Originally Posted by
parishiltons
AUTO simply means a machine observation rather than by a human. That's the trend of things and there will be more of it.
The METAR will generally be slightly different to the ATIS because the locations of the observations are different - the met station/s on or adjacent to the airport for METARs vs looking out the tower windows by an ATC for ATIS, and because the times of the observations are different. Weather is dynamic! But what is reported is simply what is observed at the time of reporting. It can be skewed by location/orientation of the instruments/eyes so this should be designed out as far as practicable.
Also not all auto stations can observe all weather parameters - the auto capability gaps indicated, of course, by the slashes.
Understood. At some of the busiest airports in the world, in some of the richest countries in the world, cloud height seems like something that would be accurately reported, especially in times of convection. Without accurate weather information it’s difficult to even brief an approach and potential risks. I always thought accurate weather observations were a necessity at busy commercial airports?