Thunderstorm avoidance

That can turn into scud-running very quickly, my friend. I've lost a couple of friends to that game. :yes:

Yes it can, but then flying through a cell embedded within a line can get you an elevator ride to hell as well. Since I've spent more time in small planes at 100' and below flying pipeline routes in shall we say, suboptimal conditions (ever build ice at 100'?) and you've spent more time punching through weather in strong & powerful jets, I'd call the difference a "devil you know" difference as neither option is really a good option, but sometimes you still have to get the job done.
 
Yes it can, but then flying through a cell embedded within a line can get you an elevator ride to hell as well. Since I've spent more time in small planes at 100' and below flying pipeline routes in shall we say, suboptimal conditions (ever build ice at 100'?) and you've spent more time punching through weather in strong & powerful jets, I'd call the difference a "devil you know" difference as neither option is really a good option, but sometimes you still have to get the job done.

This would be a last resort because your life of livelihood depended on it.

This doesn't sound like a good choice for GA types.

Around here the ground rise quickly in the east. Scud running at 3000' MSL will get you a meeting with a windmill, right quick.
 
My friends at work with 496s keep on telling me I need to get one so that I can get the XM weather. I'm not convinced I need it, I think I'd rather get myself a hand-held NAV/COM in case of total electrical failure in IMC. At least then I can fly the LOC back into Williamsport. Then again, I also keep out of IMC if thunderstorms are looming and I can't see them.

My experience with a *GOOD* Icom handheld Nav/Com was that the Nav side is near worthless. I would *NEVER* want to try and fly a LOC or even a VOR in actual with one. I wouldn't even try it.

You would be way way better off doing an approach with a $200 handheld aviation GPS. The 496--ANY DAY--over trying to do a LOC approach on a handheld radio.
 
Wrong, spend a few extra bucks and get this if you want a backup.

I've flown an approach (VFR under the hood, with safety pilot, of course) with the 496.

The update rate is plenty fast, and I would be confident using it as a backup in partial panel situation. That said, my first move on losing vacuum in an airplane so equipped would be "Vectors to nearest VFR."

While that new product may do the same thing, the point is a battery-operated, fast update rate GPS unit is a superior backup to a handheld transceiver with a NAV function.
 
I've flown an approach (VFR under the hood, with safety pilot, of course) with the 496.

The update rate is plenty fast, and I would be confident using it as a backup in partial panel situation. That said, my first move on losing vacuum in an airplane so equipped would be "Vectors to nearest VFR."

While that new product may do the same thing, the point is a battery-operated, fast update rate GPS unit is a superior backup to a handheld transceiver with a NAV function.

Yep, and a battery powere fast rate GPS containing an approach database with HITS and an AHRS for actual, rather than interpreted, attitude information is an order of magnitude better yet.
 
Sure would be -- that handheld has all those features now, or is it a future upgrade?

NOW, complete. They basically bought out VistaNav and packaged it with their name, so this isn't untried bleeding edge stuff. I flew with the VistaNav in Av Shilos plane. It works well. Oh yeah, did I mention XM weather? Yeah, it's got it.
 
NOW, complete. They basically bought out VistaNav and packaged it with their name, so this isn't untried bleeding edge stuff. I flew with the VistaNav in Av Shilos plane. It works well. Oh yeah, did I mention XM weather? Yeah, it's got it.

Wow..nice..

Is this the one that was recently released at Osh and is supposed to cost less than a 496?
 
Wow..nice..

Is this the one that was recently released at Osh and is supposed to cost less than a 496?
No. That is the handheld GPS. The synthetic vision setup is like 6k starting--higher with accessories..I think.
 
Wow..nice..

Is this the one that was recently released at Osh and is supposed to cost less than a 496?

No, that is the lesser model which has no AHRS....just a GPS w/ weather. This costs more than a 496 with an MSRP (luckily, B/K doesn't have a "No negotiations, no competetive pricing" clause with their dealers like Garmin does) at $4400 acording to the B/K guy I spoke with at OSH.
 
OK, so the one Henning is referring to is a panel mount?

If so, that doesn't provide the independent redundancy a handheld does running on batteries.

Negative, it is yoke mount on a Samsung tablet. The AHRS unit is seperate and will need to be secured to the floor in some fashion.
 
