PDA

View Full Version : Possible adverse effect of TAF changes on UK Short-Haul


Chris Scott
8th Nov 2008, 13:05
On 5th November, new timings were introduced for the issue and periods of validity of UK Aerodrome TAFs, as those pilots not on leave will already have noticed. [IOM, JER, GCI and ACI seem to have retained their independence.]

The UK Met Office has issued the following two bulletins:

Met Office: Changes to TAF format relating to migration to 30 hour TAF periods (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation/news/changes/taf.html)
Met Office: Changes to Civilian TAF issue/validity times (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation/news/changes/civilian.html)

The most obvious change is that the "Long" TAF period has been extended, at the very biggest airports (LHR, LGW, STN & MAN), from 24hrs to 30hrs.

The other protocol that has changed seems to be the introduction of the "FM" (from) group, already widely used in other countries, to supplement the "BECMG" group. The FM group enables a rapid change to be indicated, which ability was lost in the early 1990s, if memory serves, when the formats of UK forecasts and actuals were dumbed-down to conform with many aspects of foreign practice (mainly American).

The third (and innocuous) change is that the timings of the UK Short TAFs have been altered by an hour: e.g., the first new one of the day is no longer from 01-10; it is 00-09 (as always applied in France and Eire, for example).

The changes also mean that, at long-haul airports meriting Long TAFs, the "Short" (9-hour) TAFs will no longer be issued. The Short TAF has been essential until now, because the most recent Long TAF has not been effective until 7 or 8 hours after the time of its issue; and its predecessor is no longer considered valid (and certainly not subject to any necessary amendment). Under the new arrangements, however, the Long (24 & 30-hour) TAFs are issued only 55mins in advance – just like Short (9-hour) TAFs – so, at the start of the period, the most recent thinking of the forecaster is reflected in the TAF.

At a first glance, this looks like a sensible rationalisation. Why would you want a 9-hour TAF covering a part of the day also included in the Long TAF? The snag I see is that the Long TAFs, as before, are only issued every 6hrs, whereas the Short TAFs are still issued every 3hrs. Will the Long TAF be routinely reviewed, 3 hours after issue, with a view to possible amendment? Will that, or any ad-hoc amendments, be easily and reliably available to crews abroad?

The possible anomaly which concerns me is that airports meriting a Long TAF may now be getting fewer updates (covering the initial 9-hour period) than previously. Curiously, this does not seem to apply to smaller aerodromes retaining the Short TAF only. So this applies mainly to short-haul operations at airports of medium size and above; including most of the airports that operate scheduled flights. On the plus side, it is to be welcomed that most of these scheduled airports are now provided with forecasts suitable for long-haul operations.

tubby linton
8th Nov 2008, 13:19
This is the current LGW taf ( do not use for flight!):
EGKK 081111Z 0812/0918 18014KT 9999 SCT020 TEMPO 0812/0821 19015G25KT TEMPO 0812/0818 7000 BKN010 PROB30 TEMPO 0812/0817 BKN007 BECMG 0819/0822 5000 RA TEMPO 0819/0902 19023G35KT TEMPO 0821/0824 3000 RA BKN010 BECMG 0900/0903 24015KT 9999 NSW TEMPO 0902/0906 25017G28KT BECMG 0909/0912 22022G35KT PROB30 TEMPO 0911/0918 6000 SHRA
Was this change to the taf format really necessary and who authorised it?

hetfield
8th Nov 2008, 13:27
Only U.K. ?

I'm afraid, no.

mona lot
8th Nov 2008, 13:28
If it ain't broke, don't fix it:ugh::ugh::ugh:

bookworm
8th Nov 2008, 16:13
The snag I see is that the Long TAFs, as before, are only issued every 6hrs, whereas the Short TAFs are still issued every 3hrs. Will the Long TAF be routinely reviewed, 3 hours after issue, with a view to possible amendment? Will that, or any ad-hoc amendments, be easily and reliably available to crews abroad?

The claim is that they will be. I don't have a record of amendment rates before the switch but here's a look at LHR since:

TAF EGLL 050459Z 0506/0612 01006KT 5000 HZ FEW010 BKN020 BECMG 0506/0509 BKN008 TEMPO 0506/0511 4000 BECMG 0509/0512 6000 NSW TEMPO 0512/0519 BKN015 TEMPO 0517/0612 4000 BR -DZ PROB40 0603/0610 BKN004=

TAF AMD EGLL 050846Z 0506/0612 01006KT 4000 BR FEW010 BKN020 TEMPO 0506/0514 BKN010 BECMG 0509/0512 6000 NSW TEMPO 0517/0612 4000 BR -DZ BKN008 PROB40 0603/0610 BKN004=

TAF AMD EGLL 050953Z 0510/0612 01006KT 7000 FEW010 BKN020 TEMPO 0510/0514 BKN009 BECMG 0510/0512 9999 TEMPO 0517/0612 4000 BR -DZ BKN008 PROB40 0603/0610 BKN004=

----

TAF EGLL 051057Z 0512/0618 01008KT 7000 BKN012 TEMPO 0512/0515 BKN008 PROB40 TEMPO 0512/0518 9999 BKN016 TEMPO 0517/0611 4000 BR -DZ BKN008 PROB40 0603/0610 BKN004 BECMG 0610/0613 SCT025 PROB40 0612/0618 9999=

TAF AMD EGLL 051424Z 0512/0618 01008KT 7000 BKN012 PROB40 TEMPO 0512/0518 9999 BKN016 TEMPO 0514/0611 4000 BR -DZ BKN008 PROB40 0603/0610 BKN004 BECMG 0610/0613 SCT025 PROB40 0612/0618 9999=

----

TAF EGLL 071055Z 0712/0818 24010KT 9999 SCT030 BECMG 0800/0803 18008KT TEMPO 0809/0816 16015G25KT 7000 RA BKN010=

TAF AMD EGLL 071453Z 0715/0818 24010KT 9999 SCT030 PROB40 TEMPO 0715/0718 7000 SHRA BECMG 0800/0803 18008KT TEMPO 0809/0816 16015G25KT 7000 RA BKN010=

----

So it looks like review and amendment is happening.

