Hindsight is 20/20....or maybe 1SM and clear of clouds

Jim K

Jim K

360 For Spacing
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2019
Messages
6,124
Location
Knee deep in a Lycoming
Display Name
Display name:
Richard Digits
Thinking about our Florida trip which we returned from on Monday....

Learned a lot, several encounters with weather. Sunday in particular:
We diverted to KSSI, on the coast of Georgia, Saturday night as the overcast merged with the undercast south of Savannah. Gorgeous place to be stranded, except that Sunday morning, the skies were clear, save for a little bit of fog blowing in from the ocean that stubbornly kept the awos reporting 300' ceilings.

Apparently the weather station is at the end of the runway closest the ocean, because the runway was clear, but the fog persisted just inside the fence. This being a non-towered field, SVFR never occurred to me, but from what I've been researching, apparently JAX could have cleared me to takeoff legally? Im certain I could've made a short field takeoff and remained clear of the fog wall, and it would've saved sitting at the (beautiful) FBO for 4 hours.

We eventually got off, but by that time storms over central Georgia had begun to develop. It turned out to be another very stressful day of dodging around trying to stay vfr that probably could have been avoided by an earlier departure.

And before you ask, yes I've started studying for my instrument rating.
 
Is there a reg that says AWOS drives VFR limits at a non towered airport? I don’t recall one, but I may be wrong. If the AWOS is faulty and reporting mist on a perfectly clear day on a non towered field, are you grounded? I thought your eyes are what mattered.
 
You don’t need SVFR in class G, just 1sm clear of clouds below 1200
 
KSSI AIRSPACE: CLASS E svc 1100–0259Z‡; other times CLASS G.

I've done SVFR on a day like you describe from a towered airport. Pretty easy and controller was very helpful. I've found Jax ATC to be very accommodating overall.
 
I should have mentioned that KSSI is a class E surface area, so technically requires 3-152 for vfr. Which would have been impossible to maintain.

So the root of the question I guess is, do awos reports carry the same weight as metars? And if you contact approach from the ground of a non- towered a/p and ask for SVFR, what would they say? Does anyone care? If I just took off and they were working an ifr plane in at the same time, I'm pretty sure I'd be getting a phone number.
 
AWOS reports generate METARS. Are you saying you want to use an older (VFR) METAR in lieu of a current (less-than-VFR) AWOS reading? Or are you asking about the difference between human observers and automated ones?

It's times like this an instrument rating is helpful.
 
flyingron said:
AWOS reports generate METARS. Are you saying you want to use an older (VFR) METAR in lieu of a current (less-than-VFR) AWOS reading? Or are you asking about the difference between human observers and automated ones?

It's times like this an instrument rating is helpful.
Click to expand...

The field never went vfr officially until about 1pm, by which point weather along my route had gotten worse. I should have left sooner, I'm trying to figure out the legalities of doing so. Does the AWOS carry the same weight as a METAR, or do pilot eyeballs overrule at non towered a/p's? The real question is if a SVFR clearance would have been the best/ only option aside from waiting, and could I have gotten one.
 
I don't have the answer to the AWOS question. I've often heard it said that ASOS/AWOS is controlling, but have never seen the regulation supporting that claim. And, I've wondered, if, say, approaching a non-towered airport to land, with conditions such as you describe, suppose you were completely legal in a NORDO J-3 Cub. You can plainly see the runway, safe to land, and no way to listen to the (faulty or ambiguous) AWOS report?
As an additional comment, concerning Special VFR clearance, keep in mind that it's not about you and your plane, it's about being on the same page with ATC and separation from inbound or nearby IFR traffic. At a nontowered field, this may mean a hold-for-release type of clearance if there's an IFR aircraft on the approach, say, 5 miles out on an ILS or whatever. No way for each of you to "see-and-avoid", so ATC provides that separation, most likely by having the SVFR plane wait until the other aircraft has landed and closed their IFR plan, in this example.

Edit: Not personally familiar with the area, but looking at the charts, that field is very nearby a couple of other airports with instrument approaches. Jacksonville Center is the controlling agency, I don't know if you could reach them on the ground by radio, Chart Supplement lists the appropriate phone number for clearance delivery. SVFR should be entirely possible, the controller then would figure how and when to safely permit your SVFR departure so as to fit with any other traffic in the immediate area.
 
