Met not fit for purpose!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: BERKSHIRE
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Met not fit for purpose!
Why is it that since the MetOffice moved from Bracknell, they are consistently wrong with the weather forecast?
I have now seen pilots getting the latest forecast and due to the bad track record ignoring it, with the comment " don't worry it is always wrong"
Credibility is now a safety issue.
A few weeks ago we planned a trip to France forecast was poor so we cancelled our trip. On the day we should have gone the weather was fantastic and the next day as well.
As we had rearranged we missed out on a great weekends flying due to accepting the guess work of the Met office.
With all the sat photo and high tech kit, you think they could get it right some of the time. Maybe if they got some seaweed and a pine cone, or just looked out of the god damn window they might just get it right!!!
Weather Wizards please respond!
I have now seen pilots getting the latest forecast and due to the bad track record ignoring it, with the comment " don't worry it is always wrong"
Credibility is now a safety issue.
A few weeks ago we planned a trip to France forecast was poor so we cancelled our trip. On the day we should have gone the weather was fantastic and the next day as well.
As we had rearranged we missed out on a great weekends flying due to accepting the guess work of the Met office.
With all the sat photo and high tech kit, you think they could get it right some of the time. Maybe if they got some seaweed and a pine cone, or just looked out of the god damn window they might just get it right!!!
Weather Wizards please respond!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly enough I represent GA on the Met Office Users Working Group and the quality of the forecast as I have been shown is surprisingly accurate and delivered to very tight SLA's. Any pilot is able to file a complaint if they believe that a forecast is inaccurate and are encouraged to do so especially if they think safety is compromised.
The computer model they use is much more accurate than it was just a couple of years ago and planned upgrades coming will nearly double the modelling power over current levels.
The weak link might therefore be considered to be elsewhere and perhaps a little bit of self diagnosis on interpretation might be called for.....
However if you are adamant that the forecast for a period was wrong than I am happy to have it investigated on your behalf and post the results of the inquiry. So please let me have the dates in question, your interpretation of the forecast and the actual and I will get the MetOffice to do the same.
The computer model they use is much more accurate than it was just a couple of years ago and planned upgrades coming will nearly double the modelling power over current levels.
The weak link might therefore be considered to be elsewhere and perhaps a little bit of self diagnosis on interpretation might be called for.....
However if you are adamant that the forecast for a period was wrong than I am happy to have it investigated on your behalf and post the results of the inquiry. So please let me have the dates in question, your interpretation of the forecast and the actual and I will get the MetOffice to do the same.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Norfolk UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I need an ordinary non flying forecast for the day,I look at Norwich TAF and find it the most accurate of all the forecasts available!
Give your local aviation forecast a try for everyday use,it's usually the most reliable.
Lister
Give your local aviation forecast a try for everyday use,it's usually the most reliable.
Lister
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: one dot low as usual
Age: 66
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwich TAF
Why is the Norwich weather on VHF Volmet always "corrected"??
PS Bosex, thanks for the Euroweather link. I use Euro Propilots a lot (despite the pop ups) and Meteox, but the Euroweather is a new one on me. It's Google Ad feed is uncanningly accurate as well ..
Just how did it know 
Why is the Norwich weather on VHF Volmet always "corrected"??
PS Bosex, thanks for the Euroweather link. I use Euro Propilots a lot (despite the pop ups) and Meteox, but the Euroweather is a new one on me. It's Google Ad feed is uncanningly accurate as well ..
Ads by Google : Cut down 9 lbs of stomach fat every 11 days by obeying this 1 rule. FatLoss4Idiots.com
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are two main weather models we pilots get access to:
The UK Met Office model - they release the MSLP charts, F214/215, and a little bit of other stuff. The rest of the info - notably any 3D information - is commercially restricted because they sell it to commercial weather repackagers who in turn sell it to various businesses which depend on weather.