Very interesting discussion! I have all of the above on the P-Baron. Because of having all of those systems and the redundancy and being in a pressurized twin, I will fly in conditions I wouldn't in other planes.

In the old days, in the TN A-36 with a 396, storm scope and mark one eyeballs, I spoke with FSS many a time and got routed into an area of rapidly building cells. The problems were: the frequency was crazy if the weather was really bad; the briefer often didn't have information I wanted like where are tops. Being single pilot, I often couldn't keep updated on the weather in the manner I wanted to, fly the plane and listen to approach if clearances were being amended. Many briefers couldn't accurately convey the weather nearly as well as a good graphic. Many times I just couldn't figure out where the problems were and they didn't like to recommend routing. Systems can rapidly change and I never had FSS call me back to tell me it had changed--take that back, I got an update once that I recall.


Just as in the A-36, I evaluate before departure. As Lance said, on a long flight, we know this will all change enroute. Previously, I was very reluctant to enter choppy IMC with cells inbeded because I just couldn't tell where they were; I still don't like to to that but can. Just don't press things, whatever you are flying.

In a rental plane with a storm scope and XM weather you just wouldn't find me going through an area with inbeded cells that were large and close together. I'd want to be VMC in all but circumstances where I could climb, descent or very quickly get through the IMC portion of the storm. Of course, temper all that with severity. No problem with fog or stationary fronts with low tops.

Another consideration for me is: THIS IS MY PLANE. Would you point your new car through a hail storm? I know how this plane is maintained, what works and what doesn't and I don't want to fix storm damage unnecessarily.

It's great that everyone is thinking through this. Can't tell you how many times I've gone a different direction that that recommended by approach or center because I could stay on top or visual and they couldn't see what was there. On-board radar can also give you a real good feel for where tops are; many times, I've climbed right over the nasty part of a slow moving storm. One was showing yellow and red on XM from the Gulf of Mx all the way up to Kentucky; was able to go right over the top at FL190. All things to take into consideration.

In a single, even when I could get on top in the TN A-36 I was very unsettled. If something happened to that one fan, I was going to have to descend through nasty stuff and make an instrument approach in challenging conditions. The twin takes some, not all, of that pressure off.

Best,

Dave
 
I had a good flight yesterday that I thought would fit into this thread. Particularly to the discussion about using a 396/stormscope for tstorm avoidance. I had a charter up to northern MN yesterday. Was thinking about chilling out a little up there and grabbing a bite to eat. however, i had flown over an area of building cu's on the way up and figured that line would start to spawn storms for my return (empty) trip. fired up the 396 and waited for it to download the radar and decided it was time to go before the line filled in. a pretty good set of cells were down around Minneapolis associated with a Low and it was starting to build along a trough to the northwest. As soon as I took off and leveled at 13K I could see the buildups 100 miles in front of me. looked like there was a good wide gap between the cells, but who knew what it would look like in a half hour when I got there. Here's the flight track, flight aware captured the weather perfectly:

attachment.php


And the view out my window. sorry for all the bugs.

attachment.php




attachment.php


attachment.php


And the 396 was showing pretty much the same thing. The cells were moving straight south, along my flight direction, and pretty slowly, so the lag wasnt much of an issue. plus I could SEE them. And of course I couldnt get my camera to focus on the handheld. here's the picture though.

attachment.php


So as I was approaching that blob I could see inside and out that I was going to clip the corner of it. 50 miles away I got a deviation right of course so i only had to jive about 3 degrees right and swung around the west edge of it. Interesting, as I got close, the stormscope showed very little activity in the western cells, they were apparently just building and not letting anything loose. All it shows are a few strikes at 10:30 and 40ish miles, but this was taken as I was coming around the corner and right next to major buildups.

attachment.php


The best part however was the view after going around the corner. cant beat this:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • flight_track_map.gif
    flight_track_map.gif
    15.6 KB · Views: 470
  • DSC02858.JPG
    DSC02858.JPG
    569.9 KB · Views: 469
  • DSC02861.JPG
    DSC02861.JPG
    429.4 KB · Views: 459
  • DSC02860.JPG
    DSC02860.JPG
    464.8 KB · Views: 485
  • DSC02871.JPG
    DSC02871.JPG
    603 KB · Views: 433
  • DSC02867.JPG
    DSC02867.JPG
    532 KB · Views: 428
  • DSC02877.JPG
    DSC02877.JPG
    449.2 KB · Views: 463
Last edited:
Looks like you've got some of the state birds of Minnesota on your windscreen:D
 
