layer. The controller immediately declared an emergency for the guy. After determining that there wasn't a break nearby(it looked pretty solid to me), the controller asked the IFR ability of the pilot. The top was 4000' and the base was around 3000'. the pilot said he felt confident he could make the decent. The controller talked to him in a very friendly and reasuring way the whole decent. When the pilot broke out below into VFR conditions, the controller cancelled the emergency and wished him a very nice day(no harm no foul). This ws in the southeast, I wouldn't necessarily expect this in the NY meto area.

[John Pleisse]

On the other hand....light green echoes on Nexrad often represent light precip not reaching the ground with good VFR WX...Point being, Nexrad is not airborn radar and you need several data sources to formulate a complete picture.

[GaryP1007]

Quote: jackn

 This ws in the southeast, I wouldn't necessarily expect this in the NY meto area.

[PTK]

Quote: jetdriven

A XM or Skyradar only shows precipitation.  Yellow may be rain only, or it might be a developing thunderstorm. Only a Stormscope can show you realtime which it is. XM can be delayed 6 minutes or more, which is a helluva long time concerning things which can grow at 6,000 feet per minute.  I am not sure which (XM/skyradar or Stormscope) is more valuable, but if you are going to be flying a lot of IFR with precip around, you need both.  Do not count on a forecats or a controller to keep you out of the convective activity.   Funny how an airplane crashes into the ground and that controller didn't feel a thing.

[bd32322]

I dont have NEXRAD in my cockpit - I have always wondered what some of those big tall cumulous clouds show up as on NEXRAD. The ones that have not started raining yet - because they are developing - so I think it wont show any precip. I would not want to fly into one of those clouds either - rain or no rain.

Or maybe NEXRAD will still paint the cloud because of its moisture content?

[galt1074]

Quote: ChristianGodin

I am a new IFR rated pilot flying a 201. Equipment is a 430, VOR, ILS, 496, XM on my ipad and the 496, autopilot couple to 430. My experience is approx. 10 hours filing IFR in VFR or MVFR. Living in North East. Beside avoiding ice and tunderstorm can I fly in any type of clouds? Can i trust my XM? Should I file if I am not sure to be on top?

[hobbit64]

Situational Awareness = Using events of the past and present to predict the future.

XM Weather is simply a tool (of many) that you use to build your situational awareness.

I lurked through the debate here about 'Glass Cockpits', but I think your question has a similar thread and I can't sit idle.  Your success is directly related to your knowledge of the product's capabilities AND its limitations.  If you know how and why a complex avionics system operates and are proficient in its use, it will help you.  If you are not proficient and are ignorant, the system will be a detriment to efficiency/safety and a net negative.  It will 'suck you in' and monopolize your cognitive process as you try to fumble through the multitude of button pushes/knob twists etc.  I don't mean to insult you, I just don't want you to miss out on good info from a system with limitations.

XM gives you dated/perishable information that you can use to build a picture of the fluid weather around you, along your route and at your destination.  I try to use all available information to figure out what the weather WAS doing, is doing now, and what it'll be doing in the future. 

Prior to getting my official weather briefing, I Start (believe it or not) with the Weather channel and build a national picture, especially for multi-day/long trips.  Then I look at ADDS for localized radar loops, prog charts, then go to the Area Forecast, TAFs, METARS, PIREPS, AIRMETS, SIGMETS etc.  I also look at the Winds Aloft to build a temperature picture for icing prediction to back up later on the OAT gauge.  Using the XM during flight, I back up and adjust the info I got prior to flying and make changes if needed. If you're flying 400 NM, why wait untill you're in AWOS range to find out that unannounced fog changed your plans....

I have used XM in concert with ATC to request vectors around a cell or two.  You can be more precise when requesting vectors as opposed to just requesting '10 left'. 

I have also successfully used the XM function to update destination and divert weather spots for multi state trips.

Even full blown on board weather radar is simply a weather avoidance tool.

Don't forget to use EFAS!!

Know your system, use it in VMC on IFR flight plans and work your way into more and more serious weather.

 

P.S.  A few looks outside at the clouds/weather are worth a thousand weather briefs.

P.P.S.  I Strongly suggest you get a mentor to bounce questions off of or shadow/assist on some flights.  It will be a great enhancement for your skills and confidence.

