METAR decoding

Richard

Richard

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
9,076
Location
West Coast Resistance
Display Name
Display name:
Ack...city life
KEMT 231447Z 0000KT 3SM BR SCT000 OVC030 A2995 BR SCT000 BINOVC W

Why SCT000 and what is BINOVC? May as well as decode the W too.
 
Richard said:
KEMT 231447Z 0000KT 3SM BR SCT000 OVC030 A2995 BR SCT000 BINOVC W

Why SCT000 and what is BINOVC? May as well as decode the W too.
Click to expand...

SCT000 - Not quite fog, but there are some scattered clouds along the ground.

BINOVC W - Breaks in Overcast to the West
 
121Dispatch said:
SCT000 - Not quite fog, but there are some scattered clouds along the ground.
Click to expand...
Isn't that what BR is? If so, then wouldn't SCT000 be like an intensity indicator for BR? (BR appears twice in the METAR as does SCT000)

BINOVC W - Breaks in Overcast to the West
Click to expand...
I had never seen this before. Now I know. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't BR be continuous while SCT is less than 1/2 coverage of ground contact clouds?
 
Richard said:
Good question.

Aren't ground contact clouds called FG? Isn't SCT 3/8 to 5/8 sky coverage?
Click to expand...

Once in awhile we get what look like those nice big puff balls just about on the ground. That's what I'm picturing here rather than patchy fog. But I think you're right, fog is a cloud on the ground. Maybe SCTFG?
 
ejensen said:
Once in awhile we get what look like those nice big puff balls just about on the ground. That's what I'm picturing here rather than patchy fog. But I think you're right, fog is a cloud on the ground. Maybe SCTFG?
Click to expand...
I'd go with that picture except I was at the on fld restaurant during the entire valid period. There was no such obscuring phenomena.

And I've seen SCT000 in METARs elsewhere and in the same conditions.
 
Richard said:
I'd go with that picture except I was at the on fld restaurant during the entire valid period. There was no such obscuring phenomena.

And I've seen SCT000 in METARs elsewhere and in the same conditions.
Click to expand...

After reading in the Federal Meteorological Handbook, I think I've been confusing two of the reporting groups. The sky condition group is the SCT000 with 000 meaning less than 50 feet. Then the FG or BR etc come in the Present Weather Group.

http://www.ofcm.gov/fmh-1/fmh1.htm see Chapter 12
 
ejensen said:
DUATS still shows BR as mist and FG as fog.
Click to expand...
For practical purposes the only difference between FG and BR is the visibility. Which (BR or FG) the visibility limiting phenomenon is called depends on whether current visibility is + or - of 5/8 mile. Otherwise, it's all the same thing. You could have a cloud phenomenon on the ground with visibility less than 5/8 mile and the code would be FG. As the sun warmed the air and the temperature/dew point spread increased and the fog thinned to the point that visibility increased to 5/8 mile or greater then the code would suddenly switch to BR.
 
Richard said:
KEMT 231447Z 0000KT 3SM BR SCT000 OVC030 A2995 BR SCT000 BINOVC W

Why SCT000 and what is BINOVC? May as well as decode the W too.
Click to expand...

SCT000 with the REMARK BR SCT000 means the sky is partly obscured by mist (the technical translation) (we call it light fog). BR means its FOG but the visibility is 3/4 of a mile or higher up to 6 miles. for FG to be coded the sfc vis must be 1/2 mile or less.

Anyway the SCT000 BR in remarks means that mist is obscuring between 3 and 4 8ths of the sky.

In the old days pre metar it would look like

KEMT SA -X E30 OVC 3F ETC ETC
 
The real question is why does the government still use these outmoded methods of communicating?
Back in the day when you were writing to conserve telegraph and ticker tape, maybe it made sense, but not any more.
Just my opinion.
 