Last edited:
I have taken off from an airport where the automated voice was giving false information (it had been slightly foggy earlier, maybe 1/2 mile viz at the worst, was now clear.) I ignored it. But I did take off in VMC. As long as you take off in VMC, I don't believe that one could be bound by the AWOS/ASOS.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
I have taken off from an airport where the automated voice was giving false information (it had been slightly foggy earlier, maybe 1/2 mile viz at the worst, was now clear.) I ignored it. But I did take off in VMC. As long as you take off in VMC, I don't believe that one could be bound by the AWOS/ASOS.
Click to expand...

I always assumed actual conditions prevail rather than an automated weather recording. I've seen times were marginal weather cleared rapidly to VMC and the recording was updated later.
 
Sounds like SVFR would have been the way to go.

I think if it came down to an FAA inquisition (the only place where eyeball weather vs ASOS would actually matter), you’d have a hard time proving that a certified ASOS that’s been reporting accurately was wrong. The only violation proceedings I’ve ever heard of that are similar was when a bird crapped on the ASOS sensor, and it was reporting something like zero-zero on a clear day. The pilots had several people at the airport who could back up their story on the weather.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Sounds like SVFR would have been the way to go.

I think if it came down to an FAA inquisition (the only place where eyeball weather vs ASOS would actually matter), you’d have a hard time proving that a certified ASOS that’s been reporting accurately was wrong. The only violation proceedings I’ve ever heard of that are similar was when a bird crapped on the ASOS sensor, and it was reporting something like zero-zero on a clear day. The pilots had several people at the airport who could back up their story on the weather.
Click to expand...
So what the reg?
 
The time my wife and I sat at a ‘beautiful’ FBO for 3 hours under an 800’ ceiling, but looking at sunshine less than 10 miles away, is what led to my wife deciding I needed to get my IFR. I got it the next year and it’s made long cross country trips much easier to take since then.

I also didn’t think about asking for an SVFR departure at the time but now I don’t have to worry about it.

I took the one-week course from Gatts, considered that week one of the best vacations I’ve ever had, and have been confidently flying IMC when needed ever since. Consider getting your IFR.

Gary
 
Salty said:
So what the reg?
Click to expand...
91.157(c) for starters...and (d) specifically states that a pilot’s eye view doesn’t work for ground visibility.
(c) No person may take off or land an aircraft (other than a helicopter) under special VFR—

(1) Unless ground visibility is at least 1 statute mile; or

(2) If ground visibility is not reported, unless flight visibility is at least 1 statute mile. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term flight visibility includes the visibility from the cockpit of an aircraft in takeoff position if:

(i) The flight is conducted under this part 91; and

(ii) The airport at which the aircraft is located is a satellite airport that does not have weather reporting capabilities.

(d) The determination of visibility by a pilot in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section is not an official weather report or an official ground visibility report.
Click to expand...
 
GaryV said:
The time my wife and I sat at a ‘beautiful’ FBO for 3 hours under an 800’ ceiling, but looking at sunshine less than 10 miles away, is what led to my wife deciding I needed to get my IFR. I got it the next year and it’s made long cross country trips much easier to take since then.

I also didn’t think about asking for an SVFR departure at the time but now I don’t have to worry about it.

I took the one-week course from Gatts, considered that week one of the best vacations I’ve ever had, and have been confidently flying IMC when needed ever since. Consider getting your IFR.

Gary
Click to expand...

I had started reading the IFH, but my wife was not happy about the idea of me spending more time and money getting the rating. After we landed Sunday in TN (because there was a 100' thick overcast at home) , she said, "you need to get your instrument rating". Hope to get it knocked out this summer.
 
MauleSkinner said:
91.157(c) for starters...and (d) specifically states that a pilot’s eye view doesn’t work for ground visibility.
Click to expand...
I’m talking straight VFR. What says I must use the AWOS to determine visibility for a VFR flight from a non-towered field if it exists? Won’t be surprised if I exists, but I’m unaware of it. When there is no AWOS or it is marked inop, you use your eyes.
 
Salty said:
I’m talking straight VFR. What says I must use the AWOS to determine visibility for a VFR flight from a non-towered field if it exists? Won’t be surprised if I exists, but I’m unaware of it. When there is no AWOS or it is marked inop, you use your eyes.
Click to expand...
How about 91.155(d)? Flight visibility isn’t controlling for takeoff or landing if weather is reported at the airport.
(d) Except as provided in §91.157 of this part, no person may take off or land an aircraft, or enter the traffic pattern of an airport, under VFR, within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport—

(1) Unless ground visibility at that airport is at least 3 statute miles; or

(2) If ground visibility is not reported at that airport, unless flight visibility during landing or takeoff, or while operating in the traffic pattern is at least 3 statute miles.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
How about 91.155(d)? Flight visibility isn’t controlling for takeoff or landing if weather is reported at the airport.
Click to expand...

