Answer: In general aviation, one of the most cumbersome things to do while in flight is to file a pilot weather report, more commonly known as a PIREP. This has created the unfortunate situation that on any given day 98 percent of the PIREPs in the system are typically describing weather conditions at or above 18,000 feet.

It wasn’t all that long ago that the Enroute Flight Advisory Service (EFAS) was available primarily for pilots to receive weather updates while they were flying to their destination. More importantly, EFAS was the main outlet to file a PIREP such that it was guaranteed to be input into the system and become available for other pilots to see. This service was also called Flight Watch.

Given that EFAS was organized by Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC), you simply put 122.0 MHz into your radio, keyed the mic, and referenced them by a particular center’s airspace you were located within. For example, if you were in the Jacksonville Center’s airspace in Florida, your initial call might have been, “Jacksonville Flight Watch, Skyhawk One Two Three Whiskey X-ray, 30 miles southwest of the Brunswick V-O-R at five thousand five hundred.” Then as long as you were more than 5,000 feet above the ground, someone from Flight Watch came on the frequency, and you engaged in a two-way conversation to file your PIREP.

• READ MORE: The Ins and Outs of Pilot Weather Reports

However, EFAS was terminated on October 1, 2015. This now leaves the arduous task of finding the right Flight Service Station (FSS) frequency, making contact, and hoping someone on the other end responds to your call. The frequency you use to transmit and receive is dependent on your location. Pull out your VFR sectional (paper or electronic version), find the nearest VOR to your location, and look for the frequency located on the top of the VOR information box.

Of course, the correct frequency to use may also be available through your avionics or one of the many heavyweight electronic flight bag apps.

This is the frequency you will use to transmit and receive. Below the box is the name of the particular FSS to use in your initial call. For example, if you are near the Brunswick VORTAC in Georgia, your initial call may be, “Macon Radio, Skyhawk One Two Three Whiskey X-ray, transmitting and receiving on 122.2, over.” This is the easy case.

• READ MORE: How to Wrap Your Head Around Weather

If there’s an “R” shown at the end of the frequency (e.g., 122.1R), then that means FSS will receive on this frequency and you will transmit on this frequency. And you’ll need to be sure you listen for its response over the VOR frequency. Make sure your volume is turned up and not muted on your VOR radio.

This column first appeared in the May 2024/Issue 948 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post How Do I File a Pilot Weather Report Online? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Pilot weather reports, more simply known as PIREPs, are those rare commodities that general aviation pilots yearn for during preflight planning or while en route using datalink weather. They are vital since they answer these basic questions: At what altitude will I likely encounter ice? What is the severity of those icing conditions? What is the severity of turbulence at my planned altitude? And the most frequently asked question: What altitude will I find the cloud tops?

Perhaps there’s a PIREP or two out there that might just fill the void and answer one or more of these basic questions.

Other Consumers of PIREPs

It’s important to know that pilots are not the exclusive consumers of your reports. Meteorologists, air traffic controllers, dispatchers, briefers, and researchers are all extremely interested in your PIREPs. On a visit to the Aviation Weather Center (AWC) in Kansas City,

Missouri, nearly two decades ago, I asked one of the forecasters if PIREPs were important to him. He responded without hesitation, “Oh, god, yes!” as if his job depended on it. While he could continue to do his job without PIREPs, a forecaster can do his job better with more of them in the system.

Some meteorologists that issue terminal aerodrome forecasts (TAFs) examine the latest PIREPs before constructing their forecast. By far, the forecasters that depend on PIREPs the most are those located at the Center Weather Service Units (CWSUs) and those at the AWC. Let’s say an urgent pilot weather report from a Boeing 767 comes in for severe icing. An audible alarm will sound on the forecaster’s terminal at the AWC alerting them to the urgent report. They must click the alarm to silence it. AWC forecasters affectionately call this the “blue light special” since the alarm button turns that color.

• READ MORE: How to Wrap Your Head Around Weather

Such a PIREP will likely trigger the AWC meteorologist to pick up their “bat phone” and start a conversation with a CWSU meteorologist. They put their heads together to determine if there’s a need for a SIGMET or perhaps just a simple center weather advisory (CWA). The goal is to avoid advisories that may conflict and create confusion for pilots, although it does happen from time to time, especially when the weather is rather extreme.

As such, SIGMET advisories for severe or extreme turbulence and severe icing literally live and die by PIREPs. An urgent PIREP (UUA) of severe icing or severe or extreme turbulence may trigger an AWC forecaster to issue a SIGMET based solely on the conditions reported by a single pilot or aircrew. In fact, if you read the SIGMET or CWA text carefully, you will likely notice it often says, “RPTD BY ACFT” or “RPTD BY B767,” which tells you the SIGMET was issued due to one or more PIREPs of severe conditions.

