AOA vs Stormscope

[201er]

In case you guys didn't already guess where I was going with the stormscope poll, I am perplexed why pilots prioritize having a stormscope over an AOA indicator.

 

35 out of 45 respondents have a stormscope onboard their Mooney (77%)

 

Yet only 10 out of 66 (15%)respondents have or prioritize having an AOA indicator. 56 out of 66 (85%) either don't want one or are in no hurry to get one.

 

I have both (mine came with an AOA and I added a WX500). But if my plane flipped on its tiedown tomorrow and I got a check for a new plane, AOA would be the first thing I would put in and not stormscope (although I'd like one too if I could). Why? Because according to 2009 stats thunderstorms accounted for 6 fatal accidents, stalls accounted for 110 fatal accidents. That leads me to believe that an AOA is 18 times a better investment than a stormscope?

 

And before some smartass points that the prevalence of stormscopes/technology is the reason for better thunderstorm avoidance, first off I don't think this is true of all GA aircraft - seems like most skyhawks and other popular planes don't typically have them, but if it is true that the tool is help reduce accident rates, then it is an especially good case for AOA indicators in GA planes.

 

So please, someone prove to me why a stormscope is a better use of panel space than an AOA indicator?

[Mooneymite]

In case you guys didn't already guess where I was going with the stormscope poll, I am perplexed why pilots prioritize having a stormscope over an AOA indicator.

 

35 out of 45 respondents have a stormscope onboard their Mooney (77%)

 

So please, someone prove to me why a stormscope is a better use of panel space than an AOA indicator?

 

Without an AOA, airspeed indicator works fine.

 

Without a stormscope, on-board radar is the only substitute for "real time" storm info.

 

I'm not "dissing" your love affair with an AOA, but I fly planes with AOA and indexer lights and rarely refer to it except during stall practice in the sim.  Just not that vitally important for routine ops. However, a stormscope will answer that all important question:  "Can I safely go into this cloud?"

 

AOA, or stormscope?  Stormscope first, everytime.

 

.

[AndyFromCB]

Because my vRef between fully loaded and almost empty is about 5knots, I do not see any value what so ever in an AOA. Unless flying into a runway less than 3500feet, if I simply use 80knots on final, I'm set. What is an AOA going to do for me? Stormscope on the other hand has saved my bacon more than once.

 

AOA makes sense in 'real' airplanes where the vRef can be all over depending on the weight.

[Hank]

Me, too. Must be a C-model thing. The Stormscope provides real-time information not otherwise available, and helps avoid embedded T-cells when flying along enroute IMC. It also gives advance notice that I may want to change course or land short; unlike XM, it is real-time without the variable 5-20 minute delay.

 

Your use of statistics is very unmathematical:

 

Because according to 2009 stats thunderstorms accounted for 6 fatal accidents, stalls accounted for 110 fatal accidents. That leads me to believe that an AOA is 18 times a better investment than a stormscope?

 

Thunderstorms account for few fatalities because we have many ways to find out if they are in the area. I've avoided many by staying below the deck and aiming behind them. Some I've been vectored away from by ATC. Some show up on the stormscope. When the forecast is really ugly, I don't fly. Thus thunderstorm exposure is minimal, but there is no way to count how often it occurs without causing fatalities.

 

It seems that many of the stall accidents are due to pilot inattention. Adding another instrument won't make the pilot look at it. Sometimes pilots are looking at other things--like a Mooney pilot who took off VFR and cut [too] sharply to avoid a fog bank at the far end of the runway, ending up inside a building, on fire. Distraction, [poor] judgement and [bad] decision making were the causes of the accident, which led directly to the stall, and AOA won't prevent things like this.

 

Part of the resistance to AOA is the instrumentation itself. No, I don't much fancy having 16 LEDs added to my panel. No, there's no room in my panel to put anything, but I'm going to have to add ADSB capability somewhere, somehow. Oh, how qaccurately the AOA works is very dependent upon:  1) tricks of installation that are model AND airframe specific; 2) tricks of instrument calibration that are model AND airframe specific. Iron out these details and the level of resistance will decrease. Some people just don't like change, whether it's for the better or not--facts of human nature. Don't even mention cutting holes in my wing and adding probes, wires, tubes, etc!  How far out on the wing does it need to be to avoid propwash? Will location be affected by changing propellers, as when people upgrade to Top Props, 3-blades, Scimitars, etc.? Or do they get to patch the previous AOA proble hole, cut new holes, run new wires & tubing and re-calibrate? etc., etc.