[galt1074]

Hobbitt...better said than I.

[John Pleisse]

Christian.... read Richard Collins "Flying IFR". It is a clinic in the thought process, logical reasoning and how to be armed in manned with the facts, prior to making a go, no-go. It will coalesce your new found knowlege. Great read for a newly minted IFR rating. A defacto mentor until you find one.

Always leave yourself two back doors.

[aviatoreb]

Quote: N4352H

Christian.... read Richard Collins "Flying IFR". It is a clinic in the thought process, logical reasoning and how to be armed in manned with the facts, prior to making a go, no-go. It will coalesce your new found knowlege. Great read for a newly minted IFR rating. A defacto mentor until you find one.

Always leave yourself two back doors.

[KSMooniac]

I've used XM quite a bit flying around the plains and south (ie thunderstorm country) as well as on some long trips to both coasts.  I do not have a Stormscope or similar.  

As has been stated above, the data is *at least* 6 minutes old when it gets to you, and can be older, or *much* older.  I find that the updates seem to slow if there is a lot of weather data to be spread all over the country, and especially if flying towards something questionable.  (Murphy at work).

Because of the latency issue, I won't "thread the needle" between thunderstorms using XM data unless there is a wide hole and I can see through it, or at least mostly so.  "Wide" is a relative term based on the dynamics of any given system in terms of intensity and especially movement.  If there is a 20-30 mile wide gap that seems to be holding constant, then I'll very likely go through it.  If both sides of the gap are moving, and especially converging, then I will likely go around or land short and wait.  While the XM data can be old, I find the trend information in terms of movement and intensity growth/decline very valuable when making a decision on what to do.  Flying between TX and KS frequently, I get the chance to watch systems of storms develop and move, and I'll frequently deviate to fly behind them instead of out in front where they are headed.  One particular trip I ended up flying *around* a good portion of OK instead of simply crossing it b/c the system solidified and didn't move.  It eventually grew into southern KS so I ended up flying a "left hook" around one end to get home...but this was done without worry since I could see outside, had an XM map of the storms, and plenty of fuel on board.  Without XM I likely would have landed to look at a radar screen and perhaps call a briefer.

Just a couple of weeks ago in Central KS I flew through some precip/solid clouds while it was cold and noted that the XM freezing levels seemed quite accurate, yet the "moderate" intensity precip painted on XM was above me generally, and didn't reach the ground.  The ride was pretty smooth, but looking at the XM picture might lead one to think it would be kinda bad.  Based on my experience in this region, I thought it would be an easy IMC trip without issues even though the XM painted moderate stuff... once you get more experience you'll build your base of knowledge to evaluate scenarios like that, so just nibble off a bit at a time and always be prepared to turn around!  (especially with ice)

[MARZ]

I'll preface my post with the fact that I'm not IFR rated but in the beginning stages -

Does no one use flightwatch?  I find it a bit odd it isn't mentioned in any post thus far. 

I've used it on the way from Alabama to Texas about 45 minutes out to confirm my expectations of conditions at the home field

[carusoam]

Mike,

FlightWatch, ADFs, VORs, paper and talking to people...  All aging technology that still has value, but are not preferred by most......

Or

GPS, graphical weather and iPad...  New technology that does the same thing at a higher level.

I did my IFR training with the old technology and moved up to the new technology when dollars became available.

My recollection of FW: They are very busy when you really need them.  Interpreting and writing are a challenge to get correct in the bumpy cockpit.

FW works as designed, iPad does it better at a slightly higher cost.

It is still your choice.

Best regards,

-a-

[Hank]

Usually by the time I'm that close, I can pick up automated weather [AWOS, ATIS, etc] from somewhere in the vicinity of my destination. If it's a long-duration flight with unsettled weather, you better believe my Stormscope and I chat up Flightwatch. Sometimes I call in a pirep when the briefer mentions "there are no pireps along your route of flight." Seems like they are always interested, and someone else may actually want to know, too.

P.S.--My IA checkride was 23 months ago. Staying current is more difficult than I expected. Right now, I'm good through Saturday, then will need 2 more approaches. I'm not quite hitting my target of at least one every month.

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

+1

GPS, graphical weather and iPad

[xftrplt]

Furthermore, METARS, TAFs, area lightning, and cell movement are available on XM.

And data delays are also present when using FW.