TAF forecaster office phone

Reminds me of the TAF amendment issued yesterday in SEA after they realized there were still thunderstorms overnight. Even better was checking in with SEA Center heading to PDX last night as SEA went into a ground stop and the whole world exploded around us. So many holding instructions issued on that freq, and diverts, and the start of the HHOOD looked like a carrier Marshall stack with all the poor souls holding below us, waiting to get routed to BTG and then to SEA. EFC was like 55 mins in the future at that point, though they started letting people in before we even left the freq, so maybe it wasn’t that bad.
 
Domestically in the states, the NWS local offices should have a phone number on their website, but you also have the Center Weather Service Unit will have a phone. If you work at a major/regional your meteorologists either vendor or in house should have access to NWS Chat which is like AOL IM. As far as I know CWSU should be accessible though the ATCSCC phone number like flight data or TMU. At this point I think you are asking to much. They are not going to change anything or take suggests lol.
 
Aren't TAFS supposed to be reasonable forecasts to base flight planning on several hours in advance of ETA typically....so why does this happen all the time right after I send my release.....

TAF KLAX 1200Z P6SM

SPECI KLAX 1233Z 3SM BR

TAF AMD KLAX 1235Z 1/2 SM FG
 
TAF_Master said:
Aren't TAFS supposed to be reasonable forecasts to base flight planning on several hours in advance of ETA typically....so why does this happen all the time right after I send my release.....

TAF KLAX 1200Z P6SM

SPECI KLAX 1233Z 3SM BR

TAF AMD KLAX 1235Z 1/2 SM FG
Click to expand...
The Marine layer is unpredictable right before dawn...
 
TAF_Master said:
Aren't TAFS supposed to be reasonable forecasts to base flight planning on several hours in advance of ETA typically....so why does this happen all the time right after I send my release.....

TAF KLAX 1200Z P6SM

SPECI KLAX 1233Z 3SM BR

TAF AMD KLAX 1235Z 1/2 SM FG
Click to expand...
The forecast discussion will often mention a certain chance of this happening, without enough confidence to be included at the time. AWC GFA will also drop hints.
 
MIADX said:
The forecast discussion will often mention a certain chance of this happening, without enough confidence to be included at the time. AWC GFA will also drop hints.
Click to expand...
Ohh I am aware. But forecast discussions are an optional tidbit for curious readers, TAFs are legally binding flight release elements. If ZLA is putting low confidence in TAF/ 50% chance of fog forming in the discussion, then why are they putting P6SM in the legally binding TAF? A PROB30 would suffice
 
TAF_Master said:
Ohh I am aware. But forecast discussions are an optional tidbit for curious readers, TAFs are legally binding flight release elements. If ZLA is putting low confidence in TAF/ 50% chance of fog forming in the discussion, then why are they putting P6SM in the legally binding TAF?
Click to expand...
I mean, you can keep getting caught out by their last minute amendments or use all available wx tools to make an informed, proactive decision. That's up to your professional judgement. As for the "legally binding" thing, we are CATII/III capable so legally speaking I can always send it, unless I have a good solid reason to think RVR will be below CATIII mins at the ETA. But that's another discussion altogether...
 
Last edited:
MIADX said:
I mean, you can keep getting caught out by their last minute amendments or use all available wx tools to make an informed, proactive decision. That's up to your professional judgement. As for the "legally binding" thing, we are CATII/III capable so legally speaking I can always send it, unless I have a good solid reason to think RVR will be below CATIII mins at the ETA. But that's another discussion altogether...
Click to expand...

They can land sure, LAX diversions are pretty rare for fog. But the TAF amending right after push/point of dispatch/takeoff/whatever standard your airline uses and either not having an alternate or sending a high minimum captain...many an ASAP has been filed....
 
TAF_Master said:
They can land sure, LAX diversions are pretty rare for fog. But the TAF amending right after push/point of dispatch/takeoff/whatever standard your airline uses and either not having an alternate or sending a high minimum captain...many an ASAP has been filed....
Click to expand...
"...informed, proactive decision."

Does your shop discourage the use of precautionary alternates?
 