Shepherd said:
The real question is why does the government still use these outmoded methods of communicating?
Back in the day when you were writing to conserve telegraph and ticker tape, maybe it made sense, but not any more.
Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Yup. Time to kill the abbreviations. Of course you'd have to deal with the whining of the old guys that had to decode metars while walking to school barefoot in the snow.:lol:
 
So what would be the point in getting rid of the abbreviations? Are they really that hard to decipher? I think the pre METAR format was a bit easier but it was still abbreviated,
 
Velocity173 said:
So what would be the point in getting rid of the abbreviations? Are they really that hard to decipher? I think the pre METAR format was a bit easier but it was still abbreviated,
Click to expand...
Easier for new pilots that don't know them yet. Oh wait screw the new pilots, we had to learn them. Also the basic safety idea that the clearest communication is best. Why keep the abbreviations?
 
ClimbnSink said:
Easier for new pilots that don't know them yet. Oh wait screw the new pilots, we had to learn them. Also the basic safety idea that the clearest communication is best. Why keep the abbreviations?
Click to expand...

Plus the fact they are abbreviations of Fench words, not English.
 
There's that whole "decode" button on AWC if you prefer to read 10 lines of weather vs 2 lines.
 
I dunno... I don't exactly like the encoding, but it does make skimming a bunch of metars along a route much quicker.

OTOH, you have to wonder why use text at all when we have images but...
 
Velocity173 said:
So what would be the point in getting rid of the abbreviations? Are they really that hard to decipher? I think the pre METAR format was a bit easier but it was still abbreviated,
Click to expand...

The very fact that we have a full page of discussion of what some of the abbreviations mean indicates to me just how unclear the communications can be.
Time to modernize the weather reports. All of them, not just METARS.
 
Shepherd said:
The very fact that we have a full page of discussion of what some of the abbreviations mean indicates to me just how unclear the communications can be.
Time to modernize the weather reports. All of them, not just METARS.
Click to expand...

Well as I said, the pre METAR / TAF format was easier but still, on the scale of things that are hard to learn in aviation, learning weather codes isn't very high on my list. FLIPs, NOTAMs, the PCG all use abbreviations and acronyms. I actually think it simplifies the process and provides a concise easy to read format. If for some reason I don't remember a wx code it's a few seconds away in the AIM or in the FIH.
 
Last edited:
Shepherd said:
The real question is why does the government still use these outmoded methods of communicating?
Click to expand...
When you know the codes it is much faster and easier to read the coded reports than it is to read the plain English version. If you aren't good with the abbreviations just use an app, or site, that will do the decoding for you.
 
Before getting into the airplane, I am getting my METARS data through foreflight and another iOS app, both of which decode it.

I imagine most people will be moving yo something like this in the near future if not already there.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Yup. Time to kill the abbreviations. Of course you'd have to deal with the whining of the old guys that had to decode metars while walking to school barefoot in the snow.:lol:
Click to expand...
You still have people using high speed internet at zero cost who abbreviate probably and hundreds of other shorthands. How many times have you read FTFY, IMHO, OTOH, or WTF? And had to go look them up to figure out what they were talking about?
Maybe the default should be decoded and let the user select the encoded. Save the encoded for a quick lookup on your in cockpit weather.
 
silver-eagle said:
You still have people using high speed internet at zero cost who abbreviate probably and hundreds of other shorthands. How many times have you read FTFY, IMHO, OTOH, or WTF? And had to go look them up to figure out what they were talking about?
Maybe the default should be decoded and let the user select the encoded. Save the encoded for a quick lookup on your in cockpit weather.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it will get worse when native txt spkrs become pilots. Mixing up smoke with best regards or idk what.
 
If METARS were sent in Morse code, you wouldn't have to read anything - just sit there and soak it in.

And, if you don't know Morse, there are apps that can translate for you.
 
Shepherd said:
Au contraire. I have an antique telegraph that records on paper tape.
Click to expand...


I knew they existed, but they're not the norm for high speed Morse. ;)

It's a lovely musical language -- that still has a tendency to **** me off, because I'm rusty. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top