The Global Forecasting System (GFS) model - this is AFAIK a U.S. run thing and is free to all. Most of the "pilot weather" websites run on GFS data. You can get everything out of GFS, including 3D profiles (tephigrams, for cloud tops etc) and the model can be run up to 384 hours ahead (for those who want an "idea" beyond the UKMO MSLP chart dates but appreciate the 300+hr accuracy will not be great).
Neither model is consistently better than the other, but the UKMO model is sometimes claimed to be more accurate for southern England because it is claimed to be optimised for the SW airflow which dominates the region.
I think it helps to understand some of the shorthand.
A PROB30 TEMPO is generally an ar*se covering by the UKMO, and since ICAO permits only PROB30 or PROB40, a PROB30 has to go in for anything from PROB01 to PROB30 So, PROB30 very rarely materialises yet this results in so many upsets over unnecessary cancellations - often these are caused by flying schools banning operations if there is a PROB30 +TSRA. One needs to validate the actual likelihood of nasty weather by looking at radar (Meteox covers the UK and bits of Europe) and Sferics, and sure enough the majority of the time the stuff just doesn't exist where you want to go.
A PROB40 means the forecaster actually thinks it might come, so this one is more serious.
I find TAF forecasts of low cloud (warm front kind of stuff) fairly reliable, although one can see a warm front with one look at the MSLP chart.
The weather which caught out a lot of pilots was last weekend in the south east when the TAFs really were way out, right up until very close and even then they were way off, on the optimistic side. Sometimes, the weather is not possible to forecast because the picture is very complicated and unstable.
Perhaps the simplest thing would be to revise the TAFs more frequently, but this might breach ICAO regs.
Another thing is to look at where the weather is moving from, and look at METARs at airports upwind. If an airport 50nm upwind is reporting OVC002 and the wind is really blowing, then you are likely going to get OVC002 as well, an hour later.
Like (smart) accountants say "cash is king, everything else is conjecture", METARs, radar, sferics, sat images are king, and everything else is conjecture. Never bet against actual weather.
The best thing any PPL can do is get the IMC Rating or an IR, and while the weather doesn't care about your paperwork (and will still ice up your plane if you fly in the wrong place, etc), you get a lot more options which enables a flight to be planned as fully IFR even if launched "VFR", knowing that you can fly an ILS somewhere, stop for tea, and review matters.
I gave up on VFR after about the 3rd cancelled PPL lesson - with a random-future-date cancellation rate of at least 75% it's all but useless for preplanned flights. Some people will disagree with the 75% figure but they are probably instrument capable pilots who are happy to fly through anything in UK Class G having launched "VFR" into OVC005 (as I am). If you want to be 100% VFR legal, a plain PPL is hopeless for anything preplanned.
The UK Met Office model - they release the MSLP charts, F214/215, and a little bit of other stuff. The rest of the info - notably any 3D information - is commercially restricted because they sell it to commercial weather repackagers who in turn sell it to various businesses which depend on weather.
The Global Forecasting System (GFS) model - this is AFAIK a U.S. run thing and is free to all. Most of the "pilot weather" websites run on GFS data. You can get everything out of GFS, including 3D profiles (tephigrams, for cloud tops etc) and the model can be run up to 384 hours ahead (for those who want an "idea" beyond the UKMO MSLP chart dates but appreciate the 300+hr accuracy will not be great).
Neither model is consistently better than the other, but the UKMO model is sometimes claimed to be more accurate for southern England because it is claimed to be optimised for the SW airflow which dominates the region.
I think it helps to understand some of the shorthand.
A PROB30 TEMPO is generally an ar*se covering by the UKMO, and since ICAO permits only PROB30 or PROB40, a PROB30 has to go in for anything from PROB01 to PROB30
So, PROB30 very rarely materialises yet this results in so many upsets over unnecessary cancellations - often these are caused by flying schools banning operations if there is a PROB30 +TSRA. One needs to validate the actual likelihood of nasty weather by looking at radar (Meteox covers the UK and bits of Europe) and Sferics, and sure enough the majority of the time the stuff just doesn't exist where you want to go.A PROB40 means the forecaster actually thinks it might come, so this one is more serious.
