Met Office Weather Forecast? Hmmmmmmm....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a big part of the problem is that while computer power has improved dramatically, the number of ground and sea-based observation platforms has been equally dramatically decreased, so the number of points that get fed into the 3D model is very small.
The radio sondes go up only 0000Z and 1200Z, and only at a few dozen places in all of Europe. These provide by far the best data.
The rest comes from satellite observations etc.
One thing which many pilots would find helpful would be to watch the MSLP charts daily. Most look at the "weather" only before they plan to fly, but looking at it daily soon teaches you to take one look at an MSLP chart and get a pretty good feel for what is coming.
The radio sondes go up only 0000Z and 1200Z, and only at a few dozen places in all of Europe. These provide by far the best data.
The rest comes from satellite observations etc.
One thing which many pilots would find helpful would be to watch the MSLP charts daily. Most look at the "weather" only before they plan to fly, but looking at it daily soon teaches you to take one look at an MSLP chart and get a pretty good feel for what is coming.
TAF EGPH 181150Z 181322 21010KT 9999 FEW020 SCT045 PROB30 TEMPO 1318 8000 SHRA SCT015CB=
And the current METAR (also not changed much):
METAR EGPH 181350Z 26008KT 9999 FEW040 16/09 Q1000
Utter mince. No rain all day, no CBs all day, wind out by quite a bit.
And the current METAR (also not changed much):
METAR EGPH 181350Z 26008KT 9999 FEW040 16/09 Q1000
Utter mince. No rain all day, no CBs all day, wind out by quite a bit.
METAR EGPH 181150Z 22014KT 180V250 9999 VCSH FEW022 SCT035 16/07 Q1001=
METAR EGPH 181220Z 27010KT 9999 -SHRA FEW007 SCT030 14/09 Q1001=
METAR EGPH 181250Z 22010KT 190V260 9999 FEW018 16/09 Q1001=
METAR EGPH 181320Z 26008KT 9999 SCT040 15/09 Q1000=
...
Would you perhaps like to change your tune now and claim that the Met Office is failing you because it predicted a 70% probability that it would not rain?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Woking
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While accepting that whinging about rubbish forecasts isn't going to change anything, is it not somewhat surprising that despite the the massively improved tools available to the Met Office, and accepting the UK's particular climatological vagaries, forecasts for a few days hence appear not to be a great deal more accurate than they were twenty years ago?
I do know from many years working alongside forecasters that the forecasts are better now than they were twenty years ago. The fact that they can still be very wrong means that it is just very very difficult to predict weather. We can't do cold fusion or fly to Alpha Centauri either - it's on the limits of our current capabiliies here in the early days of the twenty-first century. And that's that.
B
Ah yes, the old "Unless you can do better, then don't dare comment" argument . . . .
However, doesn't change the fact that most mid/long term forecasts are useless. And that's that.
However, doesn't change the fact that most mid/long term forecasts are useless. And that's that.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, yesterdays forecast for today was pretty gothic - everything bar a plague of frogs - and yet today has, for most of SE England, been a pretty good day for VFR flying, with a 2,500-3,000 ft cloud-base, modest winds, great vis.
WTF...?
The weekend is always guaranteed to be horribly, though.
WTF...?
The weekend is always guaranteed to be horribly, though.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that bookworm, interesting reading, however living in Edinburgh I can tell you it did not rain all day on the 18th. Perhaps there were some showers out to the West of the airport which I did not see.
However I'm not going to eat my words. No, there was no rain 13-18Z, no CBs, good vis all day, and the wind was Westerly rather than Southerly. No, rather I am sticking to my observation that the TAF for the 18th was, as is often, a load of keech. Anyway, that's all, I didn't come to argue with anyone.
However I'm not going to eat my words. No, there was no rain 13-18Z, no CBs, good vis all day, and the wind was Westerly rather than Southerly. No, rather I am sticking to my observation that the TAF for the 18th was, as is often, a load of keech. Anyway, that's all, I didn't come to argue with anyone.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Urf
Age: 55
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a lot of respect for what is evidently a difficult science, and, human nature being what it is, we only remember when they get it wrong.
But.....looking out the window in Cheltenham - it is dry. The BBC tell me it is raining, and has been raining all morning. The Glos TAF claims a 30% chance of RADZ till 1900 (sounds reasonable). This inconsistency between the BBC & the met office occurs frequently, yet the Met Office apparently supply them with the info! Frequently happens, who to believe? Usually go by the Met office, but have been stung.
