"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
I'm stuck on the question "why would I care?" I mean, if I want to avoid
a
t-storm, I don't particularly care whether the discharges are to the
ground
or within the atmosphere.

I've yet to see any reference that indicates that the devices actually do
filter out cloud-to-cloud lightning. So far, all we've got to go on is a
Usenet post.

This brings me to my main concern about this type of device, at least as I
understand it. Static discharge occurs after the storm is already worth
avoiding. If I'm in the clouds, this seems terribly likely to permit a
storm to suddenly appear much too close.

First, I have no idea why you say that "static discharge occurs after the
storm is already worth avoiding". Lightning is a very good indicator of
*active* thunderstorms, exactly the sorts of storms you'd want to avoid.

Secondly, storms can appear quickly true, but it's not like one's going to
engulf you in an instant.

Solutions based upon drop size/density (ie. RADAR) would appear to be more
useful in that regard.

They are sometimes useful, sometimes not. Consider, for example, that it is
entirely possible to have heavy rain, perfectly safe to fly in without a
thunderstorm. Also consider that radar suffers from attenuation (heavy rain
hiding even heavier rain farther away), while lightning detection does not.

So...is it really safe to fly in the clouds with naught but spherics for
weather?

I haven't had a chance to use them myself, so I can't answer that question
first-hand. However, those who ought to know say that lightning is actually
a much better predictor of thunderstorm strength, and of whether what's out
there is a thunderstorm at all (of course) than rainfall is. Lightning
detectors sure seem to be the standard equipment preferred in places like
Florida, and they seem popular elsewhere at all, for those frequently
dealing with thunderstorms (embedded or otherwise).

BTW, since my club's aircraft are all carrying strikefinders, I'd
appreciate any references to descriptions of how best to leverage these in
IFR flight.

Turn it on. Stay away from the strikes. I understand your hesitance to
just cruise right on into developing thunderstorms without knowing ahead of
time how well the Strikefinder works. But I'd have to say you're at least
in a better position than most of us to report on how well they work.

If I had a plane available to rent with a Strikefinder installed and lived
somewhere that isolated thunderstorms happened with any frequency, I would
take that opportunity to go out flying when one or more isolated
thunderstorms are around, and see what the Strikefinder says. You don't
need to get very close at all for the Strikefinder to tell you what it sees.
Compare the information from the Strikefinder against that from the Nexrad
radar information (available for pretty much everywhere in the US to anyone
with an Internet connection), and see for yourself whether you think the
Strikefinder does a reasonable job of highlighting the dangerous storms.

Pete