I find TAF forecasts of low cloud (warm front kind of stuff) fairly reliable, although one can see a warm front with one look at the MSLP chart.
The weather which caught out a lot of pilots was last weekend in the south east when the TAFs really were way out, right up until very close and even then they were way off, on the optimistic side. Sometimes, the weather is not possible to forecast because the picture is very complicated and unstable.
Perhaps the simplest thing would be to revise the TAFs more frequently, but this might breach ICAO regs.
Another thing is to look at where the weather is moving from, and look at METARs at airports upwind. If an airport 50nm upwind is reporting OVC002 and the wind is really blowing, then you are likely going to get OVC002 as well, an hour later.
Like (smart) accountants say "cash is king, everything else is conjecture", METARs, radar, sferics, sat images are king, and everything else is conjecture. Never bet against actual weather.
The best thing any PPL can do is get the IMC Rating or an IR, and while the weather doesn't care about your paperwork (and will still ice up your plane if you fly in the wrong place, etc), you get a lot more options which enables a flight to be planned as fully IFR even if launched "VFR", knowing that you can fly an ILS somewhere, stop for tea, and review matters.
I gave up on VFR after about the 3rd cancelled PPL lesson - with a random-future-date cancellation rate of at least 75% it's all but useless for preplanned flights. Some people will disagree with the 75% figure but they are probably instrument capable pilots who are happy to fly through anything in UK Class G having launched "VFR" into OVC005 (as I am). If you want to be 100% VFR legal, a plain PPL is hopeless for anything preplanned.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose X
We appreciate your point, but the comments on the lack of accuracy and failures in timings are so common now we cannot accept the Met Office's views as to their accuracy
I spoke to a rep at Air Expo, as I often operate within 2 miles of the Met Office. The Exeter TAF is often wildly out - I now understand why people describe weather orecasting as astrology with numbers.
The Met Office person told me that the measures of accuracy are to do with precipitation and visibility. Everything else is outside their measures so no wonder they can claim to be accurate.
We are required to ensure we are able to fly safely and must check the weather before flight. As the CAA has a contract with the Met Office, we need to indicate we have checked their information, as the main supplier. Like others I check elsewhere as well
However, if I had taken the view of the Met Office on Sunday I would have stayed in bed, yet the day was good enough for a visit to another airfield.
Similarly, weather warnings appear on the Met Office website, vanish, then reappear, then vanish again.
Given that the USA have evacuated a major city for a Cat 4 hurricane that turned out be be a Cat 1, the Met Office is not alone.
I agree with an earlier post - I tend to ignore a Prob 30 and listen to a Prob 40. But what happens if the Prob 30 appears? If I had an incident, the MO would say they had forecast the event, even though we all know the probability is very low, and most times never appears.
THe other area of MO failure is in the timings. Too often this year and last, we have watched the forecast arrival of a significant event drift back over successive TAFs, and these may fizzle out to nothing or arrive 12-15 hours late - losing a whole day's flying.
No. The forecasts are weak and getting weaker. I have flown a lot this year by turning up on day with a poor forecast, but where my own local knowledge indicates the forecast is likely to be pessimistic. Using the MO information and overlaying it with my own knowledge and experience, I've done quite well.
The problem is that too many pilots take the MO forecast and (even worse) the BBC forecast, and have cancelled. On the other hand others have flown in obviously poor conditions and had serious problems.
Both cases show that we, as pilots, have little faith in the MO forecasts which now lack any credibility, no matter what their KPIs may show....
We appreciate your point, but the comments on the lack of accuracy and failures in timings are so common now we cannot accept the Met Office's views as to their accuracy
I spoke to a rep at Air Expo, as I often operate within 2 miles of the Met Office. The Exeter TAF is often wildly out - I now understand why people describe weather orecasting as astrology with numbers.
The Met Office person told me that the measures of accuracy are to do with precipitation and visibility. Everything else is outside their measures so no wonder they can claim to be accurate.