But in this instance, flight visibility wasn't the issue, was it? It was the cloud base being reported low due to fog near the AWOS sensors. Not sure what visibility it was stating though.
 
SoonerAviator said:
But in this instance, flight visibility wasn't the issue, was it? It was the cloud base being reported low due to fog near the AWOS sensors. Not sure what visibility it was stating though.
Click to expand...
Well, 91.155(c) talks about the reported ceiling requirements, and there’s no provision anywhere for pilot-reported ceilings.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Well, 91.155(c) talks about the reported ceiling requirements, and there’s no provision anywhere for pilot-reported ceilings.
Click to expand...

Right, I was just commenting that 91.155(d) didn't seem applicable in this case if cloud ceilings were the issue, not visibility. I didn't see where @Jim K said what the reported visibility was, so it may have been a factor as well as the reported ceilings.
 
Jim K said:
The field never went vfr officially until about 1pm, by which point weather along my route had gotten worse. I should have left sooner, I'm trying to figure out the legalities of doing so. Does the AWOS carry the same weight as a METAR, or do pilot eyeballs overrule at non towered a/p's? The real question is if a SVFR clearance would have been the best/ only option aside from waiting, and could I have gotten one.
Click to expand...
Again, you're not making sense. AWOS is a device that generates METARs. They're not mutually exclusive.

The latest REPORTED weather is what is important to the ceiling. That is the METAR unless either the AWOS broadcast/phone or ATC relaying a human observation gives you something newer.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Right, I was just commenting that 91.155(d) didn't seem applicable in this case if cloud ceilings were the issue, not visibility. I didn't see where @Jim K said what the reported visibility was, so it may have been a factor as well as the reported ceilings.
Click to expand...

SA 12/01/2020 18:53->
METAR KSSI 121853Z AUTO 16009KT 10SM CLR 23/19 A3025 RMK
AO2 SLP245 T02280189=
SA 12/01/2020 17:53->
METAR KSSI 121753Z AUTO 16009KT 10SM CLR 22/19 A3027 RMK
AO2 SLP252 T02170189 10217 20183 58015=
SP 12/01/2020 17:26->
SPECI KSSI 121726Z AUTO 17009KT 10SM SCT003 SCT018 21/19
A3028 RMK AO2 T02110189=
SP 12/01/2020 17:02->
SPECI KSSI 121702Z AUTO 17009G15KT 10SM BKN002 BKN014 21/19
A3029 RMK AO2 T02060189=
SA 12/01/2020 16:53->
METAR KSSI 121653Z AUTO 17008KT 10SM SCT002 BKN012 21/18
A3029 RMK AO2 SLP259 T02060183=
SA 12/01/2020 15:53->
METAR KSSI 121553Z AUTO 17007KT 10SM OVC003 20/18 A3032 RMK
AO2 SLP267 T02000183=
SA 12/01/2020 14:53->
METAR KSSI 121453Z AUTO 17004KT 5SM BR OVC002 19/18 A3032
RMK AO2 SLP268 T01940183 51018=
SP 12/01/2020 14:27->
SPECI KSSI 121427Z AUTO 16004KT 3SM BR BKN002 OVC006 19/18
A3031 RMK AO2 T01890183=
SP 12/01/2020 14:12->
SPECI KSSI 121412Z AUTO 15006KT 1 3/4SM BR FEW002 OVC007
19/18 A3030 RMK AO2 T01940183=
SP 12/01/2020 14:03->
SPECI KSSI 121403Z AUTO 13004KT 3SM BR FEW002 OVC009 19/18
A3030 RMK AO2 T01940183=
SA 12/01/2020 13:53->
METAR KSSI 121353Z AUTO 15004KT 3SM BR FEW002 OVC010 19/18
A3031 RMK AO2 SLP263 T01940183=

Looking at these, I think 1726Z, 1226 EST is the one I got before takeoff.

flyingron said:
Again, you're not making sense. AWOS is a device that generates METARs. They're not mutually exclusive.

The latest REPORTED weather is what is important to the ceiling. That is the METAR unless either the AWOS broadcast/phone or ATC relaying a human observation gives you something newer.
Click to expand...