The other one that amuses me (and happens a lot) is when you look at the overall forecast for the day on the BBC & there is a rain cloud, but on the 24 hour forecast it is sunny every hour. Maybe it only rains on the half hour.....
But.....looking out the window in Cheltenham - it is dry. The BBC tell me it is raining, and has been raining all morning. The Glos TAF claims a 30% chance of RADZ till 1900 (sounds reasonable). This inconsistency between the BBC & the met office occurs frequently, yet the Met Office apparently supply them with the info! Frequently happens, who to believe? Usually go by the Met office, but have been stung.
The other one that amuses me (and happens a lot) is when you look at the overall forecast for the day on the BBC & there is a rain cloud, but on the 24 hour forecast it is sunny every hour. Maybe it only rains on the half hour.....
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another wee example here.
Current EDI TAF:
TAF EGPH 211448Z 211601 07012KT 9999 -RA SCT018 BKN035
TEMPO 1921 8000 RA BKN014
BECMG 1921 8000 BKN012
TEMPO 2101 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30
TEMPO 2301 3000 RADZ +RA BKN004=
And current METAR:
METAR EGPH 211620Z 13012G23KT 9999 -DZ FEW030 13/07 Q1013
Compare wind direction and note gust - unforecasted.
Had an interesting one earlier, TAF originally showed rain at 1600Z, then the rain forecast was removed altogether from the TAF... and then it appeared again. All while there has been a sizeable band of rain observed on the (Met Office) weather radar moving steadily towards us, which as I speak seems to be very near Edinburgh now (vis. seems to have worsened & small showers of rain now breaking out).
EDIT: While I was posting this the TAFs/METARs were updated. Here's the latest EDI METAR & TAF... in comparison with earlier seems much more sensible. Well done guys.
METAR EGPH 211650Z 13011KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 BKN045 12/07 Q1013
TAF EGPH 211551Z 220024 08014KT 8000 -RA BKN014
TEMPO 0008 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30
TEMPO 0008 RADZ +RA BKN004
BECMG 0709 18012KT 9999 NSW SCT020
BECMG 1416 24012KT
BECMG 2023 32013KT PROB40
TEMPO 2224 8000 RA=
Shomeone at the Met Offish hash been at the sherry methinksh...
Shmithy (hic)
Current EDI TAF:
TAF EGPH 211448Z 211601 07012KT 9999 -RA SCT018 BKN035
TEMPO 1921 8000 RA BKN014
BECMG 1921 8000 BKN012
TEMPO 2101 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30
TEMPO 2301 3000 RADZ +RA BKN004=
And current METAR:
METAR EGPH 211620Z 13012G23KT 9999 -DZ FEW030 13/07 Q1013
Compare wind direction and note gust - unforecasted.
Had an interesting one earlier, TAF originally showed rain at 1600Z, then the rain forecast was removed altogether from the TAF... and then it appeared again. All while there has been a sizeable band of rain observed on the (Met Office) weather radar moving steadily towards us, which as I speak seems to be very near Edinburgh now (vis. seems to have worsened & small showers of rain now breaking out).
EDIT: While I was posting this the TAFs/METARs were updated. Here's the latest EDI METAR & TAF... in comparison with earlier seems much more sensible. Well done guys.
METAR EGPH 211650Z 13011KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 BKN045 12/07 Q1013
TAF EGPH 211551Z 220024 08014KT 8000 -RA BKN014
TEMPO 0008 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30
TEMPO 0008 RADZ +RA BKN004
BECMG 0709 18012KT 9999 NSW SCT020
BECMG 1416 24012KT
BECMG 2023 32013KT PROB40
TEMPO 2224 8000 RA=
Shomeone at the Met Offish hash been at the sherry methinksh...
Shmithy (hic)
So once again you're taking a single METAR and comparing it with a 9-hour TAF. Here's the full sequence.
METAR EGPH 211620Z 13012G23KT 9999 -DZ FEW030 13/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211650Z 13011KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 BKN045 12/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211720Z 11009KT 9999 -RA FEW025 BKN045 11/08 Q1012=
METAR EGPH 211750Z 10009KT 9999 -RA OVC035 11/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211820Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW018 SCT026 BKN035 10/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211850Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW016 BKN030 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211920Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT020 BKN026 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211950Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT012 BKN018 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212020Z 07013KT 6000 -RA FEW008 SCT010 BKN016 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212050Z 08014KT 9999 -RA FEW006 SCT009 OVC014 09/08 Q1008=
You complain about the lack of mention of an 11 knot gust. Bear in mind that gusts of up to 10 knots are neither recorded nor forecast. The mean wind speed is spot on. The direction is backing to the forecast direction for the period of the forecast, and unless you want TAFs to get even longer than they are, you'll have to accept some variation in wind direction around the mean.