We are required to ensure we are able to fly safely and must check the weather before flight. As the CAA has a contract with the Met Office, we need to indicate we have checked their information, as the main supplier. Like others I check elsewhere as well
However, if I had taken the view of the Met Office on Sunday I would have stayed in bed, yet the day was good enough for a visit to another airfield.
Similarly, weather warnings appear on the Met Office website, vanish, then reappear, then vanish again.
Given that the USA have evacuated a major city for a Cat 4 hurricane that turned out be be a Cat 1, the Met Office is not alone.
I agree with an earlier post - I tend to ignore a Prob 30 and listen to a Prob 40. But what happens if the Prob 30 appears? If I had an incident, the MO would say they had forecast the event, even though we all know the probability is very low, and most times never appears.
THe other area of MO failure is in the timings. Too often this year and last, we have watched the forecast arrival of a significant event drift back over successive TAFs, and these may fizzle out to nothing or arrive 12-15 hours late - losing a whole day's flying.
No. The forecasts are weak and getting weaker. I have flown a lot this year by turning up on day with a poor forecast, but where my own local knowledge indicates the forecast is likely to be pessimistic. Using the MO information and overlaying it with my own knowledge and experience, I've done quite well.
The problem is that too many pilots take the MO forecast and (even worse) the BBC forecast, and have cancelled. On the other hand others have flown in obviously poor conditions and had serious problems.
Both cases show that we, as pilots, have little faith in the MO forecasts which now lack any credibility, no matter what their KPIs may show....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin,
Please provide me with the exact dates and the nature of the problem and I will have them investigated.
But like I have said a lot of the problems are down to the interpretation.
Personally I have not had a problem with the accuracy of forecasts and flying over 400hrs a year you would think I would be a prime candidate.
I am not defending the MetOffice but I have yet to see direct evidence that they are not doing the job. So if you can provide it I will gladly follow up and post the results. After all if there is an issue with the quality of the information being provided then it needs to be addressed.
As a point, I flew on Sunday and the weather was as forecast and at no time did my interpretation lead me to believe that I should stay in bed.
Please provide me with the exact dates and the nature of the problem and I will have them investigated.
But like I have said a lot of the problems are down to the interpretation.
Personally I have not had a problem with the accuracy of forecasts and flying over 400hrs a year you would think I would be a prime candidate.
I am not defending the MetOffice but I have yet to see direct evidence that they are not doing the job. So if you can provide it I will gladly follow up and post the results. After all if there is an issue with the quality of the information being provided then it needs to be addressed.
As a point, I flew on Sunday and the weather was as forecast and at no time did my interpretation lead me to believe that I should stay in bed.
Formerly HWD
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Indochina
Age: 57
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another thing is to look at where the weather is moving from, and look at METARs at airports upwind. If an airport 50nm upwind is reporting OVC002 and the wind is really blowing, then you are likely going to get OVC002 as well, an hour later.
Don't put weight on such a technique to validate radiation, advective or convective weather such as BR and TS/CB forcasts though.
For me, the often heard glib comments that "it is usually wrong" are unquantifiable, unverifiable and wrong in my experience.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: BERKSHIRE
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Robin, glad to know I am not the only one.
I say again "the forecasts are getting worse, NOT BETTER!!"
I now check non MetOffice sites mainly Sat Photo sites for more acurate info.
Seems that most Gov bodies now just defend, rather than admit problems.
I say again "the forecasts are getting worse, NOT BETTER!!"
I now check non MetOffice sites mainly Sat Photo sites for more acurate info.
Seems that most Gov bodies now just defend, rather than admit problems.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alternative source
Thanks 172 driver, makes the point that there is better info outthere!
Doesn't address the problem with UK office though!
Thanks 172 driver, makes the point that there is better info outthere!
Doesn't address the problem with UK office though!
