First of all, Blitzortung is as far as I can tell independent, volunteer-based and thus open for everyone to use, support and feed with data. It is also real-time (or at least max 10-15 seconds of latency).
There are however drawbacks:
- The hardware is relatively expensive (relatively because when you compare it to ham or professional RF tech, it is in fact dirt cheap :(), so there's a barrier for entry into the network if you would like to cover your area. Add to that having an appropriate place for the antennas.
- There seem to be issues that make the default visualisation of lightning strikes as points on the map dubiously accurate. The example I notice most often is that whenever a lightning discharges in a cloud as opposed to the ground, it often gets detected as several lightning strikes. This may be as simple as adding the equivalent of error bars to each detection, but I am not any kind of authority on the matter.
First of all, Blitzortung is as far as I can tell independent, volunteer-based and thus open for everyone to use, support and feed with data. It is also real-time (or at least max 10-15 seconds of latency).
There are however drawbacks:
- The hardware is relatively expensive (relatively because when you compare it to ham or professional RF tech, it is in fact dirt cheap :(), so there's a barrier for entry into the network if you would like to cover your area. Add to that having an appropriate place for the antennas.
- There seem to be issues that make the default visualisation of lightning strikes as points on the map dubiously accurate. The example I notice most often is that whenever a lightning discharges in a cloud as opposed to the ground, it often gets detected as several lightning strikes. This may be as simple as adding the equivalent of error bars to each detection, but I am not any kind of authority on the matter.