I wish I'd had a camera with me yesterday, and knew how to use it halfway as well as Tony! I would have some awesome pics of building storms over northern lower MI. I got to see them in all their glory from a comfortable distance. I was flying back from GLR (Gaylord, MI) to Marine City in a rented C-182RG after flying up for what I'd hoped was going to be a nice long afternoon with a friend. The stuff I flew under on the way up, let's say between OSC and HTL, was building fast. By a half hour after I had landed there was a line of cells forming stretching all the way from TVC to BAX which the briefer said was threatening to turn into a solid band. So right after lunch I asked my friend to drive me back to the airport to gather more info and perhaps get out while the getting was good.

Another pilot at the GLR terminal building, a CAP fellow, was on his way back to OZW (Howell, MI) and was obviously very concerned as he sat at the wx station discussing the situation with a briefer and finished by filing a flight plan and getting ready to launch. His idea was to go right straight through the line, VFR, staying low and hoping to be able to pick a clear path. I hope he made it! Seriously, there is no way that I would have flown that route as a VFR pilot, and probably not IFR either if I was IR rated as the wx picture was rapidly changing and embedded TS might have been developing. Definitely not VFR underneath since the ceilings were lowering even as I was flying up. Probably not on top either as the tops were up to FL 300, though as I learned later you might have been able to thread your way between cells at 7500 or 9500.

I debated whether to launch or try to wait until the convection died down a little toward evening, but the forecast didn't provide much hope that things would improve. Things looked iffy for the next day too. But I noticed that all of the activity was over the land, nothing at all over Lake Huron. What I wasn't sure of was whether the lack of precip meant SKC/FEW/SCT or whether there was a ceiling. To the east from GLR was clear, so I launched knowing that I could at least make it to APN. It turned out that I was able to climb to 7500 and get a good view of what was going on. By the time I neared APN I knew I could at least make it to OSC, and it looked like clear sailing with just a few puffs of white over the lake. So I picked up flight following from APN approach, got handed off to Minneapolis Center, and turned south toward OSC. Off to my right were some awesomely impressive cloud buildups and areas of showers. From up there I could see that even though there was a ceiling, the really dangerous cells were still isolated. The floor would have been a craggy cloudscape with huge columns to thread between -- maybe flyable if the turbulence wasn't too bad, but there would have been no way to be sure that I would be able to get down safely. I was definitely glad to be where I was, and not there. By the time I reached OSC I could see clear and a million across to the far shore of the Thumb, so I continued on, over the open water, crossing Saginaw Bay at the widest point to avoid another forming cell over the lower part of the Bay. I went feet dry directly over Port Austin. Conditions over the Thumb were SCT and I could see only one cell to worry about, around 30 nm south of BAX. I nervously called Flight Watch and received the reassuring news that it was an isolated cell, moving slowly southeast. At 150 kts I easily outran it back to home base, though as I passed PHN I could feel a little turbulence from it and thought for a few seconds that maybe I should land there and wait it out.

On the radar back at 76G I saw that the TVC-BAX line of storms had filled in, as expected, along the CAP pilot's line of flight. For a moment back in GLR I had toyed with the idea of following him as far as MBS or FNT. Now I'm glad I didn't go that way and I really hope he and his two pax (also CAP folks) made it home safely.

I'm sure this would have been a pretty routine flight for most people here, but it was the first time in several years I had pushed the edges of my wx envelope, and my first experience dodging t'storms since finishing my PPL almost 6 years ago... so when I saw this thread, I thought I'd post my story. :)
 
Last edited:
The HANDHELD runs on a Windows OS platform; the larger one does not. I'm still leary of flying with software running on Windows...

I would be. My boss has the VistaNav running on a tablet PC. I got the blue screen of death about 1 flight in 4. sometimes multiple times in one flight. sounds like a lousy backup to me. ill take the 3/496 thankyouverymuch.
 
I would be. My boss has the VistaNav running on a tablet PC. I got the blue screen of death about 1 flight in 4. sometimes multiple times in one flight. sounds like a lousy backup to me. ill take the 3/496 thankyouverymuch.

