Tipping the Windmill: 7-Day VFR Weather Planning

[MajorTurbulence]

I’m not trying to be negative with your efforts, just that the ever changing weather and the inaccuracy of almost any longer term forecasting product on a granular level requires 3 things that must be learned for any pilot( let alone a VFR only pilot): they are decision making, interpretation, and flexibility ( there could be more things I’m forgetting but these are the three obvious ones that come to my mind).

I can see where if one is locked in by something you have created to help plan a trip, many times when your product would say not possible, I would think that workarounds could be a slightly different routing that might be longer or leaving earlier or later, would get one there safely. And you have to be flexible enough to wait for the latest weather data to make final decisions on go, no go, or modify and go. Almost all of us who actually go places on a regular basis, practice these skills. There is a limit to how much you can or should dumb down the process, or you will be canceling many trips that are possible. But what do I know, maybe you’re on to something.

 

[Palmpilot]

...There is a limit to how much you can or should dumb down the process, or you will be canceling many trips that are possible. But what do I know, maybe you’re on to something.

Graphics make it possible to take in the big picture at a glance. Since long range forecasts are not reliable, I don't think much, if anything, will be lost by reducing the time spent on them by the user.

 

[MajorTurbulence]

Graphics make it possible to take in the big picture at a glance. Since long range forecasts are not reliable, I don't think much, if anything, will be lost by reducing the time spent on them by the user.

My assertion includes the graphical products, but the only ones that are really helpful to me, IMO, are the ones within 1-2 days, and really the ones within 24 hrs of a trip(and in the case of thunderstorms and icing, within hours of anticipated departures). The others(older) that I use are just for trends to help me mobilize to change strategies ie timing or routing, if not a clear-cut no go decision. I’m willing to be shown a better way, if graphic crunching can do that.

 

[MajorTurbulence]

I guess the idea that one can come up with a way to prognosticate that, for example , if you fly on Wednesday to Thursday this coming week, you can make your trip VFR with X feet ceiling. This is like tail wagging to me, versus what I do and plan to leave on Saturday for that trip, but I may have to adjust the timing or routing to make it work because of weather. The probable reality is this is the difference in thinking that an instrument rating gets you.

 

[Jim_R]

I think this effort would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. I think what you are asking for can be done--you can present a graphical weather map 7 days out--but I think the value of that map will be nil. Whatever value it would provide is already available via other means, though it may not be graphical--sites such as Windy, Weather Undergound, Accuweather, etc. provide 7-day-out forecasts that any aviator can interpret usefully for long-range trip planning. Having the government build a graphical map will add expense without value.

The simple fact is that with today's state of the art, 7-day-out forecasting is not reliable.

Houston has a couple of meteorologists who run a local/regional weather website (Space City Weather) that's highly-respected by the locals because they characterize their uncertainty accurately--they don't make bold predictions, and they don't overly hedge. They get a lot of attention when hurricanes and winter storms are threatening, but they provide weather updates every day even when it's not exciting. These are guys who use a lot of weather resources to support their prognostications. Even with all their knowledge, skill, and weather data resources, here's what they have to say at 7am Thursday about the weather for Tuesday (5 days out) and beyond:

​

That's pretty typical, because the state-of-the-art of our weather forecasting ability just isn't any better than that today. What you're asking for is not going to be any more valuable than the weather products already publicly available.

(BTW, you can scroll back in time on that website to see other long-range predictions, and how they eventually played out. They've been running this site for years.)

 

[Half Fast]

Beyond about 3 or 4 days, you might as well rely on a groundhog....

 

[Palmpilot]

My assertion includes the graphical products, but the only ones that are really helpful to me, IMO, are the ones within 1-2 days, and really the ones within 24 hrs of a trip(and in the case of thunderstorms and icing, within hours of anticipated departures). The others(older) that I use are just for trends to help me mobilize to change strategies ie timing or routing, if not a clear-cut no go decision. I’m willing to be shown a better way, if graphic crunching can do that.

I agree that long range forecasts are not reliable for definite go/no-go decisions. Displaying them graphically makes it possible to see the long-range big picture at a glance, but it doesn't make those forecasts more accurate, as far as I know.

 

[TCABM]

I agree that long range forecasts are not reliable for definite go/no-go decisions. Displaying them graphically makes it possible to see the long-range big picture at a glance, but it doesn't make those forecasts more accurate, as far as I know.

Forecasts are developed using multiple models and educated guesses by trained people. Until we understand forecast accuracy and reliability, using a forecast as a tactical tool is like using ADS-B or SiriusXM weather to thread a squall line.

 

[Palmpilot]

Forecasts are developed using multiple models and educated guesses by trained people. Until we understand forecast accuracy and reliability, using a forecast as a tactical tool is like using ADS-B or SiriusXM weather to thread a squall line.

