If you get sferics on a satphone link, then a stormscope is of no use.
Until the satphone link stops working 
The stormscope won’t lie but you can get strikes from a fairly small piece of white fluff. If you were to fly into that, you could get hit.
Interesting paper on prop ice. Inconclusive in that the tests were carried out at too low a mach number to represent the aircraft in flight.
I also do not notice much affect on the prop in icing. I lose about 8kts in airspeed fairly quickly, which I presume is prop icing, then a much reduced slowdown as airframe ice builds. There is no vibration. The prop ice seems to stabilise early, probably due to kinetic heating and centrifugal shedding. Ice forms on the prop roots and spinner.
The prop is a Hoffman 3 blade wood composite turning at 1700-2000 rpm.
I suppose the answer is to increase prop RPM when entering icing conditions?
Ted.P wrote:
I suppose the answer is to increase prop RPM when entering icing conditions?
That’s what all AFM/POH say that say anything about the subject AFAIK
On the same flight that I posted the photo of, once we were past the Vosges mountains, the stormscope started showing a cluster of strikes over these mountains. As this was behind us, and nothing showed in front, it wasn’t worrying. After landing, I checked the strike map on Topmeteo in order to crosscheck with the stormscope, and there was not a single lightning strike in the whole area shown on the strike map. So I concluded that it was over-sensitive.
An annual checkout of the Stormscope system especially just before the thunderstorm season should be preformed by a qualified avionics shop with the factory recommended test equipment.
Don Valentine
@solaris
very interesting account, well illustrated by photos
I just came across this old thread.
I’ve developed a bit of a fear with clouds and big ones. Although most of it is in my head, is this a good mentality to keep safe?
When I flew out of Girona recently, there was TCU with tops of FL100+ and the two Finnish DA40 NGs that flew in said strong up and down draughts and even with power out couldn’t stop it. On departure I flew with Barcelona Radar and avoided this visually till clear before turning back on route. It was 36*C and they was rolling off the Pyrenees so I assumed they’d be bad.
Few months before that back from Dusseldorf, there was some embedded stuff into Stapleford with tops at FL70-FL80 which I avoided, but ended up inside one or two momentarily. There was no way of avoiding as I couldn’t see them but probably would have gone around them visually with high vertical extent.
Then recently into Prague I had a band of frontal rain sitting over the mountains, with embedded TCU. Majority of it I diverted around but Prague descended me into the weather and I was in and out of some layers. On a few occasions there was some thicker stuff that went up to FL140-FL160 that we flew through at FL90 but wasn’t anything more than light-moderate oscillations, if not on the weak side.
Does anyone have a FLxxx top of which they avoid at all costs? I normally avoid anything with very tall vertical extent, especially if above FL80+
I’ve developed a bit of a fear with clouds and big ones. Although most of it is in my head, is this a good mentality to keep safe?
For what it’s worth, my approach to it is to have personal minima and stick to them.
Coming back to flying after a 10 year interruption, I realize that my self-confidence level (particularly with turbulence – in my head too!) is not where it used to be back in the days. Therefore until that point, my personal minima is: avoid flying during the hot part of summer days (typically late morning to late afternoon) I am also very conservative with wind conditions, particularly in mountainous areas. I don’t hesitate to say no to a flight when I know it’s not gonna be fun (We fly for fun, don’t we?) and plan my trips accordingly. Yes, I am aware I risk to appear like a sissy at times. I want to fill my experience bucket without having to deplete my luck bucket too much. :D
I normally avoid anything with very tall vertical extent, especially if above FL80+
That’s good operating practice. Albeit you can get nasty, headset removing and head banging stuff much lower. DA40 isn’t the most stable ride with those glider-esque wings.
Some people, „heros“, take more chances than others.
Personally, and completely subjective, my impression is there is more „weather“ in later years in Europe. Maybe instability of atmosphere increased?
In the late 00‘s, in around 2000 flights, limited to FL250 (and mostly lower than that) there was never an issue to penetrate systems and avoid buildups. Sort of a „newspaper down, turn hdg bug, newspaper back up“ thing.
In 2021, in <100 flights, limited to FL310, I had one diversion due to TSRA and one deviation of ~300NM before a course due south (crossing alps) was possible.
For the majority of flights of ~1000nm, CB were a factor.
Snoopy wrote:
Maybe instability of atmosphere increased?
There is this thing called climate change…
