stormscope recommendation

[bd32322]

I am looking to add a stormscope/strikefinder kind of thing to show me real-time lightning. And I want it used and cheap. Looks like there are a bunch of options, strikefinder, stormscope and different models of each. Which one would you recommend for biggest bang for the buck.

 

I already used ADSB for nexrad data in-flight.

Thanks in advance

[jetdriven]

The cheapest Stormscope is the WX-10 series and it will still set you back around 800$ for a used one, and another 300$ if you install it, 3K if you pay someone.

[davidsguerra]

i have an insight strikefinder that needs a new LED. it will cost $1400 to fix it and it will come with a warranty. i havent sent it in yet but i would be happy to let it go cheap.

i have a wx 500 and i love it.

 

[Hank]

I like my WX-10, even though one of my goals is to fly in weather where very little ever shows up on it. Fronts, however, are nice to see.

[Magnum]

Quote: jetdriven

The cheapest Stormscope is the WX-10 series and it will still set you back around 800$ for a used one, and another 300$ if you install it, 3K if you pay someone.

[Piloto]

Unless you fly outside of XM\WX coverage I would not spend the time and money of having a Stormscope installed. I have XM and WX-10 Stormscope and only look at the WX-10 when flying in the Caribean Islands. Stormscope weather depiction is not as complete and accurate as XM. On the WX-10 you have to wait several minutes to get a good idea of the size and intensity of the storm. I found that turbulence in most cases is not associated with lightning but rather with build up height which is only visible on the XM satellite view.

José

 

[AndyFromCB]

Quote: Piloto

Unless you fly outside of XM\WX coverage I would not spend the time and money of having a Stormscope installed. I have XM and WX-10 Stormscope and only look at the WX-10 when flying in the Caribean Islands. Stormscope weather depiction is not as complete and accurate as XM. On the WX-10 you have to wait several minutes to get a good idea of the size and intensity of the storm. I found that turbulence in most cases is not associated with lightning but rather with build up height which is only visible on the XM satellite view.

José

 

[jetdriven]

Quote: Piloto

Unless you fly outside of XM\WX coverage I would not spend the time and money of having a Stormscope installed. I have XM and WX-10 Stormscope and only look at the WX-10 when flying in the Caribean Islands. Stormscope weather depiction is not as complete and accurate as XM. On the WX-10 you have to wait several minutes to get a good idea of the size and intensity of the storm. I found that turbulence in most cases is not associated with lightning but rather with build up height which is only visible on the XM satellite view.

José

 

[Piloto]

Quote: astelmaszek

I politely disagree, quite the oposite. I have flown thru a lot of red on NEXRAD but nothing on stormscope and had great, smooth rides, the opposite is never true. Stormscope has saved my bacon quite a few times when nothing was showing up on NEXRAD yet. You really need both if you intend to fly a lot of IFR.

[jetdriven]

XMWX shows only cloud-to-ground lightning that is at best, ten minutes old.  Thats the second worst weather advice I have ever heard.   Next we are going to hear how you can get lightning on your iPhone from the weatherchannel.com. But I only have 3 type ratings and fly all over the world. BWTFDIK?

[rbridges]

good thread.  I have a stormscope installed in my plane and was wondering if I should keep it or not if I got some type of on board weather.

[bd32322]

Quote: davidsguerra

i have an insight strikefinder that needs a new LED. it will cost $1400 to fix it and it will come with a warranty. i havent sent it in yet but i would be happy to let it go cheap.

i have a wx 500 and i love it.

 

[AndyFromCB]

Let me chime in here for another comment:

-I don't have any experience with WX10. I have used both WX500(my previous aircraft, displayed on GNS430, my current aircraft, displayed on a GMX200) and WX1000E (my current aircraft, it's a seperate head that also functions as a backup NAV head to my GNS430).

NEXRAD is a tactical planning tool to go around large areas of weather and plan hours in advance. Most of my flights are between 450nm and 700nm so it's great knowing what's happening at destination and along the route. My XM displays on my GMX200 along with WX500 stormscope data. Since I'm two of everything (other than engine) kind of guy, I also get the basic subscription for my 796 just in case my GDL69 craps out (it did once so far). Can't wait for the GDL39 to show up to cancel that subscription.

Stormscope is what allows me to fly summer IFR without 100 mile deviations. It also allows to make a decission on the ground prior to take off when launching into summer CUs. NEXRAD is useless for that purpose.

