Some of you people out there help me out. Where’s the output display for the Stormscope on an SR22? And then again, on an SR20? I’m reading all the literature and I see that the Stormscope apparently outputs to the Sandel HSI on the SR22. Does it also output to the ARNAV? And, if you select the Stormscope option in the SR20, does it output to its own display or just to the ARNAV?
For you people who are already flying more than this Website, that selected the Stormscope option, are you satisfied?
Bob Mihocik
“Bagger”
The stormscope outputs to the ARNAV in the SR20 and SR22. Not sure if it also displays on the Sandel or not.
It definitely worked once I was smart enough to turn it on.
Some of you people out there help me out. Where’s the output display for the Stormscope on an SR22? And then again, on an SR20? I’m reading all the literature and I see that the Stormscope apparently outputs to the Sandel HSI on the SR22. Does it also output to the ARNAV? And, if you select the Stormscope option in the SR20, does it output to its own display or just to the ARNAV?
Bruce Gunter, my Cirrus sales person, told me that the Stormscope displays on the SR22 ARNAV only, not on the Sandel. It is controlled (strike/cell mode, etc.) through the ARNAV.
As far as I know, the SR20 is the same way.
-Mike
Bob: The Stormscope should display on the Garmin 430, the ARNAV and on the Sandel HSI. On the Sandel the two upper keys on the right hand side select the range of displayed data and the hit rate should be displayed on the upper right of the screen. In the Garmin, once the Stormscope is installed and configured, the Stormscope setup is available on page Nav 3 and the data is mapped on Nav 2. The strike rate will appear on the upper right of the map screen. See the Garmin site under user manuals for the “400 series weather and traffic addendum” for more detail. See the Sandel site for information as to the Stromscope display on their unit. As I understand it, the range display on each of the ARNAV, Garmin 430 and Sandel are independent, and you may display the Stormscope on the different units with a different range display selected for each.
Note that the ARNAV portion of the Stormscope display is not in place yet so far as I know. ARNAV is promissing Stormscope, Ryan TCAS, BFGoodrich Skywatch and engine monitoring displays. So far as I know this is all vaporware at present. This should not affect the display on the Garmin and the Sandel units, and hopefully the ARNAV display will be wired to the Stormscope and all that will need to be done is a new software card for the ARNAV can be installed when available to impliment the Stormscope. Stay tuned!
Some of you people out there help me out. Where’s the output display for the Stormscope on an SR22? And then again, on an SR20? I’m reading all the literature and I see that the Stormscope apparently outputs to the Sandel HSI on the SR22. Does it also output to the ARNAV? And, if you select the Stormscope option in the SR20, does it output to its own display or just to the ARNAV?
For you people who are already flying more than this Website, that selected the Stormscope option, are you satisfied?
Bob Mihocik
“Bagger”
Stephen–is this from experience, direct info from Cirrus, or rumor? The stormscope has the capacity to be displayed on all those things, but I don’t believe that’s what’s actually wired up.
The stormscope support on the ARNAV definitely works, since that’s what’s in my SR20. My suspicion is that this is the case in the SR22 as well.
Stephen–is this from experience, direct info from Cirrus, or rumor? The stormscope has the capacity to be displayed on all those things, but I don’t believe that’s what’s actually wired up.
The stormscope support on the ARNAV definitely works, since that’s what’s in my SR20. My suspicion is that this is the case in the SR22 as well.
Dave, Stephen…
On N84MR, the WX500 displays on the ARNAV and not on the Garmin. I asked Brian Janzig (avionics guru at Cirrus) about that, and he confirmed that it’s wired that way; although there’s no reason he could think of that an avionics shop couldn’t wire the WX500 interface into the Garmin as well. It just isn’t that way as it leaves the factory.
From what I’ve seen so far, having it on the ARNAV only is just fine; although I suppose having it on the Garmin as well would be comforting on that dark and stormy night when the ARNAV dies…
Mike.