At the other extreme, the AWC forecaster may cancel a SIGMET because there are no longer reports of severe icing or turbulence in the area. It may just be mostly moderate reports. Again, the decision to let the SIGMET die or extend it largely comes from PIREPs.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with a forecaster issuing a SIGMET without pilots reporting severe conditions. However, many forecasters want to see “ground truth” before issuing one. This is because issuing a SIGMET for severe ice, for example, makes the area a no-fly zone for most GA aircraft. Your TBM 960 can no longer legally fly through this area since it is not certified for flight into severe icing conditions. The FAA will no doubt pull the SIGMET as evidence that you should have known better if you turn yourself into a flying popsicle and need assistance.

Automation Ingests Your PIREPs

Your PIREPs are incorporated by weather guidance such as the Current Icing Product (CIP) and Graphical Turbulence Guidance (GTG) product found on aviationweather.gov. Both of these use PIREPs for icing and turbulence, respectively, to build the product’s analysis.

For example, a positive icing report helps CIP to increase the confidence there’s icing at the altitude reported by the pilot at the time the guidance is valid. Conversely, if the report is for negative icing, it might decrease the icing probability at that altitude.

But don’t try to fool the algorithm. If you were to report moderate ice in an area where the sky is obviously clear, it will be able to toss out your bogus report since it also relies on other observational data, such as satellite and surface observations (METARs). Sure, it’s unlikely any pilot would file a bogus report on purpose, but at times turbulence PIREPs are miscoded as reports for icing or the VOR identifier provided in the report for the location is miscoded (e.g., ODG instead of OGD).

Filing That Report

If you are like me, you undoubtedly find it difficult to file a pilot weather report. This is especially true when flying in busy terminal airspace, where it often matters the most. Whether flying IFR or VFR with flight following, it’s a challenge.

First, you need to leave the frequency. That involves asking the controller permission to switch frequencies so you can make that call to flight service. Once you’ve received permission, then you have the chore of finding the correct frequency and hoping someone on the other end will answer. When the weather is challenging, expect to hear, “N1234B, you are number four, standby.”

• READ MORE: Flying Through the Center of a Trough Should Have Been Uneventful

Can you just give the controller your PIREP and skip the call to flight service? Sure, but the controller’s primary job is not to file your report—it is to separate IFR aircraft from other IFR or special VFR aircraft.

In other words, there’s no requirement for that controller to take your report and forward the details to flight service so the rest of the stakeholders in the aviation industry can take advantage of it. If you are reporting severe conditions, such as severe or extreme turbulence, severe ice, or low-level wind shear, the controller should be passing this along. However, in busy airspace, the controller may just say, “Thanks!” and that’s as far as it goes.

If you are lucky enough to have an internet connection in the cockpit, there are resources to file the report online. You may find that some of the heavyweight apps provide this service. There is one such portal on the aviationweather.gov website.

Just be aware that you have to create an account and then make direct contact to provide your name, airman’s certificate number, and specific affiliation (e.g., airline, flight school, government, military, etc.) for validation purposes. Once this validation is complete, you can sign in and file a report directly online. Those reports are appended with “AWCWEB” in the remarks like this one:

OVE UA /OV KCIC/TM 1515/FL260/TP B737/TB MOD/RM 180-260 AWC-WEB

However, to make the process even easier, download the Virga app (search for “Fly Virga” in the App Store or Google Play Store). This is a great option since it is fully integrated with the aviationweawther.gov PIREP portal. Visit www.flyvirga.com for more information. Note that you still must have a Wi-Fi or cellular connection to file the report.

When making a PIREP, be sure to be specific. Avoid general terms, such as “icing during the climb” or “turbulence during descent,” unless you specify the altitudes you experienced icing or turbulence in the climb or descent. This is critical since nobody knows what altitude you climbed to or descended from. Moreover, the CIP and GTG analyses depend on these specifics in order to utilize your report effectively.

Also, for turbulence reports, add details such as whether or not you were in or outside of the cloud boundary. This is to differentiate turbulence related to convection (i.e., cumuliform-type clouds) versus clear air turbulence.

Age Makes a Difference

How long is a PIREP useful? While it’s difficult to pick out a particular length of time, reports of icing conditions more than 75 minutes old are typically useless to a pilot and to the CIP algorithm. Not unlike thunderstorms, icing conditions and intensity can change rapidly in time and space. Precipitation and clouds come and go as the synoptic, or big weather picture, changes. Clouds become supercooled due to rapid cold-air advection, and other clouds become glaciated (all ice crystals) as temperatures fall below minus-20 degrees Celsius.