I sit on the working group which is made up of the industry to keep the Met Office honest. I would be delighted to take any complaints to them. But the have to be real complaints backed up with real data not just the venting of a few people on forums who possibly might not be interpreting the charts correctly.
Bosey, you're forgetting the current culture that everything has to be somebody else's fault these days.
Pragmatic, accurate responses are not what's called for
Pragmatic, accurate responses are not what's called for
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly a bit each year, and I cant grumble at any of the forecasts in recent times.
For example, my last three trips to the west country have all involved some element of IFR, the cloud base was exactly where it was predicted to be and the approach into St Mawgs also revealed the runway pretty much when expected - based on the TAFs not the METARs as it happened, although the METARS agreed with the TAFs.
In fact on one of the trips back I wanted to know three days in advance when the predicted front would clear the east coast because I didn’t want to divert and the base could well have been below minima. As it turned out it was below minima for most of the day. Remarkably (although it was after a chat with the met office) three days in advance they were correct within an hour or two of predicting when the front would clear through. Mind you I have to say the morning TAF was less accurate as the front cleared perhaps a couple of hours more slowly than the TAF predicted!
It has been such a rotten summer that I think we all want to find a time within the forecast when we think we can get airborne in VMC. Inevitably we are disappointed when it doesn’t necessarily work out precisely as predicted - perhaps we are inclined to blame the forecast when in fact the forecast always gave us a probability of less than 100% of the prediction.
I also have a pet theory that the weather pattern has been different this year than in past years for as long as I can remember. Perhaps if I am correct that is making the modelling the met office do more of a challenge with perhaps more prob 40s and greater variation in the weather over the span of a day.
I was told only last week by someone with more than 10,000 hours in GA that part of the problem was the increasing reliance on automated weather stations. Look at today he said, the base on the ATIS is being given as scattered 800, broken 1,000, overcast 1,200 but I will eat my hat if you are not in the soup at 700 - just look at it. 10 minutes later I was in the soup at 1,300, not a foot lower and the met prediction of the tops was 3,000 feet - I was on top at precisely 2,850 and skimming the bubbly bits at 3,000. Now that aint bad.
Must check if he ate his hat.
However, this is only my limited experience. Bose is right if you know otherwise I think in the “exact” science of weather forecasting you will need to demonstrate that rather more than half of the prob40s are considerably different than forecast!
(say at least ten times - I really must stop keep agreeing with Bose)
For example, my last three trips to the west country have all involved some element of IFR, the cloud base was exactly where it was predicted to be and the approach into St Mawgs also revealed the runway pretty much when expected - based on the TAFs not the METARs as it happened, although the METARS agreed with the TAFs.
In fact on one of the trips back I wanted to know three days in advance when the predicted front would clear the east coast because I didn’t want to divert and the base could well have been below minima. As it turned out it was below minima for most of the day. Remarkably (although it was after a chat with the met office) three days in advance they were correct within an hour or two of predicting when the front would clear through. Mind you I have to say the morning TAF was less accurate as the front cleared perhaps a couple of hours more slowly than the TAF predicted!
It has been such a rotten summer that I think we all want to find a time within the forecast when we think we can get airborne in VMC. Inevitably we are disappointed when it doesn’t necessarily work out precisely as predicted - perhaps we are inclined to blame the forecast when in fact the forecast always gave us a probability of less than 100% of the prediction.
I also have a pet theory that the weather pattern has been different this year than in past years for as long as I can remember. Perhaps if I am correct that is making the modelling the met office do more of a challenge with perhaps more prob 40s and greater variation in the weather over the span of a day.
I was told only last week by someone with more than 10,000 hours in GA that part of the problem was the increasing reliance on automated weather stations. Look at today he said, the base on the ATIS is being given as scattered 800, broken 1,000, overcast 1,200 but I will eat my hat if you are not in the soup at 700 - just look at it. 10 minutes later I was in the soup at 1,300, not a foot lower and the met prediction of the tops was 3,000 feet - I was on top at precisely 2,850 and skimming the bubbly bits at 3,000. Now that aint bad.