Mike: It seems to me that it would be Cirrus’s responsibility to provide all the necessary interfaces between avionics as a part of the factory install. I saw the recent email from Cirrus to the effect that they now have the interface in place between the GPS and the transponder to start the flight timer and to switch the transponder to active as soon as the GPS. They appear to be able to enable this option. The Garmin will definatly display the Stormscope data. There is also, as I understand from BFGoodrich no limitation on the same data being sent to more than one display device. Same applies to the Sandel. The Stormscope data should certainly be displayed on the Sandel. I intend to prepare a detailed checklist on delivery and ensure that all of the necessary wires are in place on delivery. This is not something that the buyer needs to have done at another avionics shop after delivery. So far as the source of my information, I saw the BFGoodrich display at AOPA last fall, and they were showing their Stormscope data on a Garmin 430. The is also described in the manual that Garmin has posted to their web site. I have ordered the Stormscope option with the express expectation that it’s data will be displayed on all avionics items capable of displaying the Stormscope data. There is no uncertainty that this includes all three: the ARNAV, the Garmin 430 and the Sandel.
Stephen–is this from experience, direct info from Cirrus, or rumor? The stormscope has the capacity to be displayed on all those things, but I don’t believe that’s what’s actually wired up.
The stormscope support on the ARNAV definitely works, since that’s what’s in my SR20. My suspicion is that this is the case in the SR22 as well.
Dave, Stephen…
On N84MR, the WX500 displays on the ARNAV and not on the Garmin. I asked Brian Janzig (avionics guru at Cirrus) about that, and he confirmed that it’s wired that way; although there’s no reason he could think of that an avionics shop couldn’t wire the WX500 interface into the Garmin as well. It just isn’t that way as it leaves the factory.
From what I’ve seen so far, having it on the ARNAV only is just fine; although I suppose having it on the Garmin as well would be comforting on that dark and stormy night when the ARNAV dies…
Mike.
Stephen–is this from experience, direct info from Cirrus, or rumor? The stormscope has the capacity to be displayed on all those things, but I don’t believe that’s what’s actually wired up.
The stormscope support on the ARNAV definitely works, since that’s what’s in my SR20. My suspicion is that this is the case in the SR22 as well.
Dave, Stephen…
On N84MR, the WX500 displays on the ARNAV and not on the Garmin. I asked Brian Janzig (avionics guru at Cirrus) about that, and he confirmed that it’s wired that way; although there’s no reason he could think of that an avionics shop couldn’t wire the WX500 interface into the Garmin as well. It just isn’t that way as it leaves the factory.
From what I’ve seen so far, having it on the ARNAV only is just fine; although I suppose having it on the Garmin as well would be comforting on that dark and stormy night when the ARNAV dies…
Mike.
As unpopular as this may sound, having experienced the Arnav display of WX500 lightning data on a long cross country, I can’t imagine it getting much better. With the strikes/cells plotted on the big screen (scaled out to 200 miles) along with your flight plan legs it provides tremendous situational awareness. You can watch the progress of cells along your projected course and have a very good idea of whether and where you might think about diverting. It all shows up very clearly and uncluttered. I know Arnav takes a beating on this forum but I must say with regard to lightning data I’d much rather see it on the “big screen TV” than on the Garmin or the Sandel, though I suppose it wouldn’t hurt to have it on all 3 (except for clutter). This is one area where the Arnav’s large sreen area really shines.
Hello Stephen,
My thoughts exactly. I would prefer to have it everywhere and choose where I want to display it today. I would be interested in seeing your checklist if you don’t mind sharing. Thanks
Have a happy Cirrus day
Woor
pilot4hire@bigfoot.com
Mike: It seems to me that it would be Cirrus’s responsibility to provide all the necessary interfaces between avionics as a part of the factory install. I saw the recent email from Cirrus to the effect that they now have the interface in place between the GPS and the transponder to start the flight timer and to switch the transponder to active as soon as the GPS. They appear to be able to enable this option. The Garmin will definatly display the Stormscope data. There is also, as I understand from BFGoodrich no limitation on the same data being sent to more than one display device. Same applies to the Sandel. The Stormscope data should certainly be displayed on the Sandel. I intend to prepare a detailed checklist on delivery and ensure that all of the necessary wires are in place on delivery. This is not something that the buyer needs to have done at another avionics shop after delivery. So far as the source of my information, I saw the BFGoodrich display at AOPA last fall, and they were showing their Stormscope data on a Garmin 430. The is also described in the manual that Garmin has posted to their web site. I have ordered the Stormscope option with the express expectation that it’s data will be displayed on all avionics items capable of displaying the Stormscope data. There is no uncertainty that this includes all three: the ARNAV, the Garmin 430 and the Sandel.