• READ MORE: Go or Stay? Getting Personal with Your Pilot Minimums

From an aging perspective, turbulence PIREPs have an even shorter shelf life than icing PIREPs. Turbulence is highly transitory. An eddy of air might be propagating to a lower altitude after a pilot encounters it. Twenty minutes later, the next pilot at that same altitude may not see any bumps since the cause of the turbulence is now at a lower altitude. Again, it’s hard to agree on a specific time, but after about 45 minutes an isolated report of severe turbulence is probably too old to trust.

Required PIREPs

According to 14 CFR § 91.183 (b), a pilot flying under IFR in controlled airspace must report “any unforecast weather conditions encountered” by radio to ATC. Given this broad-brush regulation, you should limit your report to any forecast errors strictly significant to aviation operations. Unless it is urgent, there’s no need to make a big deal out of it either.

For example, let’s say you depart an uncontrolled field that has a TAF issued, and the forecast suggests that ceilings will be 2,000 feet at the departure time. As you climb out, you penetrate the lowest cloud deck at 900 feet AGL—this is significant to aviation, and you should report it to ATC. “Cirrus 1WX, one thousand two hundred, climbing four thousand, ceiling niner hundred overcast” is all you need to say.

While ATC may make use of this report for its own purposes, it is highly unlikely it will assemble your report into an official PIREP. To be sure this is relayed to the rest of us inquiring pilots, take a moment to file that report with flight service when you have the time.

Catch-22?

One of the comments I repeatedly hear from pilots is, “If I report icing, won’t I be admitting guilt if I’m piloting an aircraft not certified for flight into known icing conditions?” I’m not an attorney, however, I believe the answer is yes and no.

There was a similar concern from pilots when cockpit voice recorders (CVRs) were first introduced. Could the FAA use the recording against a pilot? The FAA said that wasn’t the intention, and CVRs were strictly added to improve safety of flight to learn why mistakes are made—not to bust the pilot during some random audit.

Similarly, there are no PIREP police waiting to nab you at the FBO in random fashion. Now, if you reported icing conditions and then had a hard landing that caused a prop strike due to a load of ice on the airframe, it’s likely the FAA will use your own PIREP against you.

Controllers are there to help you out of a bad situation. As always, confess to them that you are quickly becoming a flying popsicle. Be assertive with your request— tell them exactly what you need. For example, “1WX is in moderate icing and needs an immediate descent to four thousand.” If necessary, don’t hesitate to declare an emergency because doing so will likely get you priority handling.

Just remember that PIREPs are not just a private conversation between you and flight service. They are broadcast to the world. So, try to challenge yourself on each and every flight to file at least one PIREP.

So it doesn’t matter if the weather is extremely challenging or “oh-so boring.” Sometimes the best report is one that states smooth conditions and negative icing. There may be a pilot out there getting their back fillings jarred, and your report of glassy smooth conditions just 2,000 feet above them will help make their flight more enjoyable.

The hardworking folks at the AWC only complain when they don’t get enough PIREPs. So, let’s file those reports and not give them a reason to complain. I can tell you from firsthand experience, there’s nothing worse than a whiny meteorologist.

This column first appeared in the April 2024/Issue 947 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post The Ins and Outs of Pilot Weather Reports appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Northrop Grumman, I needed something that would challenge my mind, body, and spirit. There were two options on the table. I had just graduated with my master’s degree and was seriously thinking of taking the next leap of faith and earning a doctorate.

But that was quickly overshadowed by my second option—my childhood dream of learning to fly. And I wasn’t disappointed. It did challenge my mind, body, and spirit every step of the way.

What intrigued me the most about learning to fly was that it required mastering many disciplines. In other words, it’s more than just jumping into an airplane and learning stick-and-rudder skills. You have to become entrenched in subjects such as aerodynamics, radio navigation, geography, radio communications, airspace, map reading, legal, medical, and my favorite discipline, meteorology.

Despite my background as a research meteorologist, my aviation weather background was limited when I was a student pilot. So, I was very excited to discover what more I might learn about weather in addition to all of these other disciplines. If you are a student pilot, here are some tips that will help you achieve a good foundation with respect to weather.

It Isn’t Easy

First and foremost, weather is inherently difficult. It’s likely the most difficult discipline to master because of the uncertainty and complexity it brings to the table. Therefore, strive to understand what basic weather reports and forecasts the FAA effectively requires that you examine before every flight. It certainly doesn’t hide it. It’s a fairly short and succinct list that’s all documented in the new Aviation Weather Handbook (FAA-H-8083-28) and the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). Ultimately, knowing the nuts and bolts of this official weather guidance will help with your knowledge and practical tests and give you a head start once the ink is dry on your private pilot certificate.