 

[bnicolette]

 

 

So please, someone prove to me why a stormscope is a better use of panel space than an AOA indicator?

 

I would say it depends on your mission.

 

For me I have no use for an AOA indicator as my home airport is 7000' long and any airport I intend on going to is well clear of any obstructions I need to out climb and will also have more than enough runway.

I really don't have much use for a stormscope either as I won't be flying close to any convective activity.  I had my stormscope removed to make room for my JPI830 and an electric attitude indicator.

[Z W]

I have no experience with an AOA indicator.  I like the idea of having one and may add one in sometime when the plane is in for panel work.  

 

That being said, I find it easy enough to keep my airspeed up and my bank angles shallow in the pattern, like I was taught.  I know of no similar training that can keep me out of convective activity when I'm in IMC, short of not flying into IMC.

 

I fly from a 4,000 ft paved runway usually to a longer paved runway, then back home.  A lot of the time I am flying into towered airports where I get a straight-in final just like the big boys, so there is no pattern to be flown.

 

AOA I imagine would be extremely useful for short field and high altitude ops.

 

Not intending to bash the AOA, and not saying you're wrong about which should be chosen.  Just my perspective.

[BorealOne]

It's entirely a mission question. I primarily fly long X/Cs. 99.9% of the time I'm working out weather problems, not AOA problems. For 6+ months of the year, those weather problems involve convective activity. An AOA in my scan isn't ever necessary, but I acknowledge it would be helpful in certain situations. In contrast, during the summers, a stormscope in the scan is generally very helpful for getting a better weather picture, and occasionally necessary for determining a safe route of flight.

 

I'm not knocking AOAs, and can see their utility, but having flown floats in the bush where weight and power issues are far less theoretical than they are for most GA flights off runways, I think you can be just as safe relying on airspeed, provided you know how your plane operates at different attitudes and power settings, and fly conservatively within that envelope.

[201er]

I guess I fly heavy into many short fields so I'm partial to AOA. I forget that some of you fly from runways 3x longer. No excuse to stall there. Since I fly to shorter airports, I'm practicing short landing tecnique on every landing.

[Hank]

My home field, where I did my initial training and staged from for Instrument training, is 3000' long with tall trees at both ends. Last night I visited a nearby 2000' grass strip, landing on 2 through a slot in the trees, rolled out and departed on 20 through the same slot. I was solo and very light on fuel, so I flew 80 mph final, pulled the throttle above the treetops and came over the hurricane fencing barely past the end of the runway at 70 mph. Had no trouble floating or touching down gently, and required power to reach the "far" end to turn around. [At home, I fly 85 mph on final and cross the road at 75 mph, because 3000' of runway is not short.]

 

So maybe your fears about the correct speed and accidental stalls are overblown? Of my 610 hours, 524 are in my Mooney, and my primary CFI took me to the grass strip before my initial checkride, so I'm familiar with short and obstructed. AOA would be beneficial to me during high DA, but I've really only experienced that on one multi-day trip, landing at KRAP when ATIS was broadcasting DA of 6600' once, continuing to KCOD the next day landing before noon. Who knows when my next trip will be, that one was back in 2008 with almost 200 hours in my logbook.

 

My Stormscope, on the other hand, comes in handy every time I am in IMC.

[kmyfm20s]

I guess I fly heavy into many short fields so I'm partial to AOA. I forget that some of you fly from runways 3x longer. No excuse to stall there. Since I fly to shorter airports, I'm practicing short landing tecnique on every landing.

I just thought you might have owned stock in he company:)

[Alan Fox]

Mike , your stats are incorrect , 100% of the Mooneys have an AoA device.......Mike lets talk about things other than AoA , its getting boring......Lets talk about Awful Charlies Avatar.......

[Hank]

.......Lets talk about Awful Charlies Avatar.......

 

I'd rather meet the model for it!     Wonder what the bill would be for that fly-in lunch?

