Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Onboard vs Downlink radar

Also on US Internet forums I often feel that any anomaly seen in radar images is always only attributed to time lag. But the issue is more complex. Some issues are also related to other problems with the radar infrastructure. The following image shows such an issue where the range detection of a single radar site did apparently not work properly

In my very personal opinion the key to successful data link weather usage is to combine radar, strike and infrared information. If you look at those three things together and they match geographically the probability for any error is extremely small as the data sources are measured and processed in very different ways.

The following image shows a thunderstorm system which is right now in northern France. The radar, strikes and infrared all overlap:

Last Edited by Sebastian_G at 06 Jul 09:48
www.ing-golze.de
EDAZ

I went out to gather some more real life data to compare data link weather to on board radar:

www.ing-golze.de
EDAZ

I struggled long and hard with if I should keep my radar at all on my avionics upgrade. Initially I didn’t see the need for it, but in the end it was stories like these that made me decide not only to keep it, but to update it to a new radar that can display right on the Avidyne. Not cheap, but also not insanely expensive either. The radar was $15K, which might be a bargain if it prevents you from flying into a TS that will structurally break up your plane.

Sebastian thanks for the clarification.

KHTO, LHTL

Here is a very nice video showing the merits of downlink WX. As Sebastian said, the point of it is to never actually get to the point where you need to go IMC, thanks to acting well ahead of time. Of course, if the weather is bad enough, this is not always possible.



I had some similar weather on my Ukraine trip this week, and the ADL was priceless. I also had a lot of opportunity to compare the sferics data from the ADL with the stormscope. And whilst the WX500 is definitely one of better units, the strike information from the ADL was so much more valuable. Whilst azimuth is OK from the stormscope, range is just a guess. So what you get from the stormscope is usally a “field” of displayed strikes which is much bigger than it really is. With the ADL on board, I would nowadays renounce to the stormscope, but not the other way around.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Boy do I miss ATC helping with weather avoidance. Typical weather in Florida with the heat of the day causing isolated TS that fill in over land.

KHTO, LHTL

German ATC are equipped with weather radar overlay and provide assistance like in Florida. Just that the weather is generally less convective.

boscomantico wrote:

As Sebastian said, the point of it is to never actually get to the point where you need to go IMC, thanks to acting well ahead of time. Of course, if the weather is bad enough, this is not always possible.

What’s your thoughts of using an ADL unit for CB avoidance if the forecast is for embedded CB?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

I don’t really have any thoughts about it. I don’t fly when there are widespread embedded thunderstorms forecast or present. At least I would give the area a very wide berth.

But of course one could do it, and avoid the heavy rain and areas with strikes using the equipment. Due to the delay of the data, one would want to stay well clear of the indicated CBs though. Depending on how exactly the conditions are (i.e. how closely the CBs are spaced), it would be a bit of a gamble.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

And I think one should at least have a good stormscope in addition to the ADL.

LFPT, LFPN
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top