Understanding this TAF
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: McMurdo, Antarctica
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Understanding this TAF
Can someone please help me with this TAF, Where it says BECMG 2401/2402 and in that sentence after overcast 2000feet it says "620203" what does that mean?
NZPG TAF 2315/2415 (2404/2504NZDT) 03005KT 9999 SCT030 SCT100 BKN150 QNH2888INS GRID20005KT
BECMG 2319/2321 (2408/2410) 15008KT 9999 SCT025 BKN080 BKN150 QNH2883INS GRID32008KT
BECMG 2323/2324 (2412/2413) 16016KT 9999 BKN025 BKN040 BKN080 BKN150 QNH2880INS GRID33016KT
BECMG 2401/2402 (2414/2415) 17019KT 0800 SN BLSN OVC020 620203 QNH2882INS GRID34019KT
BECMG 2404/2406 (2417/2419) 16020KT 9999 VCSN OVC015 620152 QNH2883INS GRID33020KT
TEMPO 2409/2411 (2422/2424) 1600 -SN OVC010
NZPG TAF 2315/2415 (2404/2504NZDT) 03005KT 9999 SCT030 SCT100 BKN150 QNH2888INS GRID20005KT
BECMG 2319/2321 (2408/2410) 15008KT 9999 SCT025 BKN080 BKN150 QNH2883INS GRID32008KT
BECMG 2323/2324 (2412/2413) 16016KT 9999 BKN025 BKN040 BKN080 BKN150 QNH2880INS GRID33016KT
BECMG 2401/2402 (2414/2415) 17019KT 0800 SN BLSN OVC020 620203 QNH2882INS GRID34019KT
BECMG 2404/2406 (2417/2419) 16020KT 9999 VCSN OVC015 620152 QNH2883INS GRID33020KT
TEMPO 2409/2411 (2422/2424) 1600 -SN OVC010
Icing
AFW Icing "6 Group" Code Figure Type of Icing
0 No Icing
1 Light Icing (mixed)
2 Light Icing in cloud (RIME)
3 Light Icing in precipitation (clear)
4 Moderate Icing (mixed)
5 Moderate Icing in cloud (Rime)
6 Moderate Icing in precipitation (clear)
7 Severe Icing (mixed)
8 Severe Icing in cloud (Rime)
9 Severe Icing in precipitation (clear)
So the "62" means icing (6) is forecast, that being light icing in cloud in the form of rime (2). So 620203 means light rime in clouds starting at 2,000 AGL, 3,000 feet thick, because the "020" refers to height AGL in hundreds of feet, while the "3" is the thickness in thousands.
AFW Icing "6 Group" Code Figure Type of Icing
0 No Icing
1 Light Icing (mixed)
2 Light Icing in cloud (RIME)
3 Light Icing in precipitation (clear)
4 Moderate Icing (mixed)
5 Moderate Icing in cloud (Rime)
6 Moderate Icing in precipitation (clear)
7 Severe Icing (mixed)
8 Severe Icing in cloud (Rime)
9 Severe Icing in precipitation (clear)
So the "62" means icing (6) is forecast, that being light icing in cloud in the form of rime (2). So 620203 means light rime in clouds starting at 2,000 AGL, 3,000 feet thick, because the "020" refers to height AGL in hundreds of feet, while the "3" is the thickness in thousands.
Grandpa Aerotart
You might find this a useful download to stick in your Ipad.
http://www.theflightstuff.com/AFPAM%...AF%20codes.pdf
http://www.theflightstuff.com/AFPAM%...AF%20codes.pdf
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could also request your weather through this website and select 'translated'. It'll decipher it for you (to a point). Works for global locations.
ADDS - METARs
D.
ADDS - METARs
D.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. One thing in this TAF I have never seen before is the GRID group. This obviously refers to wind, but which wind? What grid (if this isn't an acronym) is referenced here? Curious....
Haven't been down there for almost two decades (braved it before GPS made it easy!!), but McMurdo is at south of 77 degrees I think. Grid north is used for wind/runway direction etc. You may need a fuel bladder or two added to get the C172 there.
the Don
the Don
Yep, runway direction and wind all in grid north. Not really necessary at mcmurdo heading (true) northwards, but essential heading (true) southwards....
What u doing in Mactown brad?
What u doing in Mactown brad?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DEFENESTRATOR
In a previous thread PPruners warned me that translated weather would be bad for my soul and I would never be a real pilot if I practiced that.
But now you have lead me astray by showing me how to get my fix of translated weather.
Shame on you. Say six Hail Marys and put $20 in the PPrune poor box.
Why can’t AsA/BOM provide the same service in Oz? Surely it’s harmless if its consensual and done in private.
In a previous thread PPruners warned me that translated weather would be bad for my soul and I would never be a real pilot if I practiced that.
But now you have lead me astray by showing me how to get my fix of translated weather.