Second, as a student pilot, plan to get your weather guidance from a single and reliable source. Try not to bounce around using multiple sites or apps. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of websites and apps that will deliver weather guidance to your fingertips such that you can become overwhelmed with all of the choices, and entropy quickly takes over. Besides, flight instructors love to show off their unique collection of weather apps on their iPhone. Sticking with the official subset of weather guidance will allow you to focus on what matters the most.

• READ MORE: Aviation Weather Center Website Upgrade—the Good, Bad, and Ugly

Once you receive your private certificate, then you can expand the weather guidance you use to include other websites and apps.

The two internet sources that should be at the top of your list include the Aviation Weather Center (aviationweather.gov) and Leidos (1800wxbrief.com). Both of these sites provide the essential weather guidance needed to make a preflight weather decision. Using one or both of these sites will help focus you on the official weather guidance the FAA demands you use.

Categorize Your Data

Third, when you look at the latest weather guidance, take a minute and characterize each product. It should fall into one of three categories: observational data, advisories, or forecasts. Knowing its category will tell you how to properly utilize that guidance. For example, if you come across a visible satellite image, that’s an example of observational data.

Observational data is always valid in the past and typically comes from sensors. What about a ground-based radar mosaic (e.g., NEXRAD)? That’s also an observation. Pilot weather reports (PIREPs) and routine surface observations (METARs) are also considered observational data. While not a pure observation, the latest surface analysis chart that is valid in the recent past will identify the major players driving the current weather systems.

• READ MORE: What Is the Criteria for Issuing a Convective SIGMET?

Observations are like the foundation when building a house. All other weather guidance you use will build on that foundation. A sturdy and well-built foundation is the key to a good preflight weather briefing. You can’t know where the weather is going until you know where it has been. Identifying the latest trends in the weather through the use of these observations is the cornerstone of this foundation. When possible, looping the guidance over time will expose these trends. Is the weather moving or stagnant? Is it strengthening or weakening over time?

Advisories such as the initial graphical AIRMETs (G-AIRMETs) snapshot, SIGMETs, and center weather advisories (CWAs) are the front lines of aviation weather. They are designed to highlight the current location of the truly ugly weather. Advisories build the structure that sits atop of this foundation. Essentially, these advisories summarize the observational data by organizing it into distinct hazards and areas of adverse weather to be avoided.

Forecasts are the springboard for how these observations and advisories will evolve over time. You can think of forecasts as the elements that protect the finished house, such as paint, shingles, and waterproofing. This also includes the alarm and surveillance system to alert you to the possible adverse weather scenarios that may occur during your flight. While forecasts are imperfect, they are still incredibly useful. Forecasts include terminal aerodrome forecasts (TAFs), convective outlooks, prog charts, and the remaining four snapshots for G-AIRMETs.

Dive into the Details…

Fourth, details matter quite a bit. Look at the guidance and identify what stands out. Don’t make a decision too early. Instead, carefully observe and gather facts. Is the precipitation occurring along the route limiting the ceiling and/or visibility? Is the precipitation expected to be showery? This is a clear indication of a convective process in place.

Are the surface observations reporting two or three mid- or low-level cloud layers? Again, this is another indication of a convective environment. This can be especially important to identify, especially when there’s a risk of thunderstorms that have yet to form.

…But Fall Back on the Big Picture

Fifth, get a sense of the big weather picture. This is likely the most difficult aspect of learning how to truly read the weather. Think about the big weather picture as the blueprint for building an entire community. It’s what brings everything together. When I do my own preflight briefings, my decisions are largely driven by what’s happening at that synoptic level.

Lastly, read, read, and read some more. Focus mostly on the weather guidance and less on weather theory. These are the specific weather products mentioned earlier. Weather theory is something you can tackle at a later time. The FAA’s Aviation Weather Handbook is a great start. You can download a PDF document for free from the agency website and add this to your online library. This was issued in 2022 to consolidate the weather information from six FAA advisory circulars (ACs) into one source document. My book, Pilot Weather: From Solo to the Airlines, was published in 2018 and is written for pilots at all experience levels in their journey to learn more about weather.

If you fly enough, you will eventually find yourself in challenging weather. The goal of any preflight weather briefing is to limit your exposure to adverse conditions, and that takes resources and time. Once you’ve mastered the weather guidance, then giving Flight Service a call at 1-800-WXBRIEF will allow you to sound like a true professional.