What worries me more is the reduction in the long TAF reach for some UK airports.

For example

TAF EGGD 081113Z 0812/0912 23015G25KT 9999 SCT020 PROB30 TEMPO 0812/0816 7000 SHRA BKN014 BECMG 0816/0819 19025G35KT 7000 RA TEMPO 0818/0821 3000 +RA BKN010CB BECMG 0819/0821 26022G32KT 9999 SCT020 TEMPO 0821/0912 7000 SHRA PROB40 TEMPO 0900/0912 25030G40KT 3000 +SHRA BKN012CB=

But in the old scheme, at around 1100Z, the 1818 TAF for EGGD would have been issued, hence we're losing 6 hours of forecast at the end.

Was this change to the taf format really necessary and who authorised it?

It was authorised by the World Meteorological Organisation. Necessary? Can you think of a better way of doing it? Without it, time periods are ambiguous in a 30-hour TAF, e.g. in a 0506/0612 TAF, TEMPO 0711 might mean that period on either day.

The other protocol that has changed seems to be the introduction of the "FM" (from) group, already widely used in other countries, to supplement the "BECMG" group. The FM group enables a rapid change to be indicated, which ability was lost in the early 1990s, if memory serves, when the formats of UK forecasts and actuals were dumbed-down to conform with many aspects of foreign practice (mainly American).

The FM group is not introduced by this change, it has just had its format updated. What used to be written as FM1500 (from 1500) is now FM081500 (from 1500 on the 8th), reasoning as above. It will continue to be used extensively by the US and Canada and very sparingly in Europe.

Chris Scott
8th Nov 2008, 17:21
Hi bookworm,

Thanks for setting me straight on one or two points, and the detailed examples of amended Long TAFs at LHR on the first day of the new system. No doubt there are protocols about what degree of re-think of one or more parameters would justify issuing an amended TAF.

The problem with unscheduled TAF amendments for crews is that, in the absence of receipt, you are unlikely to be aware of their existence. If fresh TAFs are scheduled to be issued every 3 hours, you make sure you obtain the new one asap if there is any question of a weather issue.

I now notice that the FM group timing understandably includes 2 spaces for minutes, unlike the others.

I agree that the decreased lead-time for Long TAFs means that the majority of airfields that retain the 24-hour TAF now have TAFs that do not forecast as far into the future as before. For the same reason, the airports that now have a 30-hour TAF are able to see no further ahead (a maximum of 30h55) than they did with the old 24-hour TAF (a maximum of 31h30). So the apparent enhancement is nothing of the kind.

These changes seem to be designed primarily for further economy, though justified by international standardisation. I'm all for reducing the cost of our relentlessly expanding state bureaucracy, but airlines pay for these services and has the MoD not made more than its share of cuts already? My guess is that the majority of meteorologists have been dismayed by the continuing cuts of the last 25 years or so.

I wonder how much the pole tax-funded BBC pays the apparently cash-strapped Met Office.

PantLoad
8th Nov 2008, 18:02
We've recently changed to this new format in the U.S. as well. For now, this applies to only a few, major U.S. airports. I assume, at some point, this will be the format for all U.S. airports that issue met forecasts.

The reasoning, as I understand it, is to have the U.S. more closely conform to ICAO standards. As many countries seem to be slightly
different from others, maybe all this is a step forward to get everyone
on the same page.

Regarding the format, itself, I think it's just a matter of getting used to things. After awhile, we'll all forget the old ways and be quite comfortable with the new format.

Fly safe,

PantLoad

bookworm
8th Nov 2008, 19:25
The problem with unscheduled TAF amendments for crews is that, in the absence of receipt, you are unlikely to be aware of their existence.

That's a good point. However, if you have a decent weather provider, the risk should be minimal.

I now notice that the FM group timing understandably includes 2 spaces for minutes, unlike the others.

FM always had minutes. It used to be FMhhmm, now FMddhhmm. The US tends to use FM to replicate the old-style forecasts that had snapshots every 3 hours, whether or not the weather has changed significantly. They've moved away from that a bit e.g.

KJFK 081817Z 0818/0924 16012KT 2SM -SHRA BR OVC008
TEMPO 0818/0819 1SM SHRA BR OVC005
FM082000 17011KT 6SM BR VCSH BKN015 BKN040
TEMPO 0820/0821 BKN008 BKN035 FM082300 21010KT 4SM BR BKN025 BKN150
FM090100 25010KT 6SM BR BKN045
FM090500 28011KT P6SM BKN045
FM090700 28011KT P6SM SKC
FM091500 25012G22KT P6SM SCT045=

but the FMs are still more frequent than you would see in a UK TAF.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the change was (or was not) worthwhile. I'm just reporting what I know.

tubby linton
9th Nov 2008, 10:44
Has anybody listened to Shannon Volmet on HF since the change?I would imagine that due to the increased amount of date/time groups to be spoken there will be less time to read the actual reports.
If we are to see more forecast changes how will these ammendments be communicated to crews of aircraft that do not have acars?Often down route the agent never gives me any weather for the return sector so I am operating on a forecast I dispatched from base with ,which by the time I return there twelve hours, later could have been changed three or four times!