Weather does vary, and it sometimes varies in an unpredictable way. The appearance or absence of showers at a particular spot is a probabilistic phenomenon, like the appearance or absence of bubbles in a particular place in a boiling pan.
Met Office forecasters do sometimes get it wrong. Most of the time, they get it right, or at least as right as can be expected for any prediction of local meterorological conditions. Picking out single METARs is not a fair way to assess overall forecast performance.
METAR EGPH 211620Z 13012G23KT 9999 -DZ FEW030 13/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211650Z 13011KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 BKN045 12/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211720Z 11009KT 9999 -RA FEW025 BKN045 11/08 Q1012=
METAR EGPH 211750Z 10009KT 9999 -RA OVC035 11/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211820Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW018 SCT026 BKN035 10/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211850Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW016 BKN030 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211920Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT020 BKN026 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211950Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT012 BKN018 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212020Z 07013KT 6000 -RA FEW008 SCT010 BKN016 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212050Z 08014KT 9999 -RA FEW006 SCT009 OVC014 09/08 Q1008=
You complain about the lack of mention of an 11 knot gust. Bear in mind that gusts of up to 10 knots are neither recorded nor forecast. The mean wind speed is spot on. The direction is backing to the forecast direction for the period of the forecast, and unless you want TAFs to get even longer than they are, you'll have to accept some variation in wind direction around the mean.
Weather does vary, and it sometimes varies in an unpredictable way. The appearance or absence of showers at a particular spot is a probabilistic phenomenon, like the appearance or absence of bubbles in a particular place in a boiling pan.
Met Office forecasters do sometimes get it wrong. Most of the time, they get it right, or at least as right as can be expected for any prediction of local meterorological conditions. Picking out single METARs is not a fair way to assess overall forecast performance.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets just be clear here
Some people (and I'm one) are weather nerds. We look up weather forecasts from a host of sources, watch the way that weather moves and changes and plan our flying on the basis of forecasts, local knowledge etc etc
Most pilots, especially low-time under-confident types, have little interest in weather and will cancel a local flight if a cloud appears in a clear-blue sky.
Some of us have gone to CAA safety evenings and have had the sh*t scared out of us by stories of CFIT.
Now it is all very well experts telling us that gusts of less than 10kts aren't recorded, or some of the dark secrets of TAFs and their validities.
The reality is that most pilots look at last night's or this morning's BBC forecast (supplied dreckly from the Met Office) and could not interpret a TAF, METAR, Form 215 etc etc if their lives depended on it - and it does!
Personally I despair at the lack of knowledge of experienced pilots in my group when it comes to the nuances of weather interpretation.
However, the general perception - and that is what counts - is that the forecasts have become less reliable in recent years, and we have sufficient evidence to justify that view.
Given that my friends fly from a small airfield 2 miles from the Met Office building, it is a regular complaint when reading the METARS - 'why don't they open a bl**dy window???'
Some people (and I'm one) are weather nerds. We look up weather forecasts from a host of sources, watch the way that weather moves and changes and plan our flying on the basis of forecasts, local knowledge etc etc
Most pilots, especially low-time under-confident types, have little interest in weather and will cancel a local flight if a cloud appears in a clear-blue sky.
Some of us have gone to CAA safety evenings and have had the sh*t scared out of us by stories of CFIT.
Now it is all very well experts telling us that gusts of less than 10kts aren't recorded, or some of the dark secrets of TAFs and their validities.
The reality is that most pilots look at last night's or this morning's BBC forecast (supplied dreckly from the Met Office) and could not interpret a TAF, METAR, Form 215 etc etc if their lives depended on it - and it does!
Personally I despair at the lack of knowledge of experienced pilots in my group when it comes to the nuances of weather interpretation.
However, the general perception - and that is what counts - is that the forecasts have become less reliable in recent years, and we have sufficient evidence to justify that view.
Given that my friends fly from a small airfield 2 miles from the Met Office building, it is a regular complaint when reading the METARS - 'why don't they open a bl**dy window???'
However, the general perception - and that is what counts - is that the forecasts have become less reliable in recent years, and we have sufficient evidence to justify that view.