Stephen–is this from experience, direct info from Cirrus, or rumor? The stormscope has the capacity to be displayed on all those things, but I don’t believe that’s what’s actually wired up.
The stormscope support on the ARNAV definitely works, since that’s what’s in my SR20. My suspicion is that this is the case in the SR22 as well.
Dave, Stephen…
On N84MR, the WX500 displays on the ARNAV and not on the Garmin. I asked Brian Janzig (avionics guru at Cirrus) about that, and he confirmed that it’s wired that way; although there’s no reason he could think of that an avionics shop couldn’t wire the WX500 interface into the Garmin as well. It just isn’t that way as it leaves the factory.
From what I’ve seen so far, having it on the ARNAV only is just fine; although I suppose having it on the Garmin as well would be comforting on that dark and stormy night when the ARNAV dies…
Mike.
I was thinking about this too a couple of months ago, and came to the conclusion that it’s fine the way things are now, and it shouldn’t be screwed with.
The stormscope needs to be controlled as well as the output displayed. In my SR22, the stormscope is operated and displayed via the ICDS2000 only.
While the GNS430s, Sandel, and ICDS2000 all have the capability to talk to the WX500, they aren’t all wired to the Stormscope. It’s highly unlikely that the WX500 was designed to have multiple master control units, and even if it was, I don’t see much of an advantage to switching them or displaying the information in 4 places. What happens if I have the Sandel tell the WX500 to work in strike mode and the ICDS2000 tells it to work in cell mode? Ditto display ranges…?
If you’re going to have to pick one of them, the ICDS2000 is the right place to put it. It’s big and easy to glance at at occasion, but not in the primary scan area. The whole concept of a sterile cockpit dictates simplifying things, not making them more complex. More complexity = more to go wrong.
If the ICDS2000 breaks on a dark and stormy night, and I needed the strikefinder, I’ll land, thank you very much. That’s the weather god’s message that “tonight is a better time to be drinking a single malt on the ground than be fighting thunderstorms in little piece of plastic.”
I have the moving maps all set up on my Sandel. If I ever want or need them, they are one keypress away (e.g. a graphical version of the nearest field display from the garmins). However 90% of the time, I run my Sandel as a HSI+RMI in 360 degree view. Why? Because we have a whole bunch of other avionics that do the rest as good or better than the Sandel does.
Don’t take this as a knock against Sandel, I think their HSI display is a godsend and until we graduate to full EFIS, all of my future aircraft will be equipped with one.
Note to Sandel: If you started making EFISs, I would be glad to make my plane a test subject of yours based upon how impressed I have been with the operation and UI of your HSI display.
However, to paraphrase the old saying, “Just because you have a hammer doesn’t turn everything into a nail.”
Actually, one piece of information I think I’d like displayed on the Sandel (but I’m not sure) instead of the ICDS2000 or the Garmins would be TCAS. I think that might be the best place to display it, although I am not firm in that conviction, just thinking about it.
One problem is that that 10.4" MFD is actually going to seem really small by the time it has been divided up into a TCAS display area, an engine monitoring display area, and the moving map. These three things are NOT pages that I’m willing to swap between.
Note to ARNAV: If you really want to do the engine monitoring intelligently, what I’d really like is something like the F22 and Airbus displays. Keep the engine display hidden or small until any parameter has exceeded a user-defined threshold. If that occurs, then zoom in on the engine monitor display. I don’t need to keep an eye on the engine monitor when everything is perfect, but I do need to know when things start to move.
While the same thing could also be done for TCAS (no contacts = small display, distant contacts = medium display, alerts = large display), I suspect that users would become very annoyed with the constantly changing size of the TCAS display.
I was thinking about this too a couple of months ago, and came to the conclusion that it’s fine the way things are now, and it shouldn’t be screwed with.
Paul,
Thanks for an interesting, nicely thought-through analysis. For the most part, I agree. From what I understand, though, it is possible to separate the output of the WX500 from the input (control) part, for those who want it shown on multiple displays.
But the real reason for this response is to let you know that I, too, love my single malt; I look forward to sharing one with you on a dark and stormy night. We can discuss the amazing coincidence that caused both our ARNAVs to die while we were both closest to the only FBO for miles that happened to be serving a 12 year Macallan.
Mike.