Hey Tony --

If you want to take pics of the screen next time, switch the camera into "Macro" mode, if it has one. The standard icon for Macro is a Tulip -- depending on the camera, it's usually a quick-set option from the back.

Cheers,

-Andrew
(otherwise not contributing to the thread)
 
We flew back through a building line on the way to Myrtle Beach today. Interesting to see the on-board radar pick up several red cells in our path 10 to 12 minutes before they popped up on our 496 (XM weather). We would have flown right into more than one if just relying on XM. Just confirms what I've seen before; made a pretty strong impression on the fella in the right seat who hadn't experienced that before.

Best,

Dave
 
And in contrast to my first post, this is how it can be when one uses all of the tools one has the way they are supposed to be used.
 

Attachments

  • barharbor.bmp
    469.8 KB · Views: 307
I'm sure this would have been a pretty routine flight for most people here, but it was the first time in several years I had pushed the edges of my wx envelope, and my first experience dodging t'storms since finishing my PPL almost 6 years ago... so when I saw this thread, I thought I'd post my story. :)

Great story, Liz! Thanks for sharing it. You're right, you need a camera with you next time!
 
We flew back through a building line on the way to Myrtle Beach today. Interesting to see the on-board radar pick up several red cells in our path 10 to 12 minutes before they popped up on our 496 (XM weather). We would have flown right into more than one if just relying on XM. Just confirms what I've seen before; made a pretty strong impression on the fella in the right seat who hadn't experienced that before.

Best,

Dave

Dave, just to add to your point...

About three weeks ago I could hear thunder about 5-6 miles west of my house. Checking the weather radar, I saw what would be, at worst, a level 2 heavy rain shower, with 3, 4, 5's within a 20 mile radius.

10 minutes pass, and lightning is striking within my neighborhood (in fact, our community center was struck, about 500' from my house). I check the radar again (it's in storm mode; scanning every 3 minutes or so). Image has updated twice, and, indeed, the storm over my house still shows a level 2. Next pass... it looks like a good old crimson red level 5.

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
Andrew,

What "weather radar" were you viewing that updates every three minutes? NEXRAD? Just curious since the severe storm VCP from the NWS WSR-88D Doppler radars produce a 0.5 degree base reflectivity image every 5 minutes.

Scott -- bad memory. I thought VCP on the WSR's was 3 minutes.

Thanks for correcting me...

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
I'm sitting on my couch about to head up for the night. I hear the crack of thunder in the distance, look up, and within 30 seconds see CTG lightning. Count off, lightning struck 3 miles from the house.

Check NWS and TWC radar -- NWS shows a mild orange return, but is in clear-air mode still, so it looks more like noise than anything else.

TWC shows a gentle green gradient, nothing more.

We've had towering CU all day long west of of Richmond, so if you were IFR tonight, blundering into one of those based on XM WX would have probably made for one hell of a ride...

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
For those that might be curious...

Sound travels roughly 750 mph, or approximately one mile every 5 seconds. The speed actually varies greatly with the temperature, but a good rule of thumb of 5 seconds per mile is a pretty good approximation.

The temperature of the atmosphere affects the thunder sound you hear as well as how far away you can hear it. Sound waves move faster in warm air than they do in cool air. Typically, the air temperature decreases with height. When this occurs, thunder will normally have an audible range up to 10 miles.

However, when the air temperature increases with height, called a temperature inversion, sound waves are refracted (bent back toward the earth) as they move due to their faster motion in the warmer air. Normally, only the direct sound of thunder is heard. But refraction can add some additional sound, effectively amplifying the thunder and making it sound louder.

This is more common in the winter as thunderstorms develop in the warm air above a cooler surface air mass. If the lightning in these "elevated thunderstorms" remains above the inversion, then most of the thunder sound also remains above the inversion. However, much of the sound waves from cloud-to-ground strikes remain below the inversion giving thunder a much louder impact. This also explains why you can see cloud-to-cloud lightning directly above you, but no thunder is heard. :eek:

Why PoA rocks, right here. :yes: I knew the rule of thumb, but the inversion factoid is new! Thanks Scott! I owe you lunch next time I am in Charleston.

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top