It has saved my bacon quite a few times when there was nothing on NEXRAD for 50 miles in any direction and the stormscope just started going off, slowly at first and then more and more yellow. It's time to land. Or you turn it on before take off. A lot of times CU around here look pretty scary but are actually pretty good rides if nothing pops up on my stormscope. Quite the opposite has happend to me as well. Nothing on NEXRAD, CUs didn't look that tall at all but where very close together. My stormscope was YELLOW all over, didn't even think twice, put the airplane away. About 30 minutes later all hell broke loose. It showed up on NEXRAD 15 minutes later while sitting at the FBO in Acron, CO (BTW, great little FBO, cheapest fuel I could find around Denver).

When combined with NEXRAD it also allows me to figure out when a storm has given up it's ghost. There is a lot of RED on NEXRAD that is quite flyable, sometimes down right pleasant free airplane wash. Last year I was coming back from MN, landing KCBF. I was watching the weather for last hour of flight, entire Omaha was RED on NEXRAD, storm kept on moving EAST, I was about 50 miles out when I started talking with approach, I was IFR in VMC but could tell I was going to be IMC last 20 miles or so, big giant CUs still over Omaha. I asked for ride reports and approach said last few minutes the situation was improving, they started landing planes and the big iron was reporting good rides. Now, I'll take a "good ride report" from heavy iron with a grain of salt when I'm in a single but my stormscope was also very quiet after last clear over the area and very active about 30 miles east, so I knew it was working. I accepted the clearance. Tons and tons of rain but seriously smoother than a baby's butt. Free airplane wash.

Stormscope doesn't actually really show just "lighthing" as we think of it, it shows vertical air movement inside a cloud which in turn generates small cloud to cloud strikes, many of them not even visible to the eye outside of a CU. If there is vertical movement, there will be electricity, there will be turbulence.

[John Pleisse]

I like the Stikefinder....basic, simple, rugged. 14 years and never a repair. Old analogue units can be had for a song. Under $2k installed. They work really well....amazingly well. On the groud near DC, mine paints storm complexes off the Atlantic City coast. In concert with XM...you have a good iea what is going on.

[bd32322]

Quote: Piloto

Unless you fly outside of XM\WX coverage I would not spend the time and money of having a Stormscope installed. I have XM and WX-10 Stormscope and only look at the WX-10 when flying in the Caribean Islands. Stormscope weather depiction is not as complete and accurate as XM. On the WX-10 you have to wait several minutes to get a good idea of the size and intensity of the storm. I found that turbulence in most cases is not associated with lightning but rather with build up height which is only visible on the XM satellite view.

José

 

[jetdriven]

When something can build at 6,000 feet per minute, there is nothing except Mark I eyeball and onboard weather radar that will be of any use.  Even then a mistake is a rude surprise. Until people figure this out, expect more Bonanza's to depart the bottom of clouds with both wings and a tail missing. There were 3 in the state of MS this spring alone. Also, the Pilatus in Florida.  All had XM weather onboard. All were in radar contact.

[AndyFromCB]

Byron,

Never having have flown an airplane with on board radar can you explain how a radar can show a buildup that's not yet raining? I thought stormscope was the only thing able to do that. Is it because the really good radars use doppler effect to detect turbulance? I'm not asking for pages of details, just a quick and dirty on onboard radars.

Thanks in advance,

Andy

P.S. I like the bonanza comment, mooneys tend to depart intact, but depart non the less. We had a guy here few years back do 12G in a mooney over Lincoln, NE. Wings had a strange bend to them after landing but they stayed on. 12Gs was what the factory told NTSB would take to achieve that level of deformation. Nice to know we fly with that kind of spar. I'm only upgrading when I can afford a TBM 700 C2 so probably never ;-)

[rbridges]

Quote: jetdriven

When something can build at 6,000 feet per minute, there is nothing except Mark I eyeball and onboard weather radar that will be of any use.  Even then a mistake is a rude surprise. Until people figure this out, expect more Bonanza's to depart the bottom of clouds with both wings and a tail missing. There were 3 in the state of MS this spring alone. Also, the Pilatus in Florida.  All had XM weather onboard. All were in radar contact.

[jetdriven]

Good radar can detect precipitation before it begins falling. The window is not very big, but you can see wet buildups and if they are of the TS variety, they have a red core and a steep gradient. Tilt the radar up a small amount and watch which ones disappear from the screen first. The ones remaining are the tallest, and usually, the nastiest. I have bever used Doppler radar but it can see the red/blue shift and it marks those shear boundaries for turbulence.