 

Hey, Mike, what do you consider a short field? so far, I've not needed to do either a max-performance, short field take off or a bona-fide short field approach since my PPL checkride. But I'm careful about loading and weight when I go anywhere very much under 3000', like the lovely 33A, 2770' x 40'; but again, he doesn't sell fuel so I'll never leave there too heavy.

[kmyfm20s]

....Lets talk about Awful Charlies Avatar.......

I have to laugh! My son which is 5 came up to me when I was online and said to me "dad that girl has big muscles"

[John Pleisse]

Comparing the two is frivolous (other than your personal panel real estate). AOA? If you have to look at it and it doesn't have an aural warning, it isn't going to save you. Most stall spins are engine out or pattern ops. The basis of avoiding a stall-spin is good division of attention skills. Adding an extra gadget to look at (AOA) is detracting. I would go for recurrent training and a Stormscope of some sort. I have seen your Youtube stuff, you do a lot of cross country and IMC. Get the Stormscope.

[Piloto]

With the ASI you know if you are close to the stall region just by looking at the white and green bands lower edges, either in VFR or IFR conditions. Without a Stormscope in IFR conditions you don't know if you are heading into a severe storm ahead that can knock your wings off, and the AOA would not help you on that. And if your only option is to go through the storm yor ASI is a much better option than any AOA to maintain a slow safe speed.

 

José    

[thinwing]

If I was flying my husky into a 600 ft obstructed glacier runway while hanging on the prop like Doug Geeting of Talkeetna Ak...an aoa over a storm scope could make sense.But I donot fly into glaciers very often(I did it once)I do how ever fly IMC quite a bit..since my Mooney doesnt have onboard radar my stormscope in cell mode along with the 5 min old XM nexrad is all Ive got to confirm a bumpy cumilo nimbus.Where there is lighting ,there I am not.Not having an AOA in the Mooney I do not miss at all.I once owned a maule m5 with a safeflight aoa that I nevered used simply because when you are low and slow with the stall warner blaring in the background,the last thing you are looking at is any panel mounted instrument.My attention was completely taken up by trees and rocks,wind riffles on water and screaming passengers.

[Alan Fox]

I just wanted to throw out there if you look at Awful Charlies profile , The Avatar in the profile moves .....

[bnicolette]

I just wanted to throw out there if you look at Awful Charlies profile , The Avatar in the profile moves .....

 

LOL.  Yes it does.  I wonder how many hits he's going to have on his profile?

[FlyDave]

I just wanted to throw out there if you look at Awful Charlies profile , The Avatar in the profile moves .....

WOW! If I saw that in the cockpit I think I might need Mike's AOA indicator flashing all sorts of colors to get my attention back to flying. Could prove dangerous on a couple of fronts (no pun intended)!

[Awful_Charlie]

Oh dear - talking about a distraction in the cockpit!  I'm in the majority bucket with a Stormscope and without AoA, but my main worry is that for the very few times an AoA would be useful, I'm already busy with other things.  On the other hand, the stormscope only gets attention when everything else is done.  If the stall warner goes off, or the buffet starts, I'm lowering the nose first and working out why second.  If it's really gone bad, what does an AoA show in a spin or when inverted?

 

Principe worry about installing one is what does it do to the FIKI certification?

[Marauder]

I just wanted to throw out there if you look at Awful Charlies profile , The Avatar in the profile moves ..... LOL. Yes it does. I wonder how many hits he's going to have on his profile?

All,I know is that I feel cheated! Tapatalk has them motionless...

[Bennett]

Just open mooneyspace.com in a regular browser, go to Members, and drill down to see the motion. Pretty clever. I assume in is a .gif file. Didn't know you could upload .gifs. Might start a new trend.

[Marauder]

Just open mooneyspace.com in a regular browser, go to Members, and drill down to see the motion. Pretty clever. I assume in is a .gif file. Didn't know you could upload .gifs. Might start a new trend.

Boy Bennett! That's a lot of work when I have real ones in the house with me!

[Marauder]

Holy cow! I didn't think he was making milk shakes! Eh, since we are on an aviation site, "that is some rough turbulence Awful Charlie is going through!"

[FlyDave]

Holy cow! I didn't think he was making milk shakes! Eh, since we are on an aviation site, "that is some rough turbulence Awful Charlie is going through!"

He must be a glider pilot because glider pilots look for "turbulence".

I'm a glider pilot....