It also might be like trying to use a 7-day old forecast to thread a squall line.

 

[WDD]

Tipping Windmills

 

[WDD]

Laudable effort, but accurate 7 day forecasts for a specific geographic spot is not that accurate with the best forecasting there is. Accurate forecast over 7 days that are all accurate over multiple locations is not feasible today.

Part of the "charm" of VFR flying is the flexibility. AKA "pull over and wait it out".

 

[William Pete Hodges]

I think this effort would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. I think what you are asking for can be done--you can present a graphical weather map 7 days out--but I think the value of that map will be nil. Whatever value it would provide is already available via other means, though it may not be graphical--sites such as Windy, Weather Undergound, Accuweather, etc. provide 7-day-out forecasts that any aviator can interpret usefully for long-range trip planning. Having the government build a graphical map will add expense without value.

The simple fact is that with today's state of the art, 7-day-out forecasting is not reliable.

Houston has a couple of meteorologists who run a local/regional weather website (Space City Weather) that's highly-respected by the locals because they characterize their uncertainty accurately--they don't make bold predictions, and they don't overly hedge. They get a lot of attention when hurricanes and winter storms are threatening, but they provide weather updates every day even when it's not exciting. These are guys who use a lot of weather resources to support their prognostications. Even with all their knowledge, skill, and weather data resources, here's what they have to say at 7am Thursday about the weather for Tuesday (5 days out) and beyond:

View attachment 114512​

That's pretty typical, because the state-of-the-art of our weather forecasting ability just isn't any better than that today. What you're asking for is not going to be any more valuable than the weather products already publicly available.

(BTW, you can scroll back in time on that website to see other long-range predictions, and how they eventually played out. They've been running this site for years.)

Respectfully, I do not agree that this is a waste of taxpayer dollars. I also disagree that the idea of 7-Day VFR weather planning is of no value, especially if you take into account that the weather predicted usually does arrive, but not always on time. Take a look at my analysis table as of today. So far I have not seen any definite yes-yes days, but I have seen some maybe yes-yes days. I have also seen some definate no-no days and some maybe no-no days. I find it interesting that some of those days seem to track diagonally across the chart. When I get enough data to complete about 20 days, I'll let the data speak for itself.

One Miracle at a time.

 

[WDD]

Hey - applaud your innovation mindset.

You asked this motley group for opinions - and this group usually isn’t shy! Most that fly for a trip over 7 days probably get their IFR rating, so that’s how it’s dealt with.

No shade given. Post up what you put together!

 

[Ed Haywood]

That's not data, that is an anecdote. You need a dataset a few million times larger before it can speak for itself.

 

[William Pete Hodges]

Hey - applaud your innovation mindset.

You asked this motley group for opinions - and this group usually isn’t shy! Most that fly for a trip over 7 days probably get their IFR rating, so that’s how it’s dealt with.

No shade given. Post up what you put together!

I am a little slow sometimes, but did you just say a VFR pilot shouldn't plan a flying vacation? Or shouldn't try a flying visit with friends and family that takes more than 1 day? Unless he is willing to get an IFR rating? That seems a little restrictive to me.

 

[WDD]

I am a little slow sometimes, but did you just say a VFR pilot shouldn't plan a flying vacation? Or shouldn't try a flying visit with friends and family that takes more than 1 day? Unless he is willing to get an IFR rating? That seems a little restrictive to me.

Not what I meant. My earlier post:

Part of the "charm" of VFR flying is the flexibility. AKA "pull over and wait it out".

Plan the best you can knowing you might have to pull over and spend a day or so somewhere waiting for weather / visibility.

(But no getting around that an IFR rating does give you a lot more flexibility. )

 

[Half Fast]

(But no getting around that an IFR rating does give you a lot more flexibility. )

Maybe.

Granted that it does provide more options, but I'm a little skeptical of saying "a lot more flexibility," at least here in central Florida. It seems to me that a great deal of the IFR weather around here is stuff that I wouldn't want to fly a small plane in anyway. Quite a bit of it occurs during the warmer months and is convective. IFR this time of year is usually just an hour or two in the morning for the early fog to burn off.

I haven't tracked it, but I suspect that an IFR rating would only let me fly about 20% more of my planned flights, and if you open that up to "fly on the planned day" it's an even smaller advantage. The summer thunderstorms are almost always in the afternoon, are usually local, and move in and out of areas quickly. Waiting for the weather to clear is typically a matter of an hour or two, not a day or two, and even with an IFR rating I wouldn't fly in those conditions.

 

[Palmpilot]

I am a little slow sometimes, but did you just say a VFR pilot shouldn't plan a flying vacation? Or shouldn't try a flying visit with friends and family that takes more than 1 day? Unless he is willing to get an IFR rating? That seems a little restrictive to me.

