METAR / TAF's

[MooneyPilot]

Anyone have really tough ones to decode?? For practice and to give to students

 

[User546]

Here's a couple off a worksheet I put together for my students. They have most of the different variatiants that make up METAR's and TAF's, so it helps you get a good idea if they really understand what they're reading, or if they just know the basic METAR/TAF formula.


METAR:

KTUS 251455Z 13012G20KT 8SM BR FEW034 SCT047 OVC065 12/10 A2977 RMK A02 RAE13B29E54 SLP107 T01220067=


TAF:

KPHX 251140Z 251212 18011KT P6SM BKN060 OVC150
FM1500 14011KT P6SM VCSH FEW030 BKN050 OVC100
TEMPO 1518 -SHRA BKN040
FM1800 15012KT P6SM VCSH SCT020 BKN040 OVC070
TEMPO 1821 5SM SHRA FEW008 BKN030
FM2100 17012KT 5SM -RA SCT010 BKN030 OVC070 PROB30 2103 VRB10G20KT 2SM TSRA FEW008 BKN015CB

 

[LarryinTN]

Anyone have really tough ones to decode?? For practice and to give to students

3SM MIFG is a good one.

 

[Quillpig]

KTUS 251455Z 13012G20KT 8SM BR FEW034 SCT047 OVC065 12/10 A2977 RMK A02 RAE13B29E54 SLP107 T01220067=

12/10 is inconsistent with T01220067

 

[User546]

12/10 is inconsistent with T01220067

Good, you caught it!

 

[IP076]

3SM MIFG is a good one.

OK, you got me, can't remember MI, but I do know FG is Fog, which is defined in AC0045 as less than 5/8 sm visibility, so, you could not have 3SM and FG in the same observation.

 

[rumpletumbler]

http://adds.aviationweather.gov/tafs/index.php [font=Monospace,Courier]KRYY 211100Z 00000KT 1/2SM FG BKN001 16/16 A3002[/font]
KRYY 202327Z 210024 30004KT P6SM SCT020 JKSUX
TEMPO 0004 BKN020 JE PREM
FM0400 35003KT 5SM BR SKC JKJE HMP
FM0700 35003KT 3SM BR SKC JKWSHDNG
TEMPO 0810 1/2SM FG BKN003
FM1000 VRB03KT 1/2SM FG OVC003 THKPFLDSTRM
FM1300 03005KT 2SM BR OVC004
FM1500 08006KT 3SM BR OVC007
FM1800 09005KT 5SM HZ BKN015 JKJELARRPT
FM2100 09005KT 6SM HZ BKN030 NOT SKED 02Z-12Z

 

[pilotman2105]

OK, you got me, can't remember MI, but I do know FG is Fog, which is defined in AC0045 as less than 5/8 sm visibility, so, you could not have 3SM and FG in the same observation.

MI = Shallow (within 6 feet of the ground)

And yes, you can actually have fog with 5/8SM or greater visibility. However, the fog will have to include a descriptor, such as MIFG, BCFG, or PRFG (Shallow, Patchy, or Partial Fog respectively). You can have patches of fog while the prevailing visibility is >5/8SM, but most likely a sector visibility would be included in the remarks. It would look something like this (perhaps with a few formatting errors):

(barrowing from previous post)

KTUS 251455Z 13012G20KT 3SM BCFG BR FEW034 SCT047 OVC065 12/10 A2977 RMK A02 VIS NE 1/2 SW 1/8 RAE13B29E54 SLP107 T01220097

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

im a certified LAWRS observer for the FAA and yes you can have a higher vis then 5/8 and still have a fog discriptor. As in partial, patchy fog etc..... the visibility is an average visibility taken from the 6 sectors in the observing area. Break a 360 circle into 6 and then take the average vis and that is the vis. Then we have to get more descriptive and put any sector vis less then 3 in the remarks section...as in Vis S 2 Vis w 1/4 etc....you usually never see any of those. Im so rusty on all this stuff i just let ASOS tell me what it thinks it is, then i augment if it needs it.

 

[Singlecoil]

Ok, you're at an airport with no RVR and you want to take off.


Metar is

KXXX 251253Z 12005KT M1/4SM 10/10 A29.92, etc, etc.

Are you legal to takeoff under 135/121?

 

[millhouse21]

Sure. Adequate Visual Reference

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I don't think any plate has adequate vis below 1/4 without reference to rvr. But i could be wrong

 

[Singlecoil]

Hint: What does the M mean in a Metar?

 

[Singlecoil]

Millhouse got it right, Whiskey Tango got 30 days off.

 

[mattpilot]

Don't you need at least 1 mile vis for 2 engines and 1/2 vis for 4 engines under part 135/121 ?

 

[Singlecoil]

Don't you need at least 1 mile vis for 2 engines and 1/2 vis for 4 engines under part 135/121 ?

No, you're thinking of "standard" takeoff minimums which don't really apply to anybody. This was beaten to death in this thread. http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=40219

 

[mattpilot]

thanks for the link!