As a usual course of practice I review the wx before I leave my house for a flight. Then I file. En route to the airport I always call for a wx briefing. I figure that it helps to have someone else look over the wx and see if I missed something.
However, I think sometimes they limit their usefulness but defaulting to "flight not advisable" even though it could be a perfectly safe flight.
For example, today there was a thin cloud layer which made it OVC @ 1000 with tops around 2,500 or so with good vis above and below the deck. There was an airmet for icing starting at 8,000 or so- no problem for me as I would just be local and stay below 3,000.
I checked the freezing lvl before leaving and it was currently around 5,000 and forecast to be lifting as the day wore on.
However, when I call 800-wxbrief, the briefer tells me that because it is "so cold" the possibility for icing exists and "flight not recommended without FIKI equipment."
When I got to the airport I checked DUATS again, nothing changed from my original self brief, so up I went. I flew 5 approaches with the OAT about 2 C, picked up no ice and had an overall awesome IFR day that I would have missed if I listened to the overly cautious briefer. I'm all for making informed decisions and the last thing I want to be is stuck in ice but the lack of a AIRMET, PIREPS, or freezing level evidence should not have made the briefer advise against flight.
I feel they often advise against flight to cover themselves. There are many IFR and VFR flights I have made perfectly safe and legal even though the briefer has said "not recommended." I can't help but feel that when they use that so much its like the boy who cried wolf- they will start to fall on deaf ears.
I'll still follow my normal course of practice and brief myself before even calling them, using them as a "second check" but I just wish that they were more reliable about when a flight is not a good idea.
Ok, rant off.
However, I think sometimes they limit their usefulness but defaulting to "flight not advisable" even though it could be a perfectly safe flight.
For example, today there was a thin cloud layer which made it OVC @ 1000 with tops around 2,500 or so with good vis above and below the deck. There was an airmet for icing starting at 8,000 or so- no problem for me as I would just be local and stay below 3,000.
I checked the freezing lvl before leaving and it was currently around 5,000 and forecast to be lifting as the day wore on.
However, when I call 800-wxbrief, the briefer tells me that because it is "so cold" the possibility for icing exists and "flight not recommended without FIKI equipment."
When I got to the airport I checked DUATS again, nothing changed from my original self brief, so up I went. I flew 5 approaches with the OAT about 2 C, picked up no ice and had an overall awesome IFR day that I would have missed if I listened to the overly cautious briefer. I'm all for making informed decisions and the last thing I want to be is stuck in ice but the lack of a AIRMET, PIREPS, or freezing level evidence should not have made the briefer advise against flight.
I feel they often advise against flight to cover themselves. There are many IFR and VFR flights I have made perfectly safe and legal even though the briefer has said "not recommended." I can't help but feel that when they use that so much its like the boy who cried wolf- they will start to fall on deaf ears.
I'll still follow my normal course of practice and brief myself before even calling them, using them as a "second check" but I just wish that they were more reliable about when a flight is not a good idea.
Ok, rant off.