Yes, I eventually did earn that doctorate, but I am really happy that I took the step over 25 years ago to learn to fly. One guarantee with weather: You can never learn enough. I am still learning today.

This column first appeared in the March 2024/Issue 946 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post How to Wrap Your Head Around Weather appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Answer: There’s a great divide in our aviation community that’s been going on for decades with no end in sight. That is, why are we in the 21st century and still decoding the cryptic language of surface observations, terminal aerodrome forecasts (TAFs), and pilot weather reports (PIREPs), just to name a few? After all, they coded these reports or forecasts more than a half-century ago because of the limited bandwidth in the days of 1,200 baud rates, right? Well, yes and no. There’s no harm blaming this on these data limitations, especially if it makes you feel better, but that’s not the real reason they were coded in the first place. And no, the coded form wasn’t preserved over the years as a hazing ritual for student pilots.

The primary goal of the coded form was to allow forecasters, observers, or other stakeholders in the aviation or weather industry to key in observations and forecasts quickly. One could argue otherwise, but it wasn’t as much about the consumers of this data or the bandwidth of the teletype connection used as it was about the data entry time and opportunity to make mistakes. 

Typing more characters likely means a greater chance to make a mistake or two. Multiply that by thousands of observations (or forecasts) every hour, and that adds up to a lot of potential mistakes.   

Now that we’re in the 21st century, is there any reason to keep the coded form around? Certainly. For the same reasons as before? Not exactly. 

Although the code today is different than what you see above, automated systems are programmed to generate the text. You may use some heavyweight apps and other web applications to ingest that coded text and translate it into something a little more readable. Sometimes the translation is near perfect, and sometimes it is not. This often depends on the translator’s assumptions—and hundreds of them are out there. Even if the automated system follows the exact standard, exceptional cases pop up from time to time which may cause a poor translation…sometimes really poor.

For example, in this coded surface observation, the remarks include FZRANO:

KPVU 011356Z 15005KT 10SM CLR M14/M19 A3018 RMK AO2 SLP281 T11441194 FZRANO

The Federal Meteorological Handbook No 1 under 12.7.2 (j) Station Status Indicators states, “…when automated stations are equipped with a freezing rain sensor and that sensor is not operating, the remark FZRANO shall be coded.”

Therefore, this just indicates the freezing rain sensor at KPVU is not operational. However, some translators (including the one at aviationweather.gov) will often pick up on this as a freezing rain event (FZRA) which gets added to the translated observation present weather as “freezing rain” when in fact, there isn’t any current precipitation observed, freezing rain or otherwise–the sky is clear.

Most heavyweight apps that aviators use today have a feature to translate the coded version into plain English. If that floats your boat, then so be it. If you are more like me and enjoy the compressed version or tabular form, then there’s no reason the coded text should be abolished or minimized in any way as “outdated.” Let’s face it, translators make poor translations. It could be owing to a flawed assumption or software design, or malformed coded text from the source. All of these occur regularly. That’s the underlying issue.

For example, look at the translation below. This is from the WxWorx XM satellite weather broadcast, which translated +TSRA into a “heavy thunderstorm” instead of a thunderstorm with heavy rain. In fact, WxWorx translated TSRA to “moderate thunderstorm,” and -TSRA was translated to “light thunderstorm”—as if there’s such a thing as a “light” thunderstorm.

KCLE 102323Z 36015G22KT 1/4SM +TSRA FG SCT007 BKN021CB OVC033 23/22 A2981 RMK AO2

Perhaps today there’s a better approach; why not have the automated systems generate the observation or forecast in a plain English fashion? First, that would require the software of all of these automated systems worldwide to be modified to generate plain English text. 

Then, of course, the applications that consume this data would need to be modified to ingest the new form of text. Easy to say but costly to implement. But it could be done. For example:

• MODERATE RAIN vs. RA
• LIGHT SNOW vs. -SN
• Moderate rain and thunderstorm vs. TSRA (if you don’t like caps)
• WIND 250 DEGREES AT 10 KNOTS AND NO GUSTS vs. 25010KT
• VISIBILITY 5 STATUTE MILES vs. 5SM
• OVERCAST 2,500 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL vs. OVC025
• INDEFINITE CEILING 300 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL vs. VV003.

I am all in for plain English as long as the coded version is preserved or it gets translated correctly back into coded form. But that places us right back into the same issue of poor translations or mismatches between plain English and coded forms. So, the problem isn’t completely solved, but at least we’ll get to argue about a different issue.

The post Decoding the Weather appeared first on FLYING Magazine.