"Richard Kaplan" wrote

Strikefinder or Stormscope would be far more useful than radar in a
single-engine plane.

My RDR-160 radar was the worst investment I ever made in my plane. CBAV is
far more useful, and certainly the newer portable and panel-mount datalink
systems seem to have the potential to beat CBAV.

Saying my radar has a range of 160 miles is a cruel joke; its range is
really only 40-50 miles, and even then it only works that far out if there
is a strong storm around. No piston airplane has the speed or altitude
capability to pentrate a line of thunderstorms and thus any piston plane can
get boxed in if a hole closes in from behind while trying to use radar to
find "holes" in storms.

I bet your Radar does have a 160 mile range. What altitude were you
at? Because of the curvature of the earth that set's going to
attenuate badly down low. You probably can't use the 160 range
effectively till you get up much higher like over 10,000AGL. Even
jets have to step the range down as they get lower. Bob's right:
using the set correctly is quite an art. Many copilots I've flown
with can't do it right. For some reason, radar training is kind of a
lost art.

Best Regards,

pacplyer