Okay... perhaps I'm using the wrong terms. Im used to my controlled a/p posting METARS on the ATIS hourly. My understanding of the AWOS like at this field was that it updates the broadcast continuously in real time, whereas a METAR is an hourly sampling of that information. Im also under the impression that the METAR is the official factor in whether an airport is vfr or ifr. Can the awos broadcast override this? Can my eyeballs?

When listening to the AWOS, how do I know what the offical METAR is without checking the internet?
 
Jim K said:
Thinking about our Florida trip which we returned from on Monday....

Learned a lot, several encounters with weather. Sunday in particular:
We diverted to KSSI, on the coast of Georgia, Saturday night as the overcast merged with the undercast south of Savannah. Gorgeous place to be stranded, except that Sunday morning, the skies were clear, save for a little bit of fog blowing in from the ocean that stubbornly kept the awos reporting 300' ceilings.

Apparently the weather station is at the end of the runway closest the ocean, because the runway was clear, but the fog persisted just inside the fence. This being a non-towered field, SVFR never occurred to me, but from what I've been researching, apparently JAX could have cleared me to takeoff legally? Im certain I could've made a short field takeoff and remained clear of the fog wall, and it would've saved sitting at the (beautiful) FBO for 4 hours.

We eventually got off, but by that time storms over central Georgia had begun to develop. It turned out to be another very stressful day of dodging around trying to stay vfr that probably could have been avoided by an earlier departure.

And before you ask, yes I've started studying for my instrument rating.
Click to expand...

They couldn't clear you for Takeoff. They could give you a SVFR Clearance though.
 
Jim K said:
I should have mentioned that KSSI is a class E surface area, so technically requires 3-152 for vfr. Which would have been impossible to maintain.

So the root of the question I guess is, do awos reports carry the same weight as metars? And if you contact approach from the ground of a non- towered a/p and ask for SVFR, what would they say? Does anyone care? If I just took off and they were working an ifr plane in at the same time, I'm pretty sure I'd be getting a phone number.
Click to expand...

Yup, you'd probably be getting a phone number and that wouldn't be the end of it. They'd be asking for information and it would get forwarded to FSDO. That's when the real phone calls would begin. That's a pretty serious infraction.
 
Okay... perhaps I'm using the wrong terms. Im used to my controlled a/p posting METARS on the ATIS hourly. My understanding of the AWOS like at this field was that it updates the broadcast continuously in real time, whereas a METAR is an hourly sampling of that information. Im also under the impression that the METAR is the official factor in whether an airport is vfr or ifr. Can the awos broadcast override this? Can my eyeballs?

When listening to the AWOS, how do I know what the offical METAR is without checking the internet?
Click to expand...
@Jim K , the ASOS is considered the current report. Just like your towered airport, what’s on the ATIS or disseminated via METAR may not be current.
 
Couple of thoughts:
1) ASOS isn't the final authority, it's the PIC.
Weather can happen suddenly. Good weather report from automated system, but rapid VMC deterioration. Because ASOS said OK, doesn't mean someone can.

2) Recently had ASOS stuck on 2 hours old IMC fog report with actual 10sm & clear. I'm not grounded until the system fixes itself.

3) 2 months ago flew into costal airport reporting 1sm viz. The 0 viz was a mile off the coast, clear and blue over the airport and traffic patterns, and approaches.

There are a lot of corner cases. Person in the left seat owns the decision.
 
NordicDave said:
Couple of thoughts:
1) ASOS isn't the final authority, it's the PIC.
Weather can happen suddenly. Good weather report from automated system, but rapid VMC deterioration. Because ASOS said OK, doesn't mean someone can.

2) Recently had ASOS stuck on 2 hours old IMC fog report with actual 10sm & clear. I'm not grounded until the system fixes itself.

3) 2 months ago flew into costal airport reporting 1sm viz. The 0 viz was a mile off the coast, clear and blue over the airport and traffic patterns, and approaches.

There are a lot of corner cases. Person in the left seat owns the decision.
Click to expand...
I suggest you read the regs, or at least the rest of this thread. The PIC isn't the final authority as to what weather is reported. And reported weather is what's required in the regs for takeoff or landing, at least within the context of this thread.

But yes, whatever decision you make, right or wrong, legal or illegal, you own.
 
Last edited:
Okay... perhaps I'm using the wrong terms. Im used to my controlled a/p posting METARS on the ATIS hourly. My understanding of the AWOS like at this field was that it updates the broadcast continuously in real time, whereas a METAR is an hourly sampling of that information. Im also under the impression that the METAR is the official factor in whether an airport is vfr or ifr. Can the awos broadcast override this? Can my eyeballs?