If you care about reality (in the way that a scientist would), you may have to read some of those boring reports that you've already mentioned that show that "performance against performance targets - on cloud and visibility - and has consistently exceeded the targets".
The reality is that most pilots look at last night's or this morning's BBC forecast (supplied dreckly from the Met Office) and could not interpret a TAF, METAR, Form 215 etc etc if their lives depended on it - and it does!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an IFR pilot, I would like to see data on cloud tops.
It is 100% certain this data exists, from satellite imagery, but I have never found anything which is reasonably real time (less than 1hr old, say) and with usable resolution.
IR images will do the job because they show temperatures of cloud tops, from which one can work the cloud top altitude backwards, with a useful accuracy.
Presumably commercial considerations are holding it back.
I have consistently found the forecasts on the SigWx form to be close to hopeless. 5000ft out, easily, which is OK if the tops are forecast at FL120 because I can go to FL200. Meteoblue (working mostly off GFS) is no better and they don't run their model very often anyway.
It is 100% certain this data exists, from satellite imagery, but I have never found anything which is reasonably real time (less than 1hr old, say) and with usable resolution.
IR images will do the job because they show temperatures of cloud tops, from which one can work the cloud top altitude backwards, with a useful accuracy.
Presumably commercial considerations are holding it back.
I have consistently found the forecasts on the SigWx form to be close to hopeless. 5000ft out, easily, which is OK if the tops are forecast at FL120 because I can go to FL200. Meteoblue (working mostly off GFS) is no better and they don't run their model very often anyway.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
usedtofly said... "What is it with you lot, do you really expect someone else to make all the decisions for you and absolve you of all responsibility?"
No, but an accurate, reliable TAF helps make things a hell of a lot easier when making a decision on the weather.
As pilots I'm sure we all have a half-decent understanding of weather - we have to - and of the practical limitations of forecasting. We all understand that weather is not just a fixed constant - it is indeed variable, everyone knows that. It's all very well bearing that in mind but it's not much cop when the wind is forecast to be Southerly but instead it turns out to be Westerly - or if forecast weather arrives earlier/later than forecast or doesn't arrive at all.
I was discussing yesterday's TAF shambles with my CFI and a couple of other FIs, and we all agreed that recently the TAFs have been pretty unreliable. My CFI made the point about yesterday's TAF showing no rain at all; what if someone decided to take a trip to Edinburgh based on that TAF and got caught out by the nasty weather that appeared instead? Unfortunately I don't have the TAF at hand but it showed few/scattered clouds at about 3000 feet or thereabouts and light winds - no mention of rain. Then the TAF was changed to show the rain... fair enough but why was it taken off the TAF in the first place, bearing in mind that the previous TAF had rain to start with?
I don't think we're "bashing" the Met Office as such on this thread, we all appreciate and respect the MO's work, however as users of the MO's data all we're asking for is a little more accuracy, that's all.
IO540: I can't remember off-hand but I think there might be cloud-top data available in the subscription service on the Met Office Aviation website.
Smithy
No, but an accurate, reliable TAF helps make things a hell of a lot easier when making a decision on the weather.
As pilots I'm sure we all have a half-decent understanding of weather - we have to - and of the practical limitations of forecasting. We all understand that weather is not just a fixed constant - it is indeed variable, everyone knows that. It's all very well bearing that in mind but it's not much cop when the wind is forecast to be Southerly but instead it turns out to be Westerly - or if forecast weather arrives earlier/later than forecast or doesn't arrive at all.
I was discussing yesterday's TAF shambles with my CFI and a couple of other FIs, and we all agreed that recently the TAFs have been pretty unreliable. My CFI made the point about yesterday's TAF showing no rain at all; what if someone decided to take a trip to Edinburgh based on that TAF and got caught out by the nasty weather that appeared instead? Unfortunately I don't have the TAF at hand but it showed few/scattered clouds at about 3000 feet or thereabouts and light winds - no mention of rain. Then the TAF was changed to show the rain... fair enough but why was it taken off the TAF in the first place, bearing in mind that the previous TAF had rain to start with?
I don't think we're "bashing" the Met Office as such on this thread, we all appreciate and respect the MO's work, however as users of the MO's data all we're asking for is a little more accuracy, that's all.
IO540: I can't remember off-hand but I think there might be cloud-top data available in the subscription service on the Met Office Aviation website.
Smithy
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an IFR pilot, I would like to see data on cloud tops.
It is 100% certain this data exists, from satellite imagery, but I have never found anything which is reasonably real time (less than 1hr old, say) and with usable resolution.
