1800-wx-brief - a uk version?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cage wheel
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
something for free ? ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
this is the best you're going to get.....
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation...etMET_2006.pdf
this is the best you're going to get.....
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation...etMET_2006.pdf
Guest
Posts: n/a
Come on guys it's not that bad. Free registration here http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation/index.html gets you weather charts and spot winds, plus global tafs and metars. And similarly free registration here http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/login.jsp gets you NOTAMs.
Basically it's down to a difference in philosophy. In the US you get briefed by somebody else, in the UK you are expected to brief yourself from all available information - and the amount on the met-office's website (virtually all free) is pretty damned good these days.
I think 1-800-WXBRIEF is great when I'm in the USA, most particularly for the ability to file a flight plan at the same time. But I miss the chance to pore over multiple charts, TAFS and actuals and make my own mind up what it's likely to do.
The fax service is still there, but it's always been overpriced, and is now to be honest obsolete.
G
I think 1-800-WXBRIEF is great when I'm in the USA, most particularly for the ability to file a flight plan at the same time. But I miss the chance to pore over multiple charts, TAFS and actuals and make my own mind up what it's likely to do.
The fax service is still there, but it's always been overpriced, and is now to be honest obsolete.
G
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Playing in the sand
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis,
Next time your in the US, try adds.aviationweather.gov ; this will give you all the charts, radar and sat images, metars, TAFs, etc. I usually check that out first, then give the FSS a call just to double check. The good thing about 800-wx-brief is that they record the fact that you've been briefed; so if you were to have an accident, they know it wasn't due to the fact that you neglected to check the forcast.
Next time your in the US, try adds.aviationweather.gov ; this will give you all the charts, radar and sat images, metars, TAFs, etc. I usually check that out first, then give the FSS a call just to double check. The good thing about 800-wx-brief is that they record the fact that you've been briefed; so if you were to have an accident, they know it wasn't due to the fact that you neglected to check the forcast.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US you get briefed by somebody else, in the UK you are expected to brief yourself from all available information -
Genghis, as you'll see from the extract from the rulebook below, US pilots are too expected to gather the information themselves....Legally, a Flight Service Station (FSS) brief alone is not sufficient if there are other sources of information available.
Sec. 91.103
Preflight action.
Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include--
(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;
I hate to dissapoint you, but I'm afraid UK pilots are not the only ones who like to pore over multiple charts, TAFS and actuals .
As someone mentioned previously, I use the FSS brief as to primarily back up what I have already found (as a second opinion), to get uptodate information in the absence of other sources and to get my voice on record. There is no requirement for me to use the FSS briefer at all, but I do. It's just an extra tool to use in preflight planning.
Basically it's down to a difference in philosophy
Regards,
cl12pv2s
The US does certainly have a "superior and mature setup for General Aviation than the UK", and 1-800-WXBRIEF is certainly part of that.
But, it is nonetheless much easier on most smaller British airfields to self brief, because that is what we are primarily expected to do, just as it is easier on most US airfields to contact the briefing service (for which there's no direct British equivalent) - because that is what we are expected to do there as our primary source of weather information.
Both work; if I had to choose between between the two I'd have the American one (albeit primarily for the ease of obtaining NOTAMs and the ability to file a flight plan at the same time), but I still like my charts - which are not so readily available on most US airfields.
I'm not US bashing, I hold licences in both countries, have had great flying in both, and have many friends in both - but there is a difference in the philosophies where some things are concerned. This is often for good reasons - weather patterns in Britain are often much more localised, whilst in the US it is much more important for safety reasons to provide mechanisms for internal traffic to file flight plans. For example!
G
But, it is nonetheless much easier on most smaller British airfields to self brief, because that is what we are primarily expected to do, just as it is easier on most US airfields to contact the briefing service (for which there's no direct British equivalent) - because that is what we are expected to do there as our primary source of weather information.
Both work; if I had to choose between between the two I'd have the American one (albeit primarily for the ease of obtaining NOTAMs and the ability to file a flight plan at the same time), but I still like my charts - which are not so readily available on most US airfields.
I'm not US bashing, I hold licences in both countries, have had great flying in both, and have many friends in both - but there is a difference in the philosophies where some things are concerned. This is often for good reasons - weather patterns in Britain are often much more localised, whilst in the US it is much more important for safety reasons to provide mechanisms for internal traffic to file flight plans. For example!
G
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by mikelimapapa
Genghis,
Next time your in the US, try adds.aviationweather.gov ; this will give you all the charts, radar and sat images, metars, TAFs, etc. I usually check that out first, then give the FSS a call just to double check. The good thing about 800-wx-brief is that they record the fact that you've been briefed; so if you were to have an accident, they know it wasn't due to the fact that you neglected to check the forcast.
Next time your in the US, try adds.aviationweather.gov ; this will give you all the charts, radar and sat images, metars, TAFs, etc. I usually check that out first, then give the FSS a call just to double check. The good thing about 800-wx-brief is that they record the fact that you've been briefed; so if you were to have an accident, they know it wasn't due to the fact that you neglected to check the forcast.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Back Of Beyond
Age: 45
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could always try NOAA under the aviation weather section.
http://www.noaa.com
http://www.noaa.com
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
puntosaurus,
I admit that I don't know the extent of authority of the websites you have listed, so what I write may not apply. Also, for US Part 91 (GA) operations you are not required to use 'authorised' weather sources.
However, in the US for Commercial work, (Parts 135.213 and 121.101) pilots are generally required to use the U.S. National Weather Service, a source approved by the U.S. National Weather Service, or a source approved by the Administrator for IFR.
With this extra burden on the US pilot, it is legally safest to use either one of the approved services or the ADDS site, all of which are good enough to give the details needed to make a go / no-go decision. Furthermore, if you ask for a 'Standard Brief' then some burden is put on the briefer, who is now required to give you all 12 points (no matter how small or insignificant'). This further backs up your case if you inadvertantly wander into a hot restricted area which you weren't told about! I guess in the US the CYA mentality is strong.
Simply, proving that you did check the weather won't do to get yourself out of a legal mess...you have to further prove that it was weather from 'an approved source'!
Again, I don't know what the requirements are in the UK. Whether you can use 'any-old' internet weather source or whether it has to be an approved source.
Genghis,
OK, I appologise if I was too quick to assume you were 'US' bashing! That's how it read first time through. I see what you're getting at now....I think!
cl12pv2s
I admit that I don't know the extent of authority of the websites you have listed, so what I write may not apply. Also, for US Part 91 (GA) operations you are not required to use 'authorised' weather sources.
However, in the US for Commercial work, (Parts 135.213 and 121.101) pilots are generally required to use the U.S. National Weather Service, a source approved by the U.S. National Weather Service, or a source approved by the Administrator for IFR.
With this extra burden on the US pilot, it is legally safest to use either one of the approved services or the ADDS site, all of which are good enough to give the details needed to make a go / no-go decision. Furthermore, if you ask for a 'Standard Brief' then some burden is put on the briefer, who is now required to give you all 12 points (no matter how small or insignificant'). This further backs up your case if you inadvertantly wander into a hot restricted area which you weren't told about! I guess in the US the CYA mentality is strong.
Simply, proving that you did check the weather won't do to get yourself out of a legal mess...you have to further prove that it was weather from 'an approved source'!
Again, I don't know what the requirements are in the UK. Whether you can use 'any-old' internet weather source or whether it has to be an approved source.
Genghis,
OK, I appologise if I was too quick to assume you were 'US' bashing! That's how it read first time through. I see what you're getting at now....I think!
cl12pv2s