I saw that M20K for salvage. It had a report from Mooney engineering confirming the estimated +/-12 G in rapid succession, several of them. The wings were both bent up, and the fuselage was bent down to the point you could stick your finger in the gap between the cabin door or the baggage door with them latched.  6" or so total bend.  Absolutely incredible.

[AndyFromCB]

Quote: jetdriven

Good radar can detect precipitation before it begins falling. The window is not very big, but you can see wet buildups and if they are of the TS variety, they have a red core and a steep gradient. Tilt the radar up a small amount and watch which ones disappear from the screen first. The ones remaining are the tallest, and usually, the nastiest. I have bever used Doppler radar but it can see the red/blue shift and it marks those shear boundaries for turbulence.

I saw that M20K for salvage. It had a report from Mooney engineering confirming the estimated +/-12 G in rapid succession, several of them. The wings were both bent up, and the fuselage was bent down to the point you could stick your finger in the gap between the cabin door or the baggage door with them latched.  6" or so total bend.  Absolutely incredible.

[jlunseth]

I am going to stick with Jose.  Nice to have the storms cope as another source, but XM is all you need, because unless you have a reading on the Mk I you have no business going in, you should be deviating as far around as necessary.  Nice that the wings will stay on at 12G's, but your own frame would sustain damage I am afraid.

[AndyFromCB]

Quote: jlunseth

I am going to stick with Jose.  Nice to have the storms cope as another source, but XM is all you need, because unless you have a reading on the Mk I you have no business going in, you should be deviating as far around as necessary.  Nice that the wings will stay on at 12G's, but your own frame would sustain damage I am afraid.

[xftrplt]

Admittedly, I haven't flown with a sferic detector, but I would not consider flying IMC into an area that is NEXARAD red, regardless of the sferic indication.

Conversly, I wouldn't enter an area of sferic activity IMC, regardless of the NEXRAD picture.

They would both need to be "clean." 

[jwilkins]

I have a portable ADS-B and an installed WX-900 Stormscope. For me, they go together. The ADS-B / Nexrad is good for long range big picture planning (shall I continue, divert, set down, or turn around and go home?) and getting current airport conditions ahead. I much prefer the graphic presentation instead of trying to assimilate the verbal descriptions from Flight Watch. I have a hard time metally picturing those descriptions " 100 miles West of Phoenix to 50 miles North of San Jose to a line from ....." I like seeing the big red and green blotchs on a map.

The Stormscope seems to require more immediate action from me. It's a matter of 'Oh Crap, look at the lightning strikes ahead; I'll check the Nexrad and figure out where to divert' Or, Nexrad looks OK ahead, lightning strikes off to the far right, none ahead, continue for now.

The only issue I have with my WX-900 is that the display is a tad dim. It's not bad enough to send out or replace yet, but not as bright as I think it should be.

Before the Sat Links were available I had a Ryan WX-9. It was nice and bright but not very accurate and not heading stabilized. It was however, absolutely amazing to have something in the plane pointing out lightning that you could not yet see. Even these early scopes are pretty amazing compared to NOT having one.

Flying in TS weather can be realtively safe if you are careful. The Nex Rad and Stormscopes are very helpful in keeping you that way. I will cancel a flight if we expect to have widespread imbedded TS which I cannot get over the tops or circumnavigate. A few years ago we had one of those 'storms of the Century' across the whole country with TS, tornadoes, hail, and severe winds. I was on a trip from NY to Arizona and made the entire trip in mostly VFR conditions (filed IFR) but took four + days instead of two. I would travel behind the fronts and then find a nice airport to stay, usually somewhere I could put the plane in a hanger, and wait for the next lull between frontal passages. Flight Service was a huge help in planning which way to go and about how far I could get to stay out of the real bad weather. It was a safe and interesting trip, at no time was I in rough conditions. I had Nex Rad on XM but that plane did not have a Stormscope installed. 

I would not trust my life to any on board equipment to PURPOSELY fly in IMC with widespread embedded TS. If the Nex Rad and Stormscope are working, I have plenty of fuel - for me that means 2 to 3 hours reserve in bad weather - and the TS are isolated or I can get on top I'll go. Otherwise, I can wait. I'm not a doctor; no one is going to die if I delay a trip by a day or two. 

 

 

[Oscar Avalle]

My NEXRAD and my wx900 worked well together while I was flying int he northeast. However now I feel that my wx900 is not enough and I am installing a wx500 with longer range and better software.