It is 100% certain this data exists, from satellite imagery, but I have never found anything which is reasonably real time (less than 1hr old, say) and with usable resolution.
I am expecting a response on my request prior to the next Met Office WG meeting and if as is believed it is simple enough to change we should see the data appearing again soon.
My CFI made the point about yesterday's TAF showing no rain at all; what if someone decided to take a trip to Edinburgh based on that TAF and got caught out by the nasty weather that appeared instead? Unfortunately I don't have the TAF at hand but it showed few/scattered clouds at about 3000 feet or thereabouts and light winds - no mention of rain. Then the TAF was changed to show the rain... fair enough but why was it taken off the TAF in the first place, bearing in mind that the previous TAF had rain to start with?
TAF EGPH 210544Z 210716 09006KT 9999 FEW040 TEMPO 1516 8000 -RA BKN012=
TAF EGPH 210906Z 211019 VRB03KT 9999 FEW040 BECMG 1114 07011KT=
TAF EGPH 211204Z 211322 07009KT 9999 FEW040 BECMG 1114 07011KT BECMG 1921 8000 -RA BKN014 TEMPO 2122 4000 RA BKN007=
TAF EGPH 211448Z 211601 07012KT 9999 -RA SCT018 BKN035 TEMPO 1921 8000 RA BKN014 BECMG 1921 8000 BKN012 TEMPO 2101 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30 TEMPO 2301 3000 RADZ +RA BKN004=
TAF EGPH 211750Z 211904 11012KT 9999 -RA SCT018 BKN035 TEMPO 1921 8000 RA BKN014 BECMG 1921 8000 BKN012 TEMPO 2104 4000 RA BKN007 PROB30 TEMPO 2304 3000 RADZ +RA=
Here are the METARs from about mid-day (the morning was a boringly accurate prediction):
METAR EGPH 211250Z 06011KT 9999 FEW025 13/09 Q1015=
METAR EGPH 211320Z 06011KT 9999 FEW025 SCT045 13/09 Q1015=
METAR EGPH 211350Z 06012KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 SCT040 12/09 Q1014=
METAR EGPH 211420Z 05010KT 9999 FEW025 SCT040 13/10 Q1014=
METAR EGPH 211450Z 13012KT 9999 FEW025 SCT040 15/08 Q1014=
METAR EGPH 211520Z 15013KT 9999 FEW025 SCT040 15/06 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211550Z 13012KT 9999 FEW025 14/06 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211620Z 13012G23KT 9999 -DZ FEW030 13/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211650Z 13011KT 9999 -DZ FEW025 BKN045 12/07 Q1013=
METAR EGPH 211720Z 11009KT 9999 -RA FEW025 BKN045 11/08 Q1012=
METAR EGPH 211750Z 10009KT 9999 -RA OVC035 11/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211820Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW018 SCT026 BKN035 10/08 Q1011=
METAR EGPH 211850Z 09011KT 9999 -RA FEW016 BKN030 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211920Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT020 BKN026 09/07 Q1010=
METAR EGPH 211950Z 08011KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT012 BKN018 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212050Z 08014KT 9999 -RA FEW006 SCT009 OVC014 09/08 Q1008=
METAR EGPH 212020Z 07013KT 6000 -RA FEW008 SCT010 BKN016 09/08 Q1009=
METAR EGPH 212150Z 07014KT 8000 RA FEW006 SCT007 BKN009 09/08 Q1007=
METAR EGPH 212120Z 07013KT 9000 -RA FEW005 SCT009 BKN012 09/08 Q1007=
METAR EGPH 212220Z 07015KT 9999 -RA FEW005 BKN007 10/09 Q1006 RERA=
METAR EGPH 212250Z 08014KT 9999 RA SCT005 BKN007 10/09 Q1005=
METAR EGPH 212320Z 07014KT 7000 RA FEW005 SCT006 10/09 Q1005=
METAR EGPH 212350Z 07012KT 9000 RA FEW003 SCT004 BKN007 10/10 Q1004=
You complaint seems to be that the 1019 TAF didn't predict rain. It took until 1204Z for the Met Office to issue a TAF with a deterioration from 1900, and only at 1448 did they actually predict light rain from 1600. The light rain actually started around 1600.
But just take a look at the operationally important variables. The ceiling didn't fall below 3000 ft until after 1900. The visibility remained at least 10 km until after 1900. In RAF terminology, Edinburgh was actually Blue (the "best" colour state) for the entire period of the 1019 TAF.