Must check if he ate his hat.
However, this is only my limited experience. Bose is right if you know otherwise I think in the “exact” science of weather forecasting you will need to demonstrate that rather more than half of the prob40s are considerably different than forecast!
(say at least ten times - I really must stop keep agreeing with Bose
)
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
This summer's weather 'harder to predict', leading weather forecaster admits - Telegraph
Clearly he'd seen this thread and thought it was time to 'fess up
Clearly he'd seen this thread and thought it was time to 'fess up
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This summer's weather 'harder to predict', leading weather forecaster admits - Telegraph
Clearly he'd seen this thread and thought it was time to 'fess up
Clearly he'd seen this thread and thought it was time to 'fess up
I also have a pet theory that the weather pattern has been different this year than in past years for as long as I can remember. Perhaps if I am correct that is making the modelling the met office do more of a challenge with perhaps more prob 40s and greater variation in the weather over the span of a day.
Just getting together my cv as a weather girl!!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly it's the 1/10,000th part of total additional atmospheric CO2 added by mankind since 1750 that has caused the problem!
Where's that seaweed?
Why do they present the forecast as a given and not say " It might be that but might also be this."
Then they have really covered their ar*es!
Seriously though, if was so predictable everyone would do it. Black art afaiac.
Where's that seaweed?
Why do they present the forecast as a given and not say " It might be that but might also be this."
Then they have really covered their ar*es!
Seriously though, if was so predictable everyone would do it. Black art afaiac.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: BERKSHIRE
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well today was wrong again. How many examples do you want!!
Tell you what lets see if PPRuners can predict Saturday's weather
Few locations
Tell you what lets see if PPRuners can predict Saturday's weather
Few locations
- Liverpool
- White Waltham
- Glasgow
- Norwich
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on then Ken, tell us exactly why it was wrong? Give us the forecast and actual and explain why it was wrong.
I have just checked the forecast v actual for today and they appear to me as they were forecast.
And for the record, you have not actually given ANY examples to date......
I have just checked the forecast v actual for today and they appear to me as they were forecast.
And for the record, you have not actually given ANY examples to date......
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: waterworld
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In our op we micro analyse the weather hourly and daily all year long - the forecasts are, and have been for some time (years), totally useless. Thank god for radar (and no thanks for the opportunity to pay more for quicker updates) and webcams.
The health and safety approach of - tempo dust devils, prob30 plague of locusts, prob 30 tempo snow has gone too far. In addition, most of the tempos now last the entire forecast period - just in case !!
We often get a forecast something like : 10K+ SCT 1800 BKN 2500 PROB 30 TEMPO 4000m SCT 1000. What actually happens is the complete opposite: 4000m SCT 400' OVC 800 PROB 30 TEMPO 10K SCT 1800 etc (and like most prob 30s sometimes we never see the good bit of the forecast)
Having said all that, according to an airline friend of mine who flies long haul, he is absolutely amazed that the met office is able to very accurately and consistently forecast the wind and temperature at almost all of the waypoints on his 5000 mile flight plan. !!!!
Sorry Mr Met man but it's true - and as for examples you can audit yourself - check the forecast against the actuals.
The health and safety approach of - tempo dust devils, prob30 plague of locusts, prob 30 tempo snow has gone too far. In addition, most of the tempos now last the entire forecast period - just in case !!
We often get a forecast something like : 10K+ SCT 1800 BKN 2500 PROB 30 TEMPO 4000m SCT 1000. What actually happens is the complete opposite: 4000m SCT 400' OVC 800 PROB 30 TEMPO 10K SCT 1800 etc (and like most prob 30s sometimes we never see the good bit of the forecast)
Having said all that, according to an airline friend of mine who flies long haul, he is absolutely amazed that the met office is able to very accurately and consistently forecast the wind and temperature at almost all of the waypoints on his 5000 mile flight plan. !!!!
Sorry Mr Met man but it's true - and as for examples you can audit yourself - check the forecast against the actuals.