TAF_Master said:
They can land sure, LAX diversions are pretty rare for fog. But the TAF amending right after push/point of dispatch/takeoff/whatever standard your airline uses and either not having an alternate or sending a high minimum captain...many an ASAP has been filed....
Click to expand...
What are people ASAPing? The release was legal.
 
MIADX said:
"...informed, proactive decision."

Does your shop discourage the use of precautionary alternates?
Click to expand...
Some shops use average fuel metrics which add up over time, some shops pull specific releases to "chat" about. But yes, routinely adding precautionary alternates to P6SM TAF's can raise auditors eyebrow's at some shops when they are only looking at the TAF on the release they are auditing.
 
TAF_Master said:
Some shops use average fuel metrics which add up over time, some shops pull specific releases to "chat" about. But yes, routinely adding precautionary alternates to P6SM TAF's can raise auditors eyebrow's at some shops when they are only looking at the TAF on the release they are auditing.
Click to expand...
That's where the "informed" part comes in.

If the auditors are only looking at TAF's, that's a problem. If dispatchers are only looking at TAF's, that's a problem. If dispatchers are routinely throwing "just-in-case" fuel on flights without any remarks/justification, that's also a problem. There's a balance to be reached, and in all scenarios it involves more than TAF's.
 
MIADX said:
That's where the "informed" part comes in.

If the auditors are only looking at TAF's, that's a problem. If dispatchers are only looking at TAF's, that's a problem. If dispatchers are routinely throwing "just-in-case" fuel on flights without any remarks/justification, that's also a problem. There's a balance to be reached, and in all scenarios it involves more than TAF's.
Click to expand...
Of course. Which is why I look at the NWS forecast discussion, not just the AWC forecast discussion. The "aviation" section is only a paragraph on what is usually 2 pages of information on the NWS. Some obscure terms, but PWAT's and meso analysis, it's good stuff to know. ;)

But my overall point with my posts was, the TAF is the legal forecast out of all of it while the rest is advisory. It's what the FAA/NTSB will look at along with SIGMET's in the event of an incident, it's what the airline auditors will look at, it's what the crew will see on their release. Which is why I heavily criticize the questionable ones.
 
TAF_Master said:
Of course. Which is why I look at the NWS forecast discussion, not just the AWC forecast discussion. The "aviation" section is only a paragraph on what is usually 2 pages of information on the NWS. Some obscure terms, but PWAT's and meso analysis, it's good stuff to know. ;)

But my overall point with my posts was, the TAF is the legal forecast out of all of it while the rest is advisory. It's what the FAA/NTSB will look at along with SIGMET's in the event of an incident, it's what the airline auditors will look at, it's what the crew will see on their release. Which is why I heavily criticize the questionable ones.
Click to expand...
In other words all those ASAP's were potentially preventable. If a dx'er is aware of all of these other fantastic resources, wouldn't it be negligent to only rely on the TAF if several other legal wx products indicate that there's a good chance that fog will be rolling in? It's only 1 piece of my puzzle, but the ASAP committee's gotta keep busy I guess. Cheers.
 
Not all TAFs are created equal. Some are just blown, and others are bound by the rules. Like MIADX mentioned earlier, if the chance of x isn’t at or above a certain threshold, it will be left out of the TAF but may be included in the discussion.

Why is the TAF the legally binding forecast? Well it’s the regs, and we know how often those change.
 
"Hey yeah, ZHU? Why are we VRB30G45KT when the highest gust I saw was 21? Also why was this done 30 seconds before the OFF report"
 
TAF_Master said:
Ohh I am aware. But forecast discussions are an optional tidbit for curious readers, TAFs are legally binding flight release elements. If ZLA is putting low confidence in TAF/ 50% chance of fog forming in the discussion, then why are they putting P6SM in the legally binding TAF? A PROB30 would suffice
Click to expand...

Because of how the forecasters are graded on their tafs is how it was explained to us. They get docked every 5 minutes something they fcst does not happen. So that's why you get VFR tafs with "Vcsh" when there is a line of death approaching the field from the west. It's stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top