Shame on you. Say six Hail Marys and put $20 in the PPrune poor box.
Why can’t AsA/BOM provide the same service in Oz? Surely it’s harmless if its consensual and done in private.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't the format originally created to be simple and small in terms of bytes so it could be transmitted to the flight computers in airliners via HF so it could be decoded on there?
So they use decoders, therefore in essence, why can't we?
Plain English forecasts are long overdue. Not so much that people can't interpret them and are lazy, but there would be less mistakes made.
So they use decoders, therefore in essence, why can't we?
Plain English forecasts are long overdue. Not so much that people can't interpret them and are lazy, but there would be less mistakes made.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually disagree here. You can get the gist of a coded TAF in a glance, not so in a full-English transcription. Try it. Go to one of the 'plain language METAR/TAF' sites and try to read through all the stuff. Much quicker in code.
Of course also makes you a member of some secret society who can decipher the stuff!
Of course also makes you a member of some secret society who can decipher the stuff!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I've been using that website for years and only recently discovered the 'translated' tab.
Thanks for the laugh Seagull.
D.
Thanks for the laugh Seagull.
D.
Last edited by Defenestrator; 24th Jan 2012 at 11:08.
XXX,
You might find that coded met stuff dates to telex (or even telegram) days - nice compact reports that can be copied (or printed) and carried easily.
I'll bite - I like coded forecasts. They're compact, precise and worth the practice to read them easily.
Anyway, it's possible to carry TAFs for an entire area - imagine flicking through "translated" text for area 30, looking for somewhere with decent weather!
You might find that coded met stuff dates to telex (or even telegram) days - nice compact reports that can be copied (or printed) and carried easily.
I'll bite - I like coded forecasts. They're compact, precise and worth the practice to read them easily.
Anyway, it's possible to carry TAFs for an entire area - imagine flicking through "translated" text for area 30, looking for somewhere with decent weather!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tropical Australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Plain English forecasts are long overdue. Not so much that people can't interpret them and are lazy, but there would be less mistakes made."
I would not bet on that. Don't forget that there are many people out there (forecasters and users) who speak English as a second language. It would be very easy to make mistakes using plain language. Look how much difficulty people have just interpreting daily forecasts that are issued in plain language.
Using standard phrases and codes removes any ambiguity. There are plenty of resources to use to decode messages and they are easy to find and use. Imagine the 'fun' you would have if you had to ring the forecasters to verify that your interpretation of their plain language message, was actually correct!
I would not bet on that. Don't forget that there are many people out there (forecasters and users) who speak English as a second language. It would be very easy to make mistakes using plain language. Look how much difficulty people have just interpreting daily forecasts that are issued in plain language.
Using standard phrases and codes removes any ambiguity. There are plenty of resources to use to decode messages and they are easy to find and use. Imagine the 'fun' you would have if you had to ring the forecasters to verify that your interpretation of their plain language message, was actually correct!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: au
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why not have a choice: Plain english or coded?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we currently had a choice, and ASA decided to scrap the plain English option, there would be widespread outrage. The only reason we're stuck with the current system is inertia and the "I had to learn it, so do you" mentality.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we currently had a choice, and ASA decided to scrap the plain English option, there would be widespread outrage. The only reason we're stuck with the current system is inertia and the "I had to learn it, so do you" mentality.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tropical Australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it is a matter of being "stuck" with the present system. It exists because it works and no one has come up with a better option, YET.
Plain language might be a better option but I think you would need to demonstrate that (just like anyone else would do if they propose a different method of doing anything else). The current coded format is easy enough to decipher and there are plenty of resources to assist with this. There should be no ambiguity; all the codes are documented and they are the only things used to describe the conditions.
Trying to use both codes and plain language systems together just so people could have a choice, will almost certainly lead to confusion. Don't forget, there are people out there who use English as their second language. If someone prangs a plane because of a weather related issue, whose interpretation of the forecast will stand up in court?
"Plain" language might work if you could come up with a system of 'plain' language phrases to replace the code groups. There is a lot to be said for sticking to standard phrases when exchanging information. With 'standards' in place, everyone should be on the same page. That is how confusion is avoided.
Plain language might be a better option but I think you would need to demonstrate that (just like anyone else would do if they propose a different method of doing anything else). The current coded format is easy enough to decipher and there are plenty of resources to assist with this. There should be no ambiguity; all the codes are documented and they are the only things used to describe the conditions.
Trying to use both codes and plain language systems together just so people could have a choice, will almost certainly lead to confusion. Don't forget, there are people out there who use English as their second language. If someone prangs a plane because of a weather related issue, whose interpretation of the forecast will stand up in court?
"Plain" language might work if you could come up with a system of 'plain' language phrases to replace the code groups. There is a lot to be said for sticking to standard phrases when exchanging information. With 'standards' in place, everyone should be on the same page. That is how confusion is avoided.
