Comments on: Of forecasts and facts

By: Joe Subits

Joe Subits — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:42:31 +0000

Bottom line on forecasts. Now matter how sophisticated technology and other forecasting tools become, for every flight, it is still WYSIWIG (What you see is what you get). It still amazes me how many pilots practice see and ignore vs. see and avoid when it comes to weather.

By: Robert Buerkle

Robert Buerkle — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:43:48 +0000

My two cents:

On AWOS reports:
As an airport manager and private pilot, I can say that I have a viewpoint on AWOS data from both sides of the fence. Remember, AWOS ceilometers only measure distance to cloud bases very near the AWOS site, not within the entire traffic pattern. Clouds form as they will so differences in actual vs. reported values may differ. Also, you need to realize that AWOS sensors, while FAA certified as extremely accurate and reliable devices, do occasionally malfunction or can be out of calibration between the mandated quarterly AWOS equipment inspections.

On weather forecasting:
Wx forecasting is most accurate over a broad area and less accurate over smaller or micro climate areas (i.e. it is nearly impossible to accurately forecast lake effect snow and rain events near and close to large lakes). This is due to the NWS forecast models being designed for meso-scale or synoptic event forecasting. The amount of sensor data required for accurate micro forecasting would require a huge expenditure so i do not see it happening soon. As for using automatically produced and transmitted data form aircraft for use in forecasting models, that sounds intriguing. But the conservative engineer voice in my head would always question sensor accuracy and calibration – therefore the question would be – “Yeah, OK, I have all this data from different aircraft, but is it accurate enough to use for forecasting?”

Seems the best way to be is to “Trust but verify”. Verify with your eyes and your common sense.

Happy and safe flying to all.
Happy and safe flying to all

By: Mark C

Mark C — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:10:53 +0000

I am one of those low-time/student pilots. I like getting weather from the briefers for a x-c. Most of them are very good and will offer some interpretation and point out things I may have missed on the computer – like one day there was 40 kts. of wind shear at TPA at my destination airport, which I had overlooked. But the briefers are only as good as the information they have to work with, and I have my doubts about the AWOS out there. I went out a couple weeks ago to do pattern work. On the ground the AWOS was reporting 2000′ scattered. On my first circuit I turned crosswind and found myself in the clouds below TPA. I hurried back to the ground, parked, and called the AWOS and got 1400 overcast, when I had just left 700 overcast five minutes earlier and it sure didn’t look like it had gotten better.

By: Alan D. Resnicke

Alan D. Resnicke — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:44:12 +0000

What I find frustrating is the lack of low altitude radio repeaters out West (NM, AZ, UT). There have been times I’ve wanted to file a PIIREP only to find I can’t raise Flight Watch or FSS because I’m not high enough to get radio reception. Although I generally flight follow with Center, often the traffic with the commercial liners and bus-jets isn’t worth tying up their freq for them to relay.

By: Dan Vigesaa

Dan Vigesaa — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:42:47 +0000

I agree with Herb. The current weather reporting and forecasting system is pathetic. I have been teaching for 45 years. I used to send students out to do solo practice when the reported ceiling was 3,000 feet. Now I often find clouds at TPA when an AWOS or ASOS reports 3,000 feet. I used to check weather along the route of flight for a cross country. Now I find that I better check within hundreds of miles or I might be surprised. The current environment is treacherous for students and other low time pilots.

By: Jeff Veers

Jeff Veers — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:42:17 +0000

I fly professionally and rarely use FSS briefers for weather briefings, usually only to file, open and close flight plans in remote ares. When I do get a FSS weather briefing, is far less comprehensive than the picture of the weather I can generate from a couple great online resources. That being said however, I also instruct; and I come across may pilots who do not have the time and/or desire to become independent weather product consumers. I always recommend they talk to a briefer to be the mediator between the mass of weather information and their flight. A great feature for these pilots would be web-based briefings like a voice chat where the briefer can share his or her screen with the pilot and point out the features they are talking about. Not sure if Lockheed offers this or not, but they should.

As far as pireps, I would like to see the NextGen ATC system integrate reporting into the ADS-B system. Wind/Temp aloft data could be sent from aircraft directly to forecasters to maintain a much more accurate and up to date winds/temps aloft matrix. En-route aircraft could be queried for estimated cloud tops, layers, icing, and precipitation conditions in their area. Many times I have been on the ground wondering if I can be on top or between layers at a certain altitude when an aircraft in the area could probably give me the answer with a courtesy prompt to the pilot. The technology will be there, lets make it useful for us pilots who will be shelling out for it! In the time being, please leave pireps whenever you can, especially you two pilot crews out there!

By: Alan D. Resnicke

Alan D. Resnicke — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:23:32 +0000

Unlike Mr. White, I prefer to speak with the experts before I go out. Although I flew USAF helos for 19 years (VFR and IFR, including overseas), I now fly for fun and sighseeing. I don’t want a heads-down intensive cockpit or a bag full of spare batteries for all of the electronic stuff. Give me a paper chart, a few steam guages, and a friendly voice on the other end of the FSS line any day. I generally ask to where I’ve been connected… if an in-state FSS I trust their call more than someone from another area of the country without the local experience. Keep the FSS for me – technology tends to fail, lockup, or fritz just when you need it most!

By: John White

John White — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:27:18 +0000

Pireps should be automated and leave the human (FSS personell) out of it. We have the technoligy! XM weather in the cockpit and a subscription to Weathertap plus use Fltplan.com will cure your ills with forecasts and WX reports from “Scare you out of the sky” FSS people that are not even Pilots.
QCIP weather is available and part 91 ops do not require QCIP.
The FAA could shut down the FSS system buy every licensed Pilot an XM and Weathertap subscription plus a GPS that would display the info or an IPAD and save money and the whole General Aviation world would be much better informed and safer. This is the 21fst century and if you can afford the gas to fly cross country you can really afford the equipment and subscriptions. I fly GA Professionally approximately 600 hours a year and have not called FSS in the last 6 years and have very few doubts about what the weather is doing or going to do.

By: Hank

Hank — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:29:50 +0000

Weather forecasts are wrong too often to trust, and right too often to ignore.

That’s where PIREPs really come in handy! That, and a recent satellite view, clouds and IR for precip. Sometimes, though, you just have to take a chance, like in your two flights.

By: Bruce Landsberg

Bruce Landsberg — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:07:00 +0000

Herb….

Thanks much for your note. Others should be weighing in – agree or disagree. Will behaving the discussion with the Aviation Weather Center, the FAA and the NTSB in the next several months.

I’d like to have the group’s true opinions.