37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1080989 |
Time | |
Date | 201304 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | MMU.Airport |
State Reference | NJ |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Challenger CL600 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 45 Flight Crew Total 13400 Flight Crew Type 5800 |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
I would like to report an issue that concerns me: there was no incident at all; but I'm hoping that this submission may lead to action and improvement to avoid one! We all can learn. My home base; mmu; is not always the best on reporting weather. Often reports are missing only at mmu in all our bases; at other times the report will have obviously incorrect information; such as a dew point of 2 degrees on a humid summer day. A few days [we had] some of the most severe shear that I've seen aloft; and the challenge of the higher-minimum (roughly 600/2) GPS approach for runway 05. The weather was almost unbelievable. We called the tower from an intermediate stop. The weather was obviously wildly inaccurate; and the tower confirmed. Towers need to check what they're sending out; and then check to see if that was what was published. Automation is great; but this is going to hurt somebody! We called after this report; and the tower seemed unconcerned and unaware. On a day with some very strong conditions and weather near minimums. (The ILS to 23 is much better--had the wind been from the southwest.) all of us on the safety team need to take pride and follow-up on our actions; is there any way that we can get towers to have a system to check on the accuracy of what's being put out there? Garbage out like this could really hurt some one; especially student and private pilots.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Corporate pilot operating out of MMU voiced concern regarding the inaccurate weather information being provided; the reporter suggested Tower personnel should verify automated weather observations before they are transmitted.
Narrative: I would like to report an issue that concerns me: there was no incident at all; but I'm hoping that this submission may lead to action and improvement to avoid one! We all can learn. My home base; MMU; is not always the best on reporting weather. Often reports are missing only at MMU in all our bases; at other times the report will have obviously incorrect information; such as a dew point of 2 degrees on a humid summer day. A few days [we had] some of the most severe shear that I've seen aloft; and the challenge of the higher-minimum (roughly 600/2) GPS approach for Runway 05. The weather was almost unbelievable. We called the Tower from an intermediate stop. The weather was obviously wildly inaccurate; and the Tower confirmed. Towers need to check what they're sending out; and then check to see if that was what was published. Automation is great; but this is going to hurt somebody! We called after this report; and the Tower seemed unconcerned and unaware. On a day with some very strong conditions and weather near minimums. (The ILS to 23 is much better--had the wind been from the SW.) All of us on the safety team need to take pride and follow-up on our actions; is there any way that we can get towers to have a system to check on the accuracy of what's being put out there? Garbage out like this could really hurt some one; especially student and private pilots.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.