When listening to the AWOS, how do I know what the offical METAR is without checking the internet?
Click to expand...

You are laboring under many misconceptions.

While it is common practice for the human observers (and the AWOS mimicks this) to report weather conditions hourly on the METAR they are both supposed to issue updates more frequently if things change. A switch from IFR to VFR conditions would usually merit such a change.

The latest observation is what matters. Again, if the AWOS broadcasts a new ceiling or the controller gives you one over the air or changes the ATIS, then that is what matters, not what the delayed information online.

The only thing that the REPORTED value matters (for us small private guys) for operating under the ceiling in surface areas and visibility within class E. If they have reported ceilings and ground visibilities you are obliged to use them for 91.155(c) and (d). Otherwise flight visibility (i.e., your own eyeballs) are defining.
 
Last edited:
Everybody is wrong on this thread

you just announce "air shuttle 630 - departing runway 34 last call St Simmons traffic"

You takeoff with a tailwind, while maintaining E cloud clearances and if anybody has a question about the reported METAR at the time of departure they start calling mesa airlines wandering WTF is going on and meanwhile 123YankeeDoodle is on to clear and 100
 
I suggest you read the regs, or at least the rest of this thread. The PIC isn't the final authority as to what weather is reported. And reported weather is what's required in the regs for takeoff or landing.
Click to expand...
Operating below the ceiling is dependent on the reproted ceiling regardless of whether you're landing/taking off or just passing through.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I suggest you read the regs, or at least the rest of this thread. The PIC isn't the final authority as to what weather is reported. And reported weather is what's required in the regs for takeoff or landing, at least within the context of this thread.

But yes, whatever decision you make, right or wrong, legal or illegal, you own.
Click to expand...

The inverse of this is ASOS says clear for VFR, but it isn't. Doesn't mean we can fly because ASOS said it was.

I agree when ASOS way 2sm viz and Pilot thinks "I have 3sm" is indefensible.

I appreciated your counterpoints.
 
If its uncontrolled I'd just take off i think. If asked. I looked outside and it was VFR, radio not required for VFR flight. Hell if someone says anything just say you were staying in the vicinity of the airport and your preflight would be covered under 91.103
 
Jim K said:
SPECI KSSI 121726Z AUTO 17009KT 10SM SCT003 SCT018 21/19
A3028 RMK AO2 T02110189=

Looking at these, I think 1726Z, 1226 EST is the one I got before takeoff.
Click to expand...

Scattered does not a ceiling make, regardless how low they are. You were VMC.

:)
 
falconkidding said:
If its uncontrolled I'd just take off i think. If asked. I looked outside and it was VFR, radio not required for VFR flight. Hell if someone says anything just say you were staying in the vicinity of the airport and your preflight would be covered under 91.103
Click to expand...
Definitely violatable, at least with respect to weather requirements.
 
Salty said:
Is there a reg that says AWOS drives VFR limits at a non towered airport? I don’t recall one, but I may be wrong. If the AWOS is faulty and reporting mist on a perfectly clear day on a non towered field, are you grounded? I thought your eyes are what mattered.
Click to expand...
If there is I’m guilty.
 
falconkidding said:
If its uncontrolled I'd just take off i think. If asked. I looked outside and it was VFR, radio not required for VFR flight. Hell if someone says anything just say you were staying in the vicinity of the airport and your preflight would be covered under 91.103
Click to expand...
And you'd be breaking the regs. Class E surface area visibility is governed by GROUND VISIBILITY when such is available. If the latest report says it's 2 miles, it's illegal to takeoff regardless of what you have in your plane or what your eyes are telling you.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
If there is I’m guilty.
Click to expand...
91.155 (d) specifically calls out ground visibility if such is reported for the airport.
Ground visibility comes from AWOS or an approved observer.
 
flyingron said:
And you'd be breaking the regs. Class E surface area visibility is governed by GROUND VISIBILITY when such is available. If the latest report says it's 2 miles, it's illegal to takeoff regardless of what you have in your plane or what your eyes are telling you.
Click to expand...
I'd still be fine with going, my anti authority attitude and all that :D . But could you not make the case your preflight duties were completed under 91.103. After all under that you technically don't have to get weather and if you cant listen to awos/atis/asos... lol


Until the FAA violates somebody for departing uncontrolled airport in CAVU wx i wouldn't worry about it. #sendit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top