Unless your aircraft is made of icing sugar that dissolves in light rain, would you really have been "caught out"?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a light-single not equipped with any anti-icing equipment, and as a non-instrument-rated pilot (as yet), then yes, I would've been caught out.
There again I had been watching the Wx Radar all day and observed the large band of rain moving our way... even though the TAF suggested otherwise, which explained my (and others') disbelief at the TAF.
I still question why the initial TAF's TEMPO 1516 8000 -RA BKN012 was then bemusingly dropped altogether, before mysteriously reappearing later on as BECMG 1921 8000 -RA BKN014 TEMPO 2122 4000 RA BKN007 - fairly accurate, must give credit where it's due - but why was the rain/low-cloud/poor vis forecast on the TAF dropped in the first place? Hmm.
Also, I fail to see how Military weather terminology - Blue, White, Magenta, Mauve, Gold-with-sparkly-bits or whatever else - has to do with a civilian pilot flying at a civil aerodrome in whatever weather conditions - i.e. me. I also fail to see the relevance of this comment - "Unless your aircraft is made of icing sugar that dissolves in light rain, would you really have been "caught out"?". I assume these throwaway remarks were a crude attempt at smart-arsery, in order to make me feel small and uninformed in order for you to claim some sort of high-ground? Well congratulations you've succeeded there.
I was always taught to avoid precipitation where possible when flying in a light aircraft - icing, gusts etc. But there again not being a weather guru what do I know, eh. What place do I have to question the great weather gurus.
Anyway, that's all, like I said previously I do not want to argue with anyone, I am only here to share my experiences.
bose-x if you could keep us informed on your dialogue with the Met Office and, when it comes, the outcome of the next meeting that would be great.
Smithy.
There again I had been watching the Wx Radar all day and observed the large band of rain moving our way... even though the TAF suggested otherwise, which explained my (and others') disbelief at the TAF.
I still question why the initial TAF's TEMPO 1516 8000 -RA BKN012 was then bemusingly dropped altogether, before mysteriously reappearing later on as BECMG 1921 8000 -RA BKN014 TEMPO 2122 4000 RA BKN007 - fairly accurate, must give credit where it's due - but why was the rain/low-cloud/poor vis forecast on the TAF dropped in the first place? Hmm.
Also, I fail to see how Military weather terminology - Blue, White, Magenta, Mauve, Gold-with-sparkly-bits or whatever else - has to do with a civilian pilot flying at a civil aerodrome in whatever weather conditions - i.e. me. I also fail to see the relevance of this comment - "Unless your aircraft is made of icing sugar that dissolves in light rain, would you really have been "caught out"?". I assume these throwaway remarks were a crude attempt at smart-arsery, in order to make me feel small and uninformed in order for you to claim some sort of high-ground? Well congratulations you've succeeded there.
I was always taught to avoid precipitation where possible when flying in a light aircraft - icing, gusts etc. But there again not being a weather guru what do I know, eh. What place do I have to question the great weather gurus.
Anyway, that's all, like I said previously I do not want to argue with anyone, I am only here to share my experiences.
bose-x if you could keep us informed on your dialogue with the Met Office and, when it comes, the outcome of the next meeting that would be great.
Smithy.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SigWx does show tops (FL100+) but they are usually way off.
That's why a "cloud tops metar" would be great.
One can get it (as tephigrams) from two American university websites that carry worldwide baloon ascent data but this happens only at 0000Z & 1200Z - of some use for a daytime flight but limited to very stable air masses.
Bookworm - do you have a URL?
That's why a "cloud tops metar" would be great.
One can get it (as tephigrams) from two American university websites that carry worldwide baloon ascent data but this happens only at 0000Z & 1200Z - of some use for a daytime flight but limited to very stable air masses.
Bookworm - do you have a URL?
Here under CTH. CLA also interesting. I think you have to pay for them though.
Captain Smithy, I don't wish to make you feel "small and uninformed", I'd just like you to get your facts straight before you start mouthing off with words like "Utter mince" to describe the work product of those who are trying very hard to give you the oppotunity to stay safe. FWIW, you will not experience airframe icing in precipitation below cloud in the conditions reported on 21 June.
Captain Smithy, I don't wish to make you feel "small and uninformed", I'd just like you to get your facts straight before you start mouthing off with words like "Utter mince" to describe the work product of those who are trying very hard to give you the oppotunity to stay safe. FWIW, you will not experience airframe icing in precipitation below cloud in the conditions reported on 21 June.