In my experience, the key to surviving multi-day VFR trips is to be flexible as to travel days and times.

 

[Half Fast]

In my experience, the key to surviving multi-day VFR trips is to be flexible as to travel days and times.

And destinations.

 

[William Pete Hodges]

Not what I meant. My earlier post:



Plan the best you can knowing you might have to pull over and spend a day or so somewhere waiting for weather / visibility.

(But no getting around that an IFR rating does give you a lot more flexibility. )

I agree, but wouldn't being able to see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days help with that? If you know the next 2 days are definite no-days and the next day or 2 after that are very likely yes-days, wouldn't that help with your planning and further enjoyment of your trip? Add to that the weather tools to predict those days already exist within the NWS system, then why wouldn't you want a tool like that?

 

[Half Fast]

I agree, but wouldn't being able to see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days help with that? If you know the next 2 days are definite no-days and the next day or 2 after that are very likely yes-days, wouldn't that help with your planning and further enjoyment of your trip? Add to that the weather tools to predict those days already exist within the NWS system, then why wouldn't you want a tool like that?

Scott's website, https://ezwxbrief.com/ , offers a free 2-week trial. If you haven't already, take a look at it and see if does enough to help you "...see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days..."


Bear in mind that Scott says:

Beyond about three days, you are getting errors of +/- 12 hours and at 5 days its more like +/- 24 hours.

Unless you're using much better sources than he is (and I don't think those exist), your tool will have the same poor accuracy a week out.

 

[William Pete Hodges]

Scott's website, https://ezwxbrief.com/ , offers a free 2-week trial. If you haven't already, take a look at it and see if does enough to help you "...see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days..."


Bear in mind that Scott says:



Unless you're using much better sources than he is (and I don't think those exist), your tool will have the same poor accuracy a week out.

I have looked at the site, I am not yet sold on it but to be fair I didn't spend a lot of time with it. For now I am continuing my research and data gathering of the tools I have been using for years.

 

[WDD]

I agree, but wouldn't being able to see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days help with that?

Sure - I’d like a tool like that, it would be great. No one is disputing that. IMHO it just isn’t possible in the near future. Maybe because of the complexity of weather it might never be possible. It would be great to be proven wrong.

 

[Palmpilot]

Bear in mind that Scott says:

Beyond about three days, you are getting errors of +/- 12 hours and at 5 days its more like +/- 24 hours.

Unless you're using much better sources than he is (and I don't think those exist), your tool will have the same poor accuracy a week out.

When you build into your schedule +/- 24 hours or more of flexibility on your travel dates, the errors Scott describes above are acceptable. I know because I've been doing it for years.

 

[Jim_R]

I agree, but wouldn't being able to see the forecasted weather along and around your route for the next few or more days help with that? If you know the next 2 days are definite no-days and the next day or 2 after that are very likely yes-days, wouldn't that help with your planning and further enjoyment of your trip? Add to that the weather tools to predict those days already exist within the NWS system, then why wouldn't you want a tool like that?

But that already exists. It looks like this (from wunderground.com, but other sites are similar):

Just pick a few locations along/around your route of flight, and you've got as good as you're gonna get. No need for the gov't to get involved.

 

[geezer]

I have looked at the site, I am not yet sold on it but to be fair I didn't spend a lot of time with it. For now I am continuing my research and data gathering of the tools I have been using for years.

You should carefully evaluate and understand the competing ideas before proposing a "Better" idea

The big point that you are missing here is that if you have a superior product, lease some computer equipment, and offer with free early use, and gradual increasing fees, to a modest profit.

If the product is as good as you say, you will have an expanding, profitable company. If it is really as good as you imply, Garmin will buy your company/product, you will be a millionaire, and we will wish we partnered with the startup cash.

If you fail, then the taxpayers have no loss, and pilots continue to do their own form of weather decision making.

I have 800 hours of long cross country in my log books. One time, parked and flew home commercial. One time spent a night at an en route hotel un planned, due to weather worse than expected. Overnight due to expected weather issues fall into the product value that you are selling to the government. A thousand mile route with an overnight 2/3 of the way, as expected, for the weather to pass is just what you are positing, and I have successfully done that a number of times. Shifting my route 50 miles from the desired one has saved many flights from cancelation. Several have been dumped days before departure, and hindsight agreed to the wisdom.

The current weather products have been adequate when combined with my training and personal skills, so taxpayer funded additional products is transferring money from other uses that are currently needed, but deferred.

The Geezer is Commercial and Instrument rated. Very little of that cross country hours was actual instrument conditions. VFR is more interesting.

Edited to add, agree with Jim R. That is all I need.

