Strike Finder or ADF

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,489
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Strike finders are great at pointing area you don't want to go into also ADF at about 300kc do a good job at pointing at area you don't want to go into. You get a lot more info on the strike finder over just pointing at the area not to go into so with all the other information available would you still pull out the ADF to make room or leave it as a useful tool.
 
With the tools available today (FIS-B, XM, etc) IMO I see no reason to keep either, but I'd pull the ADF before strike finder if I had to prioritize for some reason. That is unless you had some sort of penchant for AM broadcasts.
 
An ADF is a bit redundant if you have a GPS and a VOR receiver. The ADF is nice for holds as it gives you a nice visual reference. I do love my old strike finder though, it is extremely useful especially when combined with ADSb weather. We all know ADSB lags so you can compare what you see on the strike finder to what ADSb shows to track the movement of the system in real time.
 
Grum.Man said:
An ADF is a bit redundant if you have a GPS and a VOR receiver. The ADF is nice for holds as it gives you a nice visual reference. I do love my old strike finder though, it is extremely useful especially when combined with ADSb weather. We all know ADSB lags so you can compare what you see on the strike finder to what ADSb shows to track the movement of the system in real time.
Click to expand...
Strike finder does a good job with azimuth, but distance can be way off.
 
Both are equally as useless. Those are tools of the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
Strike finder and ADF Antenna are both heavy and draggy. Remove them and gain the speed and weight back.

IIRC Strike finder also has to be calibrated periodically to truly be accurate.
 
The Strike Finder can't play cool AM radio stations while in cruise. You probably shouldn't be flying in thunderstorms anyway so ADF for the win.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
IIRC Strike finder also has to be calibrated periodically to truly be accurate.
Click to expand...
Except that even calibrated, it can’t be truly accurate. It doesn’t know how powerful the electrical discharge of a lightning strike is, so it uses a preprogrammed “average” to calculate distance.
 
A strike finder gives real time data, your weather data feeds have a delay of several minutes. OTOH there aren't many NDB stations still around.
 
Both. ADF for ballgames, spherics for lightning.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Except that even calibrated, it can’t be truly accurate. It doesn’t know how powerful the electrical discharge of a lightning strike is, so it uses a preprogrammed “average” to calculate distance.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use it (strikefinder) to pick my way through thunderboomers... so range accuracy isn't particularly important. More of a there-be-dragons kind of stay away guidance.
 
Stormscope stays. A tool already installed and working. Added to eyeballs, forecasts, METARS, ADSB-in, FSS, and whatever else ya got. Ye ole tech was helpful to me as late as Oct 2023. I’ll remove it when it dies, or replace it with one that someone ditched in exchange for that coveted clean panel look.
 
Personally I want any tool that keeps me away from thunderstorms.

Removing Storm Scope from my plane (WX-10A), but replacing it with WX-500
 
topgun260 said:
The Strike Finder can't play cool AM radio stations while in cruise. You probably shouldn't be flying in thunderstorms anyway so ADF for the win.
Click to expand...
You must really enjoy listening to low quality audio.
 
When I bought my 172 the ADF was tuned for a local 50000 watt radio station that broadcast the Reds baseball games. It didn't work, it got pulled out early on along with the wire/antenna on top of the plane. Crazy to me that that wire was used on a ADF system. I think there is still something on the bottom of my plane that was used with the ADF?
 
I had a used Strikefinder installed when I first bought my Warrior, shortly before FIS-B was widely available but XM weather was. I liked the idea of the redundancy.

In hindsight, now that the Strikefinder firmly died and was replaced with an engine monitor, I can’t think of a single time it gave me info the XM or, later, FIS-B, hadn’t already provided. It was decent for azimuth and loosely accurate for distance but lightning is a relative lagging indicator compared to the color radar picture, which shows a cell’s development and track (especially when looped). Yes, I know the Strikefinder shows sferics that precede bolts of lightning, but the NEXRAD does that even more so.

Also, depending on the model you have, if you change heading to avoid a cell, you need to clear the screen to avoid confusion: the images don’t turn when you do, without an expensive add-on, as I recall.

The one good use the thing did have was to remind me when my wingtip lights were left on in “wig-wag” mode: that made a particular pattern on the SF screen because the light module was mounted too close to the SF antenna.
 
