AGC CTLR CONCERNED BY PERCEIVED NON RESPONSE OF FACILITY MGR OVER ISSUE OF WX RPTING WITH NWS OBSERVER.

Date: 1999-10

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|inflight-event-encounter-weather-turbulence|other-weather-observation-versus-asos

Synopsis

AGC CTLR CONCERNED BY PERCEIVED NON RESPONSE OF FACILITY MGR OVER ISSUE OF WX RPTING WITH NWS OBSERVER.

Narrative

ASOS EQUIP IS LOCATED AT AGC AND AUGMENTED BY A TEAM OF WX OBSERVERS. HRLY OBSERVATION WAS CALLED TO TWR AS 2 MI; VV002. TWR VISIBILITY WAS GREATER THAN 4 MI AND NO NOTICEABLE CLOUD COVER WAS OBSERVED. A LOW FOG BANK WAS LOCATED E OF ARPT COMING OFF A RIVER. NUMEROUS ACFT RPTED ARPT IN SIGHT AT 3000 FT; 8 MI FROM ARPT. PIREPS WERE RELAYED TO WX OBSERVER. NO CHANGES WERE MADE TO WX UNTIL NEXT HRLY RPT. NUMEROUS ACFT FILED IFR FLT PLANS IN THE AIR WITH PIT APCH TO GET INTO THE ARPT AND SVFR'S WERE ISSUED TO OTHER ACFT CAUSING DELAYS. WX OBSERVERS NEED TO LOOK OUT THE WINDOW TO SUPPLEMENT THE ASOS EQUIP. THE ASOS IS FAR FROM BEING PERFECT. THESE SITS OCCUR ON A REGULAR BASIS AND WHEN THEY HAPPEN IN REVERSE (WX WORSE THAN RPTED) CAN BE A HAZARD TO AVIATION SAFETY. MY TWR MGR; WHEN INFORMED OF THIS SIT; TOLD ME THE ANSWER TO THIS PROB WAS TO NOT ACCEPT THE WX OBSERVATION AND ARGUE WITH THE OBSERVER UNTIL HE CHANGED THE OBSERVATION. I DO NOT FEEL THAT THIS IS A WORKABLE SOLUTION. I THINK THAT THE WX OBSERVERS NEED TO BE TRAINED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE ASOS EQUIP IS NOT PERFECT AND CANNOT BE RELIED ON 100%. NOTHING BEATS LOOKING OUT THE WINDOW.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.