sferics vs Nexrad

I just watched a storm develop from just light rain to nasty boomer on
the radar (and pass over my house) in seven minutes, which leads me to
wonder whether, had I been relying on Nexrad for strategic weather
avoidance, I might have flown right into it, and whether sferics would
have given me a better heads-up.

Given a choice, and noting that you usually can get a radar loop before
takeoff, which would you prefer installed in your simgle-engine IFR
bugsmasher? (The choice is between sferics and downloaded Nexrad images)
I wonder if sferics is still the better choice, given it's real time,
no subscription, and lightning is reported to precede rain by
significant time.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Sferics would have definitely been better, had you been in an airplane.
Sferics are real-time...when there is a discharge, you see it immediately.
NEXRAD, as available today, has a built-in delay of from 4 to 11 minutes.
The folks at the NWS sites can see the results of each antenna rotation
incrementally, but the "whole picture" is made up of many rotations, at
different elevations, and must be massaged before being transmitted to user
ports.

Bob Gardner

"Jose" wrote in message
m...
I just watched a storm develop from just light rain to nasty boomer on the
radar (and pass over my house) in seven minutes, which leads me to wonder
whether, had I been relying on Nexrad for strategic weather avoidance, I
might have flown right into it, and whether sferics would have given me a
better heads-up.

Given a choice, and noting that you usually can get a radar loop before
takeoff, which would you prefer installed in your simgle-engine IFR
bugsmasher? (The choice is between sferics and downloaded Nexrad images) I
wonder if sferics is still the better choice, given it's real time, no
subscription, and lightning is reported to precede rain by significant
time.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Viperdoc wrote:
I have both, along with active radar. The Nexrad gives a better all around
picture, while sferics requires some interpretation. For the money, Nexrad
download is a better choice.

Agree. I have sferics and XM nexrad. If I had to choose, I'd take the nexrad,
for the same reasons Viperdoc mentions. I concede the real-time nature of the
sferics vs. delayed nexrad, but nexrad is still the better tradeoff. Both is best.

"Jose" wrote:

I just watched a storm develop from just light rain to nasty boomer on the
radar (and pass over my house) in seven minutes, which leads me to wonder
whether, had I been relying on Nexrad for strategic weather avoidance, I
might have flown right into it, and whether sferics would have given me a
better heads-up.

Given a choice, and noting that you usually can get a radar loop before
takeoff, which would you prefer installed in your simgle-engine IFR
bugsmasher? (The choice is between sferics and downloaded Nexrad images)

I just returned from a 2-day trip to s. Texas, during which I used NEXRAD to
weave in and out among air mass CBs. I would NOT have wanted to do this
with spherics alone, as it simply does not give a clear enough "big picture"
for me to be comfortable with such tactics. Would I like to have a
Stormscope as well? Sure. Have to choose one? NEXRAD, hands down.

I wonder if sferics is still the better choice, given it's real time, no
subscription, and lightning is reported to precede rain by significant
time.

Nice to have, but inferior *overall* to NEXRAD link, IMO. The
no-subscription feature is a real point in its favor, though.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

In article ,
"Dan Luke" wrote:
I wonder if sferics is still the better choice, given it's real time, no
subscription, and lightning is reported to precede rain by significant
time.

Nice to have, but inferior *overall* to NEXRAD link, IMO. The
no-subscription feature is a real point in its favor, though.


It depends on what information you desire. I have a StrikeFinder and
XM. The StrikeFinder is infinitely better at identifying lightning.
The StrikeFinder can also help identify serious convective activity, but
then again, so can NEXRAD + Echo Tops. No way would I rely on the XM
products for lightning detection, but I didn't have a StrikeFinder, I
probably wouldn't put one in. Flying with both is optimal, but there is
substantially more information provided via XM.


JKG

The StrikeFinder can also help identify serious convective activity, but
then again, so can NEXRAD + Echo Tops.

.... except Nexrad is at least seven minutes old, and sometimes fifteen.
What prompted the question was watching hearing boomers out my window,
and seeing that Nexrad had only light rain showing. On the next update,
seven minutes later, some moderate rain was showing. Meanwhile, it was
thunder and lightning outside my window.

I'd've been unhappy in the air.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Both strike finders and NEXTRAD have strong and weak points. The
strike finder is real time. Even at the weather station the newest
image is about 5 minutes old. The strike finder will not show you the
beginnings of convective activity while the RADAR *may*.

With time you learn to anticipate, or forecast using NEXTRAD but it
takes watching it for a while as well. If you know what it's been
doing, where it's going, and it's history along with moisture, laps
rate, and lifting index you can do well in predicting 5 to 10 minutes
ahead, but don't expect to pinpoint specifically what's going to be
happening where, when.

With study and experience the two together are fantastic and I wish I
had them in the Deb.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Jose" wrote:

The StrikeFinder can also help identify serious convective activity, but
then again, so can NEXRAD + Echo Tops.

... except Nexrad is at least seven minutes old, and sometimes fifteen.
What prompted the question was watching hearing boomers out my window, and
seeing that Nexrad had only light rain showing. On the next update, seven
minutes later, some moderate rain was showing. Meanwhile, it was thunder
and lightning outside my window.

I'd've been unhappy in the air.

In practice, it doesn't seem to matter much.

The lag has not caused any problems for me in two years of regular XM Wx use
in thunderstorm country.

As with all things in flying, judgment and experience make the difference in
using linked NEXRAD safely.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

In article ,
Jose wrote:

The StrikeFinder can also help identify serious convective activity, but
then again, so can NEXRAD + Echo Tops.

... except Nexrad is at least seven minutes old, and sometimes fifteen.
What prompted the question was watching hearing boomers out my window,
and seeing that Nexrad had only light rain showing. On the next update,
seven minutes later, some moderate rain was showing. Meanwhile, it was
thunder and lightning outside my window.


NEXRAD can be a couple minutes old, or up to several minutes old
(assuming you receive the 5 minute updates.) It isn't "at least seven
minutes old." However, you have no idea HOW old it is, so I certainly
wouldn't use it to navigate around thunderstorms unless I was VMC.



JKG

Viperdoc wrote:
The Nexrad gives a better all around
picture, while sferics requires some interpretation.

I agree - I've used both. The sferics requires a lot of interpretation
- and few pilots have the skill set to use it to maximum effect. There
is a long learning curve. However, once the learning curve is
complete, the real time nature of the sferics makes it superior for
tactical operations - those where you get within about 25 miles of the
activity. The nexrad is clearly the superior strategic tool. However,
for strategic purposes Fligh****ch makes an acceptable substitute.

For the money, Nexrad download is a better choice.

For the average pilot, I agree. For someone who will take the time to
really learn how to use the sferics for tactical avoidance (more time
than he will ever save over simply taking longer detours around weather
or occasionally landing to wait it out), and will use Fligh****ch to
make up for the strategic deficiencies of sferics, the sferics is
better.

Of course both is best.

Michael