 

[William Pete Hodges]

But that already exists. It looks like this (from wunderground.com, but other sites are similar):
View attachment 114559
Just pick a few locations along/around your route of flight, and you've got as good as you're gonna get. No need for the gov't to get involved.

I understand what you are saying. But I do prefer the overhead view that shows your entire route and how the weather moves around it, as opposed to the side view that doesn't show how the weather is moving across the ground with time. (See attached thumbnails) I think that capability is an important feature for VFR weather planning. The AWC has the tool platform with the programmable viewing window and flight plan already in place, and they have the 7-day graphical weather data already in place with another tool. If they were to combine the two it would automatically update just like their other existing systems. Once the initial programming is complete it really would not cost that much operationally.

 

[Hang 4]

This is pretty much what you can do right now in windy.com. Pick from 5 different weather models. Get precipitation, cloudbase, wind etc. I use it for precisely this purpose. The European model that is the default view is pretty accurate for major systems.

 

[William Pete Hodges]

This is pretty much what you can do right now in windy.com. Pick from 5 different weather models. Get precipitation, cloudbase, wind etc. I use it for precisely this purpose. The European model that is the default view is pretty accurate for major systems.

I have WINDY Premium and it has taken me awhile to get used to it. I think it is more difficult to use but after reading your last post I decided to look deeper. It does have a route planning tool, but you can't just enter the NAS designators, you have to click on each waypoint in succession. So I spent some time with it yesterday and got most of it figured out. There are some differences between the tablet and the laptop, the laptop being the more potent of the two.

The easiest way for me to get the route I wanted was to save my waypoints as favorites, then connect them with the route tool. Some features are suppressed when the route tool is open, so I added a couple of favorites to see the breadcrumbs of my route when the route planner is closed. I like that on the laptop my route is defined on the timeline with start and end pointers, with a time bar in-between. A side view of the route appears in bar below the map with various data including ground elevation visibility, cloud base and tops, and as you move the cursor across the bar a dot on the route shows your position on the map. I am still figuring this out but I like it so far.

I guess I have to let the AWC and the NWS get away without giving us all the tools we deserve.
Oh well.

 

[Dana]

I like the Weather Underground display and use it a lot. Launch Code is also good, though it doesn't go as far out:

 

[Rcmutz]

That looks like this one from USAirnet

https://www.usairnet.com/cgi-bin/launch/code.cgi?state=OH&sta=KCMH

 

[Dana]

Yes, it's "launch code forecast" from USAirnet.

 

[PaulS]

I probably sound like a paid advertisement for Scottd, I'm not affiliated with him at all, but his site makes weather easier if you invest the time, which for basic stuff takes a few minutes. Those daily planner type forecasts have their place for weather planning, but it is a very low place IMO, they are rarely correct enough for flying, even close in, I ran in to it yesterday for a fairly short cross country. I had to modify my plans since I didn't want to deal with weather on that proficiency flight. I'm doing a long cross country (NH to FL) tomorrow, finishing up on Thursday. Scott's EZWXbrief.com is my go to source for information before and during the flights. Right now it looks as if the weather will be good for both days, final decision will be in the morning. Headwind will slow me down, hopefully it won't be too bumpy.

One of the many other things Scott does is weather overviews a few times a week on youtube. These are priceless IMO. It gives a CFI/meteorologist's view of the weather nationwide, the lower 48 anyway. It's just worth the time to watch, I do it every chance I get.

As a pilot I too fell into the trap of looking for a quick answer to weather information. The long and short of it, is there isn't a quick answer, don't fool yourself. But Scott has the quick and easiest way to research, observe and digest weather, by far.

Here is todays brief:

https://www.youtube.com/live/d9t3Y-rsLyg?feature=share

 

[William Pete Hodges]

I am starting to get really busy at work these days and I'll have to reduce my efforts on this project for now. I am an amateur and I have to earn money elsewhere and pay the bills...

I am leaving you with a copy of my 7-Day Yes/No chart, and my route. See attached thumbnails. My criteria is simple: Pick days when adverse weather or low clouds do not cross any portion of the route for a full 3-6 hours between 10am 15Z and 4pm 21z. On days when NOAA Graphical only shows 1pm then use that as the only criteria. It is easier to eliminate bad days, then it is to pick good days.

To those who say we should not ask the government to do this, I say poppycock! They work for us, and we are already paying for it with our income tax dollars and air use taxes. They already have all of the data available and I am only asking them to put it in their best aviation graphical weather planning tool, that we paid them to develop already. I am not saying there aren't other tools available, there are. The FAA and NWS and the AWC have decided that 7-day VFR weather planning is of no value, and they are already taking the CYA approach to NOT provide us with valuable tools that can help us to plan our flight for better flexibility and safety.

I think that kind of arrogance has no place in the safety of aviation.

Gotta go to work now.