WX Watch: Weatherwise, or otherwise?

We have plenty of weather products available to us, and the growing number and complexity of these products pose a challenge. Where once we had comparatively few products—such as airmets, sigmets, winds aloft, METARs and TAFs, and a few others—we now have a range of new forecast products. Such as the current icing potential (CIP) and forecast icing potential (FIP) datasets, plus more convective forecasts, types of weather radar imagery, and satellite imagery that weren’t available a few years ago via traditional aviation weather websites. This puts pilots under a greater responsibility to expand their knowledge base. So, how well do we understand these products? That’s another way to measure our weather savvy.

A recent study has shed some light on how well pilots interpret weather reporting and forecasting products. Researchers from the Department of Human Factors at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and the Department of Meteorology at the University of South Alabama came up with a set of 95 multiple-choice questions designed to assess a general aviation pilot’s knowledge of aviation weather. In all, 204 pilots took the test: 41 student pilots, 72 private pilots, 50 private pilots with instrument ratings, and 41 commercial pilots with instrument ratings.

The findings were published in the April 2018 edition of the International Journal of Aerospace Technology. The test involved 23 types of weather information, from icing forecasts and turbulence reports to radar. The results? The test-takers as a whole were stumped by “about 42 percent” of the questions, according to the researchers. Commercial instrument-rated pilots did the best, answering 65 percent of the questions accurately, with private instrument pilots coming in with 62 percent correct. Private pilots got 57 percent correct, and student pilots came in last with 48 percent answered correctly. Overall, the mean score was 57.89 percent. With the National Transportation Safety Board’s 2014 naming of “Identifying and Communicating Hazardous Weather for GA” as a “most wanted” area to improve safety, results like that don’t bode well.

If pilots can’t describe what they’re seeing, how can they make safe in-flight decisions, let alone a pirep?So what sorts of questions were asked? I tried to obtain a complete copy of the test from Embry-Riddle, but was told that this was turned over to the research sponsor—the FAA’s Aviation Weather Branch. Instead, we have four sample questions drawn from the published article.

One dealt with a METAR containing the remark CB DSNT N MOV N. This means cumulonimbus clouds are more than 10 statute miles north of the airport and moving away from the airport.

Another question involved the valid time of a TAF. The answer is on the top line of any TAF, right after the time of issuance. So KPIA 101745Z 1018/1118 means that the TAF is valid until the eleventh of the month at 1800Z.

Another question involved using a cockpit display of datalinked ground-based weather radar imagery, and dwelled on the display’s time lag. Why is it unsafe to fly through a displayed gap between thunderstorms? If you answered that cockpit displays don’t show current storm activity, you guessed right.

The last question showed a color infrared satellite image of a wide band of clouds over the southeastern United States. Where were the highest clouds? To answer this correctly you needed to know that the coldest cloud tops are identified by color, and that temperatures are published on a scale across the top of the image. So warm land surfaces show up as deep brown, blues indicate ever-colder cloud tops, and contours of white within those blue shades identify the highest cloud tops.

Are multiple-choice tests valid as indicators of real knowledge? Not really. Research from 2008 found that the FAA knowledge tests weren’t up to date with current technology, emphasized weather phenomena rather than product interpretation, and rewarded rote memorization. The development of the new, holistic airman certification standards has led to revisions of the private, commercial, and instrument knowledge tests with new, more relevant questions. Still, it’s possible to fail all the weather questions on the private pilot knowledge exam and still earn a passing score on the test.

Of perhaps greater concern are the results of other research into our weather shortcomings, as briefly pointed out in the International Journal of Aerospace Technology’s April 2018 study. One 2010 study attempted to explain why there were so few pireps, and why those that were submitted tended to be incomplete or inaccurate. Maybe, the report suggested, pilots are unable to identify and describe weather phenomena. If they can’t describe what they’re seeing, how can they make safe in-flight decisions, let alone a pirep?

One study interviewed pilots who had experienced a weather-related deviation, flight assistance request, emergency declaration, or incident. In 80 percent of cases the weather hazards were detected, accurate, and available for the areas and times of the weather encounter.A 2012 study interviewed pilots who had experienced a weather-related deviation, flight assistance request, emergency declaration, or incident. Results showed that in 80 percent of cases, the weather hazards were detected, accurate, and available for the areas and times of the weather encounter. And yet, pilots showed a lack of appreciation for the weather. This extended to a check of METARs for the departure and destination airports, but not for METARs at airports along the en route segment of flight.

Missing a few questions on a knowledge test is somewhat benign compared to dangerous in-flight decision making. But both suggest a bigger problem: a lack of curiosity. But how can this be, when any pilot knows the dangers of an adverse weather encounter? Is it the fault of educators and flight instructors? Maybe, if they’re bad teachers—or themselves don’t know the subject matter. Or is it ingrained in some pilots’ psyches? Pilots, after all, tend to be optimistic, confident, disciplined, linear thinkers with strong wills, observant to rules and with faith in procedures. Flying is often an easy repetition of routine tasks—we hope!—and if problems crop up, checklists and procedures help us deal with them.

Weather respects little of this. It works in mysterious ways, often defies predictions, and obeys arcane thermodynamic laws. Even meteorologists can’t fully explain how weather works, since each variable interacts with others in unknown ways. After all, chaos theory sprang from efforts to better understand how weather works.

This clash of characteristics may make it hard for some pilots to cozy up to a better understanding of weather, and how to deal with it. It’s reasonable to assume that a deeper (yet non-boring!) study of weather and weather products would also help, as would more experience flying in various types of challenging weather. Anything to help turn diffidence into confidence tempered by good judgment.

Email [email protected]