What_next, are you sure tha stormscope can indeed help with such assesment? I think that once there are strikes – for sure there are strong turbulances and nasty icing… But without the strikes – it may be exactly the same (if the air or ground radar shows high water content), just without the strikes …???
You are certainly right regarding convective CBs in summertime. They are almost equally nasty with and without strikes. But in frontal weather with embedded CBs, that you have to cross somewhere because it’s too wide to fly around, knowing where the strikes are helps a lot in decision making.
I fly an aircraft with radar and stormscope, one with radar only and a couple of trainers with stormscope only. From my experience I would draw my personal scale like this: radar&stormscope-100%; radar only-80%; stormscope only:30% . Without personal experience, I would rate the inflight-downloaded radar images at something like 60%. They are certainly good for avioding weather but no big help when one needs to fly through it (lack of resolution, lack of up/down scanning, not fully up to date).
What_next, are you sure tha stormscope can indeed help with such assesment? I think that once there are strikes – for sure there are strong turbulances and nasty icing… But without the strikes – it may be exactly the same (if the air or ground radar shows high water content), just without the strikes …???
In fact wondering what extra value the stormscope adds … (not much experience with that device).
With an on-board weather radar, you mainly get an image representing the water contents of the air/clouds in front of you. Whether or not this is associated to turbulence/icing and lightning can only be guessed. With an additional stormscope one can better discriminate between “harmless” water-rich clouds and real thunderstorms. (Just like the lightning symbols on the ground based radar charts.)
I have a stormscope (WX500) and a Moving Terrain device (connected by Iridium) in the plane I am flying. Just learning to interpret the data they provide.
Findings from the last trip – indeed stormscope did not map all the CB clouds found enroute. But on the MT device (radar images downloaded through Iridium) I could see them all, maybe due to the fact that weather was not extremely convective (morning hours).
I think the combination of the two is a pretty good one, with downloaded radar images being the first choice. In fact wondering what extra value the stormscope adds … (not much experience with that device).
BUT everyone expects / hopes to find IR SAT images in a future evolution of the ADL ;-)
I agree that a sat downlink beats having a stormscope. The decision whether to enter IMC cannot be based on the stormscope solely but it can be based on the information you get from a sat download:
- METARs down low
- precipitation radar
- strikes
- IR sat image (unfortunately not with the Iridium based products like ADL)
last summer i really wished i had a stormscope
The Stromscope is less complex and does not come with recurring costs but having any form of data link weather is a whole different experience in comparison.
Where can i find info about the trips kits?
The problem with a stormscope (I have a WX500, which is one of the “classics” and works fine) is that it can be used only as a “no-go hint” i.e. if it is showing a cluster of strikes, you really do not want to go there. It doesn’t work the other way i.e. if it shows nothing, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a massive CB there.
For a great demo of this, look at a sferics site e.g. here when it is raining heavily where you are. You will be amazed how often there is not a single strike. A lot of pretty severe weather, turbulence, icing conditions, you name it, doesn’t generate any electrical discharges.
I would suggest employing a strategy of flying the enroute section as VMC on top 
Thanks for all input :)
After cruising between thunderstorms last summer i really wished i had a stormscope… Certified or not…. Something similar for aviation like this:
http://www.ambientweather.com/ststrikealerthd.html
And no @what_next, i would not trust my life on it ….But still when you’re up there without any other available equipment….. ;)
Have also seen some used StormScopes on eBay. Of course nothing of interest if you don’t own you plane or probably to expensive to install..
But ADL120 seems very interesting! Good idea to buy one as a group! Where can i find info about the trips kits?
(@Airborne_again, wow that would be great if we could add one to our clubs fleet :) )
Jonas
ADL120 is the way to go if you want a working, reliable, hassle free and relatively cheap weather solution.
We share a unit with a couple of pilots and the running cost is a couple of euros per month.
We use it as a fully portable and removable solution. It’s stored in the hangar in a locker when not used.
In difficult weather I might consume up to 10€ / hr for weather downloads but the peace of mind that comes with it is priceless.