I was never particularly fond of or good at shooting ADF approaches, but it was one of the primary three approaches back in the days I was rated. I still see beauty in the simplicity of that system. I'm sad in a way to see that it has gone to the point of uselessness.... and from my perspective not knowing all the particulars of the systems, I feel strongly that ADF would make a vastly better backup system for GPS than the minimum VOR network that is the plan. With modern electronics, cheap low-power ground stations could be placed at nearly every airport and virtually anyplace else too, as en route navads. I feel like the airborne equipment could be miniaturized and very cheap too, compared to what they used to be. Compared with VOR which requires a seemingly complex and expensive ground network. ADF for the win. They could probably put in a ground-based network of stations to look like a starlink satellite network but on the ground, for the price of one VOR station.

Sadly, nobody asked me.....

So, as much as I'd like to be able to "vote" ADF, a working strike finder does seem to offer a bit more utility
 
topgun260 said:
The Strike Finder can't play cool AM radio stations while in cruise. You probably shouldn't be flying in thunderstorms anyway so ADF for the win.
Click to expand...

So add SXM and have more weather data plus music. :)
 
Brad W said:
I was never particularly fond of or good at shooting ADF approaches, but it was one of the primary three approaches back in the days I was rated. I still see beauty in the simplicity of that system. I'm sad in a way to see that it has gone to the point of uselessness.... and from my perspective not knowing all the particulars of the systems, I feel strongly that ADF would make a vastly better backup system for GPS than the minimum VOR network that is the plan. With modern electronics, cheap low-power ground stations could be placed at nearly every airport and virtually anyplace else too, as en route navads. I feel like the airborne equipment could be miniaturized and very cheap too, compared to what they used to be. Compared with VOR which requires a seemingly complex and expensive ground network. ADF for the win. They could probably put in a ground-based network of stations to look like a starlink satellite network but on the ground, for the price of one VOR station.

Sadly, nobody asked me.....

So, as much as I'd like to be able to "vote" ADF, a working strike finder does seem to offer a bit more utility
Click to expand...

One issue is that the antennas are quite large due to the low frequency.

What would be better would be to do a VHF ADF system.

NDB approaches are pretty easy if you have a coupled RMI.
 
Gary Ward said:
When I bought my 172 the ADF was tuned for a local 50000 watt radio station that broadcast the Reds baseball games. It didn't work, it got pulled out early on along with the wire/antenna on top of the plane. Crazy to me that that wire was used on a ADF system. I think there is still something on the bottom of my plane that was used with the ADF?
Click to expand...

Long antenna due to low frequency. 800 - 1700 KILO Hertz. Aircraft radios are 118 - 137 MEGA Hertz.
 
Emphatically a Stormscope/ Strikefinder should stay if working. It is one of the important significant weather avoiding tools you can have on on your light GA mover, and complimentary to all the other more modern tools, and your eyeballs. There are obviously situations where XM/ADSB weather can give you a picture that helps avoid the bad stuff, even with the lag, if far enough away. But if the movement of those areas are not either moving to or away from your direction of flight, but moving obliquely or roughly perpendicular to your flight path instead, the availability of real-time spherics data can make the difference for a safe penetration that would fool you if only relying on the pretty XM/Adsb picture alone.
 
Last edited:
Pinecone said:
.....

NDB approaches are pretty easy if you have a coupled RMI.
Click to expand...
yep
and
I remember them being fairly easy even with only just a basic ADF indicator, a stopwatch, and a compass....when the station was located on the field
 
Gary Ward said:
When I bought my 172 the ADF was tuned for a local 50000 watt radio station that broadcast the Reds baseball games. It didn't work, it got pulled out early on along with the wire/antenna on top of the plane. Crazy to me that that wire was used on a ADF system. I think there is still something on the bottom of my plane that was used with the ADF?
Click to expand...
But, now, where do you dry your socks when camping at Oshkosh?
 
Clip4 said:
You must really enjoy listening to low quality audio.
Click to expand...
Well, it's cheaper than an SiriusXM subscription AND you can tell if a thunderstorm is close by the loud crackles in the audio when lightning strikes! The crackle is in real time by the way.
 
M2C - if you're flying close enough to bad weather that the lag in FIS B is an issue, you're flying too close to bad weather.
 
ADF can act as a strike finder, but strike finder can't act as an ADF, so keep the ADF. ;) j/k
 
WDD said:
M2C - if you're flying close enough to bad weather that the lag in FIS B is an issue, you're flying too close to bad weather.
Click to expand...
Using your equipment to fly strategically is always the best option. But if you fly long enough, you may find yourself in a situation that was not completely expected. Knowing what equipment can be relied upon to give the best information for a safe outcome may then become quite important. Think of the Stormscope/Strikefinder like an insurance policy you pay for, but probably will never have to use.
 
FIS-B shows you precipitation. Storm Scope/Strike Finder shows lightening activity.

BIG difference.

Also. FIS-B may